Deciding on a first DSLR

Forums › Digital Imaging › Deciding on a first DSLR

David321

466 posts

Ultimate Geek

#245151 21-Jan-2019 12:45

Hi all,

Some of you may remember my first camera related post in this forum a month or so ago, I was asking advice on what would be a good DSLR for a first time user under $1000.

With a range of feedback taken on board (some of which I understood and some not so much) I am currently looking at two camera packages Noel Leeming has on offer (still open to other ideas though).

I will post the links below, I was wondering if anyone here could give me a detailed description of the differences between these packages, obviously the Camera is the same, but there are two different lenses, so I guess what I need to know is is one of the lenses significantly better than the other, or are they made for different environments etc?

https://www.noelleeming.co.nz/shop/photography/digital-cameras/digital-slr-cameras/canon-3000dk-portrait-lens-eos-3000d-portrait-lens-bundle/prod163109.html

https://www.noelleeming.co.nz/shop/photography/digital-cameras/digital-slr-cameras/canon-3000dtwin-eos-3000d-twin-lens-kit/prod163108.html

Thanks again!

_David_

1 | 2

7275 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2164741 21-Jan-2019 13:30

All are entry level/bundle lenses - you soon know when you go outside this range by how light your wallet gets

Basic kit is a 'walk about' lens. With similar 'view' range to your average cellphone. But the sensor is 30mm not 2mm, so its considered enough for most.

The 50mm STM is a short/compact 'what you see' field of view lens. Fixed view but good for making you use composure/positioning (if this was film days and not digital, 50mm is considered close to what the eye sees in a single fixed view)

The 2nd, I would consider a sports/additional set. 250mm puts you at the 'I wanna see that thing way over there in detail' range.

Remember its not really a 'zoom' and objects don't all of a sudden appear larger. Lenses change the field of view, so a smaller field of view (higher number lens range) covers the entire sensor so 'appears' closer/more detailed.

https://global.canon/en/imaging/enjoydslr/part3/3C.html

https://static.bhphotovideo.com/explora/sites/default/files/styles/960/public/10_8.jpg?itok=X6c_zMYC

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

Scott3

3921 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2164901 21-Jan-2019 17:24

3000D is a very compromised camera. Would avoid.

18-55 is a standard zoom. Will get used the most as it offers a versitile feild of view. Note that the one in the 3000D kit lacks IS (image stabilisation), somthing you really want if you are going to shoot in low light.

I have both the 50mm stm, and 55-250mm stm.

Both are great lenses. 50mm has quite a tight feild of view when used on a crop camera. Mainly good for shooting portraits. Lens has wide appature so lets in lots of light, and allows you to blur the background.

50-250 lens is for taking photos of far away stuff.

If it was my $1000 I would get the 200D kit from pbtech, of wait around for an 800d kit to go on special (I have the 800D).
More lenses can come later once you have worked out what you want to shoot.

David321

466 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2164927 21-Jan-2019 17:49

Scott3: 3000D is a very compromised camera. Would avoid.

Hey thanks for the info, can you elaborate on how the 3000D is compromised? we have decided to spend the extra and get the 1500D as it has slightly more mega pixels, but now you mention the 200D which I have not herd of and its roughly the same price, is there any significant difference between the 200D and 1500D?

_David_

Oblivian

7275 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2164928 21-Jan-2019 17:52

It's a crude way of explaining, and many would disagree but I see it as

xxxxD = Look, I got me a real camera not a phone!

(made to be the entry level, once upon a time it was the trap for XD cards while larger ones use expensive CF)

xxxD = My camera is a bit more functional, or has some features others do, and some they don't

xxD = Now we're talking

7D = Sports god

5D = Portrait god

6D = Featured fullframe

1D = Excuse Me Mr President, please hold for picture

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2164945 21-Jan-2019 18:54

if i were you i'd get *any late model dslr and a superzoom lens. like a tamron 16-300mm.

*i rate all canon aps-c cameras as the same for photos. some can do good video autofocus, if you want video research those, the best of which has what's called dual pixel AF and a flip screen.

David321

466 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2165006 21-Jan-2019 20:21

One user just mentioned the Canon 200D, I had a look at this online and have found it to be pretty much the same price as the 1500D which is surprising as it seems many features are better but it's the previous years camera.

Like I say the price is pretty much the same so it seems a no-brainer to take the older 700D as it outperforms the 1500D on many aspects, but perhaps I am missing something in my comparason?

_David_

Oblivian

7275 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2165010 21-Jan-2019 20:30

Just don't get hooked up on the megapixel game. It's not always the size, but how they process it :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_EOS_digital_cameras

For some reason dpreview doesn't know of the 1500 yet, seems very AU ish. But it has some nifty compare features and realtime sidebyside images

https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos700d&products=canon_eos1200d

timmmay

20427 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165012 21-Jan-2019 20:33

I still think a 4/3 camera is a better option for most people. If you go for DSLR I'd get a single fast prime, 50 F1.8 to start with, though you could add a kit lens if you wanted a zoom.

