DSLR Newbie

[Mrpeepers]

Hiya. Been looking around and reading a lot of reviews for many different cameras and would like a bit more of a personal perspective on some choices that I've made for my first dSLR camera.
I've been looking at the Nikon D50 and really like it from what I've read(plan on getting my hands on one to try it out). Anyway,what I'm looking for are opinions and suggestions in the price range of up to 700$(Generally including the lens) for at new dslr user.
Any opinions or leads to some other cameras to check out would be great. I'm planning on using it in photos of the family,landscape shots,and action shots-such as my sisters soccer games,or moving people/animals,ect.
The picture quality it very important to me,9-10.I would also like to be able to take pictures quickly,in sucession. Size dosen't matter much to me.
Thanks in advance! Cant wait to hear any thoughts. :)

[Tom_N]

I'm planning on using it in photos of the family,landscape shots,and action shots-such as my sisters soccer games,or moving people/animals,ect.


I think your biggest issue with the Nikon D50 (or the Canon Digital Rebel XT 350D) is going to be picking the best combination of lenses given the budget.

An 18-55 mm (or thereabouts) zoom will cover a lot of your needs -- including the range from landscape shots (18mm), to normal perspective (30-35mm), to portrait shots (50mm). "Kit" zooms are inexpensive (good for your budget), but they don't let in a lot of light, so you may need to crank ISO or use flash for indoor shots.

That leaves the action/telephoto shots. Finding a long telephoto lens (say one that can zoom out to 200mm or 300mm) that also lets in a lot of light (so you can use high shutter speeds), and that fits the budget, is unlikely.

A couple of possibilities on the Nikon side:

1. Get the D50 kit that includes two lenses (the 18-55 and 50-200), if you can still find it.

2. Get the D50 body ($450), and add a Nikon 18-135mm lens ($400).

Then hope for good light, and/or use high ISO (say, ISO 800), at the times when you need to freeze fast-moving subjects. One nice thing about the Nikon D50 and the Digital Rebel XT 350D is that both are supposed to have good performance at high ISO.

[Mrpeepers]

2. Get the D50 body ($450), and add a Nikon 18-135mm lens ($400).



What about this (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-f4-5-6G-Nikkor-Black/dp/B0009HN57Y/sr=8-3/qid=1170575647/ref=pd_bbs_3/104-0304691-1221553?ie=UTF8&s=electronics)? Would It still acomplish what I'm aiming to use it for? Or would it not be of good quality? Dont really have a great grasp on the whole aperture in relationship to quality,bit.
Thanks alot for the help.

[coldrain]

There is not a direct relationship to max. aperture and image quality.
BUT.
A bigger max. aperture means bigger lens elements. Bigger lens elements mean much more expensive to produce.
And that is where the relationship lies... the higher price makes the lens designers to also do their best to make the lens as good as possible, and that is where the real reason lies why cheap lenses with smaller max. aperture ranges often also perform a bit less.

And why is a bigger max. aperture something to want? A big aperture lets in more light. This means you can get away with faster shutter speeds when needed. Important in fast moving subjects (sports and such) and in lower light conditions with moving subjects (sports too, again).

So while a D50 with kitlens is a nice starters kit, it is not ideal for sports photography, since you lack any tele power. And tele ranges need a bigger aperture because they already need a faster shutter speed because tele makes camera shake show up sooner.

Since you only seem to have $700 to start with, a D50 with kit lens seems an ok choice. A Pentax K100 D is also a nice choice in the 6mp arena.
You can try with a cheap 55-200 lens from Nikon or Sigma with a cheap bit of tele range, and then figure out what you really would like/need in future lens wise.

Canon has the nicest tele zoom lens range (both in the under $1000 range and the more expensive range), maybe something to keep in mind when choosing a body/brand.

[SpecialK]

Pentax K100D is a decent basic camera with some nice extras, and has stabilization in the body that works with any lens on it. Also, the K100D has good performance at ISO 400-800, and even 1600 is "OK".

The inexpensive 50-200 zoom has good image-quality and is steal at about $170 after rebates. Though not particularly fast at f4-5.6, that should be fine outdoors.

The biggest drawback (for sports shooters only) is that with a small buffer, you can only take a few quick shots in a row, then have to wait perhaps a few seconds for the last images to be written to the card. Not much a factor unless you want to squeeze off 5 in a row frequently. It has never been a factor in my non-sports shooting.

Kits lenses are not particularly good from any manufacturer, but it is not that much more to get it with the camera and it might do well enough for you.

[Tom_N]

What about this (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-f4-5-6G-Nikkor-Black/dp/B0009HN57Y/sr=8-3/qid=1170575647/ref=pd_bbs_3/104-0304691-1221553?ie=UTF8&s=electronics)? Would It still acomplish what I'm aiming to use it for? Or would it not be of good quality? Dont really have a great grasp on the whole aperture in relationship to quality,bit.
Thanks alot for the help.

That was the one I was thinking of when I mentioned the two-lens kit. Like the other alternative I mentioned (the 18-135), it is a "slow" lens that does not let in much light. But it might prove handy if there was bright sunlight.