Newbie here. Need advice on which cam to get


archdevll

New Member
Nov 7, 2010
420
0
0
1 Corner of Singapore...
#1
Hi guys.

Newbie here. I'm interested to buy a dslr. Currently looking at Nikon D5000 and Sony SLT-A55V

Budget around 1k~1.3k
Any advice which should i get.?

What must I look at or look out for when buying a dslr o.o?

or there any other brand/model you guys would recommend.

Thanks in adv ^^.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#2
1. When joining a forum, it's usually a good idea to READ THE STICKIES.
2. For example, the very top-most sticky here in the Newbies Corner is called: "FAQ: What DSLR to get?"
3. Also, a dose of logic and common sense will help. In a forum this large, logically the question of "what to look out for" would have come up at least 100 times, and would therefore be easily found by clicking on "Search".
4. This is also discussed in the Forum Terms of Use.
 

weegk

Senior Member
Jul 16, 2010
2,700
0
0
Singapore
#3
Welcome to CS . . . :)

there is a 'Price Guide' Subforum for your reference too . . . cheers. :)
 

weegk

Senior Member
Jul 16, 2010
2,700
0
0
Singapore
#5
no worries . . . after reading then you will know what to get . . . else no harm asking again. ;)
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#6
Though I can tell you right away... The A55V is a much higher-spec camera than the D5000.
 

archdevll

New Member
Nov 7, 2010
420
0
0
1 Corner of Singapore...
#7
I did a little ... yeah very little reading... hopefully you guys could advice me further thx ^^


1. Do I need built-in antishake or not? - Yeah i need it..... they dont listen to my brain any more...

2. Do I need video? not really... but if it comes with it why not... but seriously i dont need it..

3. Do I need fast autofocus in live view mode? Do I even need Live View? Live view is the ability to see what you will take on the LCD before you take the picture, much like a normal point-and-shoot. It can be very very handy for macro shooting, or for taking "over everyone's heads" shoots at events, etc. Sony (and Olympus I believe) have DSLR cameras that can focus in live view as quickly as when using the viewfinder (using phase-detect autofocus), while other camera makers use a much slower contrast-detect method. This may or may not matter to you - again it's a personal choice. You may even want to be a "traditionalist" and get a camera that does not have live view at all.
- I would love live view... I believe the 2 model i am looking at have that feature. Fast autofocus would be a good bonus....

4. Do I need an articulating (tilt and/or twist) LCD screen? This is closely related to question 3. One of the benefits of live view is the ability to accurately frame "over the head" or ground/waist level shots without needing to look through the viewfinder. But this (in my opinion) is not helpful without also being able to adjust the LCD screen so that you can see what you're about to shoot. So it's good to understand the value of this - personally, I find it very helpful on cameras that have liveview.
- like above its good to have but not a must

5. Do I need an in-body autofocus motor? If you are considering Nikon cameras, consider that the budget range like D40, D40X, D60, D3000, D3100, D5000 have no in-body autofocus motor - so only the (slightly more expensive) lenses with the autofocus motor built into the lens will be able to autofocus. For the others (most notably older legacy lenses) it's manual focus all the way. Again, this might not be an issue to you at all!
- need advice here.. what do you guys prefer?


so other then the 2 model i mention is there any other better recommendations?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#8
I did a little ... yeah very little reading... hopefully you guys could advice me further thx ^^


1. Do I need built-in antishake or not? - Yeah i need it..... they dont listen to my brain any more...

2. Do I need video? not really... but if it comes with it why not... but seriously i dont need it..

3. Do I need fast autofocus in live view mode? Do I even need Live View? Live view is the ability to see what you will take on the LCD before you take the picture, much like a normal point-and-shoot. It can be very very handy for macro shooting, or for taking "over everyone's heads" shoots at events, etc. Sony (and Olympus I believe) have DSLR cameras that can focus in live view as quickly as when using the viewfinder (using phase-detect autofocus), while other camera makers use a much slower contrast-detect method. This may or may not matter to you - again it's a personal choice. You may even want to be a "traditionalist" and get a camera that does not have live view at all.
- I would love live view... I believe the 2 model i am looking at have that feature. Fast autofocus would be a good bonus....

