VenusNY wrote:.

I am not some professional photographer who knows how to play withthe camera, so I need something simple to use..

If you're going to get into photographing tiny subjects like insects, or tiny, fast-moving subjects like fish, you need to be prepared to learn. If you're not prepared to learn, throwing money at a new camera is unlikely to get you good results..

The pictures I intend to take with this camera are regular pictures ofpeople, landscape pictures, and pictures of tiny objects..

These call for three different setups:.

1. For family photography, a zoom range of 18mm to 55mm (on a DSLR with a 1.5x or 1.6x crop factor) is useful. So is the ability to take pictures in low light with the flash turned off, or with flash that's bounced off the ceiling..

2. Landscape photos usually call for wide-angle lenses..

3. Close-ups of flowers are often possible with regular lenses. For tiny subjects like insects, you may want specialized equipment (macro lenses, ring flashes, etc.)..

Which camera brand and model would you recommend to me? (If possible,which Nikon and Canon?).

Any current DSLR can take good pictures if you put the effort into learning how to make effective use of it..

What amount of money should I prepare for such a camera? I realizesomewhere between 1,000 - 2,000 USD? Is it possible to get a decentcamera for around $500? Being a beginner, I wouldn't want to spendthousands of dollars on something I wouldn't even know how to use..

If you shop at a reputable mail-order place (like B&H Photo Video), you can get an entry-level DSLR kit for about $500 to $600 (not including memory cards)..

* Nikon D40* Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D the predecessor of the XTi/400D)* Olympus E-Volt 500 with two lenses (covering 28-300mm equiv. in film terms)* Pentax K100D (soon to be replaced(?) by K100D Super?).

All of these can take family photos in good light, or if cranking the light sensitivity (ISO) alone is enough to make up the deficiency. All can take landscape photos, and presumably, closeups of flowers..

None includes external flash, "fast" lenses, or macro equipment. If you are intent upon an "about $500 budget", that would have to be an add-on, later. If you think you will get heavily involved in macro photography in the future, I would suggest that you research which camera makers offer the best selection in this area..

Is Nikon D40 a good camera?.

The D40 and D40x lack the in-body autofocus motor that is present on other Nikon DSLRs. Some lenses rely on this motor (instead of providing their own). So if you use a lens like the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 (cheap, good for portraits, lets in a lot of light) on a D40, the camera cannot adjust the focus. You have to do it by hand (with the help of a viewfinder light). On a D80, you'd have motorized autofocus..

Other than that, it's not bad for an entry-level DSLR..

What does 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G mean in this camera?.

18mm = smallest focal length for the kit zoom55mm = largest focal length for the kit zoom.

On a Nikon body with a 1.5x crop factor => this produces the same field of view that a 27mm - 82mm lens would on a 35mm film SLR. I.e., general-purpose zoom where wide end is useful for house/group photos, tele end is good for portraits.

F/3.5 = maximum aperture at the smallest focal lengthf/5.6 = maximum aperture at the largest focal length.

This lens doesn't let in much light especially at the portrait end of the range.Specifications like this are typical for kit lenses (even on expensive cameras)..

'G' is some Nikon-specific lens designation. I forget what it means...

It is good that your are thinking and reading first off... and that will get you a leg up when you go to buy. However, like in most of life you can only get so far with information gathering... eventually you need hands on experience..

As such, don't worry too much, but also don't spend too much money up front. DSLRs are much more complicated than their film ancestors, however the great thing about digital is the learning curve is greatly accelerated (due to the instant feedback and no film costs.).

Your stated interests lean toward macro-photography which means someday you will likely want dedicated macro lenses, but that doesn't mean you have to buy one first thing. You can get much more affordably screw in filters for the front of your lens to allow you to get images of small things, without the higher price of the albeit optically better dedicated macro lens..

Highly, highly recommend you play with as many different cameras as you can before you buy..

-gt..

I think you're approaching this in the wrong way. More megapixels do not necessarily make for a 'better' camera. Instead of trying to understand it all and attempting to get everything 'right' (which BTW is never completely possible), just get a Nikon D40x or a Canon 400D/Xti with their respective kit lenses (You can ask for an 18-70 on the Nikon which will reach further.) You can use them in automatic mode to start with and then expand your use into the more difficult areas learning as you go,and adding telephoto and wide angle lenses over time..

If you do not get on well with your camera after say 3 months then, as Nikon and Canon are the most popular brands, there is always EBay or trading them in for something else at a camera store. You see, by then you'll have a sensible idea of what you might actually require for your kinds of shots and can then get it either from the Canon/Nikon systems, or from a different manufacturer..

Not really sure if you need a DSLR? If you've got time please take a look at the introduction to my "Back to the Bridge" camera link below..

John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr..

