Choosing my first DSLR

[amin]

I have long wanted to purchase a DSLR and that time has come now. I am starting to save up to get an entry level one. But I am unsure which to choose. Right now I am stuck between two choices:

Nikon D60 and the Canon 450D.

I would personally go for the Canon 450D. The main reason is that the D60 will not work with some of the good value Nikon prime lenses. With the Canon, if you want a cheap, sharp portrait/low light lens, you can get the 50/1.8. The Nikon equivalent won't work on the D60.

For this reason, I've been recommending the entry level Canons over the entry level Nikons for my multiple friends who are getting DSLRs to photograph their newborn babies (50/1.8 is great for this).

 

[Darran]

I would like to take my DSLR out for my travels so I would not want an extremely bulky or heavy one. A D40 is perfect, but a D80 is only slightly bigger, not one which I would have problems carrying around.

After reading about how a D60 can only auto focus on certain lenses, I am deciding on the D80.

 

[mac 2005]

From what I have seen, I would be better off investing in the D40, and getting a kick ass lens.

An excellent point. The lens is the most important part of the camera, but the one most overlooked by beginning photographers. Invest in the lens because a good-quality lens will last you many, many years -- if not a lifetime; whereas the camera will be replaced or complemented many times over.

Accordingly, you'll want to buy a camera that will allow you to interchange lenses over time and safeguard your investment.

Happy shooting!

 

[nutmac]

I would like to take my DSLR out for my travels so I would not want an extremely bulky or heavy one. A D40 is perfect, but a D80 is only slightly bigger, not one which I would have problems carrying around.

After reading about how a D60 can only auto focus on certain lenses, I am deciding on the D80.

Have you decided on the set of starter lens(es) and are they factored into your budget?

As for the size, D80 is 30% larger than D40 -- 5.2" by 4.1" by 3.0" vs. 5.0" by 3.7" by 2.5". Although many people prefer larger D80 ergonomically, I wouldn't call 30% slight.

 

[dave-k]

I hesitate to contribute to this thread. A recent similar question regarding the relative merits of Canon and Sony DSLRs led to some of the most vitriolic (and unhelpful) comments I've read on this site for a while.

I don't know enough about either of the specific models you mention to make a personal recommendation. And even if I did, my recommendation would be precisely that - a personal recommendation. My guess is that either of the cameras you mention will do a good job (as will several others), and it's for you to try them and to see which you prefer.

The bulk of my experience has been with Canons and I've been very happy with them. However, it's worth commenting that, in my opinion, the best photographs I've ever taken were those I took with an old, second-hand Practica. It was manual in every way - no exposure measurement, no autofocus, no shutter priority/aperture priority/programmed mode. Relatively speaking, it took an age to measure lighting with a separate light meter, set the camera and take the picture. And therein lies the lesson - the pictures were better regardless of technology because I actually had to think about them before pressing the shutter release.

Perhaps that's not a particularly useful observation in the context of the original question.

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

1) Why Nikon: Nikon has a large line of cameras at nearly every level. Meaning my lenses will always be useful to me if I stay with Nikon, which is highly likely. Getting non-Nikon or non-Canon SLRs means a decent chance of having to start over again with lenses as outside of these two manufacturers the lines are more limited.

Folks probably said the same thing 50 years ago, but Olympus and Pentax have been making cameras the entire time. Just because one company makes more bodies than another, doesn't necessarily mean that they will automatically be in the game longer than anyone else. People have probably been giving the same advice you've given here for 50+ years, but still the only camera company to go under was Minolta, and even they didn't technically go under, but were rather purchased by Sony and had their name changed. The lenses people had with the Minolta name on them still work for Sony cameras.

Canon has forced their users into adopting an entirely new system before, when they switched to the EOS system, none of the old lenses worked with new bodies or were further supported. But people forget these kinds of things I suppose. If you were a Canon user in the early 80's you had the exact thing you're warning against happen to you.

Open your mind man!

SLC

 

[compuwar]

People have probably been giving the same advice you've given here for 50+ years, but still the only camera company to go under was Minolta, and even they didn't technically go under, but were rather purchased by Sony and had their name changed.

Only? In 2005, Kyocera halted production on all Contax, Yashica, and other Kyocera branded film and digital cameras- I think that's a pretty big chunk of 50 years or so. I'm sure I can come up with a few other "also rans" who are out of the camera business- like Zeiss Ikon...

No, Sony got the camera manufacturing assets transferred, Minolta ditched the camera business- that was pretty clear in the press releases of the time. If Sony hadn't picked it up probably it'd be another dead brand. I'm not sure how much the Cosmos takeover of Mamiya's Optical Division paralleled the K-M/Sony relationship, but the news there isn't all rosy either- it's a tough time to be a digital camera manufacturer if you're not on the top of the wave. While this is a high-demand period, it's also a high-competition period- HP's exit from the P&S market shows that even the bigger players aren't necessarily going to hold on over anything.

 

[cube]

Canon has forced their users into adopting an entirely new system before, when they switched to the EOS system, none of the old lenses worked with new bodies or were further supported. But people forget these kinds of things I suppose. If you were a Canon user in the early 80's you had the exact thing you're warning against happen to you.

Canon forced a new system. Nikon does not have a new system. Just don't buy D40/D40x/D60.

 

[Westside guy]

I think both Nikon's F mount and Pentax' K mount have remained unchanged for the past half-century or so - perhaps a Pentax user could correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[theblueone]

I think both Nikon's F mount and Pentax' K mount have remained unchanged for the past half-century or so - perhaps a Pentax user could correct me if I'm wrong.

That's correct about Pentax K-mount.

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

I think both Nikon's F mount and Pentax' K mount have remained unchanged for the past half-century or so - perhaps a Pentax user could correct me if I'm wrong.

Taken from a Wikipedia page about Nikon lenses: "The Nikon F-mount is one of only two photographic lens mounts (the other being the Pentax K mount) which were not abandoned by their associated manufacturer upon the introduction of autofocus, but rather extended to meet new requirements related to metering, autofocus, and aperture control."

You're correct on both. I've got lenses for both systems that are at least 30 years old.

Well to be technical, I don't think the Pentax K-mount is 50 years old yet. I think Pentax held onto the M42 Screwmount until the early 70's or so. Any and all K mount lenses will attach and function to some extent with any Pentax or Samsung DSLR.

Bwoods

 

[Westside guy]

Well to be technical, I don't think the Pentax K-mount is 50 years old yet. I think Pentax held onto the M42 Screwmount until the early 70's or so. Any and all K mount lenses will attach and function to some extent with any Pentax or Samsung DSLR.

Thanks for the correction. It appears (according to Wikipedia) that the K mount was introduced in 1975. I bought a Pentax K1000 back in the mid-1980s, and knew it had already been around a while.

I really liked the simplicity of the K1000. I wonder if there'd ever be a market for a low end, bare-bones digital camera of that sort? Probably not... but it really was a good way to learn the fundamentals.

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

Thanks for the correction. It appears (according to Wikipedia) that the K mount was introduced in 1975. I bought a Pentax K1000 back in the mid-1980s, and knew it had already been around a while.

I really liked the simplicity of the K1000. I wonder if there'd ever be a market for a low end, bare-bones digital camera of that sort? Probably not... but it really was a good way to learn the fundamentals.

Most people in the pentax crowd seem to think that we'll have a K2000D coming out at Photokina. Speculation is that it will be as much a throwback t the K1000 as a Digital can be.

SLC