Digital SLR buying advice ???

[dseered]

Right, heres the craic........

I have some money set aside for a new camera £6-800 ( could go to a grand if it made a worthwhile difference ) budget, I want an SLR as I have never had one and love taking pictures.

What I want from it.

It has to be a good alrounder, from bike racing to landscapes to close ups of flowers to dew on the grass to naked ladies. Good zoom and has to be able to flatter my photography.

Ideally I would like the camera to evolve with my work and so has to be upgradable, lenses etc.

Happy with entry level but if my budget allows would like something that I can grow into.

I have been into town today and the Cannon 400D looks good and Jessops seem to be doing some good deals, there is also a Nikon in the same price bracket, can't remember what that was though ?

What do you reckon ?

[Steve748]

try Which Camera (http://www.which.co.uk/reports_and_campaigns/audio_visual/reports/cameras_and_camcorders/digital_cameras/Digital%20SLRs/Digital_SLR_product_report_574_97389.jsp?CMP=KNC-GOOGLE&HBX_PK=Jellyfish&HBX_OU=50&jtid=6592182&source_code=607PAJ) for starters and This (http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/digital-cameras/buying-dslr_guide.html) might be useful too!

[Gizmo]

350D is usually a bit cheaper and equally as good if you can find one or look at 30D if budget can stretch, the 30 has an alloy body which flexes less with longer lenses and as you'll need at least a 200mm zoom for trackdays maybe worthwhile. I'd considered selling my 350D body for that reason. money spent on lenses is better than the body though, better lenses make a big difference.

[DKM]

Avoid Jessops if price is your main concern, they are never the cheapest. There are loads of UK based dealers on Ebay who will beat them by £60 or more for a 400D, for example.

[Spud Raver]

Avoid Jessops if price is your main concern, they are never the cheapest. There are loads of UK based dealers on Ebay who will beat them by £60 or more for a 400D, for example.

I went into Jessops to buy a case for my point and shoot digi cam. I had just bought a 2gb memory card of moblymemory.com (Freaks advice....£57) and asked how much the same would be from there.......about £200 he quoted me if i remember rightly!!!! :eek:

[Gizmo]

Avoid Jessops if price is your main concern, they are never the cheapest. There are loads of UK based dealers on Ebay who will beat them by £60 or more for a 400D, for example.

they also have no idea on what rights customers have, bought my 350D from them but it never worked correctly from new, error type 99, took it back they swapped memory card and it sort of worked but not in low light, bought a flash and that helped. After 16 months it wouldn't shoot at all, took it back and they tried to fob me off with the "its out of warranty" speil, i explained that warranty had no bearing on this, i was returning goods that were not fit for purpose and exercising my rights under sale of goods act, shop staff couldn't understand that so referred me to their technical support who also failed to get it. Transferred to customer service where once again i got the its out of warranty crap, got their email address, sent them links to various government websites explaining rights, followed it up with a letter and threat to take them to court and hey presto, Canon would repair my camera under warranty as a goodwill gesture. Too big a company and no idea on customer service :(

I'd recommend buying from a good local camera store, they'll help you out if anything does go wrong, it might be "cheap" via internet but it only takes one problem and you'll end up throwing an expensive camera away or a bill for fixing it. price ain't everything.

[dseered]

What about a Nikon D40X , 10 megapixels, 2.5 LCD screen, 3 area autofocus 18-55mm lens - £418.99 ?

Or a Canon EOS 400d Silver same spec and lens as above £429.99 ?

[Gizmo]

What about a Nikon D40X , 10 megapixels, 2.5 LCD screen, 3 area autofocus 18-55mm lens - £418.99 ?

Or a Canon EOS 400d Silver same spec and lens as above £429.99 ?

350D here (http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/cat1.html) with lens for 370

Once you decide canon or nikon you're stuck with it for a while, lenses, flash etc usually are specific to one or the other. when i was having the canon hassle i thought about getting a nikon then realised it would have cost a fortune to switch. Canon seem to have made better bodies for a number of years but at the mo nikon are fighting back, the D80 looked like the best combination of performance/value but a bit more pricey.

pop up and have a go with my 350D and see if you like how it works

[Gizmo]

and this (http://canonlensacc2007.onlinerebates.com/intro.aspx) might sway you to go canon

[dseered]

So is the 350D better than the 400D ? and would the supplied lens be ok in the interim for my usage ? At the prices being quoted it leaves me alot of scope, scope gettit, for getting a bag, tripod and spare cards and lens ?

