FAQ: What is the best digital SLR?

[Bodryn]

I have an *istDS and have been really enjoying taking pictures of the night sky. I have an f/1.7 lens that came with one of my Ricoh cameras. I set the camera at 800 or 1600 ISO and set the shutter for 8 or 10 seconds to get pinpoint pictures of constellations even at f/1.7, showing stars as dim as the eye can see. I use the 2 second self-timer to eliminate vibration. Then all I do is mount the camera on a tripod and point it at different things and snap away. I just love the fact that all my good old Pentax and Ricoh lenses get to be used after being neglected for like ten years or so. I have a 2.8 135mm lens that I still plan to use and an old and very heavy 28-200 zoom which I may replace with something much lighter and more convenient.

The viewfinder is so good that I can get a very precise focus on closeup objects with the 1.7 lens.

It would be nice if the camera had image stabilization. Or should I say individual lenses? I also would like it if it had a full frame imager so I could take full advantage of available wide angle lenses. I suspect that in the future Pentax will come out with something like that. Canon is coming out with one but it will cost over US$3000

[PuckJunkey]

I'll post a late vote for the D70 / D70S. Good color performance, decent noise performance at 200 and 400, easy to set up and use, and lasts a good while on a single battery charge. My biggest complaints are the small LCD and the lack of a remote terminal. Otherwise great camera for the money. And a great backup once you move to something better.

[JSPhoto]

Buying a camera, digital or film is not an easy task. When you buy one your looking for the best you can get for the money you have available. Sometimes though you need to go beyond your limits due to learning from others mistakes or your own.
I started out with a cheap Polaroid P&S, then went to an Olympus C2100UZ, wore it out and then moved up to a Canon 1D. After three years with it it is now a backup to a 1D MKII N.
How I went from the 1D to the MKII N is because the 1D needed repaired and it took so long to get it back I had to get something else as the 300D just couldn't handle it as a backup.
When I purchased the MKII N I went overboard on what I could afford, but considered more than just the "what I can do now" and looked ahead to what do I need for the future, as well as, can I make the money back. I finally decided that buying a used 1D was not the route to go, but buying a new MKII N was the route to go with the amount of work I had done this past year.
I also decided to purchase two lenses, which should cover all my needs for camera and lenses in the foreseeable future. It made sense then, and now makes more sense as I gotten additional work since buying the new camera and lenses.
So I believe that when purchasing a camera you need to not only look at what you can afford now, but what your future needs will be, and take a look into the future. Things may surprise you how they can fall into place.In my case I got two huge jobs coming now because of this purchase. Both are for a magazine, one is shooting 5 basketball games in one day, the other is 5 football games (state championships) in two days. There will be additional jobs coming out of these two as well from the rumblings I'm hearing from additional possible customers. Think ahead!

JS

[carney2]

I'm hoping it's the Nikon D200. I have not gone digital yet, and the D200 is the first camera that has me even a little excited.

[yogestee]

>The best DSLR is the one you use.

The best DSLR is the one the other guy uses!!

Jurgen
Australia

[danag42]

Now we're back to the issue of: what lenses do you already have? If you have quality lenses there's no point to switching systems, the lenses are the most important part of your equipement.

[dinor2]

I knew I wanted a dslr that was easy to hold and use and my oly e500 meets those needs. I love taking pictures, I've got two kids so my oly is a part of my body of course!

I love how it fits in my hand, and, with the kit lens, 14-45mm, it is not too heavy to work with during a photo session. Based on other reviews of other lenses that I hope to acquire soon, it looks like this is the case for most of the lenses oly has for the 4 thirds system.

I also appreciate the easy to read manual, since this IS my first dslr camera and the camera itself has been fun and not too hard to figure out which is important to me since I took no photography classes in school and therefor am learning on my own by trial and error and research of the manual and places like this site!

Although it's true that you need to know how to take good pictures no matter what camera you get, it's probably good to know your camera and how it works as well! (I'm still playing with the apeture and shutter speeds!).

