Best entry-level DSLR for wildlife photo.

[Luscinia]

Looking for a camera mainly to take along in nature for documenting wildlife and landscape. I'm also considering an ultra-zoom (see http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25716) but have been suggested to look at DSLR's. Thankful to anyone who can give help or advice in finding a good DSLR-alternative to meet my needs.


Budget

* What budget have you allocated for buying this camera? Please be as specific as possible.
As cheap as possible.

Size

* What size camera are you looking for? Or does size not matter at all to you?
A DSLR as small and light as possible.

Features

How many megapixels will suffice for you?
6

* What optical zoom will you need? (None, Standard = 3x-4x, Ultrazoom = 10x-12x, Other - Specify)
X-300 zoom. Bigger, I think, is too heavvy and expensive.

* How important is “image quality” to you? (Rate using a scale of 1-10)
8

Do you care for manual controls?
Easy to use is most important.

General Usage

* What will you generally use the camera for?
Nature and wildlife photo, especially birds, even in flight.

* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not?
Perhaps

Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos?
Sometimes

Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos?
Wildlife in action.

Miscellaneous

Are there particular brands you like or hate?
Like: Nikon, Pentax, Canon or any that uses SD or CompactFlash cards.
Hate: Any that don't uses SD or CompactFlash cards.

Are there particular models you already have in mind?
Nikon D40 or D50, Pentax K100D, Canon EOS350D.

(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD)
Perhaps Image Stabilization would be nice.

[coldrain]

You want to make wildlife photos. That usually means getting as close as possible with tele.

You also want tele for as little as possible.

Tele does not come cheap. And if it does, it comes soft and without much contrast. The best cheap telelens is the Sigma 70-300 APO DG. It does not perform miracles (soft on the edges at 300mm), but it performs a lot better than the cheap Canon, Tamron and Nikon 70/75-300mm lenses.

If you want better, you absolute best choice will be the Canon EF 70-300 IS USM. It is very contrasty and razor sharp upto 300mm. It offers image stabilization, which is a big help at the tele end to minimize camera shake showing up.

This lens makes the Canon XT/350D your best choice.

If you prefer a Nikon D50 (more complete camera than the D40), the Nikon 70-300 VR is a bit more expensive, not as good at 300mm as the Canon, but performs still ok at 300mm.

If you think the 70-300 IS USM from Canon is too expensive for your budget, the Pentax K100D with above mentioned Sigma 70-300 will offer you IS because the Pentax has IS in the body.

If you want more reach than 300mm, the Sigma 135-400mm is a very inexpensive and quite good lens for that class of lens. It will fit on Canon. Nikon and Pentax, but only on Pentax it will give you IS.

In short:
Absolute budget choice: Pentax K100 D with Sigma 70-300 APO DG.
Best image quality: Canon 350D/XT with Canon EF 70-300 IS USM.
Alternative choice for Nikon fans: Nikon D50 with 70-300 VR.

For landscape you need something wider... "ultra wide" lenses like the Tokina 12-24mm f4 and Sigma 10-20mm are available on different lens mounts.

The kit lenses of above mentioned cameras will go moderately wide and cost a lot less.

[Luscinia]

Thanks a lot for this clear info! Think I don't afford a 70-300 telezoom with image stabilization so the Sigma 70-300 APO DG sounds best for me. That don't give me autofocus with Nikon D40 so it will be hard to capture birds in flight, am I right?

If so the camera house alternatives are Pentax K100D, Canon EOS 350D and Nikon D50. I really don't know yet which one I prefer. K100D has IS and 2,5'' LCD. D50 and (especially) 350D is a bit smaller and lighter but has also a smaller LCD. Thanks to anyone who can give me input on "value for the money" of these models!

[coldrain]

IS will help reduce camera shake especially in longer focal lengths (because of that you enlarge the subject, small camera movements show up bigger).

The D40 is worst value of all. I do not think teh LCD size does determine value for money, since with a DSLR you can not use it to make photos, it is just for settings and a quick review of already taken photos.

All have their plusses (K100D, D50 and 350D), but if you can, try out a K100 D with Sigma 70-300 lens and see if it focusses fast and reliable enough.
If it does, the Pentax with IS is clearly the best value for money.

