Another one of those "what camera?" threads

['daiking']

I have been using a Panasonic TZ point and shoot model (badly) for 5 years and I am looking to upgrade to something better. Technologically that is, user will still be a little backward.

My requirements are:

- Good point and shoot/Auto mode capabilities - The TZ doesn't invite experimentation and I don't want an enforced learning curve.

- Kit lens must be a good all-rounder of reasonable quality - I won't be upgrading my everyday lens from the off, it has to be a keeper.

- Video function on the Panny is useful, I know this is a recent (heretical) addition to some DSLRs but would be nice to have. Lack of is not a showstopper though.

- Budget is £500 +/- a bit, more interested in the value rather than price.

- Timescale is some time over the next 2 months, can wait for a deal rather than getting something now.

I have pretty much discounted a bridge camera as my wife is expecting, in her words, a 'proper camera' but I am not sure whether to look at the bottom of the range DSLRs or one of the micro 4/3s format cameras that are increasingly common. I realise that DSLR options will be limited to the bottom models (1100D/D3100?) but I don't have any particular preference for Canon/Nikon and know people using either system. Not so sure about looking outside those 2 (i.e. Sony/Olympus/Pentax). Therefore the camera offering the better Auto function and better quality kit lens should be the one to go for.  

I would also consider a 4/3 camera as they look like good value and a step up in photo quality from my P&S. Panasonic always seem to be offering some sort of deal (cashback on G2, about £200) on their cameras. For all I know, one of these out of the box might be a better proposition for me personally than a more capable full DSLR. I thought I'd ask the question.

Any advice?

[Loz]

For that price you are looking at either Nikon D3100, or Canon 1100d.

Obviosuly I would pick the Nikon but really, it does just outperform the 1100d according to DXO mark and also snapsort. I haven't read in dept reviews or anything, which you may want to. The new Nikon sensors are pretty awesome though.

Also, (now that I am in fact a Canon owner also, and can give a fair unbiased review LOL) the ergonomics of the Canons (certainly the entry level) are appalling. There are no buttons on the left hand side of the LCD screen, so your left thumb remains redundant while your poor right thumb does all the work. If the on/off switch is the same as on the 1000d, it is in an awkward place compared with the Nikon (it's the little things), the scroll wheel for changing functions on the Canon feels cheap and nasty.

I don't know if these links will work, as I have entered both camera details, but these give an overview comparison, you may want to read actual reviews too in order to help.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-1100D-vs-Nikon_D3100

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en../Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/693%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/664%7C0/(brand2)/Nikon

[Hedge]

A Pentax K-r would fit your budget. I would check out www.dpreview.com for any comparisons but if all you want to use is Auto then I would stick with a point and shoot.

Most DSLR's will do the Auto thing quite well but really come into their own when you enter into a bit of manual usage.

My recommendation would be a Canon G12.

[JackClap]

I had to choose a entry level dslr and was looking at similar cameras. I had a go with a canon 550d and a nikon d3100, And I preferred the nikon overall, From just using the auto mode, I think the pictures from the canon were probably sharper but it never seemed to capture the colours as well. And the pictures seemed a bit dull. Im sure if you knew how to set the camera up properly then the 550d would be the better camera.

The nikon seemed to take a nicer photo from auto mode. Also the nikon features a guide section, which will set up the camera automatically for different situations which can also help you learn a bit more and progress as a photographer. The nikon also came with a piece of computer software. Which makes it easier to import and store your photos.

Overall I bought the nikon. I thought the nikon had more to offer to an entry level photographer. Whereas I thought the canon would appeal more to someone who had an understanding in photography.

As for video function the 550d seemed to do this better. Although there wasn't much difference.

As for 1100d I ruled it out for what I needed. But Im sure Its a great camera. It is the cheaper option so it does have more limitations. If you are just wanting to take some nice photos and not get to into photography. And by the sounds of it Im sure the 1100d can do what you need.

As for a 4/3 camera, My cousin has a sony one, not sure which model exactly. The picture she takes all seem very good. Some of them even comparable with my nikon d3100. And to most people they wouldn't recognise the difference. So in terms of price these are good value for money.

I think you would be best to visit a camera shop and have a go with them. This was the only way I managed to pick which was best for me.