[patrickwilson86]

Before you make the plunge, read some reviews and take suggestions from the forum. Don't aim too low when choosing a camera. I've never heard anyone complaining that the camera they bought is too good.

Don't rule out used and refurbished cameras from dealers and manufacturers. :thumbsup:

[nekonelac]

The simple answer is unless you are into architectural photography(View camera),or fast sport photography(many frames per second) Once you learn photography,the camera doesn't matte-rEven though I have Nikon's D200 and D50 for weddings and a Lumix G1,-I sell stock photos made with the simplest point and shoot cameras.The shot below is from a Fuji finepix S5100/S5500

[Doranta]

I think that the best DSLR is canon by far!
However, i recently found a Nikon at godigging.com which is a website where you can exchange anything you don't want for something you really need!
I think it's a good one too!!!

[margaret]

I think that Nikon is good, but Sony is the best

[rajivjaipur]

nikon also good but if you need best clearty and best pixels clors then trust only on sony

[rajivjaipur]

sony is best ever

[JSPhoto]

what is the smallest digital SLR within a $1500 budget???
A few weeknds ago I held a couple of the SLRs available and found I CAN't comfortably hold any of them....are there any smaller and non plastic body ones coming out by anyone even if it's not Canon or Nikon.

I'm doing research this year so all viewpoints are welcome...

thanks
nat

Natalie,
I went from a lightwieght digital to a very heavy DSLR and found that it took a while to get used to the wieght but it was actually easier to control, even with a lens that wieghs the same as the body. There seems to be much less camera shake.... even when shivering in the the cold.
John

[Sebastian]

Natalie,
I went from a lightwieght digital to a very heavy DSLR and found that it took a while to get used to the wieght but it was actually easier to control, even with a lens that wieghs the same as the body. There seems to be much less camera shake.... even when shivering in the the cold.
John

That's a very good point, more mass equals harder to move, which helps to deaden shake. Plus a heavier body helps to balance heavier lenses. It all is a tradeoff though depending on what your priorities are.

[patch68]

what is the smallest digital SLR within a $1500 budget???
A few weeknds ago I held a couple of the SLRs available and found I CAN't comfortably hold any of them....are there any smaller and non plastic body ones coming out by anyone even if it's not Canon or Nikon.

I'm doing research this year so all viewpoints are welcome...

thanks
nat

Hi Nat,
The Pentax-ist is the one for you, its tiny. Well actually its more the size of a film SLR. I am 6' 2" and have large hands and found it a bit too small. I like big bulky cameras coming from a medium format background, hence I have a Sigma SD10 - its a monster! Hope this helps.

[another view]

Good idea for a post - there are no easy answers here. I have to disagree with some points, but this is a time when it's probably easier to decide if you've got the right gear as opposed to the time when you replace a film SLR. I say this because all of your lenses (at least those of us with smaller-sized sensor DSLR's) have now changed their effective length.

With a Nikon system, you can get the 12-24 DX lens for about a grand. Sure, the 80-200 f2.8 basically gives you a 300 f2.8 but you lose the wide end. Add another thousand to the package if it's something you need. This will be true of both Nikon and Canon, one (expensive) full frame sensor camera available per brand. I'm sure Canon has or will have a wide zoom like this, the 17mm or 20mm just isn't that wide anymore on a DSLR.

Other things to consider if you switch brands - all of the accessories that accumulate, like flashes and electronic cable releases. However, they may or may not be compatible to some extent with a DSLR. There's also the lingo, Nikon calls it matrix, Canon calls it evaluative. I suppose they handle differently too but I don't have experience with Canon. All of the recent Nikons seem to handle pretty similarly. If you change brands, you've got to learn more about how the new camera works. All just part of a big learning curve.

[Andy B]

The answer to this whole question is simple really. The best Digital SLR is the one which produces images which your clients like. At the end of the day though, as a previous poster said - it's the photographer that counts. Cameras are stupid, photographers are clever.

