_Meyer_ 7:06pm, 5 June 2007
I want to invest in an SLR camera, so am interested to see what other people would recommend for starting out.
quick veil [deleted] 11 years ago
I have a Nikon D40, and I love it. I'm not sure what the D40x has to offer, but I'm sure it's just as amazing, just more expensive.
The D40s biggest competitor is probably the Canon Rebels, and I haven't heard too many good things about the Rebel from my friends who have them, but I don't really know, because I've never used one.

www.nickolivephoto.com Posted 11 years ago. Edited by www.nickolivephoto.com (member) 11 years ago
Ive got a Canon 30D and it works great!

To be honest most SLR's will do the job fine.

For your first SLR I would go for the Canon 400D. Its not to expensive and does a great job!
However i would recomend saving up that extra £100-£200 and buy the body by itself and a better lense.
The standard 18-55mm that comes in the package is not very good but it will do the job if your strapped for cash.

hope this helps :)

Magic Photography 11 years ago
Nikon (D40, D40X, D70, D80), Canon (EOS 350D, EOS 400D) and Sony (Alpha 100) are the main SLR contenders. Check the cameras in the price range you can afford. Usually the entry level ones are around the £500 mark. Have a look around on the web and check out the reviews to narrow down your choice, then go into a shop and actually hold them to see how they feel in your hands. Then buy cheap on the net :p .

I have the Sony Alpha 100 and have used the kit lens so far, but have just bought a 50mm 1.4 as well.
michales 11 years ago
I'd recommend the 30D. In fact that's what I want to get and use my 20D as a second body.
amateur6 PRO Posted 11 years ago. Edited by amateur6 (member) 11 years ago
If you don't have any investment in lenses, be sure to check out Pentax. As Nick says, "most DSLRs will do the job fine" and Pentax is an excellent bargain. Points in its favor (assuming the K10D): RAW capture is the equal of the best 10MP Canon and Nikons, and the shake reduction is built into the camera, not the lens -- so you get that benefit added to ANY lens you buy. That's a huge plus when you're shooting at lower speeds, obviously.

Plus, you don't have to keep buying the shake reduction over and over with each new lens, which makes even the newest lenses less expensive than the N or C equivalent.
Mr Skel 11 years ago
Okay, let's put it this way:

If you think this is something you wanna get into *seriously*, then think a bit out of the box. The lenses are far more important then the body. In a way the body is the disposable part.

Go prime and fast. It's cheaper, faster and better value for your money.

If you invest in a good set of lens, the day you'll have a bit of money and the desire to get serious with it, you'll spend a bit of money in a nice body.

Good lenses you can still have in 10 years from now =)

The entry level cameras that people mentionned in this thread are all good candidates. No worries on this side though.
Groups Beta