4. Do I need an articulating (tilt and/or twist) LCD screen? This is closely related to question 3. One of the benefits of live view is the ability to accurately frame "over the head" or ground/waist level shots without needing to look through the viewfinder. But this (in my opinion) is not helpful without also being able to adjust the LCD screen so that you can see what you're about to shoot. So it's good to understand the value of this - personally, I find it very helpful on cameras that have liveview.
- like above its good to have but not a must

5. Do I need an in-body autofocus motor? If you are considering Nikon cameras, consider that the budget range like D40, D40X, D60, D3000, D3100, D5000 have no in-body autofocus motor - so only the (slightly more expensive) lenses with the autofocus motor built into the lens will be able to autofocus. For the others (most notably older legacy lenses) it's manual focus all the way. Again, this might not be an issue to you at all!
- need advice here.. what do you guys prefer?


so other then the 2 model i mention is there any other better recommendations?
Meeting all your needs would be the A55V then. Or, if you're on a tighter budget, the A33. The Sony A500 and A550 are good choices too, but bigger and more the normal DSLR size. No video, but great battery life.
 

spree86

Senior Member
Feb 3, 2009
4,774
0
0
Bishan
www.flickr.com
#9
5. Do I need an in-body autofocus motor? If you are considering Nikon cameras, consider that the budget range like D40, D40X, D60, D3000, D3100, D5000 have no in-body autofocus motor - so only the (slightly more expensive) lenses with the autofocus motor built into the lens will be able to autofocus. For the others (most notably older legacy lenses) it's manual focus all the way. Again, this might not be an issue to you at all!
- need advice here.. what do you guys prefer?
Personally I don't think anyone would prefer not having the AF motor, the motor is an added bonus.
 

archdevll

New Member
Nov 7, 2010
420
0
0
1 Corner of Singapore...
#10
Personally I don't think anyone would prefer not having the AF motor, the motor is an added bonus.
I know it was mention in the sticky it make no difference whether is in-body or built in lens.
But what do you guys feel about having it in-body or built in lens?

Meeting all your needs would be the A55V then. Or, if you're on a tighter budget, the A33. The Sony A500 and A550 are good choices too, but bigger and more the normal DSLR size. No video, but great battery life.
The A500/550 has no video recording?
the notable difference between a500/550 and a55/33would be the battery life am i right...?

was browsing their site
http://www.sony.com.sg/product/CompareProducts.action?site=hp_en_SG_i&models=SLT-A55V&models=DSLR-A550&models=DSLR-A500

the last comparision is for recording. If its not video recording, whats that recording for?
 

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,944
88
48
#11
Personally I don't think anyone would prefer not having the AF motor, the motor is an added bonus.
Depends on the user. I find a lot of new users get attracted/(used to) to the silent on-lens motors. They often comment the AF sound of the screw driven lenses as loud and view it as backward.
So slowly, ppl are getting 'brainwashed' towards on-lens motors.
Not that there is any right or wrong though.
 

spree86

Senior Member
Feb 3, 2009
4,774
0
0
Bishan
www.flickr.com
#12

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#13

Smiles88

New Member
Jun 14, 2010
759
0
0
West
#14
I guess for Canon/Sony/Pentax system, this issue of in-body motor is moot :) AF capability is present. Only whether the user prefers to have the 'silent' on-lens motor as well...
Actually, I prefer the sound of the AF screw. It's not tt loud anyway. Lesser electronics in lens means lower chance of lens failing. But all boils down to personal preferences. Users of various brands will always try to 'pull' people to their camp. Tt's what I've noticed in CS. :)
 

arikyeo

Deregistered
Oct 23, 2010
254
0
0
Planet Earth
#16
in the long run, having the AF built in cam would save me a lot of money right?
Actually, I would prefer for AF to be at the lens. Because if 1 lens's AF spoils, at least you have another lens which its AF still works. However if yr dslr's AF stops working then all yr lenses won't have AF.
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,517
30
48
Pasir Ris
#17
in the long run, having the AF built in cam would save me a lot of money right?
I can't see how. Just compare the prices for certain Nikon lenses (coming without AF motor) to lenses of other manufacturers having the AF motor inside the lens as default (system design, no way to change it). Also, the 'long run' depends how many lenses you want to buy / sell / buy again / change body. USM / Silent Wave AF systems have the AF systems in the lens anyway, nothing for you to change.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#18
I know it was mention in the sticky it make no difference whether is in-body or built in lens.
But what do you guys feel about having it in-body or built in lens?



The A500/550 has no video recording?
the notable difference between a500/550 and a55/33would be the battery life am i right...?
Battery life, and A55/A33 has video recording, A500/550 does not.

Personally I prefer in-body IS. No matter what lens I attach, I get image stabilization, even with old, classic lenses.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#19
Actually, I would prefer for AF to be at the lens. Because if 1 lens's AF spoils, at least you have another lens which its AF still works. However if yr dslr's AF stops working then all yr lenses won't have AF.
In-body AF motors are extremely reliable. I have a 20+ year old film camera where the in-body AF motor still works perfectly. In-lens ones tens to fail more often (just see the number of "my lens won't AF anymore" posts here).

also, most manufacturers have a mix of lenses that have in-lens motor or rely on in-body. So you still have a choice.
 

Top Bottom