Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / February 2007
best camera to learn photography on?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
screenaccount@gmail.com - 19 Feb 2007 06:19 GMT Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as being better for learning the ins and outs of photography?
Nikon D40 or D50 or D70 Canon Digital Rebel XT
I know they have similar features, more or less, so it may not really be possible to recommend one over the other. But if someone had some thoughts on the matter, that'd still be helpful.
Oh, if it's important, I'd be using the kit lens included with the Nikons if I got one of those, and a Sigma 18-50mm lens with the Canon if I went that route.
Thanks for any help.
Joseph Meehan - 19 Feb 2007 12:18 GMT > Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as > being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? > > Nikon D40 or D50 or D70 > Canon Digital Rebel XT Any on the list would be fine choices. Frankly I believe the best camera to learn on is the camera you have what ever it may be. Learn to use what you have and adjust to any restrictions it may have.
 Signature Joseph Meehan
Dia 's Muire duit
Neil Harrington - 19 Feb 2007 14:12 GMT > Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as > being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any help. Any of those Nikons look fine for the purpose. I have the D40 with its 18-55mm kit lens and the D70s with its 18-70mm kit lens. Both are great. I like the D40 for its light weight and more compact size; the D70s is the more capable camera but with slightly older technology. The D40 requires the newer SWM lenses for autofocus (the autofocus motor is in the lens) while the D50, D70 and D70s will all use either SWM or somewhat older D and G type lenses that require the autofocus motor to be in the camera body. This will only be important to you if you plan on using the slightly older type lenses. The D40 can use those lenses too, but only with manual focusing.
Apart from the lens issue, which may never be an issue for you at all, any of the Nikons you mention should be good choices. The price of the D40 makes it almost irresistible, but then the D50 and D70s are selling at closeout prices that make them awfully attractive also.
I'm not really familiar with the Canon line so can't comment on that.
Neil
Neil Harrington - 19 Feb 2007 23:19 GMT [ . . . ]
> more capable camera but with slightly older technology. The D40 requires > the newer SWM lenses for autofocus (the autofocus motor is in the lens) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > older type lenses. The D40 can use those lenses too, but only with manual > focusing. I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation with many, if not most, of the third-party lenses. Any lens that doesn't have the autofocus motor in the lens itself won't autofocus on a D40, though it will focus manually all right. And the D40, like the others, has a focus indicator in the viewfinder that can be used, at least with the so-called CPU lenses (processor in the lens body, electrical contacts in the lens mount). That's not as convenient as autofocus but it does work well.
Neil
Alexander Arnakis - 20 Feb 2007 06:43 GMT >I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation with >many, if not most, of the third-party lenses. Any lens that doesn't have the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >CPU lenses (processor in the lens body, electrical contacts in the lens >mount). That's not as convenient as autofocus but it does work well. According to the D40 manual (page 97), the electronic rangefinder will work with non-CPU lenses having a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster. It seems that the electronic rangefinder is independent of the electrical contacts on the lens mount.
The great advantage of the D40 over all previous Nikon DSLR's is its small and handy size. To achieve this miniaturization, Nikon did things like remove the autofocus motor, remove the top LCD screen, go to the smaller SD memory card, and use a slightly smaller battery. These things also helped hold down the cost.
To me, the "gold standard" of handiness and portability has been the Nikon FM/FE series. Actually, the D40 is quite comparable to those cameras in overall size. I've paired mine with the 45mm f/2.8 P lens, which is the only manual-focus Nikon lens with a CPU (other than a 500mm telephoto). All functions of the camera work except autofocus (which I don't need anyway), and the combination makes a really neat companion for travel.
When used as a manual-focus camera, the D40 would really benefit from a split-image Katz Eye screen. This isn't available quite yet, but I've been assured that it's coming.
Paul Furman - 20 Feb 2007 07:05 GMT > The great advantage of the D40 over all previous Nikon DSLR's is its > small and handy size. To achieve this miniaturization, Nikon did [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > (which I don't need anyway), and the combination makes a really neat > companion for travel. Nice. Any chance you have a picture of that pairing? I can just barely cram my D200 with the 45P in my jacket pocket <grin>. <http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/photography/cameras/lenses>
> When used as a manual-focus camera, the D40 would really benefit from > a split-image Katz Eye screen. This isn't available quite yet, but > I've been assured that it's coming. Alexander Arnakis - 20 Feb 2007 20:59 GMT >Nice. Any chance you have a picture of that pairing? I can just barely >cram my D200 with the 45P in my jacket pocket <grin>. ><http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/photography/cameras/lenses> I don't have a convenient way of posting a picture, but the overall appearance is similar to your D200 setup. The dimensions of the combination (D40 + 45P) are 4 3/4" wide X 3 3/4" high X 3 1/4" deep. If you include the special filter, hood, and cap that come with the lens, that adds 1/2" more to the depth.
