Wife says $1,500. What do I do?

len20

I'm a newbie around here and I apologize if this question has been answered somewhere else.

My wife says that I can spend $1,500 on a camera and lens(s) when we get our tax return. I'm looking hard at the Nikon d80 and the Canon 40d. Do I get the Nikon d80, a cheaper body and spend more money on the lens(s); or do I spring for the Canon 40d with a lens kit, and buy a good lens next year?

We have a 4 month old baby, so I'll be shooting portraits. But I also like shooting landscapes and outdoor photography. What do you think?

(I made a pitch for the Nikon d300. That's when she started throwing things.)

DonnaLu

Turn on the charm!
Hold out for the D300 and be sweet. REAL SWEET!!

Tommyboy

I have a 40D (traded up from an XTi) and REALLY dig it. It's such a great camera.

I have no doubt that the comparable Nikon is just as good, +/-.

I'm inclined to advise an entry level body and spend more on lenses. If you're like many users here, you'll jettison the kit lens before long, and you'll get a new body in six, twelve, or eighteen months.

You could look at a high quality, utilitarian zoom like a 17-55 f/2.8 or a 17-85 f/4.5-5.6. Depending on what you spend, you could even get a telephoto zoom.

These are just random thoughts, and what I might do if it were me, given what I know now. Your results may vary. My wife is 5 months pregnant; I have the 17-85, and I'm thinking really hard about the 17-55.

Before someone else says it, go to a reputable, full-line, non-chain camera store and handle the Nikon and the Canon. Might consider the Pentax or Olympus also. See how they feel and what you like about them.

Also check out dpreview.com.

Good luck!

rebelxtnewbie

len20 wrote:

I'm a newbie around here and I apologize if this question has been answered somewhere else.

My wife says that I can spend $1,500 on a camera and lens(s) when we get our tax return. I'm looking hard at the Nikon d80 and the Canon 40d. Do I get the Nikon d80, a cheaper body and spend more money on the lens(s); or do I spring for the Canon 40d with a lens kit, and buy a good lens next year?

We have a 4 month old baby, so I'll be shooting portraits. But I also like shooting landscapes and outdoor photography. What do you think?

(I made a pitch for the Nikon d300. That's when she started throwing things.)

Get a 5D and 24-70 2.8 or 24-105 f4 IS. ~$2600-$2800
Get your wife a nice gift and hide your camera receipt.

Cameron

I'd go with the 40D, kit lens, and the 50mm f/1.8. The 50mm f/1.8 will only run you about $90 but is a great portrait lens for the kids and gives you the low-light option the kit lens won't give you.

You can then save up for a nicer lens next year to replace the kit lens. I'll second the recommendation for the 17-55 f/2.8 - I have it and LOVE it.... my most used lens.

len20

CSwinton wrote:

I'd go with the 40D, kit lens, and the 50mm f/1.8. The 50mm f/1.8 will only run you about $90 but is a great portrait lens for the kids and gives you the low-light option the kit lens won't give you.

You can then save up for a nicer lens next year to replace the kit lens. I'll second the recommendation for the 17-55 f/2.8 - I have it and LOVE it.... my most used lens.

The 17-55 is about $1,000, yes?

evoryware

Heh I remember those days, my budget grew by $500 after I did the research and it's skyrocketed beyond my wildest expectations now.
The 28-135 is a pretty good "starter kit" lens.
I would consider the:
40D with the 28-135 - good range for indoors and outdoors stuff
40D with 50 f/1.4 since you have a little one indoors.
XTi and 17-55 2.8 IS - barely bust the budget. $1518

If the XSi was out then maybe I'd try that.
Just what I would consider if I was in your position.

len20 wrote:

The 17-55 is about $1,000, yes?

yep and the lens is where a lot of people say is where you should focus your money. Though again, there's nothing wrong with the 28-135 or the 50 1.4 considerably lower priced.

Richard

I would avoid the kit lenses and instead get a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I believe it is available in both Canon and Nikon versions. Excellent optics, great value and it would keep you on target for your budget even if you decide on the more expensive Canon body.

len20

So far, with the exception of DonnaLu, everyone is pushing the Canon. Sorry DonnaLu, I don't think I have the amount of sweetness it would take to get the d300. I'd have to take out a huge sweetness loan or something.

Is the 40d simply a far superior camera to the d80? Anyone care to plug the Nikon d80?

Richard

len20 wrote:

So far, with the exception of DonnaLu, everyone is pushing the Canon. Sorry DonnaLu, I don't think I have the amount of sweetness it would take to get the d300. I'd have to take out a huge sweetness loan or something.

