# Stepping into the world of DSLR



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

I've read all the reviews and the Canon 450D seems to be the best camera for getting into DSLR's for the first time, but I'm a bit unsure if I need to get another lens with it?!?

Some say the standard 18-55 Canon lens that comes with it will do fine, but some say it's best to try and get a bundle at purchase to save money on a lens that I will need after only a few months when I find the 18-55 inadequate.

Your thoughts & recommendations on my requirements for another lens?


----------



## mattyR (Sep 14, 2006)

Not an expert by any means but I bought this lens

http://www.jessops.com/Store/s48644/1-1 ... -(Canon-AF)/details.aspx

and I find that it suits as a "one-fits-all" type of lens....although the experts will say that there is no such thing!!

It has built in OS.....optical stability.....which helps when using longer exposure times or when zooming in.

Matt


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

Kev

The 18-55mm will certainly suffice to get you started. Unless you find a very good bundle price with additional lens I would resist the urge to dive in to purchasing lens until YOU know what you are wanting from the camera. The 18-55mm is what I'd call a starter lens, most end up gathering dust or on eBay once the buyer has progressed their skills.

I have a 18-200mm, 18-70mm, 50mm and a super wide 10-20mm for my Nikon D200. The excellent 18-200mm pretty much lives on the camera as itâ€™s such a versatile lens, where as the 10-20mm is simply breathtaking for landscape photography.

Barring the 10-20mm all of my lens are Nikon as the optics are second to none, if I was to purchase a third party lens it would have to be a Sigma.

Looking long term I would certainly consider purchasing a 10-22mm Wide Angle lens for landscape photography and the Canon 28-135mm lens is superb.

You may want to budget for a decent flash (430 Speedlight upwards) as the difference it makes to your photography is phenomenal as the builtin flashes are pretty useless.


----------



## Hilly10 (Feb 4, 2004)

Depends what you want to shoot. If its motor sport or wildlife you will need 70-300mm to get you right into the action. Macro, portrait or just general stuff there are a lots of lens out there, Sigma make good quality glass to fit all Camera bodies. On the camera front dont discount the new Nikon D60 fantastic entry level camera and acording to some mags its gonna take a lot to beat it


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Agree with the above two posts.

450D a good choice, Nikon are probably ahead overall but Canon are well proven.

Go for which one you prefer. Then practice and decide what you think you might enjoy more - landscape, wildlife, macro, portrait, B&W etc. and then choose your lens.

Seeing as this is a photo thread here are a couple of recent pics with my 400D.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Cracking pics 8)


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Brilliant replies guys - exactly the kind of things I was hoping to read!

From what you've said I'm going to try a few online shops and my local dealers to see if I can get myself a decent bundle. e.g. Camera, Standard Lens, Extra Lens, mem card and bag.

Many thanks, this place is invaluable! 

p.s. JDN, awesome pics!


----------



## ratty (May 18, 2004)

jdn said:


> Agree with the above two posts.
> 
> 450D a good choice, Nikon are probably ahead overall but Canon are well proven.
> 
> ...


----------



## skiwhiz (Feb 17, 2008)

Would agree with all of above and it really does depend on what type of shots you want to take.
I would add go to local deal and get some hands on and see what feels comfortable.

Still an old fashioned 35m man but zoom len's will flatten the picture assume this is still the same with digital. Also take weight into account.

Had sigma lenses many moons ago and they were fine and I did some semi pro work in those days.

enjoy and have lots of fun


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Kev - having studied photography at college one thing I did pick up was that it's good practice to start of with a 50mm lens as working out how to take good photos with one lens is a good discipline.

It teaches you a lot about framing and stuff - and once you know the basics, then you can move on to the 'cheats' lenses.

Of course, that was only for someone who wanted to bother learning the 'craft'.

TBH, I didn't take it much further after college, but am angling for a good DSLR for my 40th - a little while away yet though.

I've always loved the shots from long lenses though.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

Nikon or Canon is the only real choice.

Personally I use Nikon and most of the time use one lens only the 18-200VR http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

This site also has very good reviews of Nikon equipment.

I dont supose you want a cheap second hand SLR to get you started?

http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... p?t=116780


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jdn said:


> Agree with the above two posts.
> 
> 450D a good choice, Nikon are probably ahead overall but Canon are well proven.
> 
> ...


Nice work there JDN. Love the first shot. Was camera on tripod? talk us through it.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

HDR I presume?


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

Great pics JDN.

Difficult to compete with those but here are a few taken with the D200 with 18-200mm VR Lens and 10-20mm Sigma (pictures have been reduced in size)


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I would say with 99% certainty that jdn's photos did not appear like that in camera.

Good though that the final results are.


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Pics 1 is unedited other than cropped. No tripod. Hand held with a 200mm lens while kids larked about in the garden.

Pic 4 has had mild photoshop to boost levels and some unsharp.

