Best entry level DSLR.

V

vinaycm

Adept
One of my friend's want to upgrade from his P&S and asked me about opinion, without a second thought i suggested the Nikon D40 due to my pleasent experience with it.. I dont have much experience with DSLR's except for my Nikon D40 & Sigma SD10 (I wont recommend this to anyone!!).. So i decided to some homework..

After doing some googling into the "best entry level DSLR", i found some more extra options like Sony Alpha A200, Canon EOS 1000D etc along with the Nikon D40/D60 for the favorites in the category.. Now iam in a confusion of which one to suggest..

Please suggest the BEST entry level DSLR among these options (though other options are also welcome).. The max budget is around 25K..
 
rutvijt said:
Go for the Canon 1000D or the 400D.

Pros:
-More than 1000 mAh Battery. Even more than 400D.
-High ISO Noise Reduction.
And believe me, i am suffering due to Nikon's Bogus Image Processing Technology. No matter what lens u use, Image Processing plays a very BIG role. Nikon is said to be a culprit in that, with respect to Entry level SLRs.

Canon EOS 1000D / Rebel XS Review: 2. Comparison: Digital Photography Review
Click to expand...

I must say, my experience with the D40 was very good.. Dont know how it compares to the 1000D.. I've heard that the 18-55mm IS lens (the kit lens) that canon provides is not much better..
 
I have seen people buying D40 or A200 as best entry level DSLR.

Sangram recently bought a D40, Soulfire and BF1983 ha sbought A200.
 
I know someone using a D40X and the quality is amazing , no problems watsoever.....

In mumbai after a lot of hunting u can find Nikon D40's for about 20-23k.....

Latest prices I got last evening via a friend for the D60 was 26k all inc with 1 yr dealer warranty. Amazing price.....else your pal can get the Sony A-200 via KMD for about 20-21k ...again amazing cam.
 
Here in local stores only these are available: Canon EOS 1000D, Sony Alpha A200, Nikon D60 (no D40!!) & Canon EOS 450D (out of budget)..

But the pricing in local stores over here seems to be a real mess..

EOS 450D : 42K
EOS 1000D : 26K
D60 : 36K
A200 : 22K

Prices in e-bay are much cheaper!!!
 
netwitx said:
Nikon d40 is the best entry level cam if you can find one

Nikon D40
Click to expand...

Yea right :rofl: and you have to link to a crazed nikon fanboy site to justify that the D40 is the best :p. Not sure but I think I've posted atleast a 100 times before. Buy a D40 if you don't plan to use anything beyond the kit lens and maybe a 55-200 VR. A camera that can't autofocus a 50mm prime is a write off in my books. Add to that a super primitive 3 point AF and no bracketting, no DOF preview, a 6MP sensor with tons of noise at ISO 800. Its the same story with the D60 as well. Its even worse than the D40 in the fact that its flash sync speed is a mere 100ms. Nikon gets seriously only from the D80 and beyond. Below it all its cameras are merely toys.

A200 is a nice camera but finding lenses for it is another story :p.
 
Like Chaos said... lens selection is tricky with D40, as it doesn't have lens motor on body hence can't use autofocus with many lenses. But if the budget is tight and you don't wanna deal with big SLR, then D40 is good choice. The Ken Rockwell site might be pretty fanboyish but quite a few of his points for D40 are true.

I haven't used one in regular, but I got chance to handle it once and it's true amateur's DSLR. It's quite compact, light and does what you would expect from entry level DSLR. Just make sure you select a proper lens compatible with it and you're well set. Also, 18-55 lens that comes with D40 is much much better than it's Canon couterpart.

Unless your friend is very picky, Tamron 18-250 lens should do him good. It's not a pro lens and not exactly cheap either, but gives better results than similarly zoom-equipped P&S cams.. You should find one around 19k I suppose, It's almost near the cost of D40 itself. This is just a suggestion as later upgrade to kit 18-55 lens, as zoom and traveling aid. And if he's fine with idea of changing lens, then Tamron 55-200 lens comes at about 5-6k, which should take care of zoom aspect. I had this one (55-200) some time back and it was surprisingly good (I bought as emergency back then, since I was need of Zoom lens at cheap, but this lens turned out pretty good. I still feel bad about that I lost it in my last ladakh trip :(). Both of these lenses are D40 compatible.
 
My friend wont be going much beyond the kit lens anywhere in the near future.. He wants a good cam with a good set of kit lens.. Moreover he told me that he would prefer the cam that cam give the best image quality in the class..

