DSLR

[StuartR]

As a photographer (serious amateur)who's just started fishing again I'd look at the Canon 1000D with 18-55mm image stabilised lens. I've just bought one for my son from Warehouse Express for £318 and you can claim £30 cash back so that's £288 net. Bargain.

18-55mm is a reasonable wide-angle (landscapes etc) to short telephoto (portrait head shots etc) focal range. If you want to go longer for nature shots / birds and the like and get quality results then you need to look at something like the 70-300mm IS (NOT the 75-300mm) but that's circa £350 quid. Lovely bit of glass for the price mind. Otherwise you're looking at serious money for something like the 100-400mm L IS. That's the downside with DSLRs - it can get expensive when you start buying the extra kit. I took a deep breath when I bought my 100-400mm (£400 cheaper on eBay than in Jessops!) but the results are stonking.

Don't get hung up on megapixels either, 10 is plenty on a DSLR unless you're a pro looking to do some big enlargements (and I mean bigger than A3). My first DSLR was an 8MP Canon 350D and I've had some big blow-ups from that that stillamaze me today.

To be honest though, I've decided not to take my expensive DSLR kit fishing with me (perhaps in the summer when there's not so much mud about) so I'm looking to buy a cheapish compact for the record shots, one with an angled screen so you can be sure you've framed correctly if taking a picture of yourself with that specimen fish - be a shame to cut your, or the fish's, head off /forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif. I'd also suggest that a mini tripod or a Gorillapod (google it)is essential for fishing selfportraits.

 

[Geoff Brown]

With camera bodies, buy from within theUK to make sure you get a warranty. With lenses I think I'm right in saying in the UK Nikon has to warranty a lens bought anywhere world wide. Double check me on that though.

Do remember whichever body you buy will be hopelessly outclassed in two years time (if that long). For many of us that doesn't matter, a great pictures is still great two years later.

Go along to a dealer and play with some Nikons, I find the D50/80/90 bodies too small, the D40/60 bodies way too small, the D70/s bodies a little too small, and the D200/300 bodies just right. You may think otherwise. The pro bodies (D1/2/3/4 whoops, said too much already) are too large for my usage.

With regard to in body focus motor, this only matters if you intend to purchase older non AF-S lenses (focus motor in lens). All newly releasedNikon AF lenses are AF-S, but there are still some gaps in the range (especially in prime lenses), and some older AF lenses are still current.

Some sites worth checking out:

DPReview for DSLR reviews, I'd give the forums a miss, been overrun with Americans

And for lens reviews:

The amazing Dr. Bjørn Rørslett at http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

and KlausSchroiff's excellent http://www.photozone.de/

 

[Cakey]

a lot of us on FMuse Stevesfor reviews

Ive saved a lot of money on Nikon lens etc on ebay so worth looking at

 

[Cakey]

Nikon

 

[Cakey]

CANON

 

[Wolfman Woody]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Tommo! wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

My other friend has on similar one similar (lower model) Woody.

I think an SLR is what I am after as a vast number of the shots I want to take will be while I am at work (dog handler) and I hate the delay on normal digitals as I always manage to miss the shot whereas 2-3fps I think would be ideal.

Hey I think I lied a little in my opening post. I know more than I first thought.</blockquote>

Yes I had the 9600, nice but slow as you say.

Best advice is to go into a big Jessops where they have loads of different models. Ask to handle them and judge them, not by their different (or similar) specs, but on how they feel in your hands. That's the most important thing, and ... will you be happy with it.

The exit Jessops and find the best deal on the Internet.

/forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

 

[Wolfman Woody]

As for a bank stick adapter -/members/images/6812/Gallery/Bankstick_Monopod.jpg



Gold Label Tackle Camera adapter. Mines years old and I've had old film SLRs on it.

(the orange bank stick is to help me remember to take the camera home /forum/smilies/embarassed_smiley.gif)

 

[Geoff Brown]

Top idea with the orange bankstick, but will a bankstick and head such as that safely hold a DSLR?

 

[Tommo!]

Some great advice, thanks.

My next port of call will be the local shop to have a touchy feel but at least I now have a starting point.

Thanks again.

 

[Cakey]

Woody would let you feel his /forum/smilies/tongue_out_smiley.gif

 

[Cakey]

i love this piccy

 

[Cakey]

its a D300 chassis by the way

does anyone know how it goes back together please ??

