Nikon D80 V Pentax K10D

Have had a few compact type digital cameras which have mostly been reliable and the picture quality has been acceptable but this year I've got a bit sick of juggling a pair of polaroids in front of the lens when photographing fish in the water.

I'm guessing that a DSLR is the way to go so that I can use a polarized filter but once I started looking into things all sorts of different specifications and differences came to light. Sure there are entry level models from them all but will I be satisfied with them long term if they're missing something that I'm going to find useful in the short term?

Lens compatibility, dust removal, shake reduction, live view etc

Now, I am looking at something which will take my photography to another level and I do have a little experiece with SLRs from years ago so I am prepared to play and learn. As well as being able to do my fish, nature and landscape photography I'll be wanting to do self take trophy shots as well.

The reason the Pentax is an option is because of it's weatherproofing seals (among other reasons) and I had originally been looking at the K20D but to be honest I can't afford one. Both the D80 and K10D would have to be second hand realistically but do I need to get something that good?

All advice and recommendations gratefully appreciated.

Get a Nikon D40X to start off with. They are highly rated and ideal as a DSLR entry camera. You will probably be able to afford one of these new.

Forget Pentax stuff for goodness sake. Not in the same league as Nikon.

You don't think its worth pushing to a D60 then Ron?

Jessops are pushing them out for £399 at the moment.

Get the best you can afford.

Happy clicking.

have a look here......... http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NIKON-D60-10-2MP-SLR-DIGITAL-CAMERA-18-50MM-3-LENS-KIT_W0QQitemZ140338208831QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN?hash=item20accf203f&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

Cakey said:

have a look here......... http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NIKON-D60-10-2MP-SLR-DIGITAL-CAMERA-18-50MM-3-LENS-KIT_W0QQitemZ140338208831QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN?hash=item20accf203f&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

Click to expand...

Thanks Cakey

I'm watching that deal at the moment, still weighing things up according to reviews and recommendations. Still interested to hear any other opinions from users of the cheaper DSLRs

There seems to be a lot of Canon 350/400/450s about. Are they worth a look or are they just popular because of the name and marketing?

Chris Frankish 2 said:

Thanks Cakey

I'm watching that deal at the moment, still weighing things up according to reviews and recommendations. Still interested to hear any other opinions from users of the cheaper DSLRs

There seems to be a lot of Canon 350/400/450s about. Are they worth a look or are they just popular because of the name and marketing?

Click to expand...

they're popular because they do some things better than the equivalent nikon, but other things not as well.

what i can say is pro wildlife photographers tended to use cannon rather than nikon because they had a better selection of lenses for wildlife photography.

if you are looking at a dslr you need to decide what lenses you're going to be using before you get the camera as once you've made the choice you're pretty much stuck with it. and decent glass is going to be setting you back 500 quid to a grand.

your other option is a bridge camera which will work out massively cheaper than a dslr, but you will only get one lense to do everything.

you can put filters on a bridge

Chris Frankish 2 said:

There seems to be a lot of Canon 350/400/450s about. Are they worth a look or are they just popular because of the name and marketing?

Click to expand...

Chris,

I bought the Cannon 450D a few months ago and have been very happy with it. A good selection of lenses and Cannon do a very good speedlite flash as well, I bought the 430 EX II.

I have found that it covers everything I need to do, record shots, riverscapes, landscapes and portraits. It is very easy to use, light (lighter than the equivalent Nikon) relatively compact and excellent quality.

In the past I used Cannon A1's for all of my SLR photography and the older lenses do fit the 450D, so when changing to digital, (and with the help of a lot of FM members) I opted for the Cannon.

At the last FM fish-in one or two Nikon owners were very impressed with the Canon.

I was ..............................

All the suggested cameras are good, but Chris's selection of the Pentax was also a good choice - it gets rave reviews for the quality of the images it produces, and the lenses seem to me to be cheaper without being rubbish.
A used D300 might be a good buy if you can find one - more robust than the plastic Nikons.
But if I were you, I'd tow around the secondhand shops looking for a good, top-end wideangle-to-80mm-ish zoom lens in ANY lens mount, then buy the body to go with it. So often I've seen people blow their wad on the camera body and end up with a naff lens (like the hideously bad Nikon 37-70 f3.3 or some Cosina rubbish).
Lens first, body second. BTW, the Nikon 18-55 gets great reviews - get a bundled deal with that stuck on it.

