Best DSLR camera for under $1k?

[pjcalla]

I know we have quite a few photographers (pro and amateur) here on INGO, so I figured I'd ask. My wife and I are looking at upgrading our 7 year old "point and shoot" to a dslr. We have a baby on the way, and figured it was time. We would like it to cost under a grand with everything included. Our main focus would be the kid, vacation, outdoors, etc.

Cannon or Nikon? I've had people tell me both. Model? We have just started the research process, so any info is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[infiremedic07]

I use a Nikon 5100. live the Nikon lenses they just have a superior quality. my total package a couple years ago was right at $1000 with a normal lens and a 55-300mm zoom. I have zero complaints so far.

 

[Tripp11]

As a non-professional, I enjoy reading Ken Rockwell's articles about various pieces of equipment.

Nikon vs. Canon

My wife IS a professional photographer, and she's loyal to Nikon.

 

[TheUziButton]

I vote for buying a used Canon 40D body off of THIS FORUM. It will cost $400-$600. Use the remaining funds for good glass. 50mm F1.4 or 24-70 F2.8L

 

[seldon14]

I used to sell cameras. Nikon and Canon are both good, but I generally preferred Canon. Most of my relevant thoughts are posted in that comparison link.

 

[melensdad]

I just went through the same dilemna and ended up NOT buying a DSLR. I was looking to replace an older DSLR with a newer one and decided to go with a mirrorless premium compact with the Micro Four Thirds format, interchangeable lenses, all metal body, and 16 megapixel resolution.

LINK => DMC-GX1 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

There is a very similar Olympus that I also considered.

For $1000 you can get the camera and 2 lenses.

FWIW, I still love, but never use, my Nikon F2a.

 

[Kirkd]

Asking about canon vs nikon is like asking someone ford vs chevy. My advise, pick p both cameras and handle them. They will both take great pics. Ergonomics are different for each camera. For me, the Nikon just felt right in my hands.

Now, what do you plan on shooting with your new camera. That may help with recommendations.

 

[ReadnFool]

I have a Nikon D7000. I believe they are now available new in your price range. Two biggest benefits 7 fps in speed mode for sports action and built in motor for auto focus with older lenses without the built in autofocus motor. That second part opens you up on all the older used Nikon lenses and can really save you money if you are gonna be looking at higher quality lower fstop lenses. If you just want to buy a single wide range 18 - 200 zoom it will be less useful.

Other positive is the 7000 has metal rather than plastic body, buttons to access many functions rather than menu driven (quicker changes to settings) and they just came out with the D7100 so the D7000 should be super cheap.

 

[pjcalla]

Thanks for all the input so far. I really appreciate it. Sounds like there is no real winner, I just need to go fondle them.

I just went through the same dilemna and ended up NOT buying a DSLR. I was looking to replace an older DSLR with a newer one and decided to go with a mirrorless premium compact with the Micro Four Thirds format, interchangeable lenses, all metal body, and 16 megapixel resolution.

LINK => DMC-GX1 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

There is a very similar Olympus that I also considered.

For $1000 you can get the camera and 2 lenses.

FWIW, I still love, but never use, my Nikon F2a.

My wife went looking yesterday, and found a Sony that was the mirrorless that she really liked. Since there is no viewfinder, is it hard to see the lcd screen in the sunlight? The one she looked at was one of these. Is there a reason you went with Panasonic over the other mirrorless?

It seems that the balance would be off with a smaller camera body with a lens sticking out of the front.

I guess I should just go and fondle them. Any shops you all recommend around Indy? Is Roberts any good?

 

[JokerGirl]

Go to the Roberts downtown and see what they have for you to fondle. Don't bother with the one in Carmel. It's not nearly as good.

Also, don't rule out possibly buying a used DSLR from them. You can usually get ones that are nearly brand new for half the price, so you may be able to get an even better camera than what you're looking for.

I will say this, though... if you have no plan on ever taking the camera out of (AUTO) mode, then you really don't need all of the functionality of a DSLR. Stick with that little Sony you're looking at, or a high end point and shoot. Many of them anymore will give you just as nice pictures as most people are looking for our of their DSLR.

Personally, I like the Canon cameras. I shoot a 7D and a 5D Mark II. They are both really good cameras that have stunning quality, but again, they are wasted if you just want to set it on auto and go.