Is the 40d simply a far superior camera to the d80? Anyone care to plug the Nikon d80?

Hah! You're new around here...Canon shooters predominate on Dgrin, but we do have a healthy respect for Nikon. I'm sure someone will jump in to plug the D80, but in the meantime, do a search on Canon vs. Nikon in the Search dropdown on the main Dgrin navigation bar and you will have weeks of reading on the matter.

Elaine

Congrats on the new baby and soon to be new DSLR!

I switched systems and upgraded from the Konica Minolta 5D to the Canon 40D (love it!) and my brother recently got the Nikon D80 (his first DSLR and he's very happy, too). He lives in Alaska so I haven't been able to try it out, personally. I'd recommend holding both cameras as part of your research. I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

I also have the 17-55 2.8 IS lens (love it). It's sharp. It's fast. It's got IS. It's not cheap.

I'd also recommend a 50 1.8 (about $100) or even better a 50 1.4 (about $300). This would be great for indoors and it can focus nice and close on that baby face and those toes. A 50 with a 17-55 2.8 IS or a more budget conscious Tamron 28-75 2.8 or Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS...would be a nice way to start out.

Sorry I don't have more to share about the Nikon. The 40D is a newer camera, but for the long term, I believe you would be pleased with either line.

All the best!

Tommyboy

Richard wrote:

Hah! You're new around here...Canon shooters predominate on Dgrin, but we do have a healthy respect for Nikon. I'm sure someone will jump in to plug the D80, but in the meantime, do a search on Canon vs. Nikon in the Search dropdown on the main Dgrin navigation bar and you will have weeks of reading on the matter.

Canon users predominate the market.

But more doesn't mean better. Just look at any of the most popular television shows. . . .

Canons are great. So are Nikons. The owners of other brands will swear by theirs as well.

I bought a Canon because--at that time--the entry level Canon was a better camera than the entry level Nikon. I shot Nikon 35mm for 20 years.

The 50mm f/1.8 or 1.4 is good advice.

Lots of people shoot 28-135s or 28-70s. I just don't feel these zooms are wide enough to be a good all-purpose lens. Clearly others disagree.

XTi or XSi and 17-55 Canon or 17-50 Tamron is pretty appealing.

davemj98

Open Horizons
A little more investigation will open more doors.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665345637

DrDavid

davemj98 wrote:

A little more investigation will open more doors.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665345637

Ick.. I wouldn't even buy a sony toilet-paper holder...

Sony has a big red mark next to their name... Distributing root kits on CD's so that people can't copy them (root kits are like a virus), screwing over 1st gen Bluray owners (non-upgradable to the new version of bluray that's required for anything good), PS3 that was marketed as being able to play PS and PS2 games too (and it never worked/was removed)... Etc.. Sony has a long history of sticking it to consumers.

David

Pupator

DrDavid wrote:

Ick.. I wouldn't even buy a sony toilet-paper holder...

Sony has a big red mark next to their name... Distributing root kits on CD's so that people can't copy them (root kits are like a virus), screwing over 1st gen Bluray owners (non-upgradable to the new version of bluray that's required for anything good), PS3 that was marketed as being able to play PS and PS2 games too (and it never worked/was removed)... Etc.. Sony has a long history of sticking it to consumers.

David

True. But I don't think Canon, Nikon, or any other huge companies are exactly humanitarian award winners either.

What Sony also has a history of is making great cameras - and the A350 is no exception.

ziggy53

I would also hold some budget for a decent electronic flash. Almost any camera will benefit from a good lens "and" good light. You can also build your own flash modifiers to additionally greatly improve any flash.

The Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR DI-II LD Aspherical (IF) is a much better choice than a "kit" version lens, as is the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro.

All of the cameras mentioned so far are crop 1.5x/1.6x, and the base 50mm, f1.8 or so from any manufacturer makes a pretty good portrait lens.

[Deleted User]

I can't help with the best camera lense combination as I am still new to this myself eve though I just bought my first decent lense (e.g. non kit). But I have just had to calulate the total cost (for insurance purposes) of all the equipment in my other hobby and that scared me when I realised it came to £4800 ( at about $2 = £1 that $9600).

So what ever you start off with its going to grow and cost you

Anyway it is not a case of what you buy, its what you can do with it is more important.

Tim

Tanuki

len20 wrote:

I'm a newbie around here and I apologize if this question has been answered somewhere else.

My wife says that I can spend $1,500 on a camera and lens(s) when we get our tax return. I'm looking hard at the Nikon d80 and the Canon 40d. Do I get the Nikon d80, a cheaper body and spend more money on the lens(s); or do I spring for the Canon 40d with a lens kit, and buy a good lens next year?

