New DSLR - What to buy?

Cube

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
550
Reaction score
1
Location
JHB
Hi Guys.

Apologies if this is an overused topic, but I need some help from those in the know.

I have been looking at various entry level / midrange DSLRs but can't make a decision. My budget is somewhere between 5 - 6 thousand (camera with lens).

I kept on going back to the Sony Alpha range, but don't want to exclude Canon or Nikon. But as I have never used Canon, or Sony for that matter, I don't know.

The use will be varied. Aim will be to get clear, sharp images for post processing. The more manual control I have over the image, the better.
Will also occasionally be used for astro photography, so the longer the exposure time and the higher the response to faint light, the better.

Would also like some advice on a reliable shop. Don't mind driving the distance, if required.

All feedback will be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Hi Cube,

I have just been in the market myself, replacing a 6yr old Canon 300D. I had a similar budget to yours, but already had Canon lenses so I had to look at a Canon body only.

I know its above your budget but its a big ticket item and sometimes its best to get it right. I felt the 500D was the best value for money, http://atto.co.za/500d
 
Thanks. Seems like a decent system.

Will keep it in the back of my mind for now.

Any more suggestions?
 
Nikon's D3000 meets your needs (and I love mine after 2 weeks of use), although the Canon 1000D supposedly has slightly better IQ. The Canon range apparently also provide better manual control.
 
I just picked up A700 for close to that kind of money, imported it from B&H in the States. It might be a about to be replaced, older model, but it is a-lot of bang for the buck and a fine, robust, enthusiasts level, photographic(no video) tool. Its great for me.
 
Last edited:
I use a Sony A-100... Don't get a Sony.

I will be changing to Nikon soon. Canons are also great and don't forget about Pentax and Olympus. I would get any of those before a Sony.
 
Not going to get much mid range stuff for R5-6k.

I am very happy with my entry level D3000 but maybe it would be best for you to save up for a 500d.
 
Might not be what you are looking for but perhaps you should ask "New DSLR - Why to buy?"

The Canon SX1 is a great alternative with a very flexible lens and LCD.
 
If you want to go with canon, save yourself the hassle and look for a used xxD on ODP classifieds. The ergonomics are worth it. A kit lens or 50 f/1.8 will be fine for now.

Edit: Location: Newcastle, still there? Sure there are similar classifieds or you can probably even get new xxD's for a fair price.
 
Last edited:
I use a Sony A-100... Don't get a Sony.

I will be changing to Nikon soon. Canons are also great and don't forget about Pentax and Olympus. I would get any of those before a Sony.

Wow you seem a bit mad at your A100, what's wrong? I still have mine and have taken some good(imho) shots with it.
 
Might not be what you are looking for but perhaps you should ask "New DSLR - Why to buy?"

The Canon SX1 is a great alternative with a very flexible lens and LCD.
At a guess because he want superior IQ? Faster start up and shoot speeds? More complete control? Better low light? Greater lens selection? Or any of the other reasons why even the best point and shoot isn't in the same league as the cheapest dSLR made in the past 5 years.

In fact since you cant easily fit the Canon SX1 in a pocket I cant even throw it that bone.
 
I use a Sony A-100... Don't get a Sony.

I will be changing to Nikon soon. Canons are also great and don't forget about Pentax and Olympus. I would get any of those before a Sony.

I'll add to that. Pentax and Olympus generally offer much better equipped bodies for the same money. Unless you know you're going to be a pro and in need of whatever exotic glass Canon and Nikon has to offer, you really have no reason not to look at these.

The Pentax K-x packs a mighty punch, with (from what I've seen on the forum) low-light performance that matches the Nikon D300. Serious bang for buck. Their glass is also very good, even the entry-level stuff.
 
Wow you seem a bit mad at your A100, what's wrong? I still have mine and have taken some good(imho) shots with it.

I've also taken loads of good shots with mine, but the images are noisier than the competitors and kit lenses are not as sharp... They have not improved at all with the newest generation alphas either.

EDIT: Also, not being able to use anything over ISO200 is also a big drawback...
 
Last edited:
At a guess because he want superior IQ? Faster start up and shoot speeds? More complete control? Better low light? Greater lens selection? Or any of the other reasons why even the best point and shoot isn't in the same league as the cheapest dSLR made in the past 5 years.

In fact since you cant easily fit the Canon SX1 in a pocket I cant even throw it that bone.

The shoot speed is important. I won't be needing lighting speed, but most p&s I've used don't quite cut it. Also looking for better dynamic range than what the p&s selection has to offer.

Canon seems to offer more direct one-button control option than what Nikon does.

Thanks for all the input thus far.
 
The shoot speed is important. I won't be needing lighting speed, but most p&s I've used don't quite cut it. Also looking for better dynamic range than what the p&s selection has to offer.

Canon seems to offer more direct one-button control option than what Nikon does.

Thanks for all the input thus far.
You mean buttons on the back of the camera to directly access settings? A real pity Nikon chose not to have some more available.

Go handle the D3000 and 1000D to see if you prefer the feel of one over the other. They're both good cameras.
 
Exactly that, Noxibox

So I went and had a play with the D3000 & 1000D. I decided on the 1000D purely because of the liveview, the slightly faster startup and shooting speed, and the (so I've read) better noise reduction system.
I liked the fact that the exposure compensation range is so wide on the Nikon D3000, but that was not enough to sway me. That and the lack of any liveview. When moving to DSLR from a P&S I thinks it's important when starting off. Nikon made a bad move there.
 
Exactly that, Noxibox

So I went and had a play with the D3000 & 1000D. I decided on the 1000D purely because of the liveview, the slightly faster startup and shooting speed, and the (so I've read) better noise reduction system.
I liked the fact that the exposure compensation range is so wide on the Nikon D3000, but that was not enough to sway me. That and the lack of any liveview. When moving to DSLR from a P&S I thinks it's important when starting off. Nikon made a bad move there.
I think even when starting off with a dslr its best to ignore the live view altogether. Instead embrace the through the lens experience.
 
u should have tried the nikon D5000 has live view and video,Im loving it.
Then he might have tried the 450D and the 500D but they, like the D5000, seem to be outside of his price range?
 
Exactly that, Noxibox

So I went and had a play with the D3000 & 1000D. I decided on the 1000D purely because of the liveview, the slightly faster startup and shooting speed, and the (so I've read) better noise reduction system.
I liked the fact that the exposure compensation range is so wide on the Nikon D3000, but that was not enough to sway me. That and the lack of any liveview. When moving to DSLR from a P&S I thinks it's important when starting off. Nikon made a bad move there.

Good choice in the 1000D. I don't miss the LiveView on the D3000, since the viewfinder is quite fine for us. It does mean that one's nose presses against the LCD screen, which is not ideal. I've ordered some recommended LCD protectors from Ebay for R120, so we'll be able to keep it clean.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X