Neil Harrington - 20 Feb 2007 16:18 GMT >>I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation >>with [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > It seems that the electronic rangefinder is independent of the > electrical contacts on the lens mount. Well, that's interesting. I'd just assumed it required a CPU lens.
> The great advantage of the D40 over all previous Nikon DSLR's is its > small and handy size. To achieve this miniaturization, Nikon did > things like remove the autofocus motor, remove the top LCD screen, go > to the smaller SD memory card, and use a slightly smaller battery. > These things also helped hold down the cost. You bet. That was really my chief reason for buying the D40 -- so much lighter and smaller than my D70s, and the compact, inexpensive 55-200 makes a perfect companion to its kit lens.
> To me, the "gold standard" of handiness and portability has been the > Nikon FM/FE series. Actually, the D40 is quite comparable to those [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > a split-image Katz Eye screen. This isn't available quite yet, but > I've been assured that it's coming. What does it cost to have one of those things installed?
Neil
Paul Furman - 20 Feb 2007 16:50 GMT >>>I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation >>>with [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Well, that's interesting. I'd just assumed it required a CPU lens. That's for the AF indicator, a non-CPU lens won't meter for exposure unless you get a D200.
Alexander Arnakis - 20 Feb 2007 20:41 GMT >What does it cost to have one of those things installed? Katz will install their screens for an additional $50 (the screens themselves run $95-105, and there's a 5% discount on the total order if you get the screen and installation together).
But it appears that installation is fairly simple for a do-it-yourselfer. The screens on both my D70 and D40 are held in place from underneath by a U-shaped wire clip, which, if pried out with tweezers, allows the screen to drop free. You have to be very, very careful in doing this. In any case, Katz includes detailed installation instructions.
Neil Harrington - 21 Feb 2007 18:51 GMT >>What does it cost to have one of those things installed? >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > careful in doing this. In any case, Katz includes detailed > installation instructions. Very interesting, thanks.
Neil
Ståle Sannerud - 20 Feb 2007 23:55 GMT > I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation > with many, if not most, of the third-party lenses. Any lens that doesn't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the lens mount). That's not as convenient as autofocus but it does work > well. Is this autofocus indicator rigged like the one in the D70 - a little round dot down in the corner of the viewfinder? If so, it's not quite as useful as it could have been, as you have to peep down to the left(?) while focusing. I wish one of the focus indicators in the middle of the viewscreen could have lit up instead!
Alexander Arnakis - 21 Feb 2007 02:30 GMT On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:55:20 +0100, "Stεle Sannerud" <ssanneru@chello.no> wrote:
>Is this autofocus indicator rigged like the one in the D70 - a little round >dot down in the corner of the viewfinder? If so, it's not quite as useful as >it could have been, as you have to peep down to the left(?) while focusing. >I wish one of the focus indicators in the middle of the viewscreen could >have lit up instead! Yes, the electronic focus indicator works exactly the same as the one in the D70. These cameras definitely could make good use of a split-image screen if you're planning to do much manual focusing.
Neil Harrington - 21 Feb 2007 18:57 GMT >> I should have mentioned also that the D40 will be in the same situation >> with many, if not most, of the third-party lenses. Any lens that doesn't [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Is this autofocus indicator rigged like the one in the D70 - a little > round dot down in the corner of the viewfinder? Exactly.
> If so, it's not quite as useful as it could have been, as you have to peep > down to the left(?) while focusing. I wish one of the focus indicators in > the middle of the viewscreen could have lit up instead! Yes, that's an excellent idea indeed. I wouldn't think it'd be too hard for Nikon to do, either.
Neil
Fred McKenzie - 19 Feb 2007 16:15 GMT > Oh, if it's important, I'd be using the kit lens included with the > Nikons if I got one of those, and a Sigma 18-50mm lens with the Canon > if I went that route. SA-
What are you trying to learn? How to point-and-shoot? With any one of these you may be able to learn some things, but you might do just as well taking an art class.
You should consider adding a lens. One with a wider aperture, so you can learn about depth-of-focus and available light photography. Perhaps a 50mm f1.4 would be good as a portrait lens on an APS-sensor digital.
How do these cameras compare for ease of manual adjustment? How easy is it to manually focus them?
I agree that these fine bodies may be equally adequate for learning photography, but my personal choice would be a Pentax. In my collection of older film cameras plus some recent DSLRs, I much prefer the way the Pentax handles. It lends itself to manual adjustment, and a wide variety of compatible AF and manual lenses are available on the used market.
Fred
Paul Furman - 19 Feb 2007 17:35 GMT >>Oh, if it's important, I'd be using the kit lens included with the >>Nikons if I got one of those, and a Sigma 18-50mm lens with the Canon >>if I went that route. This part suggests the D70 is the best choice as it's the best of those kit lenses and particularly I'm wary of the Sigma. It sounds like you are wanting to learn a bit more manual control and the D70 rates best in that category as well.
