Looking for a camera

[kinglott]

Hi there

I'm by all means a newbie when it comes to cameras and I'm looking to buy something that I can get lots of enjoyment from. I've been interested in photography for a while now and the pixelated shots I get from my digital sony cybershot have had their day. My interest is not casual, I'm looking to draw inspiration from my photography for 3D modelling, artwork and video game concept designs, but also as a creative pass-time.

I'm interested in taking all kinds of photographs from night-time skies to landscape views, architecture to the spots on a ladybird. but I'm not entirely sure what I should be looking for. I've been looking at DSLR cameras for the past week or so and although appealing in the quality images they can produce, I'm not sure they're the kind of cameras I'm looking for (or at least I've not found one yet that I can be certain of). One of my main gripes with the DSLR cameras is that they all have the ability to take recordings - a nice addition, but not something I'm interested in, I want something that just takes still pictures but I also want a camera with lots of adjustable settings. Digital is a must because I don't have the funding to purchase film on a regular basis.

I'm also unsure about lenses - I'm looking to take landscape shots and I've been reading that a wide lens is more appealing (which I'm in agreement with and had been thinking the same thing), but I'm also looking to take close up shots of things which I'm guessing would need an entirely different lens?

I'm sorry is this is a bit vague but could anyone give me some advice on what I should be looking for? Or just point me in the right direction? I have an overall budget of £750.

Thanks,

Karl

[jzhao1688]

For amateurs go for a Canon 550D with lens kit for $850USD and it's value for money. If you want to take good landscape shots and get more settings out of the camera go for a 5D Mark II with EF 24-105 f/4.0L lens for $3300USD and get the advantage of a full frame camera. The term "full-frame" refers to the digital sensor when attaching a lens of 24-105mm you get exactly 24-105mm, unlike 24-105mm on 1/3 size sensor you get 39-168mm that's wasting the advantage of a wide angle 24mm.

[petrochemist]

OK Karl, welcome to the forum, and here's my take on things.

The right camera for you will depend very much on what you want to use it for, as well as unmeasurable things like how it feels in your hand. As you want loads of things to adjust/play with a DSLR definitly sounds right to me. I don't think recordings are really relevant as you'd have to look hard for a digital of any sort that doesn't do them now (it effectively costs money to take the option away) There are a great many photographers who don't consider video a bonus.

The Canon John mentions wouldn't suit me at all for at least a couple of reasons - I like playing with older lenses/accessories, it doesn't respond to Infra red and it's lenses are far too expensive for me.
It would certainly be better than my old Pentax for action shots (slow AF is probably mine's biggest failing), and would be able to crop further (mines only 6mp) etc. But mine was only £150 and my average lens price is under £50 - even including the telescopes.

With your budget, (and buying new) I'd go for the Pentax Kr for about $500 or the Kx for £400, Which will give you money left over for accessories (external flash, tripod, lenses to match your interests) Alternatively you can get nearly new second hand 'semipro' K7's for around £500. (Note non of these would be good for IR either, but that's an unusual field or interest).

If I didn't have my history with Pentax, I might consider Nikon's offerings as they are also reputedly good with 'legacy' lenses. However their shake reduction like Canon's has to be brought fresh with every lens - with pentax it's in the body and still works with 100 year old lenses.

I've heard an unconfirmed suggestion that Sonys can use old Olympus lenses - but I've not seen too many Olympus lenses available and I don't trust Sony anymore anyway.

Unfortunately your likely to find most photographers would recommend their own brand so any advice from us runs the risk of personal bias. Knowing the sort of photography that interests you will help people to give reasonable advice, although all DSLRs can be used for practically every sort of photography (only very specialist stuff, really restricts you) for some subjects there are features that become useful (such as good low light performance. weather sealing, live-view...)

Take your time, read on-line reviews (though these are perhaps biased too?), consider future expansion, and see if you can view relevant Gallery pictures (colour rendering can be subjective). If possible get to try your short list in your hands before finalizing your choice.

Then once you've got it ENJOY it & let us see some results!

[miketoll]

I think you have to decide have to decide more specifically what interests you and what priorities you have because to cover all the things you mention would require more than one lens to do it to high quality.
This bit puzzles me "One of my main gripes with the DSLR cameras is that they all have the ability to take recordings - a nice addition, but not something I'm interested in, I want something that just takes still pictures but I also want a camera with lots of adjustable settings" A DSLR has the maximum number of adjustable settings available making them by far the most versatile. If money is a problem then DSLR plus wide to shortish zoom lens to cover landscape type stuff, night skies (with tripod) plus architecture. Ladybird spots really need a dedicated macro lens, look second hand for something like the Sigma 105mm macro in the same fitting as the make of the camera you buy. Also have a look at the macro on the cheap thread for other ideas but nothing beats the proper macro lens. Other stuff,lenses etc can be added later as interest and funds grow.