| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/15/2006 06:41:57 PM · #1 |
hi there
i'm going to buy a dslr soon, but wanna wait until summer (money issue ;/).i found four affordable quotations on ebay and now i'm just interested, which one affords the best price/performance ratio? just hope of your experience ;P
1) Nikon d50 with 18-50mm lense and 1gb kingston sd for 619 EUR
2) Konica / Minolta Dynax 5D with 18-70mm+1GB Kingston for 669 EUR
3) Pentax ist DL DA with 3,5-5,6/18-55mm for 665 EUR
4) PENTAX *ist DS with AF 18-55/3,5-5,6DA for 759 EUR
all are new cameras from professional dealers ("buy now" prices)
thx in advance for your feedback!
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:46:45 PM · #2 |
d50...but skip the lens and get an 18-70.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:48:41 PM · #3 |
Of course, I'm biased. I think the Minolta is by far and away the best camera, the Anti-Shake is a killer feature. I'm a little nervous about the future of the lens mount though.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:52:29 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by deapee:
d50...but skip the lens and get an 18-70. |
difficult to do. i only found this:
NIKON D50 +AF-S DX 18-55mm+ AF-S DX 55-200mm D 50 for 779 EUR
could you please explain why the nikon?
thx bobster.tell me more about advantages/disadvantages of this cam
and what about the pentax?
Message edited by author 2006-02-15 18:53:18. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:57:08 PM · #5 |
Konica Minolta is out of the camera business - they sold it all to Sony about a month ago. Who knows what sony may do in the future.
Glass (the quality of it) is everything. The nikon 18-70 is much better than the kit lens (18-55). You can always sell it later and get better glass.
No canon mentioned there? Popular Photography just did a comparison of the four 'entry level' dSLRs and the Canon 350 won.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:57:18 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Mephisto:
could you please explain why the nikon?
|
Because Nikon is the best ... Nikon has used one type of mount for the longest, basically all their lenses will mount to the camera...When you upgrade (and if you upgrade) in the future, you can pick the best camera out there (d2x) or the second best (d200) or their respective replacements...you will always be assured quality glass and optics...every time I see an article where someone trekked across Antarctica or some jungle, they always shoot Nikon...Nikon gets around and gets used and abused, and lives up to a quality standard unlike any other manufacturer.
hehe those are my opinions anwyay.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:58:17 PM · #7 |
You can't go wrong with any one of these cameras.
The DS being the highest priced kind of surprises me though.. but that's europe for you, Pentax has always been over-priced over there.
For me, having no former lenses or anything putting me on one brand, I would put the cameras in this order:
D50 - Fantastic lens line up, wonderful quality, great build, and easy to find accessories for worldwide.
Pentax Ds - Some of the best lenses ever made, full backwards-compatibility with old lenses going back decades, brightest non-pro viewfinder on the market, solid build.
KM 5D - Anti-shake is pretty cool, but can eat up battery power and heat up the sensor, causing added noise if used too often. Great image quality. Lens mount uncertain right now, but Sony could do good things.
Pentax DL - As entry level as you can get for a dSLR, but has all the added bonuses of the DS, just fewer options. Viewfinder not as bright. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 06:59:07 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
could you please explain why the nikon?
|
Because Nikon is the best ... Nikon has used one type of mount for the longest, basically all their lenses will mount to the camera...When you upgrade (and if you upgrade) in the future, you can pick the best camera out there (d2x) or the second best (d200) or their respective replacements...you will always be assured quality glass and optics...every time I see an article where someone trekked across Antarctica or some jungle, they always shoot Nikon...Nikon gets around and gets used and abused, and lives up to a quality standard unlike any other manufacturer.
hehe those are my opinions anwyay. |
Pentax actually has a stronger mount compatibility, the drawback is that lenses are a little harder to find (but cheaper.) |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:00:57 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
could you please explain why the nikon?
|
Because Nikon is the best ... Nikon has used one type of mount for the longest, basically all their lenses will mount to the camera...When you upgrade (and if you upgrade) in the future, you can pick the best camera out there (d2x) or the second best (d200) or their respective replacements...you will always be assured quality glass and optics...every time I see an article where someone trekked across Antarctica or some jungle, they always shoot Nikon...Nikon gets around and gets used and abused, and lives up to a quality standard unlike any other manufacturer.
hehe those are my opinions anwyay. |
The fact that Nikon has used the same mount (it's very small) since the beginning is a hindrance in lens development.
To say they are the best is just plain ignorant. How many other brands have you shot with to compare them and get that statement?
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:01:52 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Konica Minolta is out of the camera business - they sold it all to Sony about a month ago. Who knows what sony may do in the future.
Glass (the quality of it) is everything. The nikon 18-70 is much better than the kit lens (18-55). You can always sell it later and get better glass.
No canon mentioned there? Popular Photography just did a comparison of the four 'entry level' dSLRs and the Canon 350 won. |
That's no surprise. 