> What are you trying to learn? How to point-and-shoot? With any one of > these you may be able to learn some things, but you might do just as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > can learn about depth-of-focus and available light photography. Perhaps > a 50mm f1.4 would be good as a portrait lens on an APS-sensor digital. A 50mm f/1.8 is more affordable and I agree that's a great idea.
> How do these cameras compare for ease of manual adjustment? How easy is > it to manually focus them? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > variety of compatible AF and manual lenses are available on the used > market. Savageduck - 19 Feb 2007 17:50 GMT > Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as > being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any help. Learning photography is a broad subject. The real question is which camera will give you the flexibility to experiment and learn how various settings (ISO, shutter speed, aperture, etc.)along with an appropriate lens allow you to get the result you want without post processing. Your choice of subjects (portrait, landscape, architecture, macro, etc.) are going to place artistic demands on you independent of whatever camera you choose. Great and bad photographs have been taken with Brownie box cameras. Take the shot and see what framing and cropping works to get a satisfying result. The beauty of digital is you can take all the pics you want without the cost burden of film some of us had in the past.
As one of those who has rapidly descended into old-fartdom I started with my fathers WWII era Argus viewfinder and his darkroom equipment. I moved on to a Yashica Electro 35, a Pentax K1000 and a Durst enlarger all 38 years old and are now gathering dust and moths. All of these taught me the mechanics of the camera and the end process. My current armory includes a D70, a D200, a vault of lenses with a wish list and Photoshop CS2.
I would suggest any of those you have listed with some of the best bargains available on the D70 giving you financial room for the glass you will desire. Then consider PhotoShop Elements for post processing you might not need spend the money to move on to CS2/3. Just get out there and shoot, ask for and ignore criticism and learn to have an eye for what pleases you. Good luck, 'Duck
Alexander Arnakis - 19 Feb 2007 22:14 GMT >Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as >being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Nikons if I got one of those, and a Sigma 18-50mm lens with the Canon >if I went that route. If you want to really *learn* the ins and outs of photography, rather than just take more-or-less automatic pictures right out of the box, you should use manual focus and manual exposure adjustment. A fast prime lens would be preferable to a (slow) zoom lens.
I would recommend the D40, because it's as good as the other ones in manual control mode, and is cheaper. Use the savings to get something like a 35mm f/2 AF-D lens. It won't autofocus on the D40, but you don't want autofocus anyway if you're trying to learn photography.
Actually, if learning is your goal, you might want to consider a film camera. However, the drawback there is the cost of film and processing.
Ståle Sannerud - 20 Feb 2007 12:27 GMT > Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as > being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > be possible to recommend one over the other. But if someone had some > thoughts on the matter, that'd still be helpful. Of those listed I'd go with the D70, or alternatively a good, used Canon 20D if you want to go for the Canon system. Both of these can be had for relatively cheap. Either will do the job in great style, which one to buy is largely a matter of feel and what you prefer in terms of ergonomics.
The other three cameras you listed are all castrated in some way. It wouldn't matter so much if you just needed a camera for snapping pictures, but for "learning the ins and outs of photography" it's another matter I think. Neither of them has more than one control wheel, to really learn photography you really, really want to get a good understanding of the manual mode of operation (keeping in mind that automation will automatically do the wrong thing a lot of times) and then you will want to have both shutter and aperture control easily available. The D70 and 20D are the minumum cameras that give easy access to both of these with separate wheels so that you have one wheel for shutter speed, another wheel for aperture. It's possible to do this on the D40/D50/XT too of course, but it's more fiddly and this slows you down - to change aperture you have to keep a separate button pressed while rotating the single control wheel. Hence the D70 or 20D.
In addition to this drawback, the D50 also lacks a depth-of-field preview button (no big deal perhaps) and a backlight for the top LCD (now THIS is a big drawback once you are shooting in less than good light - if you ask me Nikon saved ten cents in the wrong place there). The D40 lacks a built-in focus motor, which is a total showstopper if you are ever going to buy another lens. Nikon's selection of lenses with built-in focus motors is thin in the extreme, and manual focusing is no fun at all on a digicam.
As far as the Canon XT goes there is nothing directly wrong with it except a pretty crappy viewfinder and the fact that it is so small it can be uncomfortable to handle if you have largeish hands. (And that it only has one control wheel of course, but we've already been through that).
J. Clarke - 20 Feb 2007 15:04 GMT >> Hello. Can anyone recommend one of these DSLR bodies over the other as >> being better for learning the ins and outs of photography? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >minumum cameras that give easy access to both of these with separate wheels >so that you have one wheel for shutter speed, another wheel for aperture. Note though that there are at least a few people who prefer the single wheel with mode switch. The OP might want to try both and see which seems more "natural".
>It's possible to do this on the D40/D50/XT too of course, but it's more >fiddly and this slows you down - to change aperture you have to keep a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >uncomfortable to handle if you have largeish hands. (And that it only has >one control wheel of course, but we've already been through that).
|
|
|