[mattdm]

From what you've said, I think you should take a second look at the ultrazoom non-SLR options.

[Luscinia]

Maybe Nikon D50 + Sigma 70-300 is the most interesting alternativ for me to the ultrazooms. Could a monopod make up for the lack of image stabilization?

[mattdm]

I've never used a monopod, but from what I've heard, it'd give about 2 stops advantages -- just about the same as image stabilization. Except, the monopod will really only help with vertical movement -- you've still got to hold it steady in the other directions, and that might be hard with a heavy lens. If you're set on a dslr, I think coldrain's K100d advice is good. Otherwise, for the price, I think a panasonic zoom would be a good choice.

[Luscinia]

Do someone know if it's true that image stabilization built in the camera house (like Pentax K100D) don't make the viewfinder image stabilized and therefore it's better with stabilization inside the tele zoom?

[coldrain]

In-body image stabilization works by shifting the sensor around to counter the movement of the camera body. You will not see this happening in the view finder, but this is not a problem at all. Normally when making a photo without IS you do not notice the camera shake until after you have taken the photo, on the photo itself. So do not worry about it. For IS on a small budget, the Pentax (6mp) with IS in body is a very nice solution.

The Canon XTi (10mp) with the 70-300 IS USM will give the best results due to that specific lens' optical qualities, but it will cost you considerably more.

[Honest Gaza]

....I do not think teh LCD size does determine value for money, since with a DSLR you can not use it to make photos, it is just for settings and a quick review of already taken photos.



Luscinia, I just want to reiterate this point that Coldrain has made.

Unlike a P&S Digital, the LCD is not used for pre-view of the photo to be taken. Therefore, is of no value in capturing the image.

[mattdm]

Unlike a P&S Digital, the LCD is not used for pre-view of the photo to be taken. Therefore, is of no value in capturing the image.

On the other hand, if you're going to be traveling around Europe for a month with no laptop, it really is an advantage for your only way to review pictures to be as nice as possible.

[Chickenhawk]

Hi,

Have you looked at the Sony Alpha 100. It's an excellent camera for wildlife photography as it's got an anti-vibration feature built into the camera, so every lens you fit uses the feature.
I am slightly biased as I bought one and have no regrets. :)

[Luscinia]

The DSLR for wildlife choices is now down to two, or maybe three:

1. Pentax K100D, image stabilization, 2,5" LCD
2. Nikon D50, good value for the money
3. Samsung GX1L, very low priced

The last one, Samsung GX1L together with 18-55 Schneider zoom and a Tamron 70-300 telezoom, has now (in Sweden) the same price-level as the most advanced ultra-zoom cameras, for example Panasonic Lumix FZ50.

I would be helped to be given a hint of what's the best buy for good nature/wildlife pictures and travelling: A toplevel 12x ultrazoom with image stabilization and Leica optics or a slightly bigger lowlevel DLSR with one of the cheapest telezooms available.

[Luscinia]

Hi!
I've already got good help from this forum but not yet found the "right" camera.
With "right" I mean good zoom-capablities, portability, picture quality and price.
I'm also still considering both ultrazooms and DLSR's.

Here in Sweden two Samsung DLSR's now has the same low price: GX 1S/18-55 and GX 1L/18-55.

- Which are the main differences between these models, and which one are the best?
- Is the Pentax SMC-FA J 75-300/4,5-5,8 AL a good telezoom choice to these cameras?
- An ultrazoom, Panasonic FZ50, has also the same price as the Samsung DLSR's.
How is the picture quality in comparing a top level ultrazoom with a lowpriced DLSR.

Thankful for answers! They would be small but important clues in my searchings.

[coldrain]

You should just look at the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG Macro, for the cheap telezoom class. It is the only one that performs still quite well at 300mm.

And also I would prefer the K100D above both Samsung cameras. Both Samsungs are like the older Pentax *ist DS and *istDL.
They miss the nice IS, and the image quality of the K100D is a bit better, especially in JPEG.

The bit more you will spend on the K100D + above Sigma will be very worthwhile, in terms of image quality.

The superzooms can be ok, but especially the FZ50 with its noisy results (and its detail eating noise reduction in JPEG) make any DSLR stand head and shoulders above it in terms of image quality. You do have to take a bit of care about which lenses you choose for the DSLR though.