Recommendations for a good digital SLR Camera
- Thread starter Dr S
- Start date
- Feedback
- View
Wu-Tangled":x71qm2xi said:Si
focal lengths of lenses is something to be aware of.
It all depends on your sensor size.
A smaller sensor will mean an increase in magnification of a focal length.
eg; a 16-35mm lens on a full frame sensor (costly) will equate to a 16-35mm lens.
on a 1.3 sensor, it will become a 21-45mm lens.
and on a 1.6x sensor it will become a 26 - 56mm lens.
this can be a disadvantage if you're into the wider angled stuff as it gets costly to replicate the true length of even the cheap 18-55mm lenses, but at the telephoto end it becomes quite an advantage, magnifying them and giving you effectively longer lenses (v. useful for motorsport).
Most cheaper end SLR's will be 1.6x and a few 1.3x sensors. This is just worth bearing in mind while choosing lenses as the box will say 18-55mm but as pointed out above, it won't actually have that angle of view.
I have been wondering why focal lengths on digi cams don't match my old film SLR!
I would also recommend either a Canon or Nikon, personally I use Canon, don't know why, but once you choose one you tend to stick to them.
I think I understand that Wu.
So, would something like this be a good starting point??
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-canon-eos-500d-plus-18-55mm-55-250mm/p1033151
Its a minfield out there. :roll:
So, would something like this be a good starting point??
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-canon-eos-500d-plus-18-55mm-55-250mm/p1033151
Its a minfield out there. :roll:
Your mileage may vary, but I read much of this site and it all starts to make sense. Eventually.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm
Also, it's useful to find some pictures / effects you like and discover what settings were used. Some photos contain stuff like F-stop, shutter speed etc. in the extra information which can be really useful.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm
Also, it's useful to find some pictures / effects you like and discover what settings were used. Some photos contain stuff like F-stop, shutter speed etc. in the extra information which can be really useful.
- Feedback
- View
Dr S":2b4m4cks said:
For motorsport i would have thought that 250mm lens is a bit small, but the camera is very good.
Dr S":2afk5bzq said:
You won't find a 'bad' camera made by either of the big 2... Personally I prefer Nikon, but the best way to work out which you prefer is to go into a shop and try em out.
I use a similar lens to that 55-250 a lot - it's not particularly fast (which lenses at that lebgth won't be unless you spend a fortune!), but IS does help a lot.
Dr S":3k541u11 said:
Put simply yes. Canon's 'entry' range 500D is going to be a fine camera. The next level up is the 50D. Probably fairly similar, few extra or more manual controls and better build quality.
I find the 500D (previously 350, 400, 450D models) a bit small and fiddly, but have friends with them that love 'em.
Not so sure about the Nikon's as have been Canon for a few years now, but they are all as good as each other. I do love the feel of Pap scum's D3 though - feels good in the hands as it were. ;-)
In the old days it was simple and Nikon was the Press boys (bombproof and reliable) and Canon the sports and fashion boys (fast, accurate and techy). But they're all much of a muchness I think now.
Worth taking a look at 2nd hand as anything back to the 350D and 20D would deliver good results and allow a lot more change for a better outfit/ le mans tickets. ;-)