The Nikkor 18 - 70mm is also good Mark. In addition I have a 55 - 200 Nikkor which is quite brilliant for the price, a 50mm 1.8 Nikkor which is one of the best prime lenses IN THE WORLD and only £100.00, plus a Sigma 10 - 20 wide angle, another superbly performing lens which is not a fortune.

Certainly Nikkor do make some rubbish lenses.

I've opened my ideas up a little on which camera is going to be suitable for my purposes. Perhaps if I include one of the major elements you'll be able to follow my thinking.

My intitial thoughts toward my need for a digital slr came from my dissatisfaction when taking photos of carp close up this year. Using either a compact or a canon G6 I had to juggle about with a pair of polarized glasses in front of the lens. Results were very hit and miss with perhaps 5 shots out of 90 being acceptable.

Now, I fish alone mostly so do my own trophy shots and have been using lately a Sony Cybershot with and adaptor bracket and bulb release with 10ft of tubing.

So, problem one arose when I looked into a suitable system to use with a DSLR. Because of the design changes to the shutter release button on (I think) all modern DSLRs there isn't a suitable mechanical way to use one the same as I do with the Cybershot. (I've tried the I.R. remote method and just don't get on with it. Some people do but I'd rather focus all my attention on safely holding a lively carp at 2 o'clock in the morning.)

I considered buying a dslr for photographing landscapes, nature , tackle etc and keeping the Sony for self takes but then my Trophy shots would effectively be the worst quality photos I took.

I know, what I need is a decent DSLR with the facility to program a series of shots on the back of a self timer. Brilliant, I thought, camera all arranged ready while the fish is safely in the carp cradle, press one button ,walk to fish, bend down, lift fish head facing right, click, click, click, click, turn fish around and wash over with water, head facing left, click, click,click.

You try to find a DSLR that does this!

I did, the Pentax K20D, but, in the continuous shot mode it only saves as 1.6MB jpegs.

then someone put me onto the idea of using one of these...

http://www.phottix.com/wired-remotes/phottixr-nikos-digital-timer-remote.html

So, as long as I get a DSLR thats compatible I can use it for self takes AND macro work, landscapes, nature shots etc

The reason the Pentax K10D figured was because of it's weatherproof seals as well as the reviews it got.

Even though at this stage I can't see the need for a lens for long range work I don't know where I'll go in the future. I enjoy photography and once I start using a decent camera I feel I will find a need to add lenses and such so a camera system that will be able to expand with my enthusiasm is in order.

I can't go cheap, the phottix device won't work but I can look now at possibly a canon 350/400/450 as a starting point. I am working to a budget so I'll have to look at second hand and the 400D seems well within my range.

My question is this , will the Canon 400D with the kit 18-55mm lens do the work that I've oulined with me only needing to look at a polarized filter and a decent SD card or is it worth pushing the budget for a 450D or Pentax K10D or the Nikon D80?

What noticeable differences would my extra dosh buy me?

I bought a dslr last year and was looking at the canon 400, general opinion in the shops was that the std lens was rubbish, worst on the market. The newer std lens on the 450 is supposed to be better.
Have you been on dpreview.com? not a bad site.
I ended up with an olympus e-510 twin lens kit. Suits me, smaller than the others but not as easy to get third-party accessories to suit though.
On the remote front, have you seen the cable releases on e-bay that fit the dslrs? not got the timer facility of the one you've linked to but i would think a damn sight cheaper and i've seen some with 5metre cables.

If you've not done so already, get to a shop and get your hands on a few and see which you feel most comfortable with.

The home truth is that most people won't really see the difference between one DSLR and another, especially if they want to produce a few prints (and I wish more people would get their pictures printed). Anything above 6Mp and from a reputable maker will give excellent pictures.
You want to show your pictures to a few people, don't you? Not carve out a new career as a photographer (and, seriously, don't try that. The money is rubbish).
Spend what you are comfortable with.
It is unfortunate that few (if any) electronic cameras will take a bulb release - activating the shutter by pushing on the bulb release with your knee was the easiest thing to do if you didn't want the self-timer rigmarole.
But almost EVERY DSLR can be made to shoot three frames on self-timer by using the bracketing setting, and dialling in bracketing of, say, 1/2 a stop. Not only will you get three frames but you get a variety of exposures (all of which can be tweaked in PS anyway).
And an intervalometer is a useful thing to have in any case. The idea that 1.6Mp jpegs aren't good enough is a bit judgemental. As an editor, I'd have been more than happy to use files of that size for pictures up to half a page in print. It's not the file size, but the pixels I'd be looking at - you need 2400 pixels width to stretch across an A4 page, and I bet the images you are talking about are at least that wide.

