Hi everyone- My first post on here.
I've been researching SLR cameras for years. I never bought one, for various reasons, mainly financial. I looked into them last year after my Sony P&S died, and my wife talked me into getting another P&S just due to the size of it for the things that we will be using it for. She couldn't have been more right, as I use it almost daily with zero setup time while mountain biking and snowboarding. I use these pics for a local website I run, Spudhuckster.com, and it's so convenient to have the P&S camera in my pocket. Most of my pics suck because I don't focus on setup and end up cropping the images (which is why I went with the Sony DSC-P200 at 7.2 megapixels). I would really like to have more professional images this year on the site.
I founded an upcoming mountain bike clothing company last year (Spectrum Techwear), and am in the process of setting up the business website while critiqueing prototypes. I will need lots of pro-images for the catalog/website, and rather than hire a photographer, I would like to fulfill a lifelong perceived passion for photography. I do realize that it will take years of experience to match what a pro can achieve, but I prefer to be a "jack of all trades" and DIY'er.
This year I am buying a camera for the business, but will probably will be using it even more for personal use. My friend Amanda takes beautiful pics and spent some time showing me her gear over Christmas (Nikon D100 and D2X). Like I said earlier, I have been researching cameras for a long time and I realize the differences in brands. I have no SLR lenses or gear at all. Starting from scratch, I want a camera that will last for years and can hold up to the abuses of action sports photography. Getting the perfect shot requires getting to the location, which often times is in foul weather and can be a rugged adventure. Amanda is recommending the new D200 of course, which I really like, and would buy immediately if it wasn't so expensive.
Problem here is the money. Being a first year business, I don't have $5,000 to drop on a camera outfit. I can afford a D200 and probably one good lens one not so good lens. I realize the importance of lenses to match up to your camera's ability. Will it be worthwhile to buy the D200 and a good lens/notso lens/a few accessories (small card because can't afford a big one, but not sure that this matters tremendously as I will be downloading to laptop after each session), or should I go with a Canon 20D on sale for nearly half the price and bump up my lenses and accessories?
I think both the 20D and D200 will do what I need (both shoot at 5 fps continuous). But my perceived advantages of the D200 are weather-resistance, slightly better image resolution (10.2 vs 8.2 mp's, not sure about actual image quality differences), and it appears to me that there are better glass choices for the Nikon. Amanda says the Canon controls are easier laid out for the user, but the Nikon takes better pictures. Is the 20D going to be extinct in a few years? Will it hold up to the punishment I will probably inflict? Is this realistic or too good to be true - 20d for $799?
Am I overbuying to start with? Will a Rebel XT due to it's size be a better choice for my backcountry antics? Remember the weather-proofing issue.
Thanks everyone for taking the time to read my insanely long first post. --Brad