[Loz]

I had to choose a entry level dslr and was looking at similar cameras. I had a go with a canon 550d and a nikon d3100, And I preferred the nikon overall, From just using the auto mode, I think the pictures from the canon were probably sharper but it never seemed to capture the colours as well.

Sharpness is down to the lens, not the camera. also, you wouldn't be able to tell without looking at a high res image on a computer screen, if you were looking at these on the camera, it was probably down to the different LCD screens on the camera. If I'm not mistaken, the 550d is a higher model of Canon than the D3100 is in Nikon, as such may have a bigger screen.

Either way, put a cheap lens on one and a decent lens on the other and one will be sharper!

['daiking']

@Loz

Canon vs. Nikon can wait till I'm certain about a DSLR as, luckily, I have no prejudice or previous photography baggage in the matter. Will take it on board for then

@Hedge

I respect your opinion but I can't warm to this suggestion (G12) and would always have a nagging doubt I would get more out of something with a bigger sensor. I'll keep it for a long time so I want to have scope for advancement as well as getting most of the performance from day 1. Don't want to make the mistake of wanting to upgrade again from a luxury compact in a couple of years which is not too far from where I am now. I'll look out for the Pentax if its got a genuine advantage for its auto modes.

I'll learn how to use it but I'll always want to be able to just put it in auto and snap away. If nothing else it would mean my wife could use it.

@JackClap

I'll get hands on closer to the time of purchase when I know exactly what sort of thing I want.

Looks like budget has crept up to £500 too

[Hedge]

There are bigger sensored compacts out there, Canon G1-X and Fuji X-100 but they cost.

[Loz]

Err ok, you ask for help of which SLR to get but then don't want any help on what SLR to get?! What exactly is the purpose of the thread then?! LOL

I agree with hedge tbh. If you don't want to learn how to use a camera and dont want to upgrade your lens then don't bother with an SLR. At the end of the day one 18-55 won't do it justice, nor will using auto.

Edited 16 April, 2012 by Loz

[JackClap]

Sharpness is down to the lens, not the camera. also, you wouldn't be able to tell without looking at a high res image on a computer screen, if you were looking at these on the camera, it was probably down to the different LCD screens on the camera. If I'm not mistaken, the 550d is a higher model of Canon than the D3100 is in Nikon, as such may have a bigger screen.

Either way, put a cheap lens on one and a decent lens on the other and one will be sharper!

Sharpness is probably the wrong word to describe it, both had the kit lens and both were viewed on the computer. The resolution of the canon photos seemed to have a slight edge which would be down to having 3.7MP more then the nikon. And yeah the canon is a higher model compared to the nikon. But most people actually compare the 2 and there isnt much difference between them. Think it just comes down to personal preference and who is behind the camera.

Definitley agree with your comment about the lenses and using auto. No point spending the money on a slr if you aren't going to use it to its full potential.

['daiking']

There are bigger sensored compacts out there, Canon G1-X and Fuji X-100 but they cost.

Could almost afford to pay someone who knows what they're doing for that.

You must know what its like though. People saying they're going to buy a good camera and learn this and learn that and read books and win prizes and going in to business, etc etc. I'll spare us the bull****ting and admit what i'm going to do

[Loz]

Many of us do actually do that stuff. I went from a bog standard little compact to a DSLR with no knowledge, but it's really not difficult to understand the basic concept of photography and how to get the image you are after (in a completely non "arty photographer" way). Then you learn more and more just by yourself.

If you don't want to do that, then don't buy an SLR. It just wont improve your photos. If you are willing to put marginal effort in, then buy one, and be willing to buy one or maybe two more lenses on top of your kit (problem then is you will want to upgrade, as entry level SLR is never enough forever).

But so far you have basically dismissed everyones advice, despite having posted a thread for advice. It's a bit weird tbh.

['daiking']

I've just bought one of these (http://www.tesco.com/direct/panasonic-lumix-g2-121mp-compact-system-camera-kit-black-incl-14-42mm-lens-kit/209-2459.prd)

Nothing comes close at this price.