[dseered]

I called Guido earlier for some advice, he is at Mondello though so will be talking to him next week - I think he uses Nikon, I do prefer the look of the Canon though !

[Biscuit]

friend of mine spent 700 on a Nikon Coolpix, sorry dont know model, takes grat pics and relatively easy to use. if it was my money id prolly go Canon tho, got a Canon 35mm SLR and would stick with them.

[Spud Raver]

I saw the pics that a friends point and shoot, 3.2 megapixel Canon thingy did and it convinced me, if i was ever spending that sort of dosh youre talking about, then then a Canon it probably be........:thumbs:

[Gizmo]

So is the 350D better than the 400D ? and would the supplied lens be ok in the interim for my usage ? At the prices being quoted it leaves me alot of scope, scope gettit, for getting a bag, tripod and spare cards and lens ?

do a google search for canon 350d v 400d loads of info there. for all our brochure work we bought a canon 1DS , most of the pro MTB photographers i work with use that model or the later mk11, it is the best but is quite expensive. one of the best is malcolm fearon (http://www.malcolmfearon.com/), he shot our race stuff for a few years, check his personal site above and his company website (http://www.blissimages.com/) and the quality of the images...

[alane]

350D is pretty damn good but the 400 has - amongst other things - larger display.
For what it's worth I've used 350d with a sigma 70~300 and quite happy with the results.
A close friend is professional and uses 350d/5/1 canons and swears by them, although he does get cabin fever from spending 3~4 full days at computer editing the pics.
horse jump 350d with sigma zoom (http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/picture471520.aspx)
Butterfly 350d with standard lens (http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/picture233688.aspx)
Portrait standard lens (http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/Rumble.aspx)
me doing my captain bit (http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/picture471522.aspx)

Unless you are really really discerning the difference between the various canons comes down to what's easier to live, but remember that lenses make all the difference.

[dseered]

Well I am edging toward the Canon 400D in a bundle deal.....

Canon EOS 400D (Silver) + EF-S 18-55mm Lens + Jessops 300AFD Digital Flashgun for (Canon AF)+ Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro (Canon AF)
Only £639.97 (normally £729.97)

I think that would be good to get me started ??

[Gizmo]

Well I am edging toward the Canon 400D in a bundle deal.....

Canon EOS 400D (Silver) + EF-S 18-55mm Lens + Jessops 300AFD Digital Flashgun for (Canon AF)+ Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro (Canon AF)
Only £639.97 (normally £729.97)

I think that would be good to get me started ??

thats about what i've got Ian, only difference is i've got a Canon flash and Canon 75-300 lens, both had rebate vouchers from Canon in with the camera when i bought it. Its enough to start with then decide whether you want to spend more.

[weeian]

thanks alot guys, ive been thinking about buying a camera for my wife. very usefull info !

/ian

[ProjectImola004]

by the way, I got a redundant EF-S 18-55mm going beggin' if any of you budding David Baileys are interested, it ain't worth that much £30 and it's yours to the first taker! :)

[dseered]

'kin 'ell this thing must be the nuts !

http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/product.php?productid=16233&cat=265&page=1
http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/productDetailImages/d_191.jpg
http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/productDetailImages/d_193.jpg

[Steve748]

8.5 frames per second (http://forums.photographyreview.com/showthread.php?t=13850):eek: good for motorsports:)

[Gizmo]

'kin 'ell this thing must be the nuts !

http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/product.php?productid=16233&cat=265&page=1
http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/productDetailImages/d_191.jpg
http://www.wilkinson.co.uk/store/productDetailImages/d_193.jpg

yup, I've got the mk1 DS at work :) gimme a shout if there is a sunny night this week, pop up onto Hartside , i'll take me bike and you can practice with my 350, i'll grab the DS from the office as well , see how easy that is to shoot with. take my macbook and you can see instantly what you are getting, the 1DS can shoot tethered to the laptop so image loads straight onto the screen.

[dseered]

No, stop it - don't let me near the big daddyio - I will be off to the bank !

[239desmo]

Have been watching this thread with interest as I am swithering on buying a digital SLR. I have used 35mm SLR and am perfectly happy with the results. I used it at a family wedding a year ago and produced better images than the official photographer armed with two digital Canon's. However I bought a couple of years ago a Nikon Coolpix 3100 as a "toe in the water" digital and my biggest frustration (apart from replacing batteries every 10 mins) is delay between pressing the button and camera taking a picture. It is totally useless for motorsport action (or anything involving movement!) and even catching "the moment" in any scene is impossible. I was considering something like an Olympus 550 (with huge zoom) as a stopgap but are all digitals cursed with this delay.

