Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best camera for beginners?
- Thread starter Robby9279
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do Not Buy a Camera From an Electronics Superstore... or at least don't go there to get questions answered... Keep in mind that the sales people will tell you anything you want to hear and most of it is BS. Go to a camera store.
Having said that... most of the responses are accurate, six of one...half dozen of the other. By my name you can see my bias... I am a professional... and the professionals that taught me maintain Canon is the best. Nikon is every bit as good... Canon is the technological frontrunner... but Nikon follows very quickly.
My pick would be canon's x1i... the cheapest DSLR with HD video. The kit lens is mediocre (18-55 ef-s) but an ok starter lens... if you go body only, a Macrozoom lens is a nice versatile choice for a first lens.
I went into a Pro Photo shop here in Portland, not best buy.
You meant T1i
The 18-55mm IS actually is getting decent reviews. It is NOT the same as the older 18-55mm that was disco'd with the XTi. I hated that lens. The only real exciting lens that is part of the lens kit, so to speak, is the 24-105L. The 17-85IS and 25-135mm are jokes. I would honestly rather use the 18-55mmIS over the 17-85, it is that bad.
Sure Canon is on top. They have been designing their own CMOS sensors for years now. Most, even Nikon until recently, (maybe they still do..?) were using Sony chips. Canon even uses Sony chips in their smaller P&S cameras.
I have never had a problem with Canon. The only reason I am going with Canon is because I know their system and have some glass already, now just looking for a steal on a body. I need to get out shooting! ASAP
Canon cameras are marketing-driven. Nikon cameras are photography-driven.
You have the wrong idea of who is on top.
ok, maybe i am mistaken then. But everytime i am watching football/soccer/tennis/baseball, etc, all i see is a sea of white tele's. I know that isnt Sony's lenses out there, lol. Unless Nikon has been making white lenses and hasn't told anyone.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=28999979
And the D3 was only 1 year old.
And the D3 was only 1 year old.
I think there's a minor argument to be made that Canon is engineering driven, while Nikon is more photographer-driven. Both do their share of marketing, particularly Nikon these days.
I don't think I realized just how much the D3 changed things until looking at those shots linked to above. It was the heavyweight punch that got Nikon back in the game.
I don't think I realized just how much the D3 changed things until looking at those shots linked to above. It was the heavyweight punch that got Nikon back in the game.
You've obviously never shot with Zeiss or Leica glass....
What on earth does this statement even mean???
This thread is quickly deteriorating...
What on earth does this statement even mean???
It means Canon is in a megapixel race also with their DSLRs, and that they market FullHD video capability at 20fps
Brand is not everything. They make (plastic) Zeiss lenses for phone cameras as well, but those are not of Zeiss (glass) quality.
But I do get your point. It's just that your "Zeiss" is like saying "Canon" lenses are great if you think of "Canon L" (but many people are using non-L versions).
The OP wanted something for a hobby; his goal was not to get into photographic journals. I would say that entry level models from all the brands mentioned are on par and very capable.
Robby9279, the best camera for you is the one you are going to feel the most comfortable with. Something you get excited about picking up, feels good in your hands, and works great with your eye. Nevermind technological leaps and marketing materials, because the time that you spend drooling over that stuff is time that you could spend taking photos.
Robby9279, the best camera for you is the one you are going to feel the most comfortable with. Something you get excited about picking up, feels good in your hands, and works great with your eye. Nevermind technological leaps and marketing materials, because the time that you spend drooling over that stuff is time that you could spend taking photos.
There actually is a good "all-round" lens that has lots of different uses, the Nikon 18-200, its got decent wideangle at one end but you can zoom in pretty close as well for far away subjects, especially with the DX magnification factor. It's also not that expensive.
just want to point out that the leica lenses are "leica certified" they aren't actually manufactured by leica as far as I know.
wouldn't be surprised at the same thing with integrated zeiss optics.
Just decided this issue for myself last night
I have been doing the exact same process, of researching my first DSLR purchase. I have always been a point and shoot camera guy, but the wife wanted a better camera for an upcoming event. After much research I was leaning toward the about to be released Nikon D3000 over the outgoing Canon Xsi primarily because it has a "training" mode on the display to basically bring newbies such as myself up to speed.
But, then came the LiveView v. no LiveView issue: particularly after watching some YouTube videos on the subject: I decided I wanted LiveView. It will allow my wife and I to transition from point and shoot habits and does [as YouTube shows] have potential if I ever become interested in more advanced photography shots. So this moved me away from the Nikon and over to the Canon XSi. [I bought a Dummies book to make up for the loss of the onscreen guide in the Nikon D3000]
I then decided I probably want to have video since my camcorder is very old and I may not want to be taking two cameras along anymore given the comparatively mammoth size of DSLR's. This moved me up to the Canon T1i or the NiKon D5000. The Canon has slightly better video. All else seems equivalent. Either would be an equivalent choice.
My wife is Japanese and the T1i [under the cuter "Kiss X3" name] is the most popular camera [but what do they know...]. Reality aside, the Canon was the safer choice for me domestically.
I then had to decide on Lenses. Going back and forth I elected the two lens kit with the IS on both. There is another two lens kit with no IS on a slightly more powerful telephoto, but I wanted IS. I considered not getting the telephoto lens and getting better glass later, but I felt that it is unlikely I would be spending the amount of cash required for a good lens for a long time, and the reviews on the two kit lenses with IS were actually not bad for lenses in their "budget" class.
I have been doing the exact same process, of researching my first DSLR purchase. I have always been a point and shoot camera guy, but the wife wanted a better camera for an upcoming event. After much research I was leaning toward the about to be released Nikon D3000 over the outgoing Canon Xsi primarily because it has a "training" mode on the display to basically bring newbies such as myself up to speed.
But, then came the LiveView v. no LiveView issue: particularly after watching some YouTube videos on the subject: I decided I wanted LiveView. It will allow my wife and I to transition from point and shoot habits and does [as YouTube shows] have potential if I ever become interested in more advanced photography shots. So this moved me away from the Nikon and over to the Canon XSi. [I bought a Dummies book to make up for the loss of the onscreen guide in the Nikon D3000]
I then decided I probably want to have video since my camcorder is very old and I may not want to be taking two cameras along anymore given the comparatively mammoth size of DSLR's. This moved me up to the Canon T1i or the NiKon D5000. The Canon has slightly better video. All else seems equivalent. Either would be an equivalent choice.
My wife is Japanese and the T1i [under the cuter "Kiss X3" name] is the most popular camera [but what do they know...]. Reality aside, the Canon was the safer choice for me domestically.
I then had to decide on Lenses. Going back and forth I elected the two lens kit with the IS on both. There is another two lens kit with no IS on a slightly more powerful telephoto, but I wanted IS. I considered not getting the telephoto lens and getting better glass later, but I felt that it is unlikely I would be spending the amount of cash required for a good lens for a long time, and the reviews on the two kit lenses with IS were actually not bad for lenses in their "budget" class.