As i already said, my experience with the D40 was better compared to my Sigma SD10. Its my favorite.. Iam not a nikon fan nor do i have much experience with DSLR's.. But i must say iam totally content with the image quality that D40's providing (as compared to my SD10)..
 
iGo said:
Also, 18-55 lens that comes with D40 is much much better than it's Canon couterpart.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true now. The 18-55 IS when it came out was significantly better than the kit 18-55 and had entirely new optics. Later on Canon quietly updated the optics of the non IS kit 18-55 to that of the IS version. If u compare an 18-55 that you buy now with one of two years ago, you'd notice a dramatic difference in IQ. The newer ones are a lot lot sharper.

If the 1000D costs as much as a D40, its a no brainer - get the 1000D. Its a full featured camera not a castrated one like the D40. It has the tried and tested 10MP sensor of the 400D and the 7 point AF module of the 350D. The latter is much much better than the lame 3 point AF module present in the D40. It autofocusses all lenses, has live view which is quite useful whenever you place the cam on a tripod, has a flash sync of 1/200s like all other cams, has bracketting, has DOF preview and essentially the works.

The only genuine downers are a slightly dim viewfinder and a body that feels a wee bit too tiny to many people.
 
Chaos said:
on Canon quietly updated the optics of the non IS kit 18-55 to that of the IS version.
Click to expand...

Ohh... I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the update.

Also, yes... At same cost... 1000D is definitely better choice than D40.
 
i bought a canon 1000D recently after suggestions from TE.

got for 26k with IS, without bill ofcourse.

i must say its a really good camera. and u have tons of options for future lens updgrade,

ofcourse if ur upgrading from P&S, 1000d is way too much impressive,

i dont think ur friend will stick only to kit lens for long. as u'll be tempted for longer range!
canon has very good 50mm 1.8 for cheap and decent range of telephotos as well(barring ofcourse L series)
 
vinaycm said:
Please suggest the BEST entry level DSLR among these options (though other options are also welcome).. The max budget is around 25K..
Click to expand...

Oh you are touching on a very sticky subject ! There is no best camera and each one has plenty of pros and cons. While I have an A200 I have respect for other brands as well. Let me elaborate on the pros and cons of each manufacturer.

Nikon D40 pros (I am not considering the useless D60 which is not a better camera than the D40).

1.Light weight with a nice bright viewfinder (brighter than the A200 and the EOS 1000D).

2. Good kit lens 18-55mm VR. (As good as the Canon 18-55 IS and better than the 18-70 Sony lens in sharpness and build quality).

3. Nice easy to use menu system (has some help pop ups explaining what each function does. Great for a beginner)

4. Nice punchy colours out of the box. (These are not accurate colours but more pleasing colours for a consumer). (The A200 and EOS 1000D have more accurate colours, but not as pleasing as the D40).

Nikon D40 Cons -

1. Short kit lens (The 18-55 kit does not zoom enough and most people will really miss a longer reach. The 18-70 kit that the A200 has is far more useable.)

2. No bracketing - Not a big con, unless you are shoot HDR regularly. However HDR is still possible using Shutter priority. Also the D40 meter is generally quite accurate and you will rarely use this feature)

3. No DOF preview - This is not present in the A200 either. I have never used it so I dont know how useful (or useless) it is. But I am placing it in the cons.

4. No built in AF motor - A really bad one this. Many good older lenses wont work and while I prefer to use MF a lot, the lack of AF is still a major detriment to a person new to photography.

My take on this is that the pros outweigh the cons quite decently.

Canon 1000D pros -

1. Low high ISO noise - No getting around this one. It is better than the D40 by a bit (the D40 has a good high ISO performance as well) and it kills the A200 at ISO 1600.

2. Live view - The only budget cam to support live view so thats a plus (I personally hate the slow AF in live view mode, but some people will find it useful).

Canon 1000D Cons -

1. Small grip - The ONLY reason I did not buy it is because I couldn't hold it properly. If the 1000D had the D40 body, it would be a killer deal.

2. Dim viewfinder - The A200 viewfinder is even dimmer than this, but still compared to the D40 it is much dimmer.

3. Poor kit lens reach (Same as the D40).

So while the 1000D has the best IQ over the 3, it is hampered by the poor grip and the short kit lens.

Sony A200 pros -

1. Built in IS - THE best reason to go for it is that the IS works with any darn lens that you throw at it. I personally have a minolta 28-105 and 50mm f1.7 lens and both are image stabilized. You cant get a 50mm stabilized lens from either Canon or Nikon. Oh and while the IS is not as good as the optical IS in the kit lenses of Nikon or Canon ,the A200 can be safely used upto 1/8 secs, while the Canikon can be used at 1/4 secs.

