DSLR Choice

[mikkodd]

Get a canon 60d and a canon 50mm 1.8 for starters. It'll get you a good feel and thats a good starter kit for about $600-700

[Wschnitz]

You can't get a 60D for 600-700, and even less with a lens...

[mrsleeve]

Get a canon 60d and a canon 50mm 1.8 for starters. It'll get you a good feel and thats a good starter kit for about $600-700

This is good 40d territory or well used 50d unless you get a smokin deal

[Threehz]

You can get a used 60D and 50MM for ~$700. It's just hard to justify because I can get a T2i and 50MM for $480.

The OMD/E-M5 looks good and has a price tag to match.

What is so special about the OMD?

[Wschnitz]

You can get a used 60D and 50MM for ~$700. It's just hard to justify because I can get a T2i and 50MM for $480.

The OMD/E-M5 looks good and has a price tag to match.

It's meant to look like it's grandpa the Olympus OM-1 (which I have and it takes amazing pictures as a film camera.)

What is so special about the OMD?

Nothing, it is just an SLR in a 35mm camera style body. The internals are not even better. It's just lighter and simpler.

[mrsleeve]

The OMD was a real break through for the M4/3's format to give you DSLR capabilities in a MUCH smaller format. Yes there was a bit of sensor performance gap between the Original M4/3's and ASP-C. Not Since the Pan GX1 and the OMD have narrowed that gap and there is little to NO difference at all between the 2.

1st things 1st ITS NOT A SLR, there is not mirror or penta-prisim in it, its mirrorless and has a electronic view finder

things I have noticed that make it better than my canon out fit
* the in body I.S. is fucking amazing, the hand held slow shutter times you can get sharp images with is nucking futs.think like close to a full second if you can do your part. Show me an in lens shift I.S. that is that good.

* High ISO/low light performance is incredible as well, No noise until you push up past 3200, and even then its not really noticeable till 6400 for color images, when your shooting in B&W you will likely NEVER see noise even shooting at the very high extended ISO settings

With adapters you can shoot Legacy glass from nearly any manufacturer (think Leica, Zeiss, Contax/zeiss, OM, Rokkor, ect) and with the in body sensor shift I.S. you can still keep the I.S. when using an adapter you will just be all manual focus.

* its light, compact, easy to carry everywhere with a nice little 17mm Oly or 20mm Pan and does not scream look at me I have a giant camera!!!! Where I live we have lots of people running around with DSLR's and huge glass (cuz its a tourist area) and you do take note of it. NO ONE notices the OMD everyone thinks its an idiot camera and if you want to do a lot of street shooting/candid shoots of people then it fits perfecly into that role.

*Image quality is second to NONE, there are lots of people out there with way more money in their full size SLR rigs that are letting them sit idle because they have gotten the OMD, (unless its a paying gig of course). It really is that good.

The only real draw back for the format right now is the lack of Fast zoom lenses

Like I said if you can swing it, OMD with the kit 12-50, and 45mm F1.8 for starters a 17mm F2.8 or the F1.8 MKII, or if you want to spend a bit more on the wide angle prime 12mm F2, 9-18mm F4-5.6 and a 75mm F1.8 and a long zoom and you will have one hell of a rig for the price of a used 60d and 2 chunks of L glass

[Threehz]

It is a beautiful camera. I was reading into it some and it really does seem wonderful, but ~$850 is a lot for me right now.

I had found a "like new" T2i for $378 shipped, extra battery included, but then an even better deal popped up.

So, I just ordered a T3i with the the standard 18-55mm lens for $409 shipped. In my opinion you can't really beat that deal for an entry-level DSLR. I also ordered an FD to EF adapter so I can use all my 35mm lenses, with a little degradation expected.

Thanks for all the input guys, I'll let you know how it turns out.

[mrsleeve]

Your right for the money a gently used t3 is going to be hard to beat, all though, I got my 40d with less than 10k clicks on the shutter for right around 400 bucks shipped to me, nearly 2 years ago now.

I know I can totally understand the budget thing, the only reason I got into the M4/3s was a good deal on a EP-1 for a travel rig since I am never home. Then the OMD was announced and I just had to have it, and even when I am home and my canon rig is in the bag on the back seat what do I reach for........Yup OMD. The only thing I am really using my canon rig for now is tripod shots for water features and long exposures.

The T3 is a going to serve you well, but I do think you will find yourself out growing it faster than you think you will.


Oh and where did you find a OMD for 850??? body only an used I assume or has Oly really already dropped the MSRP

[kts]

D5200 will limit your choices in Nikon glass if you want A/F to those that have the A/F drives in the lenses them selves. IIRC the 5200 does NOT have the in body Screwdrive A/F motor.

Everyone always says this and when the D40 came out in 2006 it might have been a concern. But every Nikon lens made since pretty much 2000 has been an AF-S lens which means the motor is in the lens and it will autofocus on any of Nikon bodies that don't have an A/F motor in them. To save costs 3rd party manufactures didn't put A/F motors in the lens for a while but they have all switched to putting A/F mothers in the lens for a while now. (The technology was there since all autofocusing Canon-mount lenses have always had an AF motor in them. But now I'm going off topic.)

So where we are today I wouldn't worry about a being limited on what lens will work on any Nikon body.

That said, OP, go to a camera store or a big box store that has a few different models of Nikons and Canons to play with and try them out. See what 'feels' right to you. I did this when I was looking to buy an SLR years ago and Nikon just felt more natural to use than Canon. A lot of my friends had the opposite feeling and they are now Canon shooters. You really can't beat hands on practice with them so go get your hands on some different models and play with them.

Or see who you know who is into photography and see what they use since the they will be able to help you our easier if you're using the same system.

[mrsleeve]

^
Right but when you are starting out and trying to build a kit on a budget and you find some good glass for a good price thats older, then you may run into the compatibility issues with the nikon A/F drives. Thats why I ask that. Not everyone is buying new and I have Canon glass in my bag thats older than 2000, hence why I went with canon and not nikon for the absolute A/F drive compatibility on finding decent glass

[kts]

^
Right but when you are starting out and trying to build a kit on a budget and you find some good glass for a good price thats older, then you may run into the compatibility issues with the nikon A/F drives. Thats why I ask that. Not everyone is buying new and I have Canon glass in my bag thats older than 2000, hence why I went with canon and not nikon for the absolute A/F drive compatibility on finding decent glass

The older, non-AF-S lenses out there are mostly more specialized primes and other full-frame/35mm lenses that a budget minded beginner wouldn't be picking up anyway. With all of the new lenses Nikon has released in the past few years there are a ton of great lenses with AF-S designed for a crop (DX) body that are cheaper/the same new as what a used older non-AF-S lens would be going for.

The only lens that comes to mind where this does not hold true is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8. The older non-AF-S lens used to go for ~$100 new and not much less than that used. Now it's $125 new and a newer AF-S mount one is $200. But there are enough tweaks and improvements to the new 50mm that you could argue it's a better lens.

Otherwise it's all mostly way more expensive primes or older zoom lenses that have a much more affordable AF-S equivalent that will work better on a DX body and will probably be a better lens as well.

[MNE30]

Personally I'd get the T3i because I film a lot as well as shoot photos.

Really for pictures its all about the glass. I'd rather have a T2i and a 24-70 L II than a 1D IV with a second hand sigma.