Your post made me laugh because I could have posted the exact same thing! I too am a omplete novice, from all the various chats Ive hadd, the overall reccommendation for a novice was a nikon d40x -not too expensive but enough bobs/bibs and dials to get you started!..

I was exactlt the same as you and went for the Nikon D40, which I have found a great "learning" camera as it has the facility built into the camera to "tell you what the various settings are and how best to use them" by simply pressing the ? button.This is SO usefull I cant reccommend it enough..

It has everything you need to start learning DSLR photography at an unbeatable price..

Also if your not going to make huge enlargements, the D40 takes just as good a pictures as the D40X and to be quite honest you would be best saving the money spent on a D40x as you wont see hardly any difference in picture quality.All in all brilliant camera, brilliant pictures, brilliant price!Hope this helps...

Keep in mind that, if you buy a dslr, you need to learn how to use a complicated photographic device AND you need to learn how to photoprocess your pictures. You should not buy a dslr if you intend to use primarily the "automatic" modes that do your thinking for you when you take pictures. If you do, you will be disappointed..

If you are willing to learn the camera and PP, I suggest that you buy the Canon XT and the kit lens until you learn how to use the camera. By that time, you will know what additional lenses you need for the photos you take..

Jerryhttp://jchoate.zenfolio.com/..

I have to say it again: WOW, thank you all so much for your help :o) This is a great forum to stop by if one is a beginner :o) Tom_N, thank you for your detailed response..

After I have posted my message here yesterday, I went back again into the Glossary page and printed the terms I see most often "here and there". I've read them again, and I think I've learned a bit more. I am beginning to think I'll learn what I need, all in due time..

As many of you have asked, I DO intend to experiment a lot with the camera and I DO want to learn using lens cameras well at all costs. Yes, I am a clueless beginner as of now, but that doesn't mean I don't want to learn. I've just gotta begin somewhere. And I agree with you: I do need a hands-on experience to really know what is being talked about with respect to DSLR cameras..

For this reason, like you said, I probably should buy a DSLR suitable for beginners. When I've learned enough and decided what I want from my next camera (or simply next lens?), then I'll proceed to buy another more expensive and more advanced DSLR camera (or another lens)..

I think Ill just go with Nikon D40 or Nikon D40x for now. I suppose the only difference between D40 and D40x is that D40x has a larger MP (mega pixel?) space of 10.2, yes? This simply means larger photo prints, but I dont mind the smaller ones that D40 offers. I understand that with 18-55 mm lens, the camera has a zoom capability of 3 times. Is that correct? (55 / 18 = 3)..

Question: In the future, I will be able to get additional lends with wide-angle and larger zoom (say, 7 or 11), for the Nikon D40 camera, right? Or will I have to get an entirely new camera for more sophisticated lens? Do more sophisticated lens mean Id be able to take more zoomed-in photos as well as photos of fast-moving subjects?.

Tom_N, you said: The D40 and D40x lack the in-body autofocus motor that is present on other Nikon DSLRs. Some lenses rely on this motor (instead of providing their own). So if you use a lens like the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 (cheap, good for portraits, lets in a lot of light) on a D40, the camera cannot adjust the focus. You have to do it by hand (with the help of a viewfinder light). On a D80, you'd have motorized autofocus. So, that means, I wouldnt be able to buy more sophisticated lens (in the future) for my D40 camera? Or simply, that Id have to learn how to adjust the focus manually with the new more sophisticated lens?.

Just a note: I do play with image editing quite a lot on my computer (particularly Adobe Photoshop), just never had a DSLR camera. But I know a bit about image editing. Is that supposed to be helpful with learning about DSLR cameras?..

Sorry for that but I have one more question..

I heard I could buy an "extension tube" for my Nikon D40 camera so that it will help with close-up pictures. Is that true? If so, what extension tube would you recommend to me?.

Also, what memory card should I buy together with the Nikon D40 camera?.

THANKS up front :o)..

Extension tubes are OK, but your best bet is really to get a true Macro lens. I'm talking about a true Macro lens, capable of 1:1 magnification, usually in a fixed focal lenth, probably either 50 mm or 100 mm. Both the manufacturers and companies such as Tamron and Sigma make very nice ones. These are more expensive, but will be easier to use and more versatile than extension tubes..

Giving less high quality, but decent results on a budget as you learn photography, you can get a set of closesup lenses that screw on the front of your lens like a filter. They come in sets with +1,+2,+4 which can be used together to give a wide variety of magnifications..

All these options are available for any brand camera you get. The only real weakness of the Nikon 40x is that you are pretty much limited to new lenses, which are more expensive. Other brands give the same options with lower priced used lenses. For instance, Sony has a wide variety of used Minolta lenses to chooe from even though there current new lens selection is limited. Other brands have similiar options...

To be sure, a true macro lens is best. But, you want a 200mm one for fish, and Nikon's 200mm macro is over $1300. And, the current version doesn't even have VR (image stabilization). I's suggest the Nikon 55-200mm VR lens and a 3T close-up lens. Less than $300 combined...