Couldn't be because Canon is the #1 advertiser. *cough* |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:02:58 PM · #11 |
wow keep cool guys!
i just don't wanted to start a canon versus nikon fight ;P |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:03:03 PM · #12 |
Minolta just for the anti-shake,
Nikon if you want an upgrade path..
good lenses for both. especially if you go the Sigma/Tamron route, you can get the same exact one (minus the lens mount of course)
Who know, Sony may suprise us all and make the Maxxum mount a thing of envy. I'm not holding my breath if I have to by and SLR in the next month (which I do) I'm going to try to go D200 I think. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:03:29 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
could you please explain why the nikon?
|
Because Nikon is the best ... Nikon has used one type of mount for the longest, basically all their lenses will mount to the camera...When you upgrade (and if you upgrade) in the future, you can pick the best camera out there (d2x) or the second best (d200) or their respective replacements...you will always be assured quality glass and optics...every time I see an article where someone trekked across Antarctica or some jungle, they always shoot Nikon...Nikon gets around and gets used and abused, and lives up to a quality standard unlike any other manufacturer.
hehe those are my opinions anwyay. |
The fact that Nikon has used the same mount (it's very small) since the beginning is a hindrance in lens development.
To say they are the best is just plain ignorant. How many other brands have you shot with to compare them and get that statement? |
Does it matter, I clearly said it was my opinion. And I have shot with canon lenses and canon bodies, so I do speak from experience...
I don't think Nikon's lens development have been hindered, I feel they're clearly superior to anything and everything canon has to offer, in every way, shape, and in every form.
Have fun...I'm out.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:11:52 PM · #14 |
mmmmh so many different opinions, but that's what i expected.
so maybe the nikon offer is best?
why not canon? mmh don't really know, maybe the (in comparison to the others) higher price! i had the possibility to have some photoshootings with the 350d and it was really great!
see this thread: //www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=348194
just so difficult to decide...
Message edited by author 2006-02-15 19:15:46. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:13:41 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Mephisto:
could you please explain why the nikon?
|
Because Nikon is the best ... Nikon has used one type of mount for the longest, basically all their lenses will mount to the camera...When you upgrade (and if you upgrade) in the future, you can pick the best camera out there (d2x) or the second best (d200) or their respective replacements...you will always be assured quality glass and optics...every time I see an article where someone trekked across Antarctica or some jungle, they always shoot Nikon...Nikon gets around and gets used and abused, and lives up to a quality standard unlike any other manufacturer.
hehe those are my opinions anwyay. |
The fact that Nikon has used the same mount (it's very small) since the beginning is a hindrance in lens development.
To say they are the best is just plain ignorant. How many other brands have you shot with to compare them and get that statement? |
Does it matter, I clearly said it was my opinion. And I have shot with canon lenses and canon bodies, so I do speak from experience...
I don't think Nikon's lens development have been hindered, I feel they're clearly superior to anything and everything canon has to offer, in every way, shape, and in every form.
Have fun...I'm out. |
You've shot with 2 brands, and I would have to guess that they were never pro bodies or pro glass.
That's not experience to guide people in their camera buying decision.
Message edited by author 2006-02-15 19:14:36.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:20:31 PM · #16 |
Right now, I have a very professional setup...
12-24mm
24-70mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
50mm 1.7
105mm macro
They are ALL stabilised.
For what I do (music photography), I couldn't wish for a better system, especially bearing in mind how much I paid for the lenses. My mind boggles at how much money I would have spent to get the lenses stabilised if I'd gone Nikon or Canon. And a stabilised 12mm or 50mm 1.7 is VERY useful.
But yes, I am very nervous about what Sony is going to do with this mount.
The main thing is that you have to figure out what you need the cameras for. Stabilising is important to me because I'm not allowed to use a tripod for much of what I do. It's also impractical.
Pentax may be in trouble themselves in the not-too-distant future... they seem to be pairing up with Samsung.
Nikon may have the safest future out of the cameras you mentioned, but Canon have the lead if money is no object.
It's all very personal... try them all out and see which ones you like.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:21:10 PM · #17 |
Well, of the four you have listed I would definately go with the Nikon. Like someone else said, the accessories are easy to find, you are leaving the door open for future upgrades and Nikon has been the anchor for many many years. A friend of mine has worked as a photographer for National Geographic for over 30 years and swears by Nikon. You won't be disatisfied. However, Canon does make some very very nice entry level SLRs (as well as pro SLRs) and also have a great array of lens to pick from. If you narrow the choice down to Canon vs Nikon, you can not go wrong. Pick the one that feels best in your hand. Also if you have a friend that has Nikon or Canon, pick the same one so you can share accessories and trade gear etc.
Good luck. Obviously I picked Nikon, but that's because I had a Nikon film camera and loved it. If I had it to do over again, I would definately consider the Canon line, but I haven't had any second thoughts about going Nikon. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:36:47 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
You've shot with 2 brands, and I would have to guess that they were never pro bodies or pro glass.
That's not experience to guide people in their camera buying decision. |
Great, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it.
That being said, yes, I've shot with a 1dsmkIIn on several occasions and pro glass from a 17-40L all the way up to a 400L -- so you are wrong on two accounts so far.
