Need SLR camera advice

[zahc]

If I bought a DSLR I would buy a Pentax. Because I have lots of Pentax lenses and they are cheap, and also because I like that they have in-body image stabilization, which means it doesn't have to be built into every lens and it work with all the old ones.

If I didn't have Pentax lenses I would look hard at the Olympus 4/3 system.

And if I was restricting myself to only Nikon or Canon, I would shy away for a D40, because TTBOMK older lenses do not autofocus with it. That's the good thing about Pentax...every k-mount lens works on every camera.

[Dannyboy]

I bought a Sony A200 last year and I love it.  It was relatively inexpensive and I like the older Minolta lenses.  Sony has the A300 and A350 now that are relatively inexpensive and both have Live View capability.  I do like film though.  I think film gives you more options, especially if you develop your own. 

[go_bang]

Balog, if you think this is bad you ought to see what happens when someone posts the same question on Photo Net.

[Gewehr98]

Oh, almost forgot.  You can get a photo account with many places like Walgreens, CVS, Walmart, and several national photo finishers.  Dump the shots onto your computer, pick and/or edit the ones you want, and send them via your account.

That's exactly what I do with the local WalMart.

No film, and only the images I want to keep are put on photo paper.

[Hawkmoon]

A beginner is going to "blow" a lot of shots. Even at Wal-Mart prices for film and processing, that adds up fast. A friend who just got a new digital SLR to learn photography on went out and shot 700 pictures over a 2-day weekend. Figure what that would cost with film. I used to work in a place where a professional photographer had his darkroom. He'd come back from a vacation trip with maybe 20 to 30 rolls of color slides. That's 720 to 1080 slides. Then he'd sit down with a light box on the conference table and look at the slides. Most went directly into the trash. He said if he got three "keepers" out of a 36-exposure roll he was doing well. And remember, this was a professional. It's definitely cheaper to learn with a digital. The camera cost is only the tip of the iceberg.

I love film and I have two professional-grade Canon SLRs with multiple lenses, plus a few other film cameras. I also have two point-n-shoot Canon digitals and a Canon EOS Rebel XT SLR.

I'd recommend the Canon digital SLRs. Nikons are also good, and Canon and Nikon sort of leapfrog each other on sensor development, but in general I think Canon is a bit better than Nikon. The EOS Rebel line would be a good place to start looking.

[KD5NRH]

As a Sony DSLR owner I have to agree with this. Sony made sense for me (Minolta legacy) and I love my camera but you'll have a much easier time finding lenses and accessories for a Canon or Nikon especially anything used.

You're not looking in the right places; the pawn shops here seem to have had just as much Minolta AF-mount glass as Canon, until I started buying it up.  Since I also do some B&W film work, I don't mind occasionally having to buy an extra film body to get a lens I want; the 8000i is my primary for film, but it's nice to have a cheaper body for risky situations.

The usual online auction sites also have a fair amount.

[KD5NRH]

Kinda blows the whole "film is pristine" thing out of the water.

OTOH, enlargers don't take memory cards.  Film negs leave the option of having them darkroom printed or scanned for inkjet.

[KD5NRH]

use:film cameras are way easier for me to use. Have you ever seen the users manual for a DSLR? I saw one at frys one time. Ugh.

You're making an assumption based on a time when companies cared enough to print a manual for each country.  My graphics tablet has a 60-something page manual.  Three of those pages are in English.  (I don't think there are 19 other languages there, so I guess the obvious implication is that people who can't read English are too stupid to figure it out in three pages.)  Oddly, the box is in English only, so they must be using a different (full-color, glossy) box in each market, but can't take the time or expense to assemble a different (B&W 8.5x11 20lb, probably whatever was at the local equivalent of Big Lots, folded and stapled) manual for each box type.

[Werewolf]

My quest, my purpose as a photographer, is to end up with a better photo, not to stubbornly cling to any particular technology because of it's soulful realness.  Honestly, I could care less, especially considering that I am a former die-hard film snob that was forced (darn near at gun point) to open my eyes to digital and the possibilities it holds.

I still like film.  I'll drag down my Elan or, if I'm feeling especially nostalgic, my ancient K-1000, and shoot a rolls of Velvia or Tri-X.  But my days of film are long gone.  Digital is the way to go.

Brad

Dang!
That describes me perfectly in 2003 - clinging to film - true photography. One day I opened my eyes and saw the light ( pun intended). Photography as art isn't about the tool it is about the finished work. In addition, I learned more about making good images in a year after switching to digital than I had learned in the previous 31 and did it at about a 1/10th of the cost.

With film I had to budget my shooting. With digital one doesn't. Everything I take is stored right to a PC, backed up on a USB hard drive and viewed in HD on a 32" HD LCD TV. Works fine. When, if, formats change there will surely be conversion apps to go from JPG's to what ever. Theoretically my pics could be transferred across many generations with out loss of quality and never having been printed. That can hardly be said of paper (though I have prints I processed 31 years ago that absolutely looks as good today as they did the day I processed 'em. I doubt they'd last 100 years though).

[go_bang]

Do you find a substantial difference in terms of ease of use between the various makers? What are your opinions on used bodies? I'm always a bit nervous buying used electronics as I'm not aware of an easy way to inspect them beyond a surface level. With the rapid advances typical in electronic tech, would getting a several year old digital be a good idea or would the picture quality suffer?

This is just about the only outfit you need to know about for good used gear:

http://www.keh.com/

Great customer service, good prices, great equipment.  Their BGN grade stuff is often better than what a lot of other places try to pass off as excellent.  The only big downside is that their S&H charges are high, but for the service you get and the quality of the gear it's worth it.  I've bought a lot of stuff from them and only had one camera that wasn't up to what it should have been.  They took it back and gave me a refund without any hassle, even after I had them try to repair it.  I wouldn't hestitate to buy anything from them.

The only shop I would consider before KEH would be a local shop or Craigslist seller where I could actually put my hands on the gear and check it out thoroughly.

[zahc]

2nd KEH. Their ratings are quite conservative; I wouldn't worry about buying BGN grade.

[go_bang]

I think BGN grade stuff is almost all I have ever bought from them.  Everything was fine except for one Rolleiflex that was broke on arrival.  KEH couldn't fix it so they took it back and gave me a refund.

[don]

I cannot recommend a Pentax ME, ME Super or Program Plus. If you purchased one of these and you don't have problems consider yourself very lucky. I suggest you sell them asap. Pentax lenses are good. The K1000 is good. The electronically controlled cameras made by Pentax leave a lot to be desired. Incidentally, I am/ was a camera repairman for 25+ years, trained by Pentax technicians and have owned a few over the past 25 years. Go bang is correct about KEH. I have used them for years and have no complaints. I suggest buying from a local dealer who will stand behind the cameras he sells.