New to SLR: Best Bang for My Buck?

[ms_sail]

Budget: Preferably under 800

Features:
I like to blow up and frame pictures as art around the house so I'd like to have around 10 mp

Naturally I would like to have good image quality: 8 or 9/10

General Usage: I do shoot sports games (mostly outdoor but some indoor as well) and would like to reduce blurr as much as my price range and new-commer skill will allow. However, I also plan to shoot travel pictures and around-the-house shots of family, etc.

Miscellaneous: I'm new to SLR and am looking for an entry-level camera with some room to build once I get my feet wet. From what I've researched so far, the one's I'm looking at are Canon Rebel Xti, Nikon d40x, Sony A100k, and Olympus E510.

I've heard the Sony and Olympus have built in IS whereas the Canon and Nikon require IS lenses ($$) to reduce shake, but that the quality of the built in IS is not necessarily a significant enough advantage to discount Canon and Nikon which are industry standards.

I have also heard that the starter kits with 18-55mm lenses for Canon are disapointing. If it will make a significant difference, I am not opposed to buying a body only camera and a reasonably priced but better quality lens rather than the kit. (If this is advisable then I would also need advice on which lens!)

I've "tested" the Canon and Nikon in stores (while still attached to the display) and I like the feel of the Nikon better in my hands but otherwise the sample shots I took on the spot seemed essentially the same. I get the impression that there are "Canon People" and "Nikon People" and it's a mostly a matter of personal preference, but in terms of sports shots and travel pics what's the 'best bang for my buck?'

[DonSchap]

Try the SONY A700 out for a terrific general purpose DSLR with IS-in-the-body for every lens you mount.

A trip to the SONY Style store will be your best bet for the full array of goodies. Put a typical 50mm f/1.4 lens on the body and shoot up the store with it. It provides impressive results.

EXIF: A700 w/ 50mm f/1.4 @ f/1.4 - 1/60 sec - ISO-200 - M Mode - Ambient lighting
30625

100 % crop
30626

I bought the lens right after this shot, LOL. f/1.4 stuff is rarely this sharp, at that distance. Bokeh is solid in the red LED coming from the device on the counter. Good stuff.

Remember, one thing ... in retail stores, "camera counter people" are rarely photographers ... this will require doing your homework and knowing a little bit about what you are looking to acheive. They are trying to achieve SALES!

The A700 costs a little more than you budgeted for ... but remember ... it's only money. We are talking about a quality method of taking images. It costs a bit, but the returns can be just phenomenal. (Of course, this coming from a complete novice)

But, if you've got those magical "deep pockets" for the costly IS-equipped lenses ... Canon and Nikon are waiting for you. Step right up and empty your pockets. :D

[swpars]

To shoot sports action, my advice is to get a body that has a continuous speed of at least 5 frames per second. Sony, Nikon, and Canon prosumer cameras (a700, D200/300, and 20D/30D/40D respectively) all can achieve this frame rate.

You could probably make do with a 3 frame per second body (Nikon D40x/D80, Canon Rebel XTi, Sony a100) but the faster frame rate will definitely help with sports shooting.

Beyond that, do research and decide which system has the lenses you need. If you're shooting outdoor sports, an f4-5.6 lens will be sufficient. If you need to shoot indoor sports, you'll need an f2.8 lens to get a shutter speed quick enough to stop the action.

As far as the budget goes that you stated, the 3 fps bodies all come in around the $800 mark (or slightly over for the D80) with kit lens. For 5 fps, you're going to have to get a pre-owned 20D, 30D, or possibly D200 to stay within budget.

[D Thompson]

Try the SONY A700 out for a terrific general purpose DSLR with IS-in-the-body for every lens you mount.

On his $800 budget - I don't think so.:confused:

[StefH]

To shoot sports action, my advice is to get a body that has a continuous speed of at least 5 frames per second. Sony, Nikon, and Canon prosumer cameras (a700, D200/300, and 20D/30D/40D respectively) all can achieve this frame rate.


I would not take a camera like D200 as first SLR!!! You will most likely not get happy with it. It for sure is a great camera, but it is not designed for beginners.

First: inform yourself a bit about photography, about shutter speed, aperture, ISO, ...
Second: Think about what you want to take pictures of
Third: What lenses do you need for that?
Fourth: What brands have lenses like that
Fifth: What cameras do they have

The camera decision is the last one!

"I have also heard that the starter kits with 18-55mm lenses for Canon are disapointing. If it will make a significant difference, I am not opposed to buying a body only camera and a reasonably priced but better quality lens rather than the kit. (If this is advisable then I would also need advice on which lens!)"

There are different opinions about the quality of kit-lenses, but the lens is definitely more important for image quality than the body. For 800$ consider taking a used body and a good (new or used) lens. Don't buy the most expensive body you can afford and put the cheapst lens on it!!

For sports games you will need a tele. For indoor sport a fast (= big aparture, like 2.8) tele lens. And you will need something covering the "standard range" e.g. something like 18-55. will probably be difficult with that budget. I'd stick to used equipment

And this is the advice I always give in this situation: A good book about photography will improve your skills more than a 7000$ DSLR with a 2000$ lens will do.