I like the Canon XTi from your list. The Nikons have been stripped of the ability to auto focus with some lenses..
If you are totally new and on a severe budget, get the kit lens and learn digital photography. The money involved in the kit lens is not enough to be a long term problem, and you will learn what you want for the future. You will learn lots too, because there is lots to learn, and "good" glass will be much more expensive, so it will be important to get only those lenses you know you actually need..
Wait until you know which lenses you need for your photography before you buy anything. Don't ask questions like "What lenses do I need?" on photography forums. If you don't know, you don't need it. Choosing between two lenses that both do what you do actually need may be a good time to get advice, but only you can decide how your equipment is limiting your photography..
One thing to learn about is raw capture and conversion. It is a very powerful tool that I find indispensable. Raw images are often compared to negatives, while Jpegs are like prints. If you want control, and if you are serious about photography you will want control, then raw capture is important..
You will also need to learn about digital photo manipulation with programs like Photoshop. I don't use Photoshop because it is too expensive and does too many things I don't need, but you will need something that does the photographic equivalent of Photoshop..
Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...
Poochie99 wrote:.
I do know I want either the Canon Rebel XT/XTI or the Nikon D40/D40X..
I've read that the lense that comes with the Rebel XTI isn't verygood, but since I'm new to SLR's....would I really know thedifference?.
The Canon kit lens isn't bad, in fact it is good value for the money. It is certainly a good starter lens. Its better to start with something modest until you know which direction go in..
Between the Canon's and the Nikon's, seems like the Nikon's are moreuser friendly.....will I be able to know how to use the Canon?.
The user friendliness is very subjective, a bit like the PC and Mac debate. The main thing about the Canon would be it's small size, the XTi being marginally better to hold than the XT..
Oh...and all this RAW talk.....photography isn't a phase I'm goingthrough....I love it and I seriously want to pursue some kind ofcareer......so is this a feature I need to have on my first SLR?.
I don't know of any dSLR that doesn't have RAW (called NEF on Nikons)..
Brian A...
I would actually look at the K100D or K100D special. They are not stripped like the D40 models and are quite easy to use...
Poochie99 wrote:.
Hi forum!.
I want to purchase an SLR, but after reading review after reviewafter review, I think I'm more confused as to what I want..
I do know I want either the Canon Rebel XT/XTI or the Nikon D40/D40X..
I've read that the lense that comes with the Rebel XTI isn't verygood, but since I'm new to SLR's....would I really know thedifference?.
Meh.. I wouldn't worry about it too much. Since you say below photography is something you're really serious about you'll be replacing any kit lens with some better glass anyways..
Between the Canon's and the Nikon's, seems like the Nikon's are moreuser friendly.....will I be able to know how to use the Canon?.
Sure you can figure out how to use Canon. Better yet, go to the store and try both camera's out. Hold them, play with their menu's and functions. Then make your selection by which one you liked using better..
Otherwise, continue reading the other replies and you'll essentially see a non-stop Canon vs Nikon war going on. I'm sure other's will chime in for Pentax, Olympus, Sony, etc. as well...
Oh...and all this RAW talk.....photography isn't a phase I'm goingthrough....I love it and I seriously want to pursue some kind ofcareer......so is this a feature I need to have on my first SLR?.
Any DSLR you buy will have RAW. I know pro's that shoot nothing but RAW, but I also know pro's that shoot nothing but JPEG. So, it's really comes down to what works for you and your style of photography..
*sigh*.
So many questions...I'd love some help...some advice from experiencedphotographer....some guidence!.
Thanks so much!.
Oh...and my limit is around $1000....so I know all the above mentionSLR's fit into that budget..
Stephanie.
'I reject your reality and substitute my own' -Adam Savage..
Aletheia wrote:.
I like the Canon XTi from your list. The Nikons have been strippedof the ability to auto focus with some lenses..
If you are totally new and on a severe budget, get the kit lens andlearn digital photography. The money involved in the kit lens is notenough to be a long term problem, and you will learn what you wantfor the future. You will learn lots too, because there is lots tolearn, and "good" glass will be much more expensive, so it will beimportant to get only those lenses you know you actually need..
Wait until you know which lenses you need for your photography beforeyou buy anything. Don't ask questions like "What lenses do I need?"on photography forums. If you don't know, you don't need it.Choosing between two lenses that both do what you do actually needmay be a good time to get advice, but only you can decide how yourequipment is limiting your photography..
One thing to learn about is raw capture and conversion. It is a verypowerful tool that I find indispensable. Raw images are oftencompared to negatives, while Jpegs are like prints. If you wantcontrol, and if you are serious about photography you will wantcontrol, then raw capture is important..
