many questions!helphelphelp!

[lahhhren]

Hi, i''ve wanted a dslr for around 3-4 years nows. I've never been able to afford it but now that im in first year art college i feel that im going tol need it and i finally have enough money lying around.

I've been using 35 mm slrs for around 3 years now and im quite comfortable with them, i;ve been doing darkroom for 2 years and love it but am looking for something a little less pricey in the long run and just something a little bit easier.

i'll be doing all sorts of photography ranging from portraits to urban, but its very likely the majority of shots will be in low light conditions. Im also an avid concert goer and have been photographing them for a while so im going to want something thats going to give me some sharp,low noise images even in shitty lighting and with the subjects bouncing around.

i've been majorly leaning toward the Pentax K10D and Canon EOS 30d ANDDD the Nikon d80 though i really do not have the budget for it now unless I just buy the body lol.

I have a very old pentax from '78 with a bunch of lenses from a similar year, on top of that I have a minolta from the mid/late 90s with 2 sigma lenses.

• will those sigma lenses work with the Canon eos 30d,Pentax k10d, or Nikon d80?

My budget is very tight by the way.. im reluctant to spend more than 1200 CANADIAN (on body and one lens for now) on this because im using a good portion of my university loan on this.

in conclusion,
an affordable DSLR for someone whose looking to become a professional out of university, over 8 mp, work wonders in low light action scenes, low noise and sharp images.

one more question...whats with all this hate for Nikon? is it just a rivalry between canon and nikon users (i've mostly been talking to canon users and they've all advised against nikons).

[mwfanelli2]

A few quick answers...

Im also an avid concert goer and have been photographing them for a while so im going to want something thats going to give me some sharp,low noise images even in shitty lighting and with the subjects bouncing around.

If you have been using film you already know how tricky concert photography is. Digital is no different. Unless you are up close with good lighting, no camera will give you low noise images with moving subjects and bad lighting. That's just basic physics!

i've been majorly leaning toward the Pentax K10D and Canon EOS 30d ANDDD the Nikon d80 though i really do not have the budget for it now unless I just buy the body lol.

All fine cameras.

I have a very old pentax from '78 with a bunch of lenses from a similar year, on top of that I have a minolta from the mid/late 90s with 2 sigma lenses.

The Pentax lenses will still work on Pentax cameras. You won't have all the fancy features of course. Lenses from 1978 have been superceded by quite a bit in terms of quality. But they will work.

The Minolta mount might work on Sony cameras (Minolta is no more). A Minolta fan can be accurate about that.

The Nikon and Canon will require that you buy new lenses, none of the ones you have will fit.

There are adapters around that switch mounts but don't bother. They are clumsy and limited. You'll be better off buying new or going with the Pentax.

one more question...whats with all this hate for Nikon? is it just a rivalry between canon and nikon users (i've mostly been talking to canon users and they've all advised against nikons).

Most people here are very reasonable and don't hate any camera. It is just equipment after all! Some other web sites have fanboys who have no clue what's going on and need to justify their purchases by saying rotten things about what others own.

The fact of the matter is that all major brands are about the same and vastly exceed the skills of most photographers. John Fielder, on an interview with KUSA in Denver just last week, said it best (paraphrasing): Taking good photographs is 90% vision and 10% equipment.

[freygr]

What film camera are you using now. If you have a butch of lenses for that camera it may be a wise choice to purchase that digital body and kit lens. Check your camera's web site for lens compatibility.

Most DSLR's do multiply the focal length of the lens, so your 28 mm lens is now a normal focal length lens. The larger the image sensor is the less noise you have, so you can get higher ISO.

[Frog]

I know about limited budgets all to well.
I think all of your choices are good cameras,(I have the d80) For the conditions you are going to be shooting, I would think you'd need a fast lens with any of those bodies. Of course the fast lenses cost more unless you go for a 50mm prime.
Be sure to read the camera dealer feedback forum to watch out for the places NOT to buy from. If you shop ebay watch for authorized dealers. If they're authorized you get manufacturer warranty. If it doesn't say authorized dealer in their site, they aren't and you'll get some nice grey market without a manufacturer warranty tho some offer their own warranties.

I've noticed the bashing of brands on some forums. Its all rediculous. Every camera has advantages and disadvantages and all the major brands make good cameras. I don't know why Canon fanboys seem to bash Nikon more than the other way around but thankfully you won't find much if any of that here.

[pisco]

About your Minolta mount lenses, if they are autofocus (A-mount, not the MC or MD manual lenses) they will work with the Sony Alpha A-100 and the new A-700.
You might not like the A100 because it has the reputation of being noisy above ISO 400 (it's not only reputation, it is noisier than other 10mp cameras withing the same price range), but has great image quality @ iso 100 & 200 and 400.
And the A700?, it should be very good with noise, but will cost US$1,400 (or $1200, not sure)

[another view]

What film are you shooting concerts with? If you like Ilford Delta 3200 (shot at 1600 or 3200) and want a "color version" of that sort of feel, then a newer DSLR at those ISO speeds should be just fine. IMO, that film is excellent for concerts so that's a good thing...

Any DSLR that you buy today will be pretty outdated for doing professional work years from now. Pros can't have equipment problems, so you'll find most of them shooting fairly new cameras just for the reliability (not that it's too likely that you'll have a problem with one, but just as cars go, newer is usually better). Buy it for your needs today and hopefully something a bit beyond that and you'll be fine. Even the least expensive cameras can create excellent work. Once you're familiar with digital (different than shooting film), start learning about Photoshop and other imaging programs that can reduce digital noise, etc.

The Nikon lenses that you have will be useable on a D40, 50 or 80 but you won't have autofocus and at least on some of these you won't have any metering. I wouldn't plan on using older lenses with a DSLR just for this hassle. If you go with Nikon, pick up a 50mm f1.8 for $100 USD and something fairly wide as your budget dictates.

People bash Nikon, Canon, McDonalds, GM and any other product that is sold anywhere in the world. Pentax has some nice features but I still think I'd stick with either Canon or Nikon just based on how many different system products they offer and if (down the road) you need to rent a lens chances are you'll only find Canon and possibly Nikon. My experience is with Nikon, so that's why I mention their stuff above.