Best DSLR for under $1000

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by brett, Jun 28, 2007.

  1. brett

    brett Guest

    brett, Jun 28, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. brett

    Somebody Guest

    "brett" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've been going by the two top picks on this list:
    > http://reviews.cnet.com/4323-6530_7-6509048.html?tag=txt. Can anyone
    > comment on what they believe to be the best sub $1000 DSLR camera and
    > why?
    >



    Pentax K10D best bang for the buck!

    Somebody!
     
    Somebody, Jun 28, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. brett

    ray Guest

    On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:40:58 +0000, brett wrote:

    > I've been going by the two top picks on this list:
    > http://reviews.cnet.com/4323-6530_7-6509048.html?tag=txt. Can anyone
    > comment on what they believe to be the best sub $1000 DSLR camera and
    > why?


    'best' for what? If there were a 'best' one, why would the others still be
    around? For comparison: what is the 'best' car under $20000?
     
    ray, Jun 28, 2007
    #3
  4. brett

    ASAAR Guest

    On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:40:58 -0000, brett wrote:

    > I've been going by the two top picks on this list:
    > http://reviews.cnet.com/4323-6530_7-6509048.html?tag=txt. Can anyone
    > comment on what they believe to be the best sub $1000 DSLR camera and
    > why?


    Since I assume that you mean both camera and lens for no more
    than $1,000, probably the cheapest DSLR, whatever brand that happens
    to be. If used (uh, "pre-owned", as they say) and cheaper, so much
    the better. That'll allow the remainder of the $1,000 to be used
    for a much better lens (or two) than the normal kit offerings. If
    you plan on eventually spending more than $1,000 total, you might
    get a better body with a lesser lens and delay your image
    gratification by a couple of months or years. :)

    It would be considerate, btw, to name the two cameras rather than
    posting a URL. Some people (namely me!) have very slow internet
    connections, and that page still hasn't loaded, although I can see
    it limping along, slowly . . . :)
     
    ASAAR, Jun 28, 2007
    #4
  5. brett

    brett Guest

    I guess a camera to compare to is the

    Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT 8.0MP Digital SLR Camera Digital Rebel XT
    18-55 Kit ($700 @ bestbuy.com)
    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...CategoryId=pcmcat99300050011&id=1099394810083

    I don't know if 1/8000 shutter speed really matters over 1/4000. I
    also want Vista compatibility, which this has. I believe the cameras
    I posted in the OP are a little old.

    I know the Canon D30 is over $1000 but what kind of comments can
    people here give about it?

    Thanks,
    Brett
     
    brett, Jun 29, 2007
    #5
  6. brett

    brett Guest

    Actually it looks like the Canon 20D is a much better deal than the
    30D. Although not Vista compatible (I don't think), the CF readers
    are.
     
    brett, Jun 29, 2007
    #6
  7. brett

    banjo`s Guest

    "brett" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've been going by the two top picks on this list:
    > http://reviews.cnet.com/4323-6530_7-6509048.html?tag=txt. Can anyone
    > comment on what they believe to be the best sub $1000 DSLR camera and
    > why?
    >



    why ?? because you caqnt beat quality


    Nikon D80


    8.0
    Excellent
    Review date:
    08/31/2006
    $875-$998

    from 10 stores


    Nikon scores big with the D80, its new 10-megapixel, sub-$1,000 dSLR.
    Specs: Digital camera, 10.2 megapixels, LCD display - TFT active matrix -
    2.5 in - Color

    Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT with 18mm-to-55mm lens (silver)


    8.0
    Excellent
    Review date:
    05/04/2005
    $569-$700

    from 13 stores


    The Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT is an exceptionally small and lightweight
    camera designed for amateur digital SLR photographers, but it delivers the
    responsiveness and image quality you'd expect from a semipro model.
    Specs: Digital camera, 8 megapixels, LCD display - TFT active matrix - 1.8
    in - Color
     
    banjo`s, Jun 29, 2007
    #7
  8. brett

    ray Guest

    On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:44:15 -0700, brett wrote:

    > I guess a camera to compare to is the
    >
    > Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT 8.0MP Digital SLR Camera Digital Rebel XT
    > 18-55 Kit ($700 @ bestbuy.com)
    > http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...CategoryId=pcmcat99300050011&id=1099394810083
    >
    > I don't know if 1/8000 shutter speed really matters over 1/4000. I
    > also want Vista compatibility, which this has. I believe the cameras
    > I posted in the OP are a little old.