This is what prompted me to post a little earlier than i would have but no doubt by the time i have finished procrastinating, it will be sold out. It is a much better camera than i have and it will give me all the photographic control i would want. But does it suit my personal requirements?

['daiking']

Many of us do actually do that stuff. I went from a bog standard little compact to a DSLR with no knowledge, but it's really not difficult to understand the basic concept of photography and how to get the image you are after (in a completely non "arty photographer" way). Then you learn more and more just by yourself.

If you don't want to do that, then don't buy an SLR. It just wont improve your photos. If you are willing to put marginal effort in, then buy one, and be willing to buy one or maybe two more lenses on top of your kit (problem then is you will want to upgrade, as entry level SLR is never enough forever).

But so far you have basically dismissed everyones advice, despite having posted a thread for advice. It's a bit weird tbh.

I'm sorry i thought the OP specifcally said I am looking at the very common entry level popular DSLRs (Canon/Nikon) OR the less common entry level DSLRs (Pentax/Sony/Olympus) OR a micro 4/3 mirrorless interchangable lens camera like the Panasonic G-series or Olympus PEN cameras. Hedge offered advice and i shall look into it, the Pentax DSLR and the mainstream high end, small sensor compact, G12. My reservations over another compact or fixed lens camera is in the OP. I don't want to be thinking about upgrading again anytime soon (5+ years)

For everyone of you, there will be 4 others who don't use their entry level DSLR that the nice man in the shop told them was a brilliant camera. They won't use it because its too big and cumbersome or they won't use it because they're intimidated by all the controls, or they won't get the best out of it because they leave it in auto and auto isn't great on that camera or they won't get the best out of it because auto is good and they persist in being David bleeding Bailey and fiddling with all the settings.

Incorrect client specifications are the bane of my professional life. No point in bull****ting about what you hope to do with it or go to night classes or marry it or whatever. I have 2 kids and if i want to catch on memory card their first mugging, stabbing or other precious memory i want to be able to pick up the camera and take a picture immediately. I want to be able to trust the camera and not my level of learning at any particular moment. I want to take good pictures tomorrow when i take it out of the box and good pictures in a year or two's time when I understand more about how it works. Is that not allowed?

[Babs]

(problem then is you will want to upgrade, as entry level SLR is never enough forever).

This is why I'm jumping at at near-the-deep-end

[K1W1]

Olympus E-P3 or E-PL3.

Why?

low cost (E-PL3 especially)

small size / light weight

great image quality

fast focus speed

in body vibration reduction (keeps cost of lenses down and means even old legacy SLRr and DSLR lenses with adapters have vibration reduction)

great out of camera images

huge range of lenses and growing daily (you can also get adapters that will allow you to fit virtually any lens on the market if you want)

lots of accessories (cases, bags, flashes, viewfinders, etc)

The E-P3 has slightly more user adjustable features and an in built flash but the E-PL3 comes with an accessory flash and has a swivel screen. The E-PL3 is cheaper.

Have a look at a twin lens kit if it is in your budget or else start with the 14-42 kit lens and go from there.

DO NOT buy the Panasonic equivalent of theses cameras. No in camera VR and their jpeg engine ruins details compared to the Olympus (I own three Panasonic cameras I speak from experience)

Despite what some DSLR snobs will tell you these are not toy cameras and the results that can be achived with them are outsanding BUT they have a size and convenience factor that no DSLR can match. Remember the old adage, "The best camera to use is the one you have with you". You will take a m4/3 way, way more places than a DSLR because even an entrey level DSLR has a pro look and is intimidating to many people in many situations.

Just to let you know where I am I am a Nikon tragic who carries 8 or 9 kg or roughly Aus$10,000.00 worth of DSLR and lenses most places I go including motorcyle rides but I have recently purchased a small Fuji X10 (not suitable for what you want) and I have had a revalation. It's the closest thing to a regilous experience I have had since I was a teenager and discovered girls.

Edited 17 April, 2012 by K1W1

[hertsnminds]

Best advice is go into the biggest camera shop you can find and

Hold every model you have shortlisted

Change the settings of every model you have shortlisted

Look at the cost of accessories (lenses, flash guns, cases) for every model you have shortlisted

Ask yourself which of the cameras you have looked at you would be prepared to carry everywhere you go all day long and which one would take YOU the least time from bag to shot. That should help you narrow things down.

