Digital slr camera advice for a novice. (1 Viewer)

I am a complete camera novice and am thinking of going down the DSLR route for birding photos( the digiscoping route has been ruled out as too fiddly and slow for me).I have seen the Nikon D50 mentioned in other threads and would like to know if it's any good?

I have read some of the DSLR threads and not really understood them but I have gleaned that I will need a telephoto lens and a converter ( is that the word) to get a anywhere near even a close bird.

If I bought the D50 body and say a Sigma 70 - 300 lens to go with it would I be an idiot? Is there any other combinations that I should consider?

My budget is £500 - £600.Any advice to prevent me adding to the list of poor purchases would be much appreciated.

Max.

The D50 is a little gem, Max.

It's well known for its ability to provide punchy, vibrant, low noise images straight out of the camera (albeit at the theoretical expense of some loss of detail - but I truly don't see it), and you need only look at Greypoint's gallery for an idea of the D50's capabilities.

She is rather good though..!



The lens is a tougher call, but the Sigma 70-300 APO is probably as good as it gets in your price range ("APO" indicates that a better quality of glass - "ED" glass - has been used in the construction of the lens).

Some of Yossi's postings have demonstrated what it can do, and I always pull this link out if anyone doubts how good a lens it can be!

http://www.pbase.com/ccraft/image/34529964

Oh - and you don't need a teleconvertor either (and to be honest they're not really made for the 70-300mm) - you just need to pick your shots, and be realistic in your expectations.

Not sure if I should write this, but... As it happens I've got a mint Sigma 70-300mm APO I never use so if you want to save a few quid we could come to a deal on it.

Keith this is interesting.A guy I know has bought his wife one of these cams for Xmas,and he was asking me for any info I could find.So ,after Xmas when he comes around for a chat,I can find this as a subscribed thread,then we can follow your links(the only way I can find the thread again!!).So it appears he has chosen the right cam for her,he will be pleased.

Hi Keith,
Thanks for your response.The links were very interesting.I think I will have to do a lot more research before I take the plunge but it's nice to know that the Nikon D50 is a good camera.It,s going to be the lens that is going to be difficult to decide on as there must be loads of choice out there.
Can I ask you another question :- How do you convert a lens on a camera (say a 300) to the magnification of your scope or bins (ie 8 X) for comparison purposes?

Max.

senatore said:

Can I ask you another question :- How do you convert a lens on a camera (say a 300) to the magnification of your scope or bins (ie 8 X) for comparison purposes?

Max.

Click to expand...

That's not quite as straightforward as it sounds what with the different amounts of 'crop' factor with different-sized digital sensors involved!

Firstly, a scope or bins give a circular image whereas the camera takes a rectangular image from the full circle so it already crops a bit out - then the smalller sensor on the D50, say, just takes the middle part of that image although it doesn't really magnify it in any way - it's only the same as enlarging the central part of a 35mm full frame image.

The standard lens of any system is reckoned to be the one that shows a 'normal' field of view, similar to the naked eye, and by measuring the diagonal of the format you get the standard focal length lens - with 35mm the diagonal measures 43.5mm from which you can work out all the approximate magnifications of different lenses.

Thus 10x would need a 435mm lens as its equivalent and the popular 400mm focal-length is as near to 9x as makes no difference! with the 1.5x factor of the D50 a 400mm will give a similar field of view to a 13.5x binocular.

Of course, this is just the starting point - how big you print that image and whether you crop just the centre part of the image will have an apparent effect on the magnification of your final picture. It's at this point that the quality of your lens comes into play together with the number of pixels that are on the sensor.

I use a 400mm lens and it's rare that I want to zoom 'down' from there - I would like the lens to zoom up to a higher magnification much more often than the other way so I would say that 300mm is not really long enough unless you can get very close to your subject. The shot of a blackbird that I put into my gallery yesterday: http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/74036/sort/1/cat/500/page/1 was, actually a full-frame shot on a Canon (which has a 1.6x crop factor) and I was shooting from my car with the bird just a few metres away and near enough to be aware of the shutter noise - you wouldn't get more than one shot at this distance with a more nervous subject!

At the other end of the scale, I posted a photo of one of the Draycote Hawfinches in post #19 of this thread: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=46792 which looks OK but it was cropped from the centre of the image below which in itself is a 1.6x increase on the frame size for which the lens was originally designed. It's fine on the screen but I wouldn't like to make a large photo from it!

Hi Max

For your budget you'll struggle to find a better camera to go for than the D50 - it's is an excellent camera, at an amazing price (and that's coming from a Canon user).

The Sigma 70-300 APO is a great all purpose lens, I used to use one on my Minolta film camera and was always very pleased with it. The only possible downside is the reach, while you'll be able to get some bird shots, you'll find you want a bit more (though that will probably be true of any lens you go for). Both the 135-400 and 170-500 Sigma's are good lenses that offer some more reach, they would both be beyond your budget, but do regularly turn up secondhand, so bargain can be had.

