# Cameras



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

Hey ya'll, I got a significant tax return this year and wanted to buy my wife a nice camera. She is really into photography and wants a nice camera that has a nice zoom to get some great wildlife shots. I'm not the camera expert and I'm not even sure if digital or 35MM is better. I've seen a lot of the pictures ya'll take and I know she would love a camera that could take those nice close ups with such great quality. Anyway, I'm really looking for info and I figured what better place to come than here? So, Any help or input ya'll can give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## threshershark (Sep 7, 2007)

Hey Uz-A-Bow: Congrats on the significant tax return!

Everyone has different needs and budgets, but it sounds like your wife is a "serious amateur" and has some good experience under her belt. Usually that is the realm of the digital SLR. These types of cameras offer the ability to use multiple lenses depending on what the photographer is trying to accomplish.

To be frank, the single greatest skill in wildlife photography has little to do the camera itself. Rather, it's the ability to get close to the subject. I always marvel at how close big zoom lenses DON'T get you to wildlife. That said, most consider the minimum focal length for wildlife to be 300mm.

Nikon and Canon are the industry leaders in digital SLRs. There are other players too, but none of them will be able to offer the wide variety of lens choices. Both companies are excellent and don't produce anything crappy.

I've been shooting Nikon for years, and personally I think the best deal on the market these days for first-time SLR owners is the D40. It comes with a great little kit lens (18-55mm) which is fine for portraits and macros, but for wildlife you will want a telephoto like the Nikon 70-300mm VR (vibration reduction). There have been some great deals on this camera and various kits lately at Costco. If she ends up wanting to upgrade the camera body later on, all Nikon lenses are interchangeable so your investment is safe.

If you have more in your budget, Nikon also offers the D80, D200, and D300. The latter 2 offerings are pricey but are essentially professional grade camera bodies. My suggestion is usually to spend the majority of your budget on lenses because all of Canon's and Nikon's digital SLRs take fantastic images.

Lenses:

Nikon 18-55mm should come with most kits.
Nikon 55-200mm VR runs about $250 and gives you a good mid-range zoom.
Nikon 18-200mm VR takes the place of the above 2, making it so you don't have to carry 2 lenses and switch between them. It costs more than both combined. Canon does not have anything to compete with this lens, and wishes they did.
Nikon 70-300mm VR isn't wide enough for landscapes and so forth, but is an excellent telephoto.

If you want to see pictures and reviews of these products, visit http://www.kenrockwell.com and use the search feature to find them.

Here is a link to a slideshow with some of my February 2008 eagle photos, taken with a Nikon D200.

http://s160.photobucket.com/albums/t181 ... =slideshow


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

Thanks for the reply Threshershark....I had a question though, What is the difference between the D60 and D40?


----------



## waltny (Sep 8, 2007)

UZ-A-BOW said:


> Thanks for the reply Threshershark....I had a question though, What is the difference between the D60 and D40?


D60 is based on the D40x(D80,D200) 10.2 MP engine and the D40 is based off the [D100,D70(s)] D50 at 6.1 MP(but dont let MP be the deciding factor). You can go and read the reviews at http://www.dpreview.com. The biggest issue for me would be the compatibility with non cpu lens. Here is a fairly exhaustive review
http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard ... c_id=13319 . I happen to have a D70s that I got used that I love and the price was hard to beat(400 for body and CF cards). Check out the KSL classifieds for great deals. It is a great portrait and landscape body and sometimes I can really get some gems from sports and wildlife. Not to shabby.


----------



## waltny (Sep 8, 2007)

Also here are some suggestions I would have for a budding Nikon shooter(yes I love primes and I can change lens with the best of them now, most of these lens will fit in a shirt pocket or even a fishing vest pockets and yes I do this)

12-24mm f4 Tokina
30mm f1.4 Sigma
50mm f1.4 or 1.8(is only 114 on adorama!) Nikon
85mm f1.8 Nikon
105mm f2.8 macro nikon


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Careful, The D40 has no front command dial, There is no depth-of-field preview, no bracketing feature and no support for a large number of Nikon lenses. The last being a big deal to me.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=26558374

Here's a list of compatible lenses. I marked a few suggestions for fairly inexpensive one's that are compatible with the D40 for photographing wildlife.

AF-S VR DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED It's fairly inexpensive. 200mm is a _little_ short for most wildlife photography, but the VR is a very useful thing to have.

AF-S DX 55mm-200mm f/4-5.6G ED - I own this one, it sits in my closet. It is inexpensive and under 80mm or so, works great, but I don't love it.

AF-S VR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED - A little better than the one above, I think the only difference is the VR. Of the two, I would get this one.

AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G - I've owned this one and taken some decent photos with it. I don't think the extra money for the ED lens is worth, nor do I think the ED is compatible with a D40. Good value IMO.

That's pretty much it for inexpensive Nikon lenses that are compatible. Sigma and Tamron make a few that are compatible as well, but I'm not a big fan of their cheaper stuff.

How much are you looking at spending?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Good point waltny. If I had to choose between the D40, D40x, D60 and a used D70, I'd take the D70..

Again, it depends on how much you want to spend. These suggestions woul be for a set up under 1000 dollars or so (With a few lenses such as the 18-55mm and something like the 70-300G.


----------



## waltny (Sep 8, 2007)

The main problem with cheap glass and mid range is lack of speed, sharpness, and the inherent vinetting, distortion(bowing and pincusioning) CA, being soft wide open and flaring. 

For the cheap lens the 18-55 has a sweet spot in the f8-11 range and the other ones are almost unusable in my opinion once the lighting is less than optimal. 

Ive had it preached to me and Ill get on my soap box now and do it, invest in some good glass and go with a decent body. You could almost get a D70s body, nikon 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8 and the 18-55 kit lens and be rocking and rolling. Go to pictureline in SLC and rent some real high end glass( 300mm 2.8 ) for telephoto if you need it till you can afford such luxuries...


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Agreed. Buy good glass, bodies will come and go.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

*A few examples*

Nevermind!


----------