[Hedge]

Could almost afford to pay someone who knows what they're doing for that.

You must know what its like though. People saying they're going to buy a good camera and learn this and learn that and read books and win prizes and going in to business, etc etc. I'll spare us the bull****ting and admit what i'm going to do

I have read a few books over the years and I have a good friend who has been into Photography for a long time. I am always learning.

I have had some specific photos published and used by various people mainly to do with the Vulcan but being a 'Pro' was never my aim. I take pictures primarily for myself and others that I chose to share with.

Buy a camera, use it, enjoy it and get as much out of it that you can.

[KBPhoto]

I'm a professional photographer and have been researching these options with the intention of buying one.

Samsung NX200 (APS-C sensor 20.3mp & compact size - lack of additional lens options, but enough for most people)

Olympus EPL-3 (m4/3 sensor 12.?mp and small - Panasonic or Olympus lenses with more on the way this year)

['daiking']

@ K1W1 and KBPhoto

The Olympus cameras look good if nothing else, which cannot be said for the G-series. It is a shame they have made the E-PL3 look more like a modern camera than the other PEN models. As a non-Photographer I can only go by the opinions of others as to whether this would be suitable. The reviews indicate it would be ideal.

One thing I have experience is that my panasonic TZ3 will only manage about 250 shots on a single battery charge. I won't get much more from one of these whereas a entry level DSLR should be good for far more. But you can't have everything in a small package.

@ Hertsnminds

I'm sure the shop would love me for that

[theandywaite]

Sorry to throw a spanner into the works, I am just getting into photography and it sounds like I had similar requirements to the OP.

I looked around, and ended up buying a Canon EOS 500D with the 18-55 kit lens from the Canon refurb shop on ebay for a shade over £300, about 6 months ago.

Other than having a tatty box, it's is like new and comes with a 1 year warranty.

It has HD video, live preview, and a perfectly capable auto mode (although I never use it now I've mastered the basics). In fact, it also has quite a nice "creative auto" mode which allows you to change some really basic parameters - a sort of stepping stone between auto and the manual settings.

Since then, I've been experimenting and exploring the settings further and further. I've now got a kit bag with loads more stuff: a cheap telefoto, a prime portrait lens, a selection of filters and a tripod. The whole lot has cost me about £500 in total probably, and I'm really happy with the results I've been getting. As I explore further, I'm sure I'll end up buying some higher end stuff but for now, I've got a wide range of kit that allows me to experiment with different techniques and situations.

Unfortunately I can't speak from experience about what other makes/models are like, but I'm very happy with my Canon and the value for money. I hope that helps.

[Loz]

- Budget is £500 +/- a bit, more interested in the value rather than price.

- Timescale is some time over the next 2 months, can wait for a deal rather than getting something now.

I have pretty much discounted a bridge camera as my wife is expecting, in her words, a 'proper camera' but I am not sure whether to look at the bottom of the range DSLRs or one of the micro 4/3s format cameras that are increasingly common.

Any advice?

Your 'OP' suggests to me as a reader that you were more interested in a DSLR, ergo I gave you a couple of factual reference points along with my opinion from experience of being an owner of a Canon and a Nikon. I don't have any other digital SLRs so I limited to commenting on those two, which you;d expressed an interest in. I know sod all about 4/3 systems so I didn't mention those because what would be the point?

I'm sorry i thought the OP specifcally said I am looking at the very common entry level popular DSLRs (Canon/Nikon) OR the less common entry level DSLRs (Pentax/Sony/Olympus) OR a micro 4/3 mirrorless interchangable lens camera like the Panasonic G-series or Olympus PEN cameras. Hedge offered advice and i shall look into it, the Pentax DSLR and the mainstream high end, small sensor compact, G12. My reservations over another compact or fixed lens camera is in the OP. I don't want to be thinking about upgrading again anytime soon (5+ years)

For everyone of you, there will be 4 others who don't use their entry level DSLR that the nice man in the shop told them was a brilliant camera. They won't use it because its too big and cumbersome or they won't use it because they're intimidated by all the controls, or they won't get the best out of it because they leave it in auto and auto isn't great on that camera or they won't get the best out of it because auto is good and they persist in being David bleeding Bailey and fiddling with all the settings.

