Camera question

[Capt_Cully]

I was thinking of grabbing a used Nikon D60 or a cannon T3. I AM NOT a good photographer and I don't understand any of the Mumbo-jumbo. My question is, should I be concerned about the number of pics/shots on a camera body? If so, how many? And why?

Thanks

 

[SkiFletch]

In a similar boat. Following with interest

 

[NirvanaFan]

I wouldn't worry about the number of shots taken by the body. They're good for hundreds of thousands. There are a few things I would watch out for though.

Check the lenses very carefully looking for any imperfections/scratches. Hooke each one up to the body and look through them very carefully. Note any spots. Hook up another lens and see if there are spots in the same place. If there is, it's an issue with the body.

Look at the mirror and look for debris. If it gets junk on it, it will have to be cleaned. Most people just take it to a shop to be cleaned. The D60 will have an anti-static feature, but dust and crap still clings to the mirror.

Make sure the AutoFocus works. The Nikon has motors in each lens, while the Canon will have one motor in the body. Turn off the AF. Turn each lens to make sure it focuses correctly and there is no grittiness in it.

Turn the lens to zoom in and out and make sure it is smooth and not gritty.

Obviously look for any damage to the body, particularly the LCD screen and corners. Dents/scratches in the corners mean it was likely dropped.


The D60 is an awesome camera, and is what I have. However, my friends D40 cost a little less. The D40 has basically the same features. His camera can take pictures more rapidly without having to stop and wait for the camera to write the pictures to the card.

 

[Capt_Cully]

I primarily need fast. This years Xmas card was a debacle until I used my mother in laws D40. Nice and fast. That's all I care about.

The real money is in the lenses anyway right?

What lenses would you say are essential? Macro, portraits, and I might be interested in some longer distance stuff while I'm hunting. Might be cool to shoot some non-shooters with a camera.

 

[Srixon]

If you get a 1:1 macro be prepared to spend$ (I've been looking $350+ for a good one) I have a d40 that came with a 18 to 55mm and a 55 to 200mm lens as a kit....very happy with these for the general stuff but if you want the cool coral shots gotta get a macro

 

[NirvanaFan]

They both take pictures with the same shutter speed. It's in how fast the photos move from the internal memory cache to the memory card.

My D60 kit came with the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses as well. They suit me fine. If you're looking for absolutely crazy photos, you'll want better ones.

You know the UV, sepia and other filters that screw onto the end of the lens? I've got a macro one. It is pretty cool. It's not as good as a good macro lens, but it didn't cost hundreds of dollars either.

Not my best macro photo, but I believe that I took this one with the macro adapter.

 

[Capt_Cully]

How about the cannons? T2i or T3? For comparison.

 

[oneradtek202]

Mainly sensor upgrades, increased megapixel ....remember that I took those macros on an older t1i ...the lenses are the key . Borrow my canon f2.8 macro anytime

 

[NirvanaFan]

I've haven't shot extensively with a cannon, but my cousin raves about hers. The Nikon seems to fit my hand better. Honestly, for 99% of us, it won't be the camera holding us back. It will be the user.

 

[magdelan]

I have the T2i. It's a Great camera. Super Fast. The important part IS the lens though. I have a great everyday lens. It's the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. It beats the 18-55mm in my opinion and consistently takes great pictures.

 

[SkiFletch]

Nice tips guys.

Another question while you're all going... Would a novice user who plans to stay not much better than novice be better suited to a D40 rather than shelling out major cash for the 6 series?

 

[Gravesj1s]

I'm still using the T1i canon body and I dont know how it compares to the 2 or 3.

with these lenses.

18-55mm" IS" zoom (came with the camera pretty decent and compact.
55-250" IS" zoom ( good for distance ,especially if you dont have a tripod that "IS" <image stablizer> makes a noticable difference the further the distance.
100 mm macro (same as brandons but with the image stablizer "IS"

On the macro I paid hefty for that lens and the image stablizer helps a little but not enough to justify the cost. Secondly a fixed macro should really only be used for non moving objects and with a tripod.This is why I dont think the "is" matters for that lens.

-Steve

 

[oneradtek202]

Or the 4 now Steve! I think gettin an older style body like a 2i would be great and buy a decent or two lenses with the cash ud save

 

[Jeremy_Martin]

I'll echo what others have said about the body not being so important. I have about ~15K in camera equipment and have been shooting for years. I have had plenty of images published from the original Rebel I had 8 years ago that only had 6MP. Getting a good macro lens would be a much better investment than a more expensive body. They also hold their value much much longer. That being said, you may just want to look at a good point and shoot. Lots have much better macro than any SLR with a deeper depth of field (look it up if this doesn't make sense, hard to explain without pictures). If you were to get an old Canon G9 and learn how to use it I'm sure you would be very happy.

 

[Capt_Cully]

I spent a decent amount of cash on a point ant shoot that supposedly had a really fast shutter for shooting kids. After using it for a year, I'm don't with it. I can get some cool still macros with it. I have a nice tripod too.

But for kids, I need the speed. I'm leaning towards Canon vs Nikon. Just had better luck over the years with their point and shoots and have their software on my desktop already. Like my sis in laws T3 just a touch better than mom in laws D40. Not that I even have a clue, but you seem to get way more MPs for the $ with the Canons too.

Thanks for the tips. I'll be surfing eBay for sure.

 

[fpv930]

Capt,
I just saw the thread in my email updated and decided to follow. I am a very very novice camera user. However, I purchased a Nikon D3100 (entry level) DSLR last year for work. I love this camera and it wasn't expensive. It came with a kit 18-55 lens and I purchased a 70-300 VR lense for long distance.
As a beginner, this camera is awesome! Way better than my 300.00 (2006) point and shoot. These types of cameras will get you out of 'auto" mode and you will be shooting great photos in no time.
If you purchase either a Nikon or a Cannon you won't be disappointed. The kit lenses are OK. However, you should be able to take good photos with any lens. IMO. Once the lens holds you back... time to get better glass.
These cameras are available on Craigs List. Many people purchase the cameras and then don't spend the time to figure them out.
I don't have any tank pics as I have not yet purchased a macro lens. lol

Just thought I would chime in. Have a great Christmas.

 

[Capt_Cully]

I think I'm just going to grab a t1i. Macros can be taken with my point and shoot. If I can get some long distance zoom, that's probably more important to me at this point.

Brandon & Steve, how is the speed on the T1? Should I look at the t2i? If I'm not gaining much, I'd as soon save the money. Seems to be about $100 difference for used T1 vs T2. They will all go well beyond my capabilities, or even my interest to be honest. I'm just tired of delayed, blurry, poorly lit, pictures of my kids or special events.

 

[der_wille_zur_macht]

Can you clarify something? You keep talking about "speed." Are you referring to speed as in "I can shoot fast moving things without them getting blurred" or speed as in "I can take lots and lots of pictures in a short amount of time without waiting for the camera to catch up?"

 

[Capt_Cully]

I think a little of both. I'd love to take a bunch of pics in a row of the kids. Out of 5 or 6 pics in rapid sequence, you can get a keeper. But they are live action subjects, as are various wildlife (or fish).

Does that make sense?

I don't want to too caught up in a lot of technology that will frankly, be wasted on me. Give me a Chevy, not a Cadillac.

 

[Gravesj1s]

I doubt theres much difference between t1i & t2i other than mega pixels.Good pics are more about settings & lenses than pixels ,imo. You can shoot in rapid sequence about as fast as you can push the button. Moving objects I haven't done a whole lot of that to say.The little I have done seemed to come out good with the shutter speed set down to fractions of a sec.Im a novice ,sorry.

-Steve