Help needed for a soon to be newby!!!

[gp100]

Hi everyone,

I am looking to get myself a new DSLR camera and some lenses. I have approx. $1300-$1400 and am looking at the following combinations:

400D + Canon 70-200mm F/4 L + Sigma 17-70mm

or

D80 + Nikon 70-300mm VR + Sigma 17-70mm

I would love your opinions and other suggestions if you have an extra minute or two!!!

Thanks

[jestev]

I would go with the Nikon setup because I'm a Nikon guy. That being said, I wouldn't buy the Nikkor 70-300VR. I just don't think it's that great of a lens. Try and save up for the Nikkor 80-200.

[adz929]

I try not to be brand loyal as you can get great results from just about any DSLR, however, saying that, I don't like any of Canons entry level bodies, they are too cramped and their build quality isn't all that great. Of the two I'd pick the D80 hands down. As for tele zooms, the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM or the Nikkor AF-D 80-200 f/2.8 would be well worth saving for.

[toosnvetts]

Another newbie here. All I can say is that I have been shooting for a year with a Canon 400D and a 70-200 4L IS USM and am having a blast! I think the entry level body is fine. It gives you time to understand what you really want to do and upgrade accordingly. I plan to buy only ES lenses though so they will fit on a full frame camera when I do upgrade.

[prinothcat]

I'd go with the d-80. The 70-300 is an accepstable enrty zoom. It's soft at 300, but adaquate at 70-250 or so. Stopped down it's fine, it just isn't sharp at 300 f5.6. I have one. It works. The VR is good. It will hunt in l,ow light, since f 5.6 is the baseline where AF starts to work. Faster is better.
That being said, if you can get the funds, the 80-200 2.8 AF-D is vastly superior. Far beter build (it's metal..) fast AF though it's not AF-S fast. It also suffers from not being overridable, it's either AF or manual. AF-S allows you to grab the focus ring and finetune. AF-D is noisy as well. Also yone notices a small "torque" sensation since the AF-D focuses the massive front elements whereas the AF-S focuses the rears which are much smaller. It definately does not suffer from bad optics, it's razor sharp throughtthe entire range. It's being discountinued. I have some stuff going upline that will demo teh strengths of this lens..( I hope..) The replacement is the 70-200 2.8 AF-S VR. NIIIICCCE! Costs twice as much. 80-200 can be had new for +- 900 out of NYC, on the used market you can get a good one for 600-700, again out of NYC.

I was also turned off by the ergonomics of the enrty Canon line. Some people also likethe nikon menus better. Look at them both in detail, and look at eh lens you think you want as well. One line will say BUY ME NOW!. hte down side of the nikon n\line if there is one, is thateh consumer lenses are just that. The 18-xx's AF-S DX G's feel cheap. I have come to really dislike the lack of a focus scale on my 18-135 DX. The 70-300 is a step up. The aperture ring omission on the G series is less of an issue for me, siince I have been spinnning dials since the days of the Canon A-1.

Lookin at online vendors? Look at B&H, Adorma, and Ritz. For used check out KEH. I can supply web addy's for all those after I get back on my own 'puter tomorrow night.

[junglejuice]

As the owner of a Canon 350d I must say that I am very happy with my choice though I did find it neccessary to add the battery grip as I found it too small but as I tend to do a fair amount of portrait oriented shots the battery grip is invaluable with the vertical shooting buttons.
The build quality issue is a non-issue as I have carried mine all over the country side in my 4x4 and it did a 6 week trip through Europe where it was used extensively everyday and there is not one mark on it and seeing that it has done around 7-8000 shots that is pretty good. I would certainly recommend it.
I use a Canon 17-85IS and the Canon 70-300IS as well as the Sigma 10-20 for normal photography and a Tamron 28-75 2.8 for portrait work and a Tamron 18-200 for travel work and find all of these great for their intended uses.

[brickfielder]

The important thing about buying any camera is what kind of photographs you want to take. Your suggested choices of lens suggest a fairly broad range of uses or that you do not really know what types of photography you like best. Don't spend loads of money on kit that you may not be sure about or that is so heavy that you will not want to carry it around. Either of the cameras you mention are good starter cameras with the nod perhaps going to the D80 if you are serious about photography, because it is ergonomically better for a professional user. Having said that I own a canon 400D largely because the range of lens and options in the canon range offered me opportunities that at the time nikon could not offer. Remember to include in your costs some options like memory cards, proper flash ,a camera bag, a tripod and perhaps polarisers.
Make sure that you are familiar with the weight and sizes of the kit you are thinking about by actually handling and looking at them in a shop or by finding someone else who owns them. Consider the nikon 18-200VR lens or whether you want a fast lens for indoor or poor light. My first instinct advice might be get a kit lens, a fast 50, then consider a longer macro or something like a 70-200/300. Remember good lenses make it easier to get a great shot but are not essential and equally this years cameras will be out of date all too soon while the lenses will continue to be valuable tools. Take a look round the site and see what inspires you to photograph and you will probably be on your way to deciding what kit to buy.