A new DSLR buyer needs some clarifications

[balsop]

I'm interested in moving from the point-and-shoot realm to the DSLR market, but I want to make sure the costs don't get out of control (read: $500-700). I've been reading about the Nikon D40, D40x and D60 as well as the Canon XTi. I have a few questions, though, about moving from the "film" SLR realm to the "digital" one.

1. What is the likelihood that any of my old lenses would work with whatever camera I choose? I have several different types (my father has some old SLR lenses) including a Tamron lens that fits my Pentax SLR, and my father's old Canon lenses. Are there adapter kits available for lenses, just as there used to be for the old style SLRs?

2. How important are megapixels? I tend to think the Nikon D40 is a great camera right in my price range, but I'm a little hesitant about the fact that it's only a 6.1 megapixel camera. After all, my current point-and-shoot has 7...although I would assume that there are other factors that produce great pictures aside from megapixels. On the flipside, can too many megapixels be a problem (so as to produce "noise" in my pictures?)

3. Is the issue of image stabilization a huge one? I'm inclined not to lock myself into a camera system, such as with the Nikon, that locks me into these specific image-stabilization lenses. Does a digital back that includes image stabilization mean I'll have a much larger degree of freedom with lenses in the future (I absolutely HATE making a choice that restricts me in the future, especially if the lens market ever trends away from image-stabilized lenses).

Sorry if that's a pretty basic set of questions, but I'm still trying to tease out the differences here since this is a pretty big purchase for me that I want to get right (by asking a lot of questions). Any help would be greatly appreciated, and additional comments/considerations are welcome!

[Rooz]

1. What is the likelihood that any of my old lenses would work with whatever camera I choose? I have several different types (my father has some old SLR lenses) including a Tamron lens that fits my Pentax SLR, and my father's old Canon lenses. Are there adapter kits available for lenses, just as there used to be for the old style SLRs?

the canon and pentax lens' should be fine, (obviously for use on their respective systems. ie: you cant mount a pentax lens on a sony camera). some of them may not meter correctly but they should work ok depending on just how old they are. alot of people get caught up on old film lens' working and this could be a miseconomy cos alot of the older lens' people want to put on to their dslr are pretty crappy so whats the advantage in it ? the new consumer lens, (that are very reasonabley priced), are generally far better optically than older consumer grade glass.

2. How important are megapixels? I tend to think the Nikon D40 is a great camera right in my price range, but I'm a little hesitant about the fact that it's only a 6.1 megapixel camera. After all, my current point-and-shoot has 7...although I would assume that there are other factors that produce great pictures aside from megapixels. On the flipside, can too many megapixels be a problem (so as to produce "noise" in my pictures?)

only really important if you are heavily cropping an image or printing massive poster size prints. depends on your needs. MP on P&S and dslr are incomparable mainly due to the sensor size, so dont even try and draw comparisons. the MP race, especially on P&S, is just marketing gimick.

3. Is the issue of image stabilization a huge one? I'm inclined not to lock myself into a camera system, such as with the Nikon, that locks me into these specific image-stabilization lenses. Does a digital back that includes image stabilization mean I'll have a much larger degree of freedom with lenses in the future (I absolutely HATE making a choice that restricts me in the future, especially if the lens market ever trends away from image-stabilized lenses).

IS has its applications and uses. its not anywhere near as crucial as some people try and make it out to be, but its nice to have in some cases like really low light where your shutter speeds have to be low or for really long telephoto shots. keep in mind also that using IS for low light, slow shutter speed shots is only useful for stationary objects. if your subject is moving then IS becomes completely useless.

the lens market is actually trending towards in-lens IS not away from it. mainly becasue the "big 2" canon and nikon, have commited themselves to in lens IS. that being the case, 3rd party providers like sigma and tamron are increasing the range of in-lens IS. thanks to mainly sony's entry in the market with in body IS, C&N have also signficantly increased their range of consumer grade IS lens' to compete. in a nutshell, no it wont be a problem.

the advantage of in-body IS is of course that any lens you want becomes an IS lens which can be pretty cool.

its a good time to be a dslr buyer. lots of great options out there. i know you only mentioned nikon and canon, but dont discount the a200 and k200d. personally on such a limited budget the d40 presents pretty good value and id go for that over a d60 if you are price conscious.

[balsop]

Thanks for such a thorough and helpful reply; I really appreciate your taking the time to answer my questions!

--Ben

[DonSchap]

Rooz ... good man. I think we need to let Ben know that he needs to think ... uh, bigger. Investment. They don't make good performing glass pricey because it is fun to do. It actually has a legitimate purpose, under the bright sunshine.

33872

[balsop]

It can be difficult to make decisions about purchasing a new DSLR, especially for the first time, when you've got an extremely limited budget (think graduate student who borrows his income at this point). That's why I'm grateful for the advice of people like you on this forum who have experience and can steer me away from the pitfalls of ultra-specialized equipment that won't be supported by a good array of lenses or accessories in 5 years. My idea of investment is choosing a good quality digital back that is as universally compatible as possible for future expansion, knowing that my passion for photography might grow beyond the realm of autofocus and family gatherings (as it already has). It never ceases to amaze me what variety of compatibilities (and incompatibilities) exist when jumping into a new area of technology, so we newbies are left to the advice of our wiser counterparts in order to make an informed decision that can affect what brand of lenses we spend the big bucks on in the years to come.

Thanks again for all your advice and patience with a new guy.

[Rooz]

honestly balsop, i dont think yoiu can go wrong with any dslr system at the moment. all of them offer great products. the hard bit is probably choosing the one that fits your personal needs best.

[Visual Reality]

Right now the D60 would not make sense. Reason being you can get most of the camera for a lot less money with a D40, or just pay about $75 more and get yourself a D80.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Balsop if you're worried by the quality of camera and lens at your price point don't be too worried. Have a look at the D40 pics thread on the Nikon DSLR page, there's some awsome photography there and you'd have to be seriously good to be too limitted by your gear. A lot of the pics there are done with a budget like yours. PS I'm sure the other manufacturers are great too.:D