 

[indyjoe]

With the next version coming out, I have to jump on the Nikon D5100 bandwagon as well. I've been blown away for the low light quality compared to my first DSLR (D70) and second (D40). It all comes down to what glass you like. I've been collecting Nikon glass and feel their controls are easier to use while still looking through the lens, rather than the heavy menu driven Canon.

With modern $500 or so bodies, the largest difference you will see is in the photographer. Budget at least half your money for glass.

Also, unless you are going to get the use out of the body to pay for itself, don't go with high end. My brother in law spent $2k on his Nikon body a couple years ago, to shoot family stuff. My D5100 completely kicks its butt. It is lighter, easier to hold, has 8x the low light capability and 2x the resolution. My $700 70-200 2.8 lens is still worth $700. My $1800 D70 I bought at the same time is worth $200 if I was lucky. Maybe $100.

 

[CitiusFortius]

Our main focus would be the kid, vacation, outdoors, etc. .

IPhone?

 

[MikeDVB]

I have always been Canon, but more so due to having Canon glass than anything else. I can operate a Nikon just as well as a Canon and they're both great.

Starting over, would I stick with Canon? I'm not sure - I'd do a lot of side-by-side comparisons to see which one offered what I felt I needed the most...

That said, I got a Canon 60D kit from BestBuy last year for ... $899 + Tax. It's now my backup as I got a 5D Mark III for Christmas.

 

[Brandon]

I have a Cannon Rebel XTi, it's old but still takes a great picture. Much better then an Iphone

Go someplace you can hold both, Roberts as mentioned before is a great place for this, plus their sales people know what they are talking about.

I can't say for sure if I were to replace mine I would go with a Cannon again or not. Not to knock them, but they both make great products.

 

[melensdad]

. . .My wife went looking yesterday, and found a Sony that was the mirrorless that she really liked. Since there is no viewfinder, is it hard to see the lcd screen in the sunlight? The one she looked at was one of these. Is there a reason you went with Panasonic over the other mirrorless?

It seems that the balance would be off with a smaller camera body with a lens sticking out of the front.

I guess I should just go and fondle them. Any shops you all recommend around Indy? Is Roberts any good?

Is it hard to see in sunlight? Not really. I've got a couple others that have BOTH a viewfinder AND an LCD screen. For 90+% of my pictures I use the LCD screen. BUT, one of the things I liked about the Panasonic is that it has an optional viewfinder that attaches on top. I didn't buy it. I may never end up buying it. Here it is if you want to buy one => [ame]http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMW-LVF2-External-DMC-GX1-DMC-LX7/dp/B006FKR1PG[/ame]




Is there a reason I went with Panasonic...? Yes, the FIRST reason was the reviews that I found all over the internet. I looked at every review I could find. Basically, in the UNDER $1000 price range, this camera is generally considered to be one of the very best. SECONDLY, the "Micro Four Thirds" standard is a bonus as there are a few different companies that adopted it so you can buy your lenses from Panasonic, Olympus, Leica, etc and they work with this camera. THIRDLY, I've had other Panasonic Lumix cameras and each has been an absolute brick in terms of durability and each has/does offer a great suite of controls for customizing photos, while each has been among the highest reviewed of any camera in its class when I purchased them so they seem to have a reputation for quality.



Seems like the balance would be off ... Not that I can tell. The reality is that virtually all the DLSR cameras are plastic bodied, some are metal/plastic hybrids and they are very lightweight. The GX1 is a metal body that oozes quality in its build and control feel. The slight bit of weight from the metal body gives it a good feel without making it heavy. The "balance" issue really comes from the design and ergonomics. If the camera "fits" your hands and you can grip it will because it has a good shape/design then there are no balance issues in your hand. Further, you tend to hold the camera with 2 hands, one on the lens and one on the body, so no matter which style you choose (DSLR or Mirrorless SLR) the balance is not an issue.



BTW, I know nothing about Roberts or any other INDY area shops, I'm up in NW Indiana so I actually shop in Chicago. Sorry I can't help with that question.



Just my opinions, but YMMV.

 

[CitiusFortius]

I have a Cannon Rebel XTi, it's old but still takes a great picture. Much better then an Iphone.

All I'm saying is lots of people overbuy for features they will never use. Dslr cameras are sexy, but probably overkill for most applications.