In photography people have always got hung up on having the right label, right camera, right lens. I take photographs for a living, I am now moving away from Nikon lenses to Tokina, because from side by side comparisons I've done, they're better built as good or better optically and a third the price. But then maybe I've grown up beyond being a label snob.

[Ronnoco]

In photography people have always got hung up on having the right label, right camera, right lens. I take photographs for a living, I am now moving away from Nikon lenses to Tokina, because from side by side comparisons I've done, they're better built as good or better optically and a third the price. But then maybe I've grown up beyond being a label snob.

Interesting that Popular Photography's lab results and testing placed Tokina at the top of the "other lenses" in terms of quality and value for money spent. Your experience would seem to confirm that finding.

Ronnoco

[Andy B]

Interesting that Popular Photography's lab results and testing placed Tokina at the top of the "other lenses" in terms of quality and value for money spent. Your experience would seem to confirm that finding.

Ronnoco

I have a whole bunch of lenses and the Tokinas are stunning. They're built like tanks and you just feel like you are handling something that would survive a nuclear war. I am a big convert. Sad thing is that it is getting increasingly difficult to find stockists in the UK.

[danag42]

The answer to this whole question is simple really. The best Digital SLR is the one which produces images which your clients like. At the end of the day though, as a previous poster said - it's the photographer that counts. Cameras are stupid, photographers are clever.

And my customers dont give a rat's @ss what I take the photo with, as long as it suits their purpose. When I did archatecture, it was a 4x5 TOYO. Now that I'm doing a lot of studio photography, I'm using DSLR's. Since I have a stable of top-notch Pentax lenses, the *st D was the obvious choice, the lens is what counts. The body just holds the film/sensor so the lens can create an image.

Now the K10D is a hopeful sign that Pentax is going to enter the pro small DSLR market, since medium format (their usual pro market) is kind of drying up. In New York, the big ad agencies demand zillion megapixel MF backs so they can print a double-gate spread through a 150 line screen, effectively using the same resolutin that a 5 or 6 megapixel camera produces. But they've been hoisted on their own petard, they swallowed their own propaganda!

Pixelitis is a serious condition. There is no known cure. Perhaps medical advances will allow the poor suffering clods to be cured, but I'm not holding my breath!

[Homer]

What camera is the best, will I think it's been discussed quite a bit already. Bottom line, to each person that question means so many different things. I for one went with the Minolta 7D because I had a good assortment of Minolta glass already. Within a year of having the 7D I had a problem and had to have it repaired, because I shoot a lot of sports I ended up buying another 7D. Now that I have been shooting sports solid for about 1 1/2 years I've come to the conclusion that I need to make a change and move to Canon. Right now I'm saving all my pennies to get the Canon EOS - 1D mark IIn. This I'm doing for two reasons. I want the 8.5 shots a second, and the better glass that Canon has over Minolta, also because of all of the great feedback I read about Canon. If I could have afforded the Canon from the get-go then I would have bought it, but I couldn't so I stayed with Minolta. So I guess what I'm trying to say is what is the best is not always what we can get.

Jim

[Ronnoco]

If you take the question quite literally, the current answer is the 16.7 megapixel Canon 1Ds Mark 11 but here is the interesting part with Leica lenses on the front. The Leica lenses were much better than the top Canon lenses in all areas of lens comparisons.

Ronnoco

[mwfanelli]

If you take the question quite literally, the current answer is the 16.7 megapixel Canon 1Ds Mark 11 but here is the interesting part with Leica lenses on the front. The Leica lenses were much better than the top Canon lenses in all areas of lens comparisons.

Ronnoco

Interesting. What is the reference for this data?

Cheers.

[Ronnoco]

Interesting. What is the reference for this data?

Cheers.

Photo Techniques, March/April edition, the author has a Phd in Physics as well as his photography in several art museums of contemporary and modern art.

Ronnoco