[salluks]

Am also planning to pick up pohotgraphy as a hobby, so need suggestions for a good camera.

i was thinking of a bridge camera or a low cost dslr with all in one lens.

dont have any specific budget. please suggest something around 25k

[frankmehta]

if you are going to do hobby photography then theres nothing like an slr. maybe a d40 in your budget.
if you dont wanna stretch to buying lenses and stuff then just go for an ultrazoom.
try looking at a panny fz28k.
i have a canon s3is that is BUILT for hobby photography. you can check it out in the classifieds section. its for 1/3rd your budget and it has many more features than the usual ultrazooms

[cranky]

I've been using a D40 for the last few days and I'm really, really happy. The quality of the pictures is amazing for the money I paid, and the low-light performance is pretty good too. Outdoors and in good light, the results are stunning even if I'm not doing too well with the manual set modes. I don't foresee upgrading from this unless disaster strikes, just adding high-quality lenses as time goes by. The three AF points is the only weak point of the camera, but it works for any of the conditions I've put it through.

I got the camera with the kit lens from the D60 (which has image stabilisation), for 22K. With the basic kit lens (that's a non-IS lens) it's about 19K. All prices from grey market. A good entry-level tele will add about 6K to the price (Tamron/Sigma, the Nikkor 55-200 is about 9K) and with those two lenses you can pretty much straddle all kinds of photography. I felt the need to a bigger zoom range on a holiday, but the 18-55VR lens worked fine for 99% of my pics (including a super-close up of a pregnant caterpillar).

There were a lot of recommendations for the A200 from Sony, and AT (!) has put up a good review of the camera as well.

A superzoom will be far more convenient - even though the picture quality may not be up to the same standard as a DSLR.

[salluks]

so do u suggest D40 or A200??

i always taught D40 was a bridge camera.

can i buy only the body and go with tamaron/sigma?

[cranky]

Yes you can, but you should get the kit lens at least.

The D40 does not autofocus with any lens that doesn't have a focus motor built in. If this is important to you, get the D60 or A200 instead. I don;t find it a big deal, as I'll only ever need one more lens.

If you want to stay on the low cost side, buy good glass and get a cheap body (like the D40). That way the lenses will stay with you through your migration to better bodies and sensors.

[BF1983]

Go for Sony A200 only. Ill mention a comparison between the two -

Pluses for A200 over D40 -

1. 10 Megapixels vs 6 Megapixels - MPs are not everything, but they do help in cropping photos.

2. In built IS (image stabilization) vs lens based IS - Since the IS is built into the A200 body it will work with ANY lens you use.

3. Longer 18-70mm kit lens - A major advantage for the Sony since it has a longer zoom. I tried both cameras and I was never happy with the zoom range of the D40. The 18-70 was not a big difference, but it was close to what would have been ideal for my daily use.

4. 3 year warranty vs grey market - The Sony A200 + Sandisk Ultra II 4 GB CF card + bag + UV filter = 24500. Compare this to a grey market Nikon D40 (with IS lens) and the Sony makes more sense.

5. Exposure bracketing/White balance bracketing/JPEG+RAW - These modes are simple unavailable on the D40. Exposure bracketing is very useful to make HDR pictures and for taking snaps in tricky conditions (very bright sky with dark foreground) etc. JPEG + RAW is also useful since you have the JPEG file to show people and you can work on the RAW files at your leisure.

Pluses for D40
1. Better sensor - The D40 may have less megapixels and it is also made by Sony ! But the higher ISO settings produces much cleaner images that those of the A200 (which have lots of noise at ISO 1600). Comparatively the ISO 1600 on the D40 is much more useable and once of the main advantages of using a DSLR is the high ISO performance.

2. Sharper kit lens - The kit lens on the D40 is much sharper than the kit lens on the A200. Of course on a general 4x6 photo you wont be able to see the difference, but print a nice 16x10 poster and you will see some difference.

3. Lighter body - The D40 is ligher than the A200 (which has a considerable weight and bulk) and is easy to hold. Of course the A200 is not bad and I infact prefer to hold the A200 to the D40.