2. Good ergonomics - Love the feel of the camera in the hands due to the meaty grip. The D40 is lighter, but I still prefer the A200 grip. The 1000D feels like a poor joke after this.

3. Cheap - It costs 24500 with a bag, 4 GB CF Lexar Pro 133x card + UV filter with a 3 year warranty. Let Canikon beat that !

4. RAW + JPEG shooting - Nikon uses a lower quality Basic JPEG instead of the higher quality fine JPEG which defeats the purpose of RAW + JPEG mode. Canon has this mode as well. I shoot RAW + JPEG all the time btw.

5. Best battery life. - The Sony is rated for 750 shots over the 450 shots for the D40 and approx 500 shots with the 1000D. Plus it has a percentage display which is very accurate and useful.

6. Warranty - This is the only basic DSLR in your budget where you get a 3 year warranty. So you can protect your investment.

Sony A200 Cons -

1. Dim viewfinder - The biggest con (for me) was the dim viewfinder. And since this is the only way to compose your photos, having a dim viewfinder is not so much fun. I am surprised that no one has pointed out this problem in any review online. And I checked 3 different A200 cameras so I know this is not a one off problem.

2. Lack of lenses - Yes they have less number of lenses compared to Canikon. But come on, most of the lenses are in the professional segment which none of us will dream of buying. Currently an average photographer will need just 3 types of lenses - a wide to short telephoto lens (16-80mm types), a normal to telephoto lens (70-300mm types) and a fast prime for low light photographs (50mm f1.8 types) all of which are present on the Sony system. Plus with KMD here, you wont have a problem getting lenses and stuff from the US.

3. Ignorant people - Another con is that you get bombarded with questions on why you chose Sony over some Canikon camera. So you will have to keep explaining it to many people. I choose to use some technical terms (which I barely understand) to keep such people quiet ! :bleh:

So there you have it. A basic comparison between the 3. I would say pick either the A200 or the D40 instead of the 1000D unless your friend likes the grip of the 1000D.

Also assuming your friends budget is 28k, you will get -

1. Canon 1000D + bag + 18-55 IS lens + 4 GB CF fast card.

2. Sony A200 + bag + 18-70 lens + 4 GB fast card + 50m f.17 lens (used)

3. Nikon D40 + 18-55 VR lens + 55-200mm VR lens + 4 GB SD card.

So as you can see from the above. Your friend will be better served choosing the Nikon or Sony rather than the Canon. :)
 
Good post BF1983. As I mentioned, if the only idea is to sit on the kit lens+ a single tele zoom, a D40 will do fine. However if its with an intention to grow, the Nikon is very bad value.

The main issue with the A200 is the super dim viewfinder. Its very very hard to compose images while manual focussing (YMMV). If one is interested in macros (where AF doesn't work half the time), this is a serious downer. The rebels are bad too but much more usable plus one has live view for those situations. The other issue is that sensor shift stabilization doesn't work very well with telephoto zooms at their long end. I tried a 70-300 on an A700 at a camera store abroad and the results were a lot worse than what I usually expect out of a canon. However there's no discounting the fact that IS on every single lens is quite useful.

The thing with canon cameras is that they are more expensive than competition at the outset but over time, you'd be a lot happier with them. The canon telephoto zooms cost a lot as well. (12000 bucks or so for an E-FS 55-250 IS) But what you do get is killer image quality. Even the most basic tele zoom is razor sharp (other than the 75-300 which is a piece of $hit).
 
^^ Yes very true. I have a bit of a problem using MF in macro. Otherwise it is OK for general purposes outdoors and stuff. But for macro and in low light it is a real pain.

Canon is a good bet for those willing to spend on the lenses. The 55-250 IS lens is a brilliant lens, but at 12000 it is a bit expensive.

In fact neither Nikon nor Sony have a really good normal to telephoto lens (the Nikon has the 55-200mm which is short on the long end and the Sony has the 75-300mm lens which is very soft at the long end and and the IS is not too effective at that length.)

Another problem with built in IS is that you cannot see the image stabilizing effect in the viewfinder. So if you are shooting hand held shots using a telephoto lens, the image in the viewfinder will be jumping a lot making it difficult to compose your snap. But still for shorter lenses, its not a problem.
 
Another big plus for canons is almost universal support for the CR2 format. Nearly every imaging software supports it. On the other hand NEFs are kind of a pain to process - the reason why one sees so many nikon shooters use JPG which essentially defeats the very purpose of a DSLR. Not sure about what the state is with Sony.
 
Back
Top