 

[melensdad]

All I'm saying is lots of people overbuy for features they will never use. Dslr cameras are sexy, but probably overkill for most applications.

I agree.

But, I also believe that most of the cameras on the market, be they $129 or $1129, they all offer features that are useless to some users, critical to others, and occasionally used by a few.

One feature that I look for is focus speed. Combine that with the ability to shoot rapid sequential shots and the camera is great for sporting events. The problem is that most consumer grade point & shoot cameras simply can't do that due to latency in their focus. One thing that attracted me to the GX1 was its 0.09 second focus speed and its ability to shoot several shots per second. With a 1 second lag to the first shot from powering the camera on (pretty normal for higher grade cameras) but once powered on, the time lag is only 0.2 seconds so it allows for pictures to be taken at sporting events like Fencing where there is very fast action. Add a priority dial for shutter, apature, etc and you have a lot of flexability.

So I get a bunch of features with a camera that I won't ever use, but I get a couple features that I need that I can't get with many cameras.

Try that with an iPhone

 

[MikeDVB]

I agree.

But, I also believe that most of the cameras on the market, be they $129 or $1129, they all offer features that are useless to some users, critical to others, and occasionally used by a few.

One feature that I look for is focus speed. Combine that with the ability to shoot rapid sequential shots and the camera is great for sporting events. The problem is that most consumer grade point & shoot cameras simply can't do that due to latency in their focus. One thing that attracted me to the GX1 was its 0.09 second focus speed and its ability to shoot several shots per second. With a 1 second lag to the first shot from powering the camera on (pretty normal for higher grade cameras) but once powered on, the time lag is only 0.2 seconds so it allows for pictures to be taken at sporting events like Fencing where there is very fast action. Add a priority dial for shutter, apature, etc and you have a lot of flexability.

So I get a bunch of features with a camera that I won't ever use, but I get a couple features that I need that I can't get with many cameras.

Try that with an iPhone

I don't know about you, but my camera has a startup time of 0.1s (100ms) and a shutter lag of 0.059s (59ms)...

Focus speed has more to do with the particular lens I have attached than anything else, but it's certainly not slowed by the camera body or in-body focusing sensor.

All of that said, it's a $3,500 camera body before lenses. My average lens cost me $1,200, some upwards of $2,200 while others in the $300~500 range. That said, I thoroughly enjoy photography and it's a hobby of mine. If there was money to be made in professional photography [these days, not so much] I would consider doing it for a living but my current form of employment is more than enough for now.

Having used everything from the film, camera on a flip phone, up to a high-end DSLR - ultimately the biggest limiting factor is going to be the user. You could pick up my most expensive set-up and take horrible shots and I could pick up your P&S camera and get stunning results. Equipment does have an impact just as the quality of a gun has an impact but what's most important is the one pulling the trigger/pushing the shutter release.

A high-end camera does not make you any more a professional photographer than picking up a high-end rifle makes you a world-class marksman .

 

[melensdad]

Mike, I agree that a good camera will NOT make anyone a photographer any more than an expensive rifle makes you a marksman.

But as this thread is asking about high quality consumer grade Sub-$1000 cameras I stand firmly by what I wrote in response to JoFra's post about using an iPhone and about features.

My whole point was to look for the features you need in a camera. I simply chose AF speed as a feature to highlight and illustrated it with the sport of Fencing (the tip of a Saber moves faster than anything else in Olympic competition except for a bullet). I chose Fencing because I'm a Fencing coach at one high school, volunteer at 2 high schools and also volunteer at the local Fencing club. So when I choose a camera it must meet some specific criteria. That said, it was nothing more than an example of a feature that I find useful.

Now features that I probably will never use that I get with a camera will include such things as "toy" scenes and "minature" scenes that make things look like toys or minature models. They come with the camera. I won't use them. And that is something that JoFra points out. DSLRs often come with a dizzying amount of features that most people never use, to that end, his observation is correct and valid.

* In a former life I shot film for a newspaper (yea, I'm THAT old).​

 

[MikeDVB]

I wasn't disputing what was already posted; I was just making the point that more often than not you're limited by your skill set and not the gear. Just about any sub-$1000 camera should do just fine. There are certainly crappy ones out there like there are crappy guns, but that's where a little research comes into play.

If you know you need a particular feature, then you would use that as a criterion for choosing cameras within your budget while doing research .