Expert: John Oliverio - 3/26/2009

Question
QUESTION: Hey John i recently got into photography more am going to upgrade from a compact to an SLR.
Can you recommend a few good models to go for as a relative beginner? Im not looking to spend too much more than $700, but when im a bit more flexible when it comes to getting a few lenses.
Is it best to stick with brands such as canon and nikon? and should i get the same brand lens and body in order to get best results?
If you could give me any website or magazine that you find useful that would be great, im in australia so not US only mags.

Thanks for any help
Calum

ANSWER: Calum,

You might like to consider the Nikon D60 and Canon Rebel XSi.
As a rule of thumb I would say stick with the makers lenses.  However, there are exceptions.  If you want a higher-end lens but can't afford the name brand, then you should consider aftermarket.  Sigma and Tamron are good choices.  

My favorite web-site is www.dpreview.com.

I have no idea what magazines are available in Australia.  Never been there.  A google search did bring up several magazines native to Australia, but I've no first hand experience of them.  I personally no longer read photo magazines.  As far as camera reviews go, dpreview is quicker off the mark getting his reviews printed.  And as far as wanting to read about photography and art in general, I find the web is a richer and more divers source.  I will on occasion buy a magazine that is more about photography than it is cameras....  about the art.  Like American Photographer or Outdoor Photographer.  And I sometimes buy Layers Magazine which is about editing photos.  But I've found that by the time the "gear" magazines do their camera "round-ups" that it is all old news.  

And of course you are welcome to ask me any questions you like.  And I do have some general advice for you.

Don't get too caught up in the equipment.  All of todays SLRs are orders of magnitude more advanced than the gear I grew up with.  Even the cheapest of them.  We've been making beautiful photos for 70 years with very primitive stuff.  It's more about the eye than the camera.  

As far as brands go I admit I do tend to suggest Canon and Nikon more often than not.  But the reason is a practical one....  not one of quality.  Simply put, Canon and Nikon dominate the SLR market and have done for quite some time.  And thus they practically have the entire pro market in their hands.  For the novice who may want to become more advanced this means two things.  1. If you want to walk into a store and play with a camera, it is much easier to find the Nikon or Canon on the shelves than it is the others.  Stores stock what they can sell and Canon and Nikon advertise and dominate the market.  2. Since these two big guys have a large pro customer base, they have a bit more in the lines of exotic gear.  If you wanted something really unusual, like a PC or UV lens you probably won't be able to get it from most of the other makers.  

Having said all that...  Sony, Pentax and Olympus usually offer a better value.  They are often more aggressive in price.  

I do have some opinions (and I stress the word opinion) on what I think is the right camera for certain kinds of photographers.  If you are interested in a particular aspect of photography or certain subject, etc. let me know what it is and I will make suggestions.  For example, sport/action.  Or portrait/documentary.  Do you like to shoot horses?  Rugby?  Nudes?  Give me an idea.  But really think about it.  Usually what I hear back to that question is a wishy-washy generalized answer.  Don't feel that if I make a suggestion based on your answer that you won't be able to shoot other subjects.  I just feel that some makes are a little better in one area than another as far as performance goes.  And if you look at the different pro segments of the business, you will see that they feel the same way.

John

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hey John, superb answer thanks a lot.

The main areas of photography ill be initially interested would be mostly landscapes. So this will include cityscapes, night shooting and wilderness areas. Im also really interested in macro photography and would be looking eventually for a good macro lens. Is this needed? or can cameras do macro well on a standard lens? Obviously i dont know a whole lot about photography yet but im learning every day.
I definitely want to get into painting with light also, it looks class.

Ill probably ask a few more questions soon.
Cheers
Calum

Answer
Well, I'm going to suggest the Canon Rebel in this case.  The main reason is that with the subjects you are interested in you are going to want a super wide lens.  Canon has the 10-22 for around $800 USD while doesn't have one in that price range.  

As far as macro goes, see if you can get as close as you want to with out buying one.  That is how I decide to buy a lens.  If I keep missing shots I want to make because I don't have the gear, then I see about getting the gear I need.

For painting with light you will need a good tripod, wired remote and a flash.  Also assorted flash lights and things to modify the color of light.

Don't cheap out on a tripod.  You really get what you pay for.  I suggest you stick with Manfrotto or Gitzo. The wired remote is called the RS60E3. I suggest the wired because it more reliable. For painting with light, you don't need an expensive flash.  You could buy something used even.  But if you want to use the flash "on camera" for portraits, etc. then you will want a Canon brand flash...  which can be rather expensive.  

John