We have a 4 month old baby, so I'll be shooting portraits. But I also like shooting landscapes and outdoor photography. What do you think?

(I made a pitch for the Nikon d300. That's when she started throwing things.)

I'm sure you will be happy with any of the major DSLR manufacturers. Personally, I went the Nikon route because I preferred the ergonomics to the Canons. I was very pleased with my D80.

No matter which camera you buy, you might consider a used model so you can have enough budget for lenses and flash / acessories, such as a 50mm prime, a fast (f2.8) zoom, and a flash that you can trigger off-camera.

Mike

len20

Here's what I've got if I go through B&H:

Option 1.
Canon 40d with 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 lens + 50 mm f/1.4 lens = $1,657.25

Option 2.
Canon 40d body + Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens = 1,505.55

Option 3.
Canon 40d body + Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 = 1,575.10

Option 4-10.
Could go on forever.

Am I going to want to make sure my all-purpose lens zooms past 50mm or wider than 28mm?

nightowlcat

And I'll put in another plug for Nikon cameras I posted this elsewhere for someone else, so just copied it here. If you're willing to go used, you can do even better on the body and have more for lenses and/or flash I got a nice D1h used for $249. :ivar:ivar


Nikon D60 SLR Digital Camera Kit with 18-55mm G AF-S VR DX & 55-200mm G AF-S VR DX AF Lenses New @ $979.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/543638-REG/Nikon_9609_D60_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

The D60/D40/D40x cameras only Autofocus with lenses that have the motors in them, otherwise you will have to manual focus them, but it does get you a new camera with two lenses to take you from 18-200mm to get started.

For a higher level body you could build with this:

Nikon D80 body only - New @ $729.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/449061-REG/Nikon_25412_D80_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor Lens - New @ $199.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/532521-USA/Nikon_2176_18_55mm_f_3_5_5_6G_VR_AF_S.html

Nikon Zoom Normal-Telephoto 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor Autofocus Lens (Vibration Reduction) New @ $229.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486717-USA/Nikon_2166_55_200mm_f_4_5_6G_ED_AF_S.html

$1159.85

Nikon D80 body only - New @ $729.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/449061-REG/Nikon_25412_D80_SLR_Digital_Camera.html

Nikon Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX - New @ $329.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/324190-USA/Nikon_2149_18_70mm_f_3_5_4_5_G_AFS_ED_IF.html

Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S Autofocus Lens (Vibration Reduction) New @ $479.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/449088-USA/Nikon_2161_70_300mm_f_4_5_6G_AF_S_VR.html

$1539.85

And this is a good lens to have in your bag no matter what:
Nikon Normal AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Autofocus New @ $109.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247091-USA/Nikon_2137_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html

Flash

SB400
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/471717-USA/Nikon_4806_SB_400_Speedlight.html

SB600
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/323882-USA/Nikon_4802_SB_600_Speedlight.html

SB800
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/300467-USA/Nikon_4801_SB_800_Speedlight.html

DonnaLu

len20 wrote:

So far, with the exception of DonnaLu, everyone is pushing the Canon. Sorry DonnaLu, I don't think I have the amount of sweetness it would take to get the d300. I'd have to take out a huge sweetness loan or something.

Is the 40d simply a far superior camera to the d80? Anyone care to plug the Nikon d80?

I would be the last person to poo-poo a Canon because I've never used one. I got my my first DSLR , a Nikon D50, as a gift from my fiance. Loved it. When it came time to upgrade, the D300 was getting such rave reviews, I really never considered Canon. Doesn't mean that I'd tell anyone not to go Canon, though.

Thanks for not getting miffed at my first response. I tend to be a goofball :giggle

evoryware

The 28-135 isn't that wide on a 40D, which is why the 17-55 could be cool.
But 28-135 is a nice range to start out with while you try and figure out what size you REALLY DO need.

I did mean type the 40D, 50mm 1.8 and 430EX, but I guess I deleted it by accident. That would be my last choice anyway.

len20

Elaine wrote:

Congrats on the new baby and soon to be new DSLR!

I switched systems and upgraded from the Konica Minolta 5D to the Canon 40D (love it!) and my brother recently got the Nikon D80 (his first DSLR and he's very happy, too). He lives in Alaska so I haven't been able to try it out, personally. I'd recommend holding both cameras as part of your research. I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

I also have the 17-55 2.8 IS lens (love it). It's sharp. It's fast. It's got IS. It's not cheap.

