PDA

View Full Version : Looking for a great $500 digital camera


artesc
2007-11-20, 14:43
Ok. What is the best digital camera (not video) I can buy for $500 (or thereabouts)?


Oh, I don't want a point and shoot. As professional as possible. (thinking something along the lines of the Fujifilm Finepix S9100)

Windswept
2007-11-20, 14:48
Have you checked out this site?

http://dpreview.com/

ghoti
2007-11-20, 15:23
Also, you should decide whether you want a compact camera (like the Canon PowerShot G9) or a DSLR (like the Nikon D40). SLRs always offer you better image quality and are much more versatile. The D40x is a bit above your budget (~$600), but is a great camera. A compact one like the G9 has the same level of control (if not more, at least compared to the D40x), but is more limited in image quality, and you can't swap the lens, etc. (which is also a good thing because it keeps you from spending lots of money).

DPReview is a great site to get an idea of what you want and to narrow down the choices.

chucker
2007-11-20, 15:35
"Best"? How about stating what you're looking for? Should it be lightweight? Should it support AA batteries? Do you need much zoom? Exchangeable lenses? A big screen? Remote control? WiFi?

thegeriatric
2007-11-20, 17:22
there is no such thing as "the best digital camera" it all depends on what you want to use it for, and your personal preference will pay a large part in what you choose. I have a personal favourite brand, but so will everyone, and they are probably all different.

Brad
2007-11-20, 18:27
Editing thread title because... really... "One simple question."? :lol:

PKIDelirium
2007-11-20, 18:31
Personally if I was going to spend that on a camera, I'd buy a Canon S5 IS, a couple large cards and some good batteries.

screensaver400
2007-11-20, 19:20
Is $500 your starting point, or your final budget for all photo gear?

If you want to get moderately serious at that price point, go with a Digital Rebel XT body ($420 from Amazon) and a Canon 50mm f/1.8 ($80 from Amazon).

Now, the 50mm is a bit long, but it's the best lens at that price point, and is a good "trainer" lens.

After, you'll want to think about the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (under $400 from Amazon), a good all around lens. Also consider the much better and more durable Canon 50mm f/1.4 (Under $300 on Amazon) to replace your $80 f/1.8. For a little telephoto, look at the Canon 100mm f/2 (under $400 on Amazon).

All in all, once you have those three lenses and the XT body, you'll be set for the next few years. The other plus is that you can get a new body to replace your XT whenever something much better comes out, and be able to use the same lenses (so long as you buy a Canon body, that is).

Note that I listed all prime lenses. This will force you to "zoom with your feet," instead of relying on the lens to do the work for you. This will make you a better photographer.

You said you wanted pro. This is as close to a pro setup as you're getting for $500.

Oh, and PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't get the Rebel XT Kit and stop there. So many people do that, and are disappointed in the photos. The kit lens is pretty bad-- I wouldn't even bother with it. For the same money, you can get the body with the 50mm lens, and thats a much better deal for you.

artesc
2007-11-21, 15:26
Hmm, thanks a lot (and sorry for the title).


Well, I don't care about how heavy or small it is, I was kind of leaning towards the dslr bunch...which i know means lenses and stuff. but i have no idea what to get.

thanks for the tips and the link!

torifile
2007-11-21, 18:08
Hmm, thanks a lot (and sorry for the title).


Well, I don't care about how heavy or small it is, I was kind of leaning towards the dslr bunch...which i know means lenses and stuff. but i have no idea what to get.

thanks for the tips and the link!
please be aware that there is a high likelihood you'll be frustrated with a DSLR since they are harder to use to get good photos.

However, I second the recommendation to get a body + prime lens to start. I don't know that I'd recommend 3 prime lenses but get at least one.

SKMDC
2007-11-21, 19:31
I got my wife a Nikon D-40 and I think I've seen it at around 500. I got an email from Nikon today that has a deal starting today for a 55-200mm lens for an extra hundred clams.

screensaver400
2007-11-21, 20:57
However, I second the recommendation to get a body + prime lens to start. I don't know that I'd recommend 3 prime lenses but get at least one.

I agree, to an extent. The reason I recommended the three primes is because you need to spend much much more on zoom lenses to get comparable image quality to a decent prime. From what I hear, it's pretty tough to design good zoom lenses, and far easier to develop good primes. Many have argued that the 50mm f/1.4 and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 provide L quality images for under $300 and $400, respectively-- I've not heard any claims of a zoom lenses for under $400 providing L series quality. To get an L series zoom lens would cost at least $1000.

However, I don't think it would be a sin to get, say, a 30mm f/1.4 Sigma (there are a number of bad copies of this lens, so be sure to get it checked out with someone who knows what they're doing to make sure it functions properly) and a Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM ($500 on Amazon). The zoom lens isn't quite as fast (I.E., you'll need more light) as the primes I recommended, and the image quality won't be quite as good, but it is a good compromise between price and quality.

But, again, I'd hope he doesn't just pick up the body and zoom lens, with the argument that the 17-85mm can do 30mm and 50mm. Its important to learn with a prime, then pick up a good quality zoom for the times when good photographic technique on its own won't cut it. Plus, the big apertures of the primes will really help.

I remember, a while back I bought a little Panasonic point and shoot, and the first day I bought it I tried taking some photos of my sister's ice skating recital. Between the low light, fast action, and Panasonic's crappy high ISO performance, the photos didn't turn out at all. I vowed then to get a system that could capture fast action in low light situations. A 50mm f/1.4 on a Rebel would have done quite nicely, I think.