RMM Loc: Suburban New York

I'm not sure when the budget will stand for a new camera. I'll probably start with the basic kit lens. I've been looking at the Sony SLT A35, the Nikon D3100 and maybe a Canon T2i. I had been leaning towards the D3100, but the Sony looks very interesting. Anybody else been through this, and have any wisdom to share?

My current camera is a 6-year-old Panasonic Lumix FZ-20. 5 MP, 12X zoom. I'd like to be able to get more out of the camera, and less out of Photoshop, not that I've got anything against Photoshop.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

If you're looking at the Sony a35, look at the a55. Same camera, but it has 16mp v. 14mp, 10fps v. 6fps, and has built in GPS.

Rhino

So many people still link camera quality to mega pixels. Honestly, unless your end result needs to be a poster sized print, 12 Mp is way more than enough and camera companies keep fning up their image sensors to wow the consumer with the resolution equals better so pick me approach. In reality, anything over 12mp hurts the dynamic range and the iso capabilities. I would much rather have a 12 mp camera that shoots high iso than a 24mp that suffers at high iso due to noise because of finer resoultion. Unless you need to print huge)..

Rhino

Another, and even better choice if you need to stay in that price range would be to buy a good film slr or rangefinder. The systems can be bought at crazy prices, and slide film processing easy as digital th,ese days, but is ob
verlooked. Film is so much better in terms of dynamic range, and unless you can afford a dslr with a full frame sensor, medium format, or a leica m9, results are hard to match.

jack taber

I agree with you on the the MPs But if the price is the same and the frame rate is 60% higher I would think that the sensor may be better. As far as the GPS goes, I couldn't care less.

mrhotel

I have the sony nex-5n with the 18-200 mm . best all around camera made , at least thats what i think.

Adirondack Hiker Loc: Southern Adirondacks

The best camera for you is the one that feels most comfortable in your hand. Go to a store and hold each, is the grip on one better than the other? How easy is it to use the most common controls. When you have decided, go to a major online camera store, Adorama or B&H and check their used equipment. It will come with a warrenty and save you hundreds. I got a Nikon D5000 with the 18-55 mm lens, as well as the Nikor 18-105 mm lens for less than the cost of a new D5000. All were in perfect condition. I agree about the MP's, 12 is more than enough, unless you plan to print 18x24's. 280 ppi is all that is required for printing, so you will have no problems at even 11x14's

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

As others have said, get a chance to hold each one so you can figure out which feels best to you. I would also recommend going to dpreview.com. They have a side by side camera comparison where you can check the features and specifications of various models. If you run into terminology you don't understand, there's a section for that.

Here's another thought, and this is just my opinion: too many of us get caught up in having this brand or that model and ignore the most important asset you have going for you. That's located several inches behind the viewfinder. Develop your eye and refine composition as you squeeze as much as you can out of the camera/lens combo you eventually choose. When your gear limits your vision, then look for "better" gear.

<Steps off soap box>

Have fun.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Partial quote

Indeed above a particular point megpix are fluf and my cause signal noise ration problems and how the camera feels and if you like the buttons and menus counts. Sony has a big advantage based on millions of Minolta AF lenses in the atic and on the closet shelf of homes for sale at a low cost... not cheap lenses... quality indeed since 1985 AF fit and work well.

280 ppi is indeed correct, not dpi which is incorrect speak from old printing days. Lots of confusion. If dpi were important, then all would buy Canon at 72 dpi vs Nikon at 300dpi?
www.clubsnap.com/forums/canon/605516-canon-72-dpi-vs-nikon-300-dpi.html

RMM Loc: Suburban New York

This is almost funny. I asked about three entry-level DSLRs because I'm using a 6-year-old camera which is good, but limiting in some ways. It's not so much that I'm an entry-level photographer, or that I am unfamiliar with film. I wish I had the budget to afford a midrange camera, and to equip it with really good lenses, but I don't.

Instead, I'm hearing all about megapixels, handling cameras in the store (I did, thank you), and a micro four-thirds camera, which I can't hold properly without putting on reading glasses.

Not one reply regarding the question I asked.

Staying tuned to this station...

Sensei

Canon T3I, Nikon D3100, NikonD 7000, Pentax K-R, or Sony A390, would be my thoughts for an entry level DLSR right now. I lean towards the Sony,If I were going for an SLT near that price range I would look at the Sony SLT A55. I think Sony has an edge in many ways, and although I have several Nikon here, along with a 5d mark 11 from Canon, the Sony bag is the one I grab most I find having image stabilization in the camera saves money on lens purchases, and like the 2x digital zoom feature on some Sony models (a550/580)to extend lens range. Film!!? I still use it and know some who shoot nothing else. Do want a limit of 24 or 36 pictures, pay for development, be limited in post processing or have a photo lab? I have a bunch of film cameras come into the auction that I can't give away. In fact some go for under $10.
I still use film on those few occasions when I am shooting a medium format or want a stereo image.But it would have to be very unusual circumstances, if I recommend buying a film camera.

Adirondack Hiker Loc: Southern Adirondacks

Not one reply regarding the question I asked.

These are all answers to which camera body is best for you: comfort, ease of use and image quality. For the record, final answer: get a used nikon D5000 or D90. More camera for the same cost.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

Funny? Why not try reading what people wrote instead of mocking them for trying to help. My answer was a direct response to your question. You asked about the a35, and I suggested you consider the a55 instead, and listed the reasons. Others answered your question from various perspectives. Maybe you should stick to what you have until you have the manners needed to ask others opinions without ridiculing them.

RMM Loc: Suburban New York

Read what I wrote, i wasn't ridiculing anyone. I went as far as to preface my comments with a note that it was funny how far the conversation drifted from the question. But most of the answers were to questions not asked. As regards the Sony a35/a55 choice, the a55 costs $150 more than the a35. Continuous shooting is faster on the a55, and it has a tilt screen viewscreen, but I use the viewfinder. Otherwise, the specs are nearly identical.

As to the suggestion of a used camera, my two Minolta SRTs were used, but I'm a little leery of used electronics. I'd be open to some further discussion of the merits.

Since my SRT-201 died, I've been using digital cameras, an Olympus C-2100 ultrazoom, which drowned when I fell out of a canoe, and the Lumix FZ-20 which I bought six years ago to replace it. My beloved Kodachrome 64 is no longer available; you can't even get it developed. And I've gotten used to the instant gratification of being able to download to my computer, cull the shots, take a trip through Photoshop if necessary, and forward to friends and family.

I don't think there's anything wrong with my manners, but on this occasion, I'll apologize to anyone who felt offended.

MarkH Loc: Cape Coral, FL

The d3100 with good glass will make for some great images.

Admittedly, I'm biased towards Nikon.