When buying your kit make sure you budget for everything - you will need memory card(s) and may want a spare battery and a camera bag to carry it in. Given your budget I'd say get a D50 (you will not regret it) and talk to Keith about his 70-300 lens, it will make a good starting set up, you can always think about longer lenses in the future.

I'd take a look at something like the Tamron 28-300mm Di lens. At just over £200, it's a good "all-round" lens, and i find that the "wide-angle" end is good for landscapes and other shots - you will probably want to take indoor candid shots and other stuff, and 70mm is often just too long for that.

I used to use a Nikon 70-300, but changed to the Tamron for just this reason.

senatore said:

I am a complete camera novice and my budget is £500 - £600.Any advice to prevent me adding to the list of poor purchases would be much appreciated.

Max.

Click to expand...

Having looked at your question and the excellent replies my only contibution is forget any idea of a keeping to a budget - life doesn't work like that - you'll either spend £600 and lose interest or become enthralled with photographing tiny birds at great distance and whatever equipment you have it will never be quite good enough unless you are stupidly rich.
I have a Nikon D70, Sigma 70-300, Sigma 170-500 which cover macro to many yards away but are ultimately frustrating as you can never have too much reach or much quality.
I often forego quality and take my tiny Minolta Z1 with me as it has a 380mm zoom and gets a 'for the record' pic allowing me to pack my bins, scope & tripod & junk.

Thanks again everyone for the advice you have given me.I did ,however,have to read some of the posts a few times before I understood them.This does not bide well for a future purchase !!!!!!

Max.

senatore said:

Thanks again everyone for the advice you have given me.I did ,however,have to read some of the posts a few times before I understood them.This does not bide well for a future purchase !!!!!!

Max.

Click to expand...

Good luck Max. I agree with Chris on doing this with a tight budget - I just can't see the numbers stacking up.

I've just gone through the process of trying to find a budget DSLR set up, decided it would end up costing way more than I had budgeted for, so bottled it and went for a Panasonic FZ20 with 12x zoom instead (£280).

I'm really glad I did. When you're used to digiscoping, or viewing through scope / bins, it's impossible to comprehend how close you need to be to small things like birds with a normal camera set-up. Even the 430mm or so on my Panasonic feels like nothing (I'm already looking at teleconverters and such like). With DSLR kit I reckon I would have gone through 300, 400 and 500mm lenses, and still wanted more. Saw someone yesterday with an 800mm lens - it was the size of a cannon!

Unless I decide to become a 'proper' bird photographer I don't think I will ever be able to justify those kind of costs.

Hi Max, I too went the superzoom route and recently bought the canon s2 is. I used to use a film slr and wanted to go digital but couldn't justify the cost. Just as important, to me, was that I didn't want to have to carry around so much stuff, camera, lenses, tripod, bins, lunch etc. So far, I am glad I did, I am learning and still have alot to learn about this camera and even more to learn about what to do with the images once I get them onto the computer. The 12x optical zoom is amazing as is the image stabilization but if i am truely honest the image quality is not as good as my film slr. I think you have to get the right balance between what you want to do photographically and the enjoyment or lack of it from being too burdoned with too much heavy kit.
Joanne

joannechattaway said:

The 12x optical zoom is amazing as is the image stabilization but if i am truely honest the image quality is not as good as my film slr.

Click to expand...

Watch out with this figure though. 12x zoom doesn't mean 12 times normal. It starts wide angled and zooms 12 times in from that.

A 50-500mm lens is a ten times zoom, but so is a 30-300mm or a 18-180mm.

rezMole said:

Watch out with this figure though. 12x zoom doesn't mean 12 times normal. It starts wide angled and zooms 12 times in from that.

A 50-500mm lens is a ten times zoom, but so is a 30-300mm or a 18-180mm.

Click to expand...

That's true, but the actual specs are easy to come by, especially online. For the Canon S2, the lens is 36 - 432 mm equivalent, which is fairly typical for these 12x cameras.

Hi everyone again,
Recent posts have confused me re. the times factor you get from various lenses which have to be set out for me (being a bit thick)in a way that you can compare it with what you get from your bins (in my case 8 X).

If I bought the D50 and a 28 - 300 lens would this give me 6 X magnification compared with my bins?

A friend says I could also get a telecoverter to increase the magnification.Are these any good with my proposed set up?

Max.

senatore said:

If I bought the D50 and a 28 - 300 lens would this give me 6 X magnification compared with my bins?

A friend says I could also get a telecoverter to increase the magnification.Are these any good with my proposed set up?

Click to expand...

As a vague rule of thumb on an slr 50mm equates to 1x, so a 300mm lens is about 6x. The D50 has a 1.5 crop factor so a 300mm lens is the equivilent to a 450mm on a 35mm film camera, giving an effective mag of 9x... though I'm not sure that makes it any clearer.

TCs are not really designed to be used with lenses like the 28-300, they are most effective with prime lenses. While I'm sure you could fit one to this lens you will probably find that it will not auto focus.