    Please explain what 'vista compatibility' means. You should be able to
    plug any modern camera into any modern operating system and go.


    >
    > I know the Canon D30 is over $1000 but what kind of comments can
    > people here give about it?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Brett
     
    ray, Jun 29, 2007
    #8
  9. On 2007-06-28 20:44:15 -0700, brett <> said:

    > I guess a camera to compare to is the
    >
    > Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT 8.0MP Digital SLR Camera Digital Rebel XT
    > 18-55 Kit ($700 @ bestbuy.com)
    > http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...CategoryId=pcmcat99300050011&id=1099394810083


    I
    >
    >
    > I don't know if 1/8000 shutter speed really matters over 1/4000. I
    > also want Vista compatibility, which this has. I believe the cameras
    > I posted in the OP are a little old.
    >
    > I know the Canon D30 is over $1000 but what kind of comments can
    > people here give about it?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Brett


    Search your local camera shops. I got my 30D body for $1100.00. Just
    100 over your limit. No hassles with shoddy internet scams, no waiting
    for ups.

    --

    thepixelfreak
     
    thepixelfreak, Jun 29, 2007
    #9
  10. brett

    brett Guest


    > Search your local camera shops. I got my 30D body for $1100.00. Just
    > 100 over your limit. No hassles with shoddy internet scams, no waiting
    > for ups.


    You didn't get a lens though. Add at least another $300.
     
    brett, Jun 29, 2007
    #10
  11. brett wrote:
    >> Search your local camera shops. I got my 30D body for $1100.00. Just
    >> 100 over your limit. No hassles with shoddy internet scams, no waiting
    >> for ups.

    >
    > You didn't get a lens though. Add at least another $300.



    Bzzzzzt. A very fine 1.8 50mm can be had for well under $100. And please
    don't say a camera is worthless without a zoom.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Jun 30, 2007
    #11
  12. brett

    brett Guest


    > And please
    > don't say a camera is worthless without a zoom.


    I won't. The 20D I just bought surely doesn't have one.
     
    brett, Jun 30, 2007
    #12
  13. brett

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:23:23 -0600, ray <> wrote:
    : On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:44:15 -0700, brett wrote:
    :
    : > I guess a camera to compare to is the
    : >
    : > Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT 8.0MP Digital SLR Camera Digital Rebel XT
    : > 18-55 Kit ($700 @ bestbuy.com)
    : > http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...CategoryId=pcmcat99300050011&id=1099394810083
    : >
    : > I don't know if 1/8000 shutter speed really matters over 1/4000. I
    : > also want Vista compatibility, which this has. I believe the cameras
    : > I posted in the OP are a little old.
    :
    : Please explain what 'vista compatibility' means. You should be able to
    : plug any modern camera into any modern operating system and go.

    Sure you should, but that doesn't mean you can. At one time Canon's (non-EOS)
    Camera Window had serious problems with Windows XP, and I haven't been able to
    get the last two or three versions to work with Windows Server 2003. Many
    software vendors have difficulty with Vista. It should surprise no one if
    Canon and/or Nikon are on that list.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 30, 2007
    #13
  14. brett

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:23:52 -0700, John McWilliams <> wrote:
    : brett wrote:
    : >> Search your local camera shops. I got my 30D body for $1100.00. Just
    : >> 100 over your limit. No hassles with shoddy internet scams, no waiting
    : >> for ups.
    : >
    : > You didn't get a lens though. Add at least another $300.
    :
    :
    : Bzzzzzt. A very fine 1.8 50mm can be had for well under $100. And please
    : don't say a camera is worthless without a zoom.