You will also need to learn about digital photo manipulation withprograms like Photoshop. I don't use Photoshop because it is tooexpensive and does too many things I don't need, but you will needsomething that does the photographic equivalent of Photoshop..
Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough..
So the kit lens......
Here are my choices from the photography store I want to purchase it from.....
- Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi with Sigma 18-125 lens- Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi with 18-55mm EF-S lens.
With the reading I've been doing....I think I'm on the right track in thinking that I would enjoy the Sigma 18-125 lens more.....because it's a bigger zoom?.
Sorry...I'm not familiar with the correct photography lingo......YET!..
....Oh...but a Sigma lense is third party???....not as good as Canon?.
Oh boy......decisions decisions decisions!!..
...LOL...I know myself...once I decide to pursue something...I go full force. I already know...eventually, that I will want prime lenses.......
....Oh...but a Sigma lense is third party???....not as good as Canon?.
You can't make that generalisaion. Canon make some very expensive and optically excellent lenses, as well as a few much cheaper and poorer ones (like the 18-55 kit lens). So third-party lenses like Tamron and Sigma will probably be better than the Canon kit lens but poorer than many other Canon lenses..
The same is true of other major manufacturers: e.g. Pentax make some expensive and very well regarded 'prime' (non-zoom) lenses that are regarded as the best of their kind, whereas their cheap telephoto zoom has been heavily criticised..
If you go for the Canon camera, a third-party standard zoom to replace the cheapo Canon kit lens would be a good idea if you can afford it, although this bumps the price up significantly. Remember that it is the lens that actually determines the quality of the picture far more than the camera body. The Sigma 17-70 is popular and good value: have a look at this thread....
Http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=24355137.
Good luckMike..
Mike703 wrote:.
....Oh...but a Sigma lense is third party???....not as good as Canon?.
You can't make that generalisaion..
LOL...I realize that I can't make any generalizations....there seem to be many pro's and con's on almost everything SLR.....guess what it really does come down to....once you've educated yourself on SLR's.....is what you feel comfortable with...
If you know that, skip the kit lens and start your prime collection..
Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...
Sounds like you are very excited .
So a Sigma lens huh?.
My experience with them is nothing but fantastic, but I spent a lil extra to get the EX line. They make great products that can rival MOST canon lenses while being a little cheaper. I'd recommend for the future the Sigma 150 f/2 macro. A great investment. In the meantime, look around on the forums for reviews of the other lenses you are looking at. My understanding is that the canon kit lens isnt so hot.
They both a considerable investments, but will produce MUCH better images. Instead, I would save money now, hold off on the kit lens and look at the 50/1.8 which I will describe now.....
If you are interested in starting into some prime lenses, I must insist on the Canon 50/1.8. You can get it for less than $80USD and will be hard pressed to find a lens that takes photos as sharp for under $500. Its also a great lens to learn on, and besides, if you want to zoom, use your feet...
Aletheia wrote:.
If you know that, skip the kit lens and start your prime collection..
Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough..
Body only........
Erckmatt wrote:.
Sounds like you are very excited .
So a Sigma lens huh?.
My experience with them is nothing but fantastic, but I spent a lilextra to get the EX line. They make great products that can rivalMOST canon lenses while being a little cheaper. I'd recommend forthe future the Sigma 150 f/2 macro. A great investment. In themeantime, look around on the forums for reviews of the other lensesyou are looking at. My understanding is that the canon kit lens isntso hot.
They both a considerableinvestments, but will produce MUCH better images. Instead, I wouldsave money now, hold off on the kit lens and look at the 50/1.8 whichI will describe now.....
If you are interested in starting into some prime lenses, I mustinsist on the Canon 50/1.8. You can get it for less than $80USD andwill be hard pressed to find a lens that takes photos as sharp forunder $500. Its also a great lens to learn on, and besides, if youwant to zoom, use your feet..
Ohmygosh...I'm SO excited about this! I've thought about taking my love of photography to the next level for a couple of months now......
And now I'm off to search for info on your Canon 50/1.8........
Poochie99 wrote:.
Aletheia wrote:.
If you know that, skip the kit lens and start your prime collection..
Body only.......
I would still recommend the kit lens for a couple of reasons. It is easier to sell a camera with a lens, if or when you upgrade to a more advanced camera. With the 1.6 crop sensor camera, there arent many fixed focal length lenses in the wide angle range..
The kit lenses adds about $80 to the price of a body, have a look at the prices of the primes in the 20 mm range. (And 20 mm x 1.6 gives you only 32 mm as a FF equivalent.).
Brian A...
Thank you for everyones input....it's helped me out alot!!..