Incorrect client specifications are the bane of my professional life. No point in bull****ting about what you hope to do with it or go to night classes or marry it or whatever. I have 2 kids and if i want to catch on memory card their first mugging, stabbing or other precious memory i want to be able to pick up the camera and take a picture immediately. I want to be able to trust the camera and not my level of learning at any particular moment. I want to take good pictures tomorrow when i take it out of the box and good pictures in a year or two's time when I understand more about how it works. Is that not allowed?

You basically shot Hedge down too, for suggesting a bridge camera, yet now saying you are interested in it. Can you blame me for being confused here? At no point have I (or anyone) said you're 'not allowed' to want something that will point and shoot. You asked for ADVICE, yet when people try to give it to you it seems to be some kind of problem. They produce point and shoot compacts and bridge cameras for the very reason that DSLRs are too bulky, too complex, too expensive and too time consuming for people who want to snap decent quality memories, not go out on a hobby shoot using technical photography. With a bridge it's all there, with some manual function if necessary and no need to outlay on more lenses. Low end SLRs will shoot in auto mode perfectly well, of course they will. My comment was if you are thinking of getting an SLR, its very simple to learn, I never said you had to (however you'll need extra lenses, and no doubt soon want to upgrade to a better body). You seem to be getting in a grump because people are suggesting a bridge would be a better option. It's not an insult, it's advice based on your needs. Untwist your knickers.

Back in your first post you actually said you weren't that interested in the less popular makes, and were potentially more concerned with Canon and Nikon, so again you're contradicting yourself.

This is why I'm jumping at at near-the-deep-end

Exactly. I ended up buying a new SLR within about 2 years, just because I had gotten into it and wanted something better, hence why it was worth mentioning as a warning. But hey, it seems posting advice in an advice thread is a shooting offence round here

[Brimma]

I'm biased to Nikon too, owning a D5000

One of the reasons I put it ahead of others is the fold-out screen, which has come into it's own on many occasions

Have you thought about looking at good used equipment? There's potential for getting a higher spec camera than you would otherwise

[K1W1]

@daiking

Truthfully when was the last time you took 250 photos in a session and does your car not have a power socket that you can plug a USB charger into?

If you want to carry 2kg plus of Nikon DSLR and glass like I do to sports events and take 1500 photos in a couple of hours then buy a 2kg pro or semi pro camera with the appropriate battery capacity but when you said you wanted something small and light for a couple of hundred pounds then you immediately discounted those sorts of cameras.

My Fuji X10 also only takes around 250 shots per battery charge but guess what? For 12 pounds I purchased TWO extra batteries and now I have a 750 shot capacity without having to recharge and I still have a small and light package. To be honest I have never come vaguely close to needing to change the battery in any day anyway. the only reason I have the extras is to save me taking a charger on multi day motorcycle rides.

[hertsnminds]

I'm sure the shop would love me for that

If they want your business that is the advantage a bricks and mortar store has over the online brigade. You can talk to a person ask questions and see what features work for you and what features don't.

[Mort]

I looked around, and ended up buying a Canon EOS 500D with the 18-55 kit lens from the Canon refurb shop on ebay for a shade over £300, about 6 months ago.

^This

Covers everything you're asking for, is reasonably small for a DSLR, and if you want to get into it a bit more in a year or two then you can throw money at glass until you realise you need a better body.

Personally I have a large, heavy, bag of Canon bits when I want to be photography-man and I have an old, battered, scratched to death IXUS for when I want something small that will produce images that will outlast my godawful memory. If you want both in one, then you're asking for a bridge camera - which you've said you don't want. So I'd advise a recon DSLR and resign yourself to the fact you need to carry something bulky around.

A recon 500d (body-only) would probably leave you enough budget to find a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 - which, together, will be more than enough to outperform your expectations. It's a great (albeit quite loud) general purpose lens for a crop-sensor camera.

(Disclaimer: I shoot Canon, I'm sure there's model numbers that can be swapped in the above to make it a Nikon-centred post that's just as valid, but I don't know them.)

Edited 18 April, 2012 by Mort