    A general-purpose camera is certainly a lot less useful without a zoom. Or are
    we not allowed to say even that?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 30, 2007
    #14
  15. Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:23:52 -0700, John McWilliams <> wrote:
    > : brett wrote:
    > : >> Search your local camera shops. I got my 30D body for $1100.00. Just
    > : >> 100 over your limit. No hassles with shoddy internet scams, no waiting
    > : >> for ups.
    > : >
    > : > You didn't get a lens though. Add at least another $300.
    > :
    > :
    > : Bzzzzzt. A very fine 1.8 50mm can be had for well under $100. And please
    > : don't say a camera is worthless without a zoom.
    >
    > A general-purpose camera is certainly a lot less useful without a zoom. Or are
    > we not allowed to say even that?


    Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass first eg
    the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.

    --
    john mcwilliams

    "Andre, a simple peasant, had only one thing on his mind as he crept
    along the East wall: 'Andre creep ... Andre creep ... Andre creep'."
     
    John McWilliams, Jun 30, 2007
    #15
  16. John McWilliams wrote:
    []
    > Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    > budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass first
    > eg the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.


    But isn't 50mm rather long for a general purpose, first lens?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 30, 2007
    #16
  17. brett

    brett Guest

    On Jun 30, 9:03 am, "David J Taylor" <-this-
    part.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    > John McWilliams wrote:
    >
    > []
    >
    > > Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    > > budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass first
    > > eg the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.

    >
    > But isn't 50mm rather long for a general purpose, first lens?
    >
    > David


    Isn't 18-50/55mm a general purpose lens?

    Brett
     
    brett, Jun 30, 2007
    #17
  18. David J Taylor wrote:
    > John McWilliams wrote:
    > []
    >> Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    >> budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass first
    >> eg the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.

    >
    > But isn't 50mm rather long for a general purpose, first lens?
    >
    > David


    Not with the optional golf cart carrier....

    Somewhere years ago it was all right to abbreviate millimeter as "mm" at
    least in a limited context. Sorry.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Jun 30, 2007
    #18
  19. brett wrote:
    > On Jun 30, 9:03 am, "David J Taylor"
    > <-this- part.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    >> John McWilliams wrote:
    >>
    >> []
    >>
    >>> Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    >>> budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass
    >>> first eg the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.

    >>
    >> But isn't 50mm rather long for a general purpose, first lens?
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > Isn't 18-50/55mm a general purpose lens?
    >
    > Brett


    It's what's sold as a "kit" lens, but anyone with a 50mm lens alone is
    going to find themselves rather restricted indoors. I would have thought
    that some in the 25 - 30mm f/1.8 range would have been a more useful
    choice.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jul 1, 2007
    #19
  20. John McWilliams wrote:
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >> John McWilliams wrote:
    >> []
    >>> Hah! And I used "please"! <s> I was thinking that if one were quite
    >>> budget limited, it might be a plan to get good but simple glass
    >>> first eg the 1.8, rather than a cheap zoom which one would outgrow.

    >>
    >> But isn't 50mm rather long for a general purpose, first lens?
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > Not with the optional golf cart carrier....
    >
    > Somewhere years ago it was all right to abbreviate millimeter as "mm"
    > at least in a limited context. Sorry.


    Within Europe "mm" is still the accepted abbreviation. You will need to
    explain why your part of the world is different.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jul 1, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mike

    best pc under uo to $1000

    mike, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    819
    SgtMinor
    Jun 20, 2005
  2. JK

    Re: Best Camera For Under 1000

    JK, Jul 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    418
  3. Matt Williams

    Under $1000 Nikon DSLR ?

    Matt Williams, Sep 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    564
    Todd Walker
    Sep 22, 2003
  4. Freedom55

    Is the under $1000 10mp DSLR coming soon?

    Freedom55, Feb 10, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    474
    Kennedy McEwen
    Feb 14, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    989
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page