I'd also recommend a 50 1.8 (about $100) or even better a 50 1.4 (about $300). This would be great for indoors and it can focus nice and close on that baby face and those toes. A 50 with a 17-55 2.8 IS or a more budget conscious Tamron 28-75 2.8 or Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS...would be a nice way to start out.

Sorry I don't have more to share about the Nikon. The 40D is a newer camera, but for the long term, I believe you would be pleased with either line.

All the best!

Am I going to notice a difference in the 50 mm 1.8 vs. the 50 mm 1.4?

St_rydr

My first dslr is a canon 30D 28-135 is. $1500 at the time now you can get the 40D with same lens for 1500 but I would look into warranty I went with Big Box store to give me a no fault warranty for 4 years and no interest payments. A flash is 430ex $230 or 580 ex11 $400 don't know how I got by with out it? A bag to haul all this stuff around $200, Flash cards $200, Batteries $50, Lens hood $30, UV filter $30 kinda see where this is heading... If I had to do it all over again I would buy some great used equipment for half the price I paid and take some great photo's.

i_worship_the_King

I'll plug the Nikon too. When making the decision within my budget it all came down to ergonomics. Slightly more megapixels was in favor of the canon, but what good is that if I don't like the way it feels in my hand. It's the same philosophy used to buy any good instrument, and most good cars. Imagine driving a 350Z and a Mustang, except the 350Z has a seat that makes your back hurt... Same deal here. If it wasn't comfy I was not going to use it.

If you've got bigger hands, I think Nikon wins hands down. If you've got money for MkIII or D3 grade though, it's a toss up - they're both huge.

Elaine

i_worship_the_King wrote:

I'll plug the Nikon too. When making the decision within my budget it all came down to ergonomics. Slightly more megapixels was in favor of the canon, but what good is that if I don't like the way it feels in my hand. It's the same philosophy used to buy any good instrument, and most good cars. Imagine driving a 350Z and a Mustang, except the 350Z has a seat that makes your back hurt... Same deal here. If it wasn't comfy I was not going to use it.

If you've got bigger hands, I think Nikon wins hands down. If you've got money for MkIII or D3 grade though, it's a toss up - they're both huge.

I can certainly understand the desire for comfortable ergonomics. This was one of the reasons I went with the KM 5D over the Rebel XT, back when I bought my first DSLR. Between the Canon 40D and Nikon D80, I believe the Canon is larger, and I find it fits great in my female hands. But this is one of the reasons camera prospects should be checked out in person, if possible.

ziggy53

len20 wrote:

...

Am I going to want to make sure my all-purpose lens zooms past 50mm or wider than 28mm?

The majority of what I shoot, and what the "average" photographer shoots, can be covered with a standard/normal zoom of 18-50mm-ish range on these crop cameras. That's why most "kit" lenses are in that range. It really depends on your shooting style and the mix of photography you desire as to what coverage you will require.

Borgus

Sony A700 or Sony A350 DSLR's

len20 wrote:

I'm a newbie around here and I apologize if this question has been answered somewhere else.

My wife says that I can spend $1,500 on a camera and lens(s) when we get our tax return. I'm looking hard at the Nikon d80 and the Canon 40d. Do I get the Nikon d80, a cheaper body and spend more money on the lens(s); or do I spring for the Canon 40d with a lens kit, and buy a good lens next year?

We have a 4 month old baby, so I'll be shooting portraits. But I also like shooting landscapes and outdoor photography. What do you think?

(I made a pitch for the Nikon d300. That's when she started throwing things.)

Can't beat Sonys new Alpha lineup. Check it out. Anyone can buy a Nikon or Canon. jeh

ziggy53

len20 wrote:

Am I going to notice a difference in the 50 mm 1.8 vs. the 50 mm 1.4?

I have both and I do find that the Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 is more accurate to focus and yields a higher percentage of keepers. I reserve the f1.8 for situations where the risk doesn't justify the f1.4.

The f1.8 can still give good results if you are careful and pay attention in the viewfinder.

Richard

len20 wrote:

Am I going to want to make sure my all-purpose lens zooms past 50mm or wider than 28mm?

You are going to want both longer and wider. The question for you now is, where do you start on a tight budget? Later on, you will expand your range by buying additional lenses. I recommended the 28-75 because (for me) it is a good mid-range zoom and does fairly well in low light, but then I also have a 17-40 and a 70-200. Nevertheless, I still want something else longer and something else wider. It never ends...

nightspidy

suggestion
Have you considered a new/used canon 30D? Excellent camera, I really love mine; it was a major step up from the Reb XT that I was using. I'm sure you could find a reasonably priced one and still have enough left over to get the len(s) that you need.