[alane]

Have been watching this thread with interest as I am swithering on buying a digital SLR. I have used 35mm SLR and am perfectly happy with the results. I used it at a family wedding a year ago and produced better images than the official photographer armed with two digital Canon's. However I bought a couple of years ago a Nikon Coolpix 3100 as a "toe in the water" digital and my biggest frustration (apart from replacing batteries every 10 mins) is delay between pressing the button and camera taking a picture. It is totally useless for motorsport action (or anything involving movement!) and even catching "the moment" in any scene is impossible. I was considering something like an Olympus 550 (with huge zoom) as a stopgap but are all digitals cursed with this delay.

The delay is still present in a few lower range digitals but take a look at the horse picture in my earlier post, short burst of three frames as she came into picture (both eyes open on the camera so you can track your subject AND look through the lens). This is only one of loads of pics when I see my daughter and the main advantage of digital slr over 35mm slr???...the number of pictures you can take without re-loading the film. That's why you can afford to take bursts of shots (think the 350d does 4fps) and not worry about how many you are taking.
I've got a couple of 35mm, pentax and canon, and use them maybe once a year. The servicing costs more than they are worth.
The 350d with a 2gb SanDisk can cope with nearly 500 jpeg hi-res pictures and one battery charge. RAW pictures will obviously bring that figure down.
One of the first accessories to buy should be a second battery to do swaps with.
A friend had the Nikon and he too had problems with battery life - guess you live and learn.

[239desmo]

Aaaah! Significance of boasting of x frames per second make sense now! Ok just to show my complete ignorance what is difference between a jpeg and RAW. ( to be brutally honest I don't know what either is and why I should shoot pictures in one or the other!:o ) Also do I have to become computer literate and spend all my time "touching in" photos on the computer afterwards?

[dseered]

Turning out to be a really interesting thread and thank you for your questions Desmo, I am gagging to learn about all things SLR !

[colzo]

The June 07 issue of Digitial Photo has a review of the Canon 400D Vs the Nikon D40x. The verdict at the end was a tie so I suppose it comes down to personal preference. I've used Nikon SLR's for years and when I upgraded to digital I stuck with it as all my old stuff is compatable. Traditionally Nikon has had better lens quality while Canons' autofocus system has been much better. These days though I think it comes down to which brand you prefer and that they are both much of a muchness to the amateur. As for prices yes Jessops USED to be the cheapest however they will pricematch if you go into the store with a magazine or print off a web page from an internet store, they will add P&P costs though. I find www.dabs.com is the cheapest for memory cards. If I were you I'd make my own bundle up. The classifieds at the back of Digital Photo have lost of advertisements with good prices for both cameras. I'd buy a cheaper body and a few lenses or flash with the rest of the cash. Then there's filters, memory cards, tripods.........:)

[Gizmo]

Smiths had a good magazine user guide to the 350D on sale a few weeks ago, it might be worth checking if its still in store. it covered RRAW/jpg, converting files, different camera settings on 350 and more.

speed (FPS) is also linked to quality, RAW and hi res jpg are biger files which take more time to write to the card so you can improve speed by reducing quality.

A jpg is a file where the colour/detail info is compressed by the camera's computer taking into account the white balance and other parameters, once the shutter is pressed you can't correct colour or white balance. RAW is the actual raw data, all the detail is there its a much bigger file. you can then import that into a computer and let a much more powerful processor and software take over, if you make a mistake or don't like what you see you'e still got the original info there to adjust. A camera jpg can't do that, once you set the parameters it uses only that info.

Learning to convert RAW isn't hard, photoshop cs2 handles it or we use Capture One Pro but there is no need for home use. Personally i'd rather get the shot as good as i can and minimise editing on computer time, the problem with digital is that you take too many images and if you can't retouch every one.

my 350 is very good on batery life, one of the "benefits" of the small screen, the newer cameras all have bigger screens which unsurprisingly eat batteries.

[colzo]

Aaaah! Significance of boasting of x frames per second make sense now! Ok just to show my complete ignorance what is difference between a jpeg and RAW. ( to be brutally honest I don't know what either is and why I should shoot pictures in one or the other!:o ) Also do I have to become computer literate and spend all my time "touching in" photos on the computer afterwards?

