Camera Advice

This is one of my pet topics.... So bear with me!

1) Why do you want a DSLR? What experience do you have with SLRs? What advantage do you anticipate in the DSLR over a sealed unit camera? Do you understand the reciprocal nature of f-stop and shutter speed and when and how to use them in various shooting situations to achive the artistic end you want to achive?

2) I firmly believe that for the average amature shooter looking for a good camera for family and travel photos who has no real interest in photography as a serious hobby with artistic ends that a sealed unit camera is a better choice. It offers the advantage of never having to worry about sensor cleaning. You're more likely to take it with you to the park, short trips, school plays, etc. They tend to be easier to use and less likely to change a setting that ruins your photos.

3) The kit lenses with the camera you're looking at are the bottom of the barrel that Nikon makes. They're adequate for point and shoot but offer no advantages over the one lens built into a good quality sealed camera. The offer the inconvenience of having to exchange them, increased bulk, and lack of image stabilization (which most good sealed units have built in). Too get superior quality glass with Vibration reduction (I see that the first lens with the kit is VR, but the glass won't be that good) (Nikon's image stabilization) you're looking at spending the cost of the entire package you're looking at an more. The next lens I intend to buy sells for about $1800...and it's nothing particularly special. If it were me, in your position, I'd spend MORE money on one good mid-zoom. You'll be more likely to use it and get more mileage out of the camera and have much better image quality.
See: Nikon | 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR Autofocus | 2159


4) That body is a very nice entry level DSLR body...no complaints there at all if you do decide to go with a DSLR.

 

BTW, that seems to be the going price:
Nikon | D60 SLR Digital Camera Kit with 18-55mm VR Lens | 9609

 

What do you mean by 'high speed pics'? Are you talking about wanting to freeze high speed action like race cars and runners on a track so that they're not blurry? Or do you mean that you are having trouble catching a specific moment you want because of shutter lag?

Since we're talking kids I'm going to bet you mean you're missing shots b/c of shutter lag--the camera doesn't fire for about 1/2 second or more when you press the shutter release.

High end sealed unit cameras (by that I mean fixed lens, you don't open them up for anything but for batteries and memory cards, etc) have performance specs on par with low end (ala D60) DSLRs. You can get some that have very fast focus and very fast shutter lag.

I recommend the site DPReview which does very thorough reviews of lots of cameras and they routinely look at shutter lag (both with pre-focus and without).

What's pre-focus? Most inexpensive digicams include a pre-focus option where when you partially depress and hold the shutter release the camera will go through it's focus and exposure setting logorhythm so that when you are ready to catch that moment the shutter lag is MUCH less. For instance...the very cheap digicam I just bought for my son ($80 on amazon cheap) has a measured shutter lag of 0.4 seconds without pre-focus, but only 0.1 seconds with pre-focus. My Fancy D200 DSLR has a shutter lag of something like 0.07 seconds...but that's a $1400 body...not much difference in shutter lag for a big difference in price.

I'll refrain from specific recommendations as there are new cameras introduced at a rate and volume far too fast for me to keep up with.

I recommend only buying cameras that use AA batteries, the OEM ones are too expensive. Optical zoom and high quality lenses matter, digital zoom doesn't.

I prefer a viewfinder to using the LCD for framing so I like a nice eye-level view finder, but you may have different preferences there.

The flexibility to use manual settings is nice, but honestly even I don't use them on my wife's point & shoot digicam.

 

Here's the DPReview of the high end compact cameras...a good starting place:
Prosumer Camera Group Test Q4 2008 Review: 13. Conclusions and ratings: Digital Photography Review
Above is the conclusion link, you can, and should, read the individual reviews. Even if you don't get one of those I think it's useful to read the individual reviews so you can learn what the pitfalls are when purchasing a digicam so you don't end up with something and later realize that some quirk is really irksome to you.