4. Greater support and accessories - With the D40 you can use any cheap flash, buy some nice old sharp lenses (like the 50mm f1.8 lens for 5k) and also get lots of support on the net and in camera repair shops. You will be hard pressed to find support for the A200 in India. But with a 3 year warranty, you are quite protected.

So now you have a gist of information to run over. Now you can decide which one you prefer. You cant go wrong either way.

Also in order to confuse you further - you can also check out the Canon 1000D for about 29k with IS lens. It does not have any of the flaws of the D40 and it quite near perfect. But it doesn't have good ergonomics (lots of people have not bought this camera/returned this camera because they did not like holding it in their hands)

I would advise you to visit Croma to try the cameras first. They had all three cameras.

[cranky]

To add to Brendon's post - the 50mm prime does not in fact autofocus with the D40, you have to focus manually.

[adder]

also according to Anandtech the A200 has the best viewfinder compared to nikon D60,canon eos 1000d etc and has a 9point focus compared to 3point focus on nikon D60 and 7 point on canon eos1000d.

if u can afford the canon eos 1000d go for that,othewise go for the sony A200 true VFM.

[BF1983]

Just one more thing. I am used to AF with my P&S camera. It also has manual focus, but using it is very tedious on my cam and I believed MF was something for those will all the time in the world and AF was gods gift to a photographer.

Many reviewers also condemned the Nikon D40 for lacking an AF motor and made it sound that if you could not use AF, your lens is practically useless and best used as a paper weight.

However I happened to use the manual focus on the Nikon D40 18-55 mm VR lens and it was ridiculously easy. I clicked so many photos in a short time using MF and in all the pics the focus was spot on.

So don't feel disheartened if you can't AF with older lenses like the 50mm f1.8. These lenses you will use in only certain situations and using MF is not as bad as it sounds.

But as Adder says, if you can afford the EOS 1000D, you should go for it. On the other hand, you can get the D40 + 50mm f1.8 lens for the same price as the Canon 1000D.

[salluks]

wow, thanks all!!!

since am new to this, i tought of investing in a good vfm dslrr kit with all in one lens. once i get a hang of it then i can upgrade lenses later.

i am ok till 25k, but my bro will send it from dubai, so i can beg another 5k from him

which would u all buy,
will go with ur decision, so i can blame u all later

[BF1983]

Well if you are getting it from Dubai, stick with Canon. Get the Canon 1000D with the 18-55mm IS lens. Make sure you make your bro get the IS lens and NOT the standard 18-55mm non IS lens.

Once you get the camera, get the 50mm f1.8 lens for 5k and you are set. After some months, you can get the 55-250mm IS lens for 10k and complete your DSLR kit.

[salluks]

after much taught i've decided to go with A300. is there any decent all round lens for this cam that i should look out for?

[BF1983]

^^ How much are you getting that for ??? A decent all round lens will be the Tamron 18-250mm lens for about 19k grey. You will not really need to carry any other lens and it is optically quite decent for a superzoom.

If you want something cheaper but with similar convenience (super zoom), get a Tamron 18-200mm lens for about 11k. It is not as good optically as the other Tamron, but it is a decent lens all the same.

[salluks]

i went to croma yesterday, they didn't have nikon d40,

checked A200, canon 1000D and d60

somehow i didnt like the d60,

theres a new canon launch showroom opened in bangalore, so the guy there gave clear details about it.

wow, i dont have so much money to spend.

now either i can go with canon 1000d with IS as u suggested above, then wait for a year and buy 55-250

or go with A200 and get a decent 55-250 from amazon or something.

my bro already left dubai, so thats not happening

i checked the canon, after u saying that it doesnt feel quite well in hands,

i heard the kit lenses are pretty bad. so i was wondering whether to go with sony and buy a decent prime lens. or just go with canon 1000d

which one will would be better VFM?

[BF1983]

VFM ? The Sony hands down !

Performance and upgradability ? - The Canon hands down !

The Canon will have better IQ (which is one reason you are spending so much money on a camera). But, it is much more costly as well. If you like the feel of the Canon, go for it. I am not buying the Canon ONLY because I dont like holding it. I mean you are buying some big bulky thing and if you dont like holding it then what ?

I just loved the grip of the Sony. But I can't seem to find some cheap sharp lenses. They are all quite expensive and the number of lenses limited.