Read this 239desmo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAW_image_format in short , and just what I think so probably wrong, with a jpeg the camera converts and processes the image where as with a RAW the computer does. A RAW you can change the colour balance and several other factors and then compress it. Everytime you open and close a jpeg on your computer (wether you alter it or not) you loose quality but with a RAW you don't. Most SLR's will give you software to open a RAW file free with the camera, you can then change it to a TIFF file (which doesn't compress so you don't loose quality). On my Nikon a top quality jpeg is about 4meg a RAW opened and saved as a TIFF is about 35meg.

A good photo mag will explain a lot but I'm still learning.

[239desmo]

Turning out to be a really interesting thread and thank you for your questions Desmo, I am gagging to learn about all things SLR !

:thumbs: When it comes to flaunting ignorance, I'm your man!;) :D
Now this is another query on same lines. I have used an Olympus OM10 35mm slr for years and this was considered "basic" compared to the OM1/2 etc but I have only used basic features in the camera but use half decent lenses and obtain very acceptable results, so do I need a digital slr with 30 different pre-set scenes? I don't use any on the small Nikon compact I have. Would it not make sense(unless you are very serious about this) to buy an "obsolete" model and spend the money on 1 or 2 quality zoom lenses. To take it a stage further if you only wanted a point & shoot type camera do you need an slr or would one of the new compacts which are "pretend" slr's be a better bet? I know that they are creeping close to £300 but they come with a lens which does wideangle to super-telephoto as standard. Presume flash would be an issue with them?

[239desmo]

Cheers Colzo & Gizmo! Must confess to losing the will to live trying to understand all this though! When you say that you lose quality on a jpeg every time you open & close (excuse the ignorance again) but do you mean if I view it and then close it the next time I view it some of the quality has gone?:eek:

[colzo]

You have a very valid point in buying an obsolete camera as long as it was new and with a warranty, I wouldn't buy secondhand. With my Nikon I think it has too many program modes I tend to use the old shutter or arpature priority, program if i'm lazy or full manual mode. Personally I think thats all you need. I would definately get an SLR no question. The quality is that noticable even at a basic level. The sensor on an SLR is much bigger than that of a compact then there's the lenses some on compacts are plastic however most SLR's are glass. An SLR will grow with you and you will get more creative. I think the only question here is which SLR is for you. :)

[colzo]

When you say that you lose quality on a jpeg every time you open & close (excuse the ignorance again) but do you mean if I view it and then close it the next time I view it some of the quality has gone?

Yes thats right. A photo mag a while ago ran an article on it. They open and closed a jpeg, although it was about 100 times, but the loss was quite noticeable. To confuse you evenmore :) you can convert your jpegs to Tiffs which don't compess so no loss in quality.

Don't worry about all this confusing stuff when you used a 35mm camera you would hand the film to the shop and they would give you photographs back. Simple. Now with computers most people print and adjust them themselves. Instead of having a darkroom we have a lightroom (computer). Once you get the hang of it you'll get some professional looking shots even if all you want is a snap.

P.S. All SLR's have a fully automatic idiot mode so you can use them like a point and shoot.

[alanswerthat]

Just bought a digital SLR last week.
Decided on the Canon EOS 30D + EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens bundle from Jessops, paid £979 and you get £165 cash back if purchased before the 30th of June I think.

[Gizmo]

Stewart, composition still makes up the majority of what a good photo is!!

An SLR will let you choose a lens suitable for the shot you want, from very close to action motor sport, digital compacts are a compromise so SLR is a better choice if you can be bothered to learn. The 350D with a couple of lenses is fine to start with, i was out with a pro MTB photographer and he didn't want to carry his DS so he used my 350, the photos were subsequently used asa double page spread in our brochure and full page in a magazine, all done with a £400 camera and 150 lens despite him usually using a £4k camera and £2K lens. you can pick the older 350D up even more cheaply than a 400, i posted a link earlier or keep an eye on ebay. If you can find that 350D magazine its worth buying, it's nice and easy to understand, goes through the preset functions and then explains how to start using the more advanced options, it explains compression and how RAW works in nice easy to understand terms. Its published by Future, and is Photography Focus Guide Issue 6 - Canon 350D its not on their website (http://www.dcmag.co.uk/) but subs/back order number is +44 (0)870 444 8680

[alane]

...speed (FPS) is also linked to quality, RAW and hi res jpg are biger files which take more time to write to the card so you can improve speed by reducing quality....