Pic 2 is a three exposure HDR blended in photomatix.

Pic 3 is a single RAW with tone mapping to increase dynamic range.

Here is another water shot:










A bit of fun:










Sea Eagle:










My girl:










Sorry for thread hijack..


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Fantastic shot - would make a great poster.


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

nice pics jim 

you should get that last one printed as a poster print 8)


----------



## davidg (Sep 14, 2002)

Like canon , older model but still good :?


----------



## QuackingPlums (Mar 10, 2004)

sonicmonkey said:


>


What did the original of this one look like? It's really dark in there and I found it quite hard to take photos with this level of detail and contrast.
I'm no photo expert and I was only using various compact snapshot cameras but my pics of Grand Central always look too dark if I want detail, or too blurry if I increase the exposure to get more light in, which is only useful for those "look at me standing still whilst the rest of the world is rushing by in a blur" kind of shots.... :lol:


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Went to a few of the local camera dealers today and a couple suggested the Nikon D60 would be a better option?

However THIS seems a good price? With discount codes I can get it for around Â£595.

Anybody got any opinions on either suggestions?


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

kmpowell said:


> Went to a few of the local camera dealers today and a couple suggested the Nikon D60 would be a better option.
> 
> Anybod
> got a opinions on this?


Nikon have always been renowned for their optics. I've had the D200 since release a couple of years ago and a friend has the D40x and we're both very pleased with the result and the camera's haven't missed a beat. Try and do a like do like comparison (specification wise) for the lens between Nikon and Canon, you'll find the Canon lens very well priced. I find the layout of the Nikons to be slighty more logical with a better menu system, but at this level of camera's you'd have to be a pro to tell the difference between them.

Hold both and see which is more comfortable for you, either way you won't be disappointed.


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

QuackingPlums said:


> sonicmonkey said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


QP,

Barring a very mild tweak of the levels in PS this is the "original"  For difficult to judge lighting conditions Ill take a RAW capture and tweak in PS. Cheating I know but it does the job!


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

We should start a photo thread, some of these are brilliant. Makes me want to throw my antique pick up and click digital and get a PROPER camera.


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

I agree - although the Nikon is technically a little more advanced and feature rich both are fine cameras.

I based my decision on Canon vs. Nikon on which felt more comfortable to use. Spent about an hour in the shop with both, plumped for the Canon. Having used my sisters D300 I still feel more comfortable with a Canon and happy that I do not have the skills to utilise the extra features of the Nikon.

It is an investment so a personalised choice is wise.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

jdn said:


> I agree - although the Nikon is technically a little more advanced and feature rich both are fine cameras.
> 
> I based my decision on Canon vs. Nikon on which felt more comfortable to use. Spent about an hour in the shop with both, plumped for the Canon. Having used my sisters D300 I still feel more comfortable with a Canon and happy that I do not have the skills to utilise the extra features of the Nikon.
> 
> It is an investment so a personalised choice is wise.


I have decided to defo go for the Canon due to it having the all important 'LiveView' that I didn't realise was absent from the Nikon until I read the reviews on dpreviews.com.

Now I just need to find the best price/package.


----------



## cuTTsy (Jan 31, 2003)

I have a Nikon D80 had it about six months, really pleased with it. Bought it online at http://www.parkcameras.com/, great service and the best price at the time. I am sure you will enjoy what ever you buy.

Nikon do courses for the first time users that are good value
http://www.nikon.co.uk/training/digital ... howCourses I am sure Canon might do the same.

I then picked up some lenses in the states, that is were the real investment comes in, just remember you might upgrade the body later but you can use the original lenses if you buy carefully.


----------



## damo (May 7, 2002)

I bought my first SLR 3 weeks ago and after a lot of research and shopping around I went for a Canon 40D with 17-85 USM IS lens.

The reason I went for the 40D rather than the 450D, in additon to it being a better camera, is because it is eligible for Â£100 cashback from Canon. Mated to Â£40 extra cashback for the lens, this makes it pretty close in price to the 450D with an 18-55, but with a better body and lens.

Cashback details here:

http://canonlensacc2008.onlinerebates.c ... claim.aspx

If you're flying soon, the best deal I found is here:

http://www.dixonstaxfree.co.uk/index.cf ... id=7000819

After cashback works out at Â£591.

I intend to use the 17-85 for a few months to get the hang of things, and then upgrade. When I do, I'll get a lot more on ebay for the 17-85 than I would for the 18-55.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

Had a good read through this as been looking at taking the same plunge.

Was going to get a Nikon D40, and nearly got a few months old one with extras for Â£200 but that fell through.

Have now just bought a UK sourced (Jessops) 4 week old Canon 450d with 15-55mm lens and a Lowepro Slingshot 100 bag for Â£435 delivered. Is this a good deal? Was going to buy a new 450d from Dixons earlier this week for Â£490, but this deal, with the bag price itself being about Â£45, seemed fairly good.


----------