I've shot with my d70 and 80-200 f/2.8, 85 1.8, 85 1.4, and 300 f/4 -- I've shot with a d2h on more than one occasion, so again, you are wrong.
That being said, if you don't think I'm 'qualified' to give people camera recomendations, then I'd say you're not qualified either.
If you want to debate our 'qualifications' -- then start a new thread or PM me. If you have something valuable to add, other than pointing out exactly how wrong you think my opinions are, then you're more than welcome to continue this discussion in this thread. Otherwise, keep it to yourself, please, for the sake of keeping things on-topic.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:44:07 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
You've shot with 2 brands, and I would have to guess that they were never pro bodies or pro glass.
That's not experience to guide people in their camera buying decision. |
Great, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it.
That being said, yes, I've shot with a 1dsmkIIn on several occasions and pro glass from a 17-40L all the way up to a 400L -- so you are wrong on two accounts so far.
I've shot with my d70 and 80-200 f/2.8, 85 1.8, 85 1.4, and 300 f/4 -- I've shot with a d2h on more than one occasion, so again, you are wrong.
That being said, if you don't think I'm 'qualified' to give people camera recomendations, then I'd say you're not qualified either.
If you want to debate our 'qualifications' -- then start a new thread or PM me. If you have something valuable to add, other than pointing out exactly how wrong you think my opinions are, then you're more than welcome to continue this discussion in this thread. Otherwise, keep it to yourself, please, for the sake of keeping things on-topic. |
Last time I checked I could offer my opinions and attitudes how ever I wanted, just like you do with every poisonous post. I mean really, I find it hard to believe you actually have time to post with your demanding schedule of self portraits.
Last time I checked, 17-40 was an f4 lens. Definitely not what most would consider pro glass, and that 400 was probably the 5.6 version.
I don't really need to debate my photographic qualifications. Go to a most retailers with an outdoor rec section and you'll see my work.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:49:38 PM · #20 |
Woah people! Please remember to keep your discussions on-topic, and not to make any personal attacks against other users...
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:50:05 PM · #21 |
At those prices that you listed the Nikon D50 looks like great value.
Funny that in our country the Pentax DL with kit lens is equiv of around 460 euro which makes it the best value by a long way.
Even the DS, if you can still find one, is only 553 euro with a Sigma kit lens.
They are all capable of taking great pics so it's primarily a value for money thing.
cheers,
bazz. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:52:20 PM · #22 |
This has become a pissing contest :-) Much like PC vs Mac. there are so many tests out there, so many opinions. It would seem to me that the best advice you have gotten so far, is to feel your way to a new camera. Which one feels good. And if you have a pal that would like to swap gear with you, and vice versa, that would be a nice advantage, save a lot of money but still get more to play with and learn from each other's experience.
I bought a D70 because I had a F80 and could use the same lens and then a new one.
Good luck and trust your own judgement. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:52:52 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Last time I checked I could offer my opinions and attitudes how ever I wanted, just like you do with every poisonous post. I mean really, I find it hard to believe you actually have time to post with your demanding schedule of self portraits.
Last time I checked, 17-40 was an f4 lens. Definitely not what most would consider pro glass, and that 400 was probably the 5.6 version.
I don't really need to debate my photographic qualifications. Go to a most retailers with an outdoor rec section and you'll see my work. |
So now you're a pro on what's 'pro glass' and what's not pro glass? I was making the assumption that if Canon put an "L" in the lens, that it was a pro lens...and like I said, I'm not trying to debate your photographic qualifications, only that if I'm not qualified, you are not qualified...that is the purpose of these message boards, everyone has an opinion, and everyone is qualified to share their opinions...good luck convincing me otherwise.
Furthermore, it's none of your business how many self-portraits I decide to shoot or how many I decide not to shoot for that matter. Even further yet, I have no intention of going to any place to see your work...I am not the one that cares ... apparently you are, and like I said, I'm not going to defend myself to you lol. Like I said, if you want to continue this discussion, start me a thread, or send me a PM because this is severely off-topic.
|
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:53:56 PM · #24 |
| If your not really looking to upgrade on the glass for awhile you may want to check out the Olympus e-500 or e-300. They just released press about the e-330 so the prices of the other two will probably drop quite a bit. They are on a different system for glass (four thirds mount) though, so right now there aren't many options and the ones that are out there are quite expensive. I got my e-300 with two lenses off eBay for about $610 usd. |
|
|
|
02/15/2006 07:55:54 PM · #25 |
first of all thx everyone for the great feedback, i will sleep some nights, before i decide ;P
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
At those prices that you listed the Nikon D50 looks like great value.
Funny that in our country the Pentax DL with kit lens is equiv of around 460 euro which makes it the best value by a long way.
Even the DS, if you can still find one, is only 553 euro with a Sigma kit lens.
They are all capable of taking great pics so it's primarily a value for money thing.
cheers,
bazz. |
wooow 460 Eur!!! is it possible to buy a camera in the us via internet and then "import" it to europe???
looks like the us prices are sooo much lower then here in europe!!! |
|