The current limiting factor on speed is not only the size of the file but the speed of the card you are using. The camera will post as fast as the card will accept.
I'm using sandisk III and it copes no problem with 4fps.

[dseered]

Later today I should be the proud owner of a Canon 400d :)

[alane]

Later today I should be the proud owner of a Canon 400d :)

Ian, you're not doing this just because prontoprint wouldn't develop those bikini photo's are you?

[239desmo]

Later today I should be the proud owner of a Canon 400d :)

Good luck with that and sorry for muscling in on your thread!
Thanks to all for this which has sort of confirmed what I thought in that I enjoy the "simplicity" of the 35mm slr in that I hardly ever got the photos cropped or whatever as I composed them in the viewfinder. I would probably never use the "point & shoot" modes (all 40 of them or whatever) and providing the manual mode was straightforward to use I would stick with that. Do most digital slr's have a depth of field preview and how important is the various "anti shake/image stabilisation" features of some of them? Sorry for all the questions.:o

[alane]

Read this 239desmo [url]Everytime you open and close a jpeg on your computer (wether you alter it or not) you loose quality but with a RAW you don't.

Only if you save the jpeg do you lose quality. Opening and closing the file should have no detriment to the photo quality.

Don't be put off by the jpeg quality and the ability to modify the end product, most applications include the "one step fix" for your photos which does exactly what it says on the label - fixes the photo to more "aesthetically pleasing" effect. But you can still modify the colour/balance et cetera in many many different ways.
The BIGGEST advantage for me with digital over film is the number of pictures and speed to output.

I reckon that given last years throughput of pictures the 350d has paid for itself + the sigma lens with a few bob to spare.

two pictures:
first in basic colour as seen each night and the second modified to black and white plus some to bring out the writing not seen on the original:
http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/images/278171/original.aspx

http://community.dcmag.co.uk/photos/sim1s_gallery/images/278170/original.aspx

By any stretch of the imagination I ain't even a good photographer but I am really pleased with the ease at which the photos can be taken and processed using the newer digi slr's

[dseered]

First shot off the new camera, still really busy at work so will come back and tell you what I got later :)

http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/8139/img0003shrunkor0.jpg

[ProjectImola004]

First shot off the new camera, still really busy at work so will come back and tell you what I got later :)

http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/8139/img0003shrunkor0.jpg

what did you get in the end?

[alane]

400d wasn't it?

[ProjectImola004]

talking of RAW images, I tend to use this format then convert to jpg for forums like this, these are images taken in this format, but reducing them down to less than 97kb can spoil a great pic....

...talk about sunseekers; took these a couple of minutes ago. :p

"ok, which one of you two (my daughters) killed the cat??? ;)

[dseered]

Canon EOS 400D kit with EF-s 18-55
LowePro Slingshot 100
Pentax Supaclean lens cloth
Tamron 70-300 F4 / 5.6 Di LD
2GB card
Spare battery
UV filter for both lenses
3 year warranty
£65 cash back from Canon

:)

[Gizmo]

reducing files sizes always loses data but you can compensate in photoshop

http://homepage.mac.com/gizmo999/images/redsquirrel.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/gizmo999/images/ullswater.jpg

[dseered]

The LowePro bag is ubercool I have to say - all I have to do now is learn how to use the chuffing camera !

[ProjectImola004]

reducing files sizes always loses data but you can compensate in photoshop

I know what you mean, but there's nothing quite like printing a 6mb picture on A3 and having such clarity only experienced with large format cameras like Mamiya RB67s and the like!! I always get frustrated when posting pics on here as everyone always takes the @@@@ that they are out of focus when on my PC they are massive and superb quality and pin sharp.... gentlemen, you know who you are!!! :p ;)

[Gizmo]

Mike, I know this may be going a little 'off piste' but I also belong to a LandRover forum http://www.landrovernet.com/with the same sort of format as DuN, they have a section entitled 'Camera Emporium' as it is such a popular subject.

...may be an idea for something to add to the DuN site....

...should I shut up now??? :o

really this should be in other hobbies forum and i may move it later :)


I know what you mean, but there's nothing quite like printing a 6mb picture on A3 and having such clarity only experienced with large format cameras like Mamiya RB67s and the like!! I always get frustrated when posting pics on here as everyone always takes the @@@@ that they are out of focus when on my PC they are massive and superb quality and pin sharp.... gentlemen, you know who you are!!! :p ;)

focus don't alter with compression though :confused: , go for a smaller image size and use higher quality jpg will keep definition.

the problem with all photos is how they are published and whilst the web allows distribution its at the expense of quality. guess it depends upon whether you create a work of art and no-one sees it or accept its better to have more viewers ?....