 

Dave,
I've done some reading and am going to back off a bit from my above recs. It seems that over the past year or so many companies have opted for consumer priced DSLRs over the "prosumer" compacts. And, indeed, the shutter lag are significantly less (aka faster) on the DSLRs. Further, the "kit" 18-55 D60 lens has VR and they've improved the glass to reduce flare ( a common problem on cheap kit lenses).

For the $700 kit you posted above I think it would be hard to go wrong. It has an automatic dust-off mode which may eliminate some of the concerns about crap on the sensor.

It still doesn't get you past the bulk/inconvenience factor, but with your primary goal being shutter lag, at that price, with those lenses...I'm gonna say it's a great place to start for a camera to meet your needs.

 

Hmmm, not sure what you're asking now.

If you're capturing fast action then higher ISO can help as it allows for faster shutter speeds.

If you're asking about shutter lag, then ISO isn't really an issue...auto-focus will always be slower in low light so shutter speed will be longer, but that's not related to the ISO setting.

If bulk is not an issue then choose the D60 over the compacts.
There are not lens and sensor maintenance issues with the compacts like the LX3 except for occasionally cleaning the front of the lens when it gets dirty.

Occasionally the sensor on the D60 will require cleaning. How often depends upon a) how often you change lenses, b)how dusty/dirty the environment you shoot in is (windy deserts are worse than pristine studios), and c) how well the sensor cleaner built into the camera works. Cleaning the sensor yourself isn't that complicated, but it requires care and the right tools. I get mine professionally cleaned once a year...cost is around $30-50.

 

ggood,
You really don't need to spend $1000+ on a DSLR body when you're starting as a rank amateur.
All you need is a body like the one Dave is looking at...a D60, or a Canon equivalent. If you think you might take up photography as a serious hobby the body is probably the least important of the things you will buy. Most important is your first lens...spend a lot of money on that...when you're ready for a better camera body the lens will still work on it. If you have a cheap body and a cheap lens you'll have to replace them both. I've still got a couple lenses over 10-12 years old, but have been through 5 or 6 camera bodies over that same time frame.

So, I'd spend maybe $1200 on your first lens (a good mid-zoom), and maybe $500 on a body. Spend $200 or so on a good tripod, another $200 on a good tripod head, and another $200 on a good speedlight/flash. That puts you over $2000, but all but the body will last you for many years...and even the body will still serve well as a back-up/second camera when you are ready to upgrade. There really aren't any features on a professional camera that an amateur needs or would have any idea how to use until they learn to use a cheaper body.

 

the 2/3 sensors have sort of gone the way of betamax and HD-DVD, they seemed like a great idea, but haven't really come to much. It doesn't make a lot of difference though, in choosing your camera.

That's my sense as well. And this may be a consideration for you....see below.

Not quite true. The Nikon DX series lenses have a smaller image on the sensor. While you can use those lenses with a full-frame sensor camera you will have a ring of black around the edge the you'll have to crop down to the smaller sensor image area. Thus, if you think you'll one day upgrade to a full-frame body you might be better off spending a bit extra for a non-DX lens. I'm currently enjoying this dilema. I'd like to buy the D700, but it's full frame and all but 2 or 3 of my lenses are now DX lenses...to replace my current DX lenses and buy the D700 would cost me well over $5000....and then how ever much I lose in my divorce that would be sure to follow!!

I'm a Nikon shooter and have been for about 14 years. I like their quality, their speed lights, and now am comfortable with their body layout.
But, if I were going to start over today from scratch I don't know which way I'd go. I think Canon may still hold an edge in DSLR quality, but Nikon is quickly closing the gap (with the release of the D700 in particular). Both have great lenses and I wouldn't make my decision based upon that factor.

If you think you might get serious about this the best thing for you to do is to go to a pro camera shop and handle some cameras with various lenses. See how they fit your hand. How do you like the layout of the controls on the body, do you find the menus easy to navigate? Do you like the viewfinder data and how the AF selectors work?

They both make great cameras and you really can't go wrong with either.