Upgrade

[Kelburn]

I am currently wish to save up for a DSLR camera.
I am currently undecided on what to get though.

It would be used mainly for Aviation Photography (quite a bit) and holiday photos etc. (but importantly aviation )

Anyways I am looking at the following:

Canon 1000d w/ 18-55;70-300 (Rebel Xs)
Nikon D60 w/ 18-55;55-200
Sony A300 w/ 18-70;70-300

I'm not entirely sure on the Sony (which is cheapest) and am currently teetering towards the 1000d at the moment because its cheaper by 100NZD and it has further in zoom.
What would your recommendations be.

Just to note, 200mm should be adequate for me and I don't want to spend over $1400NZD (about $900USD) as I have other financial commitments

Cheers,
Kelburn

[JamesV]

First off Welcome to the forum.

You have selected a good group of cameras to choose from. Did you get a chance to take a look at the Reviews of those cameras on this website? I would say the first thing would be to go and see the three cameras in person to judge for yourself how they feel in your hands. There is always a plus for doing this, some have said that one camera just didn't feel right to them. I know that price is a factor but if it is awkward in your hands you are not going to be happy in the long run.

Take your time when deciding also. I know it took me a few months as I was looking at certain models then seen one I didn't even think about looking at. In the end I ended up with the Canon XTi and couldn't be happier.

Good luck and enjoy.

James

[Frog]

All good choces but what will make the difference is what lenses you use with those bodies. I'd think for the aviation you'd want a quality zoom lens.

[SmartWombat]

I would think eventually you'll buy a good zoom lens instead of the kit lens.
Probably around 70-200mm with IS (Canon) or VR (Nikon).

Don't rule out the Sony.
They have a complete system of bodies and lenses, their G series lenses are weather sealed like the Canon and Nikon professional lenses. Also they have image stabilization in the camera body, so you don't pay for it in each lens you buy.

You could perhaps put the money you save on buying Sony into a better lens.
There's more improvement to be had investing in good lenses than in the latest and whizziest body.

[Anbesol]

Well, I would encourage the Sony with that budget and interest. The beercan (70-210 f4 Minolta Vintage) is an incredible lens at the range, at a great price, (You can keep it under $900 with the A300 body, or very close). Here is a thread dedicated towards showing off the lens. Also it will keep you at f4 on the 200 side, and with an image stabilizer built into the body. Heres a link to an ebay listing of the beercan, at $250 its a steal! You wont find a lens of that particular quality for such a low price with either nikon or canon, at least not with that particular range. You'd have to spend $500-$800 on a Nikon or Canon lens to get that quality.

And considering Sony's Zeiss lens, you wont ever be at a loss for the top, best kind of quality in lens. Those are a heavy investment though, so perhaps something to look at down the road.

[byjamesderuvoDHQ]

Although some will rave about the Zeiss lens, I really don't think you can do much better than the Nikkor lens. You have over 40 years of legacy lenses there you can use and the great irony is that Nikon is now using Sony chips. So you get the best of both worlds.

Close second is Canon. But I'd go with Nikon for the lenses alone.

[Anbesol]

Show me a 70-210 that Nikon offers that competes with the Minolta 70-210 at that price.