[239desmo]

... as everyone always takes the @@@@ that they are out of focus when on my PC they are massive and superb quality and pin sharp.... gentlemen, you know who you are!!! :p ;)

No-one would take the @@@@ here, you must be getting confused with the Landrover forum!:)
Mind going as well as your eyesight!!:p :p :p :D :D :D

[ProjectImola004]

really this should be in other hobbies forum and i may move it later :)



focus don't alter with compression though :confused: , go for a smaller image size and use higher quality jpg will keep definition.

the problem with all photos is how they are published and whilst the web allows distribution its at the expense of quality. guess it depends upon whether you create a work of art and no-one sees it or accept its better to have more viewers ?....

...true, I leave the camera set on the highest quality, it's just for snapping something quickly to put it up on this forum where I get fed up with losing quality. Hey, maybe I'm as crap-er photographer as Davie says I am!!!! :p

[ProjectImola004]

No-one would take the @@@@ here, you must be getting confused with the Landrover forum!:)
Mind going as well as your eyesight!!:p :p :p :D :D :D

...oh yer, and Stewart!!!! :p

[dseered]

Its this series bag, mines the 100 aw.

http://www.daymen.co.uk/promos/q107ms/slingshot_d.htm
http://www.daymen.co.uk/promos/q107ms/bilder/100.jpg

[ProjectImola004]

yes sorry about that, I realised after I'd posted that.

[rockjock620]

You don't need to ask a painter what brushes he uses - the quality of the image is down to the quality of the artist. Having been involved in Graphics for a number of years taught me that in no uncertain terms. It's down to you make artwork not the equipment. Next expenditure should on some sort of course I reckon. That will help you maximise the use of the gear you've bought. Just a thought.

I remember a few years ago now David Bailey was asked to do (publicity thing I think) a series of shots with the cheapest, gnarliest camera around. Stunning results.

Granted, more expensive kit might give you more technical scope but it depends what you want at the end of the day. It's like expensive hi-fi or HD TV - if all you listen to/watch is Kylie or Coronation Street then why bother?

Right I'm off now.......:D

[dseered]

You don't need to ask a painter what brushes he uses - the quality of the image is down to the quality of the artist. Having been involved in Graphics for a number of years taught me that in no uncertain terms. It's down to you make artwork not the equipment. Next expenditure should on some sort of course I reckon. That will help you maximise the use of the gear you've bought. Just a thought.

I remember a few years ago now David Bailey was asked to do (publicity thing I think) a series of shots with the cheapest, gnarliest camera around. Stunning results.

Granted, more expensive kit might give you more technical scope but it depends what you want at the end of the day. It's like expensive hi-fi or HD TV - if all you listen to/watch is Kylie or Coronation Street then why bother?

Right I'm off now.......:D

Don't you worry, I am a big beliver in professional training, I will be having a trip to Cambridgeshire to the Canon ' Experience Seminars' at some point, I also used to work with a couple of Pro photographers up here, I was on the other side of the camera though ;) so will be getting in touch for some pointers !

[Spud Raver]

Hey, maybe I'm as crap-er photographer as Davie says I am!!!! :p

:stir: :stir: :stir: :stir: :D

[alane]

.....It's like expensive hi-fi or HD TV - if all you listen to/watch is Kylie or Coronation Street then why bother?

Right I'm off now.......:D

Too right you should be after that blasphemous comment.
Heathens at the gates, repel, repel.!!

[239desmo]

Just for your info, I spent many days and nights studying mag articles on merits of various Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Samsung/Pentax etc models and decided to leave it until I came back from holiday when I would have a proper look around. However.........wandering through duty free shops at airport on way out I had a cursory glance at Dixons and discovered they had a limited selection od DSLR's etc on the shelves. Quick glance at a camera mag I had in my bag confirmed prices WAY below anything advertised in the discount stores etc and I purchased a Nikon D40X. Price was less than anything advertised in USA or UK and it seems a combination of a competitive starting price minus 17.5% VAT was the key.
So if anyome is half thinking of buying one and you are going through (or know someone going through) duty free may be an otpion worth considering.
Now have to get to grips with instruction manual and software!:o