450d

Thanks to all for the help and advice.

I finally decided to go for the Canon 450D which I've bought with the standard EF-S 18-55mm lens.

From what you've all said and the reviews that I've read this should suit my purposes.

I've now got a whole series of other questions to fire out though. Filters!

Cheap from Hong Kong or proper from the likes of Hoya?

I know I want a decent CPL filter and I should have a decent UV filter, anything else to consider?

Filters for digital cameras need to be multi coated jobs, designed for digicams as they're more prone to lens flare apparently. I bought sigma DG filters (uv) as they were cheaper than the hoya digital filters. http://www.greatdigitaldeals.co.uk/sigma-filters-uv-filters-c-105_111_112.html not used these guys, a good price tho.

I didn't have the confidence to buy from china as i'd read about counterfeit filters and memory cards being a problem.

I bought a set of grad ND filters from these guys http://www.formatt.co.uk/default.aspx on reccomendation from photo forums. good quality, will fit cokin filters holders if you have one, check for width as they do a couple of sizes.

Be aware when using polarising or effect filters, on some dslr lenses the filter thread spins when focusing so you have to focus first then adjust the filter as necessary. Don't know about the canon lenses, just watch the lens front as you focus to check.

Some good advice about filters but, personally, I cannot see the point of having much more than the skylight to protect the front lens element and polarisers (circ and linear). All of the other filter effects can be done digitally afterwards.
Incidentally, the advice above ONLY applies to linear polarising filters, not circular.

MarkTheSpark said:

Some good advice about filters but, personally, I cannot see the point of having much more than the skylight to protect the front lens element and polarisers (circ and linear). All of the other filter effects can be done digitally afterwards.
Incidentally, the advice above ONLY applies to linear polarising filters, not circular.

Click to expand...

I have both types of polarizing filter Mark. (Linear and circular) Any chance of explaining the difference between the two?

---------- Post added at 15:24 ---------- Previous post was at 15:20 ----------

MarkTheSpark said:

Some good advice about filters but, personally, I cannot see the point of having much more than the skylight to protect the front lens element and polarisers (circ and linear). All of the other filter effects can be done digitally afterwards.
Incidentally, the advice above ONLY applies to linear polarising filters, not circular.

Click to expand...

ps Can graduated and neutral density filters be accurately replicated in PS etc as well?

From what I've seen on the web the linear type of polarizing filter is better for getting rid of the reflected glare from water (which is predominantly the reason I want one) but it messes about with AF systems so should be used only when manually focussing. I don't know if this is something to do with what Paul B mentions regarding whether the lens spins or not (mine doesn't) because the circular type work in AF mode. Presumably because the filter doesn't have to be in the right "plane" to be effective.

The linear one sounds better for fish in the water photography but by it's nature theres not always enough time to manually focus into moving fish. The circular type sounds a better option for auto focus "point and shoot" photography but with the downside that the glare removal isn't as effective.

Thats if I understand things right.

Chris,
In the fortunate position of being able to offset camera purchases against tax I've tried a few different digital cameras over the years, from the Fuji S1 Pro and S2 pro (body & lenes Nikon - electronics Fuji) to the fairly new Nikon D300. These are fine cameras for taking pics of other people but not ideal for self takes, unless you want to shell out an extra £250 for an additional remote viewer like the Zigview or link it to a small laptop (with possible voice activation - I got my S2Pro to respond to voice commands like focus and fire, but who want to carry a laptop unless you're a carp angler and you also want to watch DVDs).

I've tried cameras like the popular Canon Powershot S5 with the flip screen (articulated) and its not bad. I found two problems with it. No remote so you have to fanny around with a support bracket from Jessops and air release/ or use the not ideal timer. Secondly, the sensor used is old technology and anything over about 100 ISO and the resulant images start to show noise.

The best camera for an angler that I've found (by a considerable margin) is the Lumix G1. Fantastic piece of kit. Superb 12 Mpixel sensor, lovely 3inch flip over screen - and as many built-in options as you could possibly want (more than the Nikon D300) - plus a Lumix wired remote is available. The price of the camera is a very reasonable (I got mine for £430 including the 14mm-45mm lens) considering what you get, but the extra Lumix remote is expensive (£50+). You can get the JJC ws combined wire & wireless remote for about half the price. Anyone interested in an angler-camera that will give professional results should at least check the camera out. I really rate it and I don't bother taking my Nikon D300 anymore.