I prefer Nikon. I used Canon professionally for years but their autofocus is not great - maybe it's improved. Nikon AF is awesome. I went from about 30 - 40% keepers to 95% keepers in dynamic situations by changing brands.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165017 21-Jan-2019 20:49

timmmay:

I still think a 4/3 camera is a better option for most people. If you go for DSLR I'd get a single fast prime, 50 F1.8 to start with, though you could add a kit lens if you wanted a zoom.

I prefer Nikon. I used Canon professionally for years but their autofocus is not great - maybe it's improved. Nikon AF is awesome. I went from about 30 - 40% keepers to 95% keepers in dynamic situations by changing brands.

I've used many lenses on one pro(-ish) Canon body and I have found AF is lens specific (on a pro body at least). I can name the lenses which are very iffy in AF and those that nail every shot.

For the benefit of the OP, Nikon may or may not be better than Canon, depends on which model and how good you are at using it. But Canon APS-C second hand lenses are by far more abundant and cheaply available.

timmmay

20427 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165019 21-Jan-2019 20:53

Canon may have improved. I was shooting professionally, and I had no tolerance for equipment that didn't work well for me. Others had no problems. I had 7D, 40D, 50D, tried 5D but didn't like them. Nikon D700 worked well for me. If you're not shooting professionally even the older cameras are probably good enough for most people.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165025 21-Jan-2019 21:14

timmmay:

Canon may have improved. I was shooting professionally, and I had no tolerance for equipment that didn't work well for me. Others had no problems. I had 7D, 40D, 50D, tried 5D but didn't like them. Nikon D700 worked well for me. If you're not shooting professionally even the older cameras are probably good enough for most people.

I used a new Canon kit lens (18-55 version 1) in 2007 on a new Canon 450D - it was very poor at AF (1 out of 10). Not sure how the new kit lens would fare.

Scott3

3921 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2165026 21-Jan-2019 21:15

David321:

Hey thanks for the info, can you elaborate on how the 3000D is compromised? we have decided to spend the extra and get the 1500D as it has slightly more mega pixels, but now you mention the 200D which I have not herd of and its roughly the same price, is there any significant difference between the 200D and 1500D?

The 3000D is the cheapest DSLR canon makes. They have cut a lot of stuff out to reach the low pricepoint and to encourage people to buy their more expensive cameras.

Abundant camera reviews are available online.

Cons include: Poor high ISO proformance, plastic lens mount, slow burst (only 3fps), no touch screen, no flip out LCD, no power switch (need to use mode dial for that), no dipoler adjustment on optical viewfinder (required if you use glasses), no NFC for bluetooth pairing, low number of Auto focus points, no dual pixel auto focus. Also the Kit lens for the xxxxD camera's lacks Image stabilisation. Shooting a camera with a slow kit lens, Poor high iso performance, and no IS is going to be challenging in low light.

Regarding pricing:

3000D kit is $600 at pbtech

1500D kit is $700 at pbtech

200D kit is $950 at photo warehouse / Noel leeming

800D kit is $1120 at photo warehouse

50mm f/1.8 stm lens is $195 at PB tech

55-250 IS stm lens is $ 250 at Parallel imported (or $350 from PBtech)

So the pricing is only really similar because you are forgoing the additional lens. (personally something I would recommend doing to get a mid range body)

The reason I recommended the 200D is it is is a recently released camera, and the cheapest DSLR with their latest APS-C sensor (same sensor that is in the 800D, 77D, 80D, M100, M50, M5 etc.), and a modern imaging processor. Also it comes with a stabilized lens in the kit. It's main selling point is also it's compact size, (rather than low price as with the 3000D)

That said, I love my 800D, if your budget can stretch. Image quality is no better than the 200D, but has a few more buttons that make life easier, and has faster drive mode.

Beware that photography can grow into an expensive hobby. Budget for a memory card at the start, then a second battery & tripod a few months down the track, and another lens, or external flash in a year or so...

Could also consider used gear.

jarledb

Webhead
3249 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165073 22-Jan-2019 01:03

Used bodies drop it price when a new model comes out. Lenses keep their value for a long time.

So if you want the most out of your budget, buy a used body and invest in one or two really good lenses.

Mind you, the type of lenses I look at would probably use your budget and then some.

This is the "Kit lense" I use for my 7D. 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM. It starts around $1,300 NZD.

Like Scott3 said, this can easily become an expensive hobby :)

Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.

timmmay

20427 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2165084 22-Jan-2019 06:41

DSLR is eight years old I think, they work great

rb99

3401 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2165108 22-Jan-2019 08:21

Think D5600 is quite good, though you'd have to spot a sale to get it under $1000

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

1 | 2