 

[Geoff Brown]

Isn't that one of those old small sensor DSLRs? Be worth a bomb one day. /forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

 

[Cakey]

ha ha ha.............we aint all got your money

 

[Bryan Baron 2]

Save for one of these.

Nikon D3x

 

[Tee-Cee]

I have just read Tommo's opening post on this thread............he said(more or less)the camera should be capable of dealing with every thing from general landscape views to wildlife and you guys have made suggestions as to what he might need.

My question(and I know very little about serious photography-okay!)is:

1. Which of the cameras mentioned deals with this vast difference best?Wildlife shots suggests one type of lens and general views another assuming that the wildlife shots need to be close-ups(for obvious reasons).

2. If this desire to take pics is part of his fishing trips then surely the weight of the camera gear and accessories must be taken into consideration......it all needs to be carried(along with rod bags,tackle bags,bait,seat etc etc)from the car.I carry a very small Canon(uses roll film!!)and this does very well for fish pics and other general shotsbut,with the best will in the worldTHEY ARE ONLY SNAPS,and nothingthat could be described as'real photography'What I get is a'record'of sorts but at least I don't have to carry tons ofcamera gear around with me!!

So,as I said,I am no photographer but does the gear you suggest meet Tommo's initial requirments without the weight and bulk or could he do with something smaller/lighter??

(As you may have guessed I am hopelessely out of date with cameras so what you come back with might just bring me into the 21st Century as well!!!)/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif

Good thread though!!

 

[Geoff Brown]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Cakey wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>ha ha ha.............we aint all got your money</blockquote>Lol.Money? What money?I was just teasing you...I'm happy with my antique D200.

 

[Wolfman Woody]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Geoff Brown (KLAA, YMCA, D.I.V.O.R.C.E.) wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>Top idea with the orange bankstick, but will a bankstick and head such as that safely hold a DSLR? </blockquote>

It should do, it used to hold my old Minolta 303 with a zoom lens on. But if in doubt, use a Gorillapod and wrap it around the bankstick or something else like a tree. They are good!

TEE-CEE,

That is what was going through my mind when I suggested the Fuji with a fixed zoom lens, but they are slow to respond to pressing the shutter. like this picture of of Bryan Baron trying to feed a swan. I wanted the picture of it taking the food from his hand, but the swan was quick to move it's head and Bryan was even quicker to remove his hand away from the swan.

/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif/forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

That was on my Fuji 9600, but now I have an Olympus 510E (new one is a 520E). This is a proper DSLR albeit with the 4/3rds sensor (you'll have to read about this). It's a compact enough camera, fairly light even with the longer zoom lens, and yet takes picture with 10megapixels and has vibration reduction built into the body instead of needing it in the lens. This allows you to take shots 3 stops slower without the shake you normally get, and it does work.

The whole thing, that's with a 28-84mm (eq.) and 80-300mm lens, can fit into a tiny shoulder bag along with a dedicated flashgun and spare battery, filters, and CF chips.

And they just announced an new model, I think it's the 30, to be released this month, if you can afford a little more. Not that it has an awful lot more going for it, but might have a better kit lens. Any one would be OK for fishing, wide angle for tight swims and landscapes etc. and a decent zoom of 300 for some nature shots.

The only thing reviewers complain about is the small viewfinder, but I don't even think about it. I know the Nikon D300 is much and bigger probably the D700 is bigger still, but that wouldn't worry me because unless you're half blind it won't help you to take better pictures unless you're really into the realms of macro photography.

Here's the 520.

And the new E-30.

Don't bother with the E-420, it doesn't have the image stabiliser function and that is such a blessing.

 

[Tee-Cee]

Thanks for that Woody................I guess its down to S.Claus now(I nearly said I could use my heating allowance but that would probably start another row!)........

Oh,by the way,its not snowing in Lane End yet so Marlow safe for a few hours/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif

To be honest I have to think about how much I want to get into photography-its as much a major pastime as fishing-new rod or new camera-now that is a dilemma!!

thanks again....andI have to say the response on this site is first class-even if I don't understand every word-more bedtime reading I guess!!

 

[Tommo!]

Very good point Tee-Cee, thanks for bringing it up.

StuartR had another good point with regards to expensive gear and muddy banks (although my bankside gear is probably worth more than a mid range DSLR).

The hunt continues.