Digital camera

[Moscow Mule]

Good tip. Don't get blinded by simply comparing the figures though - a higher MP rating doesn't necessarily mean a better picture.

Ok, DSLRs... my take on the types out there...

...

I would add, if you go Argos Special (I did, a Canon 350d) the addition of a decent lens seems to improve pictures tenfold. I've got one of these badgers

[realityhack]

Not included in the above are Pro Compact of Choice (see my first post), & the Digiblads, digital medium format cameras (drool), used by astronauts and rich pros for slower-paced work, when you absolutely have to get every grain of detail blown up to the size of a bus.

To specifically address Olympus - that models you mention WDMIG - I wouldn't buy them TBH. You only get top quality Olympus workmanship at a high price tag (E3) or with the manual, film cameras of old (which is how they made their name).

E410
Pros: The 'self cleaning' CCD (Learn how to clean a camera properly! ), The live view meaning 100% previewing & (Simulated) Depth of Field at a low price.
Cons: The Olympus E410 has a known underexposure issue indoors, as much as 2 stops less light than would be expected, build quality, basic metering system.
E510
Pros: Lots of features, in-body stabilisation, small, light.
Cons: Poor range of compatible lenses, I still think low-end digi Olympus lenses are sluggish and soft, expensive compared to Canon & Nikon equivalents.

You're paying for (IMO gimmicky) Live View and anti-dust technology. Spend less and live with the prism finder and proper maintenance instead - you'll get better focusing and metering with other makes.

[realityhack]

I would add, if you go Argos Special (I did, a Canon 350d) the addition of a decent lens seems to improve pictures tenfold. I've got one of these badgers

I wouldn't call Sigma decent - but they're better than Tamron, and bloody good value for money if you want to experiment.

[ruth11]

I can't go into detail like RH but I would like to add my vote for entry level DSLR for Nikon. We bought a D70 a couple of years ago and love it.
Pretty sure it's been superceded now, and things change fast, but back then there were really only 2 choices for a less than a grand DSLR - Canon or Nikon. Friend has Canon and loves it (we bought it for her because she already had lenses that would fit it from her Canon SLR) but another friend who's Dad was pro photographer went with the Nikon. Cost about £700 at the time, but reckon prices have dropped now.

Best advice I was ever given about the DSLR range is to go in to a shop and try one. They are big and bulky so "feel" is important. Whichever one "feels" right when you hold it, is probably the one to go for.

HTH

[realityhack]

We bought a D70 a couple of years ago and love it...

...go in to a shop and try one. They are big and bulky so "feel" is important. Whichever one "feels" right when you hold it, is probably the one to go for.

HTH

D70 - lovely mid-spec SLR, a mate has one.

Good advice ruth - I bought my EOS after picking various brands/models up and trying them out in a shop, for ease of use/features. I find Nikons to be a bit finicky, but that's probably because I'm so used to the Canon control layout by now that anything else seems a bit strange.

[where did my id go?]

OK, interesting.

I must admit I thought from what I'd read that the olympus was the cheap option - which is fine for me at this point. I've used http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/index.html for pricing info and given that all the reviews that I've read say that the kit lenses with the canon are poor but the oly ones are OK, it seemed that the oly worked out significantly cheaper if the twin lens kit would give me enough to play with in the medium term. (but then I've also read that the olympus overexposes)

I think I need to understand more about lens designations etc.

I presume the lenses from an old AE1-P wont work with a modern canon dslr? or is there an adapter ring?

more reading
*sigh*

[realityhack]

I must admit I thought from what I'd read that the olympus was the cheap option...

I presume the lenses from an old AE1-P wont work with a modern canon dslr? or is there an adapter ring?

You do get a lot for your money in terms of features - I'm just not too sure about the quality. If you're not a perfectionist about this, and you want to experiment with DLSRs, then go for it. It's what you like at the end of the day - it's just me comparing them to other setups I've used.

Bear in mind that Live View and 'self-cleaning' CCDs/CMOSes are found on several mid-high end brands, including Canon and Nikon.

IIRC, the AE1-P uses FD lenses, same as my old AV-1 - if that helps. Not sure you'd get a converter as the FD lenses have a smaller diameter than EF lenses - and you'd lose a lot of functionality if you could fit them.

[EvilWeevil]

the kit lenses with the canon are poor

I'd say they were adequate. Perhaps "poor" by canon standards, but probably at least as good as most point and shoots.

I presume the lenses from an old AE1-P wont work with a modern canon dslr? or is there an adapter ring?

There might be a ring, but they'll only be manual focus (if they aren't anyway) and, to be honest, it's probably not worth the effort.

[expat]

...
Best advice I was ever given about the DSLR range is to go in to a shop and try one. They are big and bulky so "feel" is important. Whichever one "feels" right when you hold it, is probably the one to go for.

HTH

Absolutely. I bought my first OM (Olympus 35mm SLR) over 30 years ago, and over the years I have come to love them mainly for the "immediacy" feel: the link from me to the camera is so close that it gets out of the way and lets me take the photo. That's why I'm still using them.

I've tried the E410 and E510, and they just don't feel like that. OTOH the Nikon does, at least the D40 that I have tried.

Olympus's holy grail is the "Digital OM". I'm afraid that I don't think they've got it. But only YOU can tell for yourself.

[expat]

I'd say they were adequate. Perhaps "poor" by canon standards, but probably at least as good as most point and shoots.


There might be a ring, but they'll only be manual focus (if they aren't anyway) and, to be honest, it's probably not worth the effort.

Using old 35mm lenses with a DSLR is pretty much a mirage IMO. Firstly the effective focal length is double, more or less. That 18mm that is so spectacularly wide (and expensive!) on 35mm is just a medium-wide on a DSLR. Not worth choosing a system around.

Standard lenses are better done afresh, they're not so costly that it's worth reusing old glass, especially if your system has image stabilisation in the lens; that would be in the new digital lens, not the old one. Long lenses, if you have a collection, might be worth it: but you are using a much larger, heavier lens than needed for the image area.