Greg Nut wrote:.

To be sure, a true macro lens is best. But, you want a 200mm one forfish, and Nikon's 200mm macro is over $1300. And, the currentversion doesn't even have VR (image stabilization). I's suggest theNikon 55-200mm VR lens and a 3T close-up lens. Less than $300combined..

Thank you :o).

I will look up these (Nikon 55-200mm VR lens and a 3T close-up lens) on Amazon.com. I can find them exactly by the terms you gave me, right? (Don't know what VR and 3T mean.)..

VenusNY wrote:.

I understand that with 18-55 mm lens, the camera has a zoom capabilityof 3 times. Is that correct? (55 / 18 = 3)..

Yes. Note that the zoom factor doesn't tell you how wide the largest and smallest fields of view are. (An 18-55mm lens and a 70-210mm lens both have 3x zoom.) It's just that point-and-shoots usually start out from something that translates into about mid-30s in 35mm film SLR terms..

Question: In the future, I will be able to get additional lends withwide-angle and larger zoom (say, 7 or 11), for the Nikon D40 camera,right?.

You can get all sorts of lenses Nikon and third-party that will mount on a D40. You shouldn't have to throw away the camera body, but with many lenses, I think you will need to manually adjust the focus..

Do more sophisticated lens mean Id be able totake more zoomed-in photos as well as photos of fast-moving subjects?.

Yes. There are different aspects to this:.

1. A telephoto lens lets you magnify the image more. Two challenges here are that the high magnification magnifies sources of blur (hand shake, subject motion), and that it's difficult to make these lenses gather lots of light (without greatly increasing cost and weight). So most affordable (<$1000) telephoto zooms are slow..

Note that "lots of magnification" and "lets you get real close" aren't always identical the Nikon 70-300mm VR lens magnifies almost 6x as much as the 18-55mm lens, but it has a minimum focusing distance of 5 feet. A Nikon 50mm f/1.8 has slightly less magnification than the kit lens, but it lets you take pictures from much closer so the difference in "closest distance" magnification (for small subjects) is not quite what the focal length difference suggests..

2. Macro lenses are designed for taking photos of small subjects that are very close. Some of the other specialized gear for this type of work will hold a camera on a rail (so you can move it very slowly towards or away from a fixed subject)..

3. For fast-moving subjects, what you need is either a high shutter speed, OR a way of illuminating the subject almost entirely by flash (so the flash freezes the action)..

To use a high shutter speed, you need one or more of the following:.

* Lots of light. Adding external flash or studio lighting can sometimes help here..

* A lens that lets in lots of light..

* The ability to crank the light sensitivity (ISO) of the camera, without addingexcessive noise...

VenusNY wrote:.

(Don't know what VR and 3T mean.).

VR is Vibration Reduction a feature of some Nikon lenses that compensates for hand shake..

Canon's name for this is Image Stabilization (IS)..

Some other vendors put it in the camera body, so you get stabilization of virtually all lenses "for free". But with in-body systems, the image shakes around in the viewfinder while you're trying to compose the picture...

You should be able to find them on Amazon. I'd also recommend B&H (bhphotovideo.com). Don't forget that the D40 will only autofocus with AF-S lenses. The 50/1.8 and 35/2 are nice lenses, but you need a D80 to use them...

See this site for more Nikon and general DSLR discussion..

Http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm..

All right everyone, THANKS A LOT :o) I am saving this thread (and another thread of mine somewhere in this forum) for future references. If I ever need to buy another camera or lens and what-not (lol), I'll definitely look inside this thread again, or I may even come back to the forum to bother you again with my annoying questions. Hope you won't mind ;o).

Thanks :o)..

Jchoate wrote:.

You should not buy a dslr if you intendto use primarily the "automatic" modes that do your thinking for youwhen you take pictures. If you do, you will be disappointed..

Limiting ones-self to the automatic modes offered on a DSLR will certainly make some types of creative shooting more difficult, but I disagree that it would be a "disappointment"..

Even entry-level DSLRs shoot w-a-a-a-a-y better pictures in their automatic modes than any P&S, and better than most prosumer models in the same hands..

There's no doubt that a skilled photographer can get more from a DSLR than a newbie shooting in full-auto but that same newbie shooting in full-auto will get far better results than s/he would shooting a P&S in full-auto (which is the only mode most P&S's even offer). And that is often enough for many people who aren't interested in learning all the DLSR arcana..

Dpreview & pbase supporterhttp://www.pbase.com/digirob..

Digirob:.

Technically, you are correct. However, the OP likely would be disappointed because his photos would not have the punch of other photos he sees on the web that were taken by that camera unless he made adjustments in-camerea or with PP..

Jerryhttp://jchoate.zenfolio.com/..