DSLR used choices...

[Aragorn]

I have been doing some research lately and have decided to step up (or sideways) from my Nikon point and shoot (L120) to a DSLR. Not yet decided but like the idea of using some of my non-auto focus legacy glass from my Pentax K1000 with a recent Pentax, probably an IST or K series (both around $150 to $250used.) Old 35mm lenses seem to work with new DSLR's but cancel out some features of the camera. They also have a tendency to change the magnification due to differences in the CMOS size to the old 35mm size.

My questions are these:
- Should I use the fact that I have a few good non-auto focus lenses as a factor in this equation of which brand I buy (most AF lenses cost anywhere from $50 to $1000's based on brand and specification)?
- Do non AF lenses work well for sports photography and landscapes in a DSLR or am i going to want a fast AF lens for sports?
- Is there another choice out there that will be a good starter DSLR (I have seen a few Canon and Nikon DSLR's in the same price range for the body only without lenses which can also use legacy lenses.)
- Should I just go ahead and buy a new Canon or Nikon and forget the Pentax.

Any suggestions or opinions on the subject are welcome. Tell me what you use and why you like it. TIA.

[GH85Carrera]

Unless you buy a full sensor spendy camera the lenses will all be "longer lenses" Often a factor of 60%. That is good for telephoto lenses but is sucks for wide angle.

So just multiply the focal length by 160% to get the effective focal length of 35mm film camera.

[onewhippedpuppy]

I just bought a Nikon D3000 with two lenses for $400 on Amazon.

Amazon.com: Nikon D3000 10.2 MP Digital SLR 6 Piece Bundle with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX & 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lenses: Camera & Photo

I'm a total newbie to the DSLR world but love the camera. In auto mode it takes better pictures than either of our digital point and shoot cameras, and is simple enough that even my technophobe wife likes it. Change the mode and you can tinker with settings to your heart's content, which is where I geek out. I can't imagine trying to go without AF, but I know some pros do it regularly. Here's my stupid DSLR newbie thread: DSLR Newbie - Tips & Tricks?

[Scott Douglas]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

I have been doing some research lately and have decided to step up (or sideways) from my Nikon point and shoot (L120) to a DSLR. Not yet decided but like the idea of using some of my non-auto focus legacy glass from my Pentax K1000 with a recent Pentax, probably an IST or K series (both around $150 to $250used.) Old 35mm lenses seem to work with new DSLR's but cancel out some features of the camera. They also have a tendency to change the magnification due to differences in the CMOS size to the old 35mm size.

My questions are these:
- Should I use the fact that I have a few good non-auto focus lenses as a factor in this equation of which brand I buy (most AF lenses cost anywhere from $50 to $1000's based on brand and specification)? Only if you really like the lenses.
- Do non AF lenses work well for sports photography and landscapes in a DSLR or am i going to want a fast AF lens for sports? How well could you focus them with your old camera shooting sports? It won't get any better with a DSLR.
- Is there another choice out there that will be a good starter DSLR (I have seen a few Canon and Nikon DSLR's in the same price range for the body only without lenses which can also use legacy lenses.) I started with a D80 Nikon. You should be able to find one in that price range, or even a D90.
- Should I just go ahead and buy a new Canon or Nikon and forget the Pentax. That depends on your budget I'd think.

Any suggestions or opinions on the subject are welcome. Tell me what you use and why you like it. TIA.

I use a Nikon D7000 w/18-200 zoom. I like it because it's fast enough for what I want to shoot and it FITS my hand like a glove so it's really easy to handle.

[Aragorn]

Originally Posted by Scott Douglas

I use a Nikon D7000 w/18-200 zoom. I like it because it's fast enough for what I want to shoot and it FITS my hand like a glove so it's really easy to handle.

One of the problems I have with my current point and shoot is it is so small. It always seems like it is about to slip out of may hands. I also have a tendency to touch the lcd screen alot with my thumb also. I like the ease of use of a point and shoot but just want something more (feel more involved in the shot like the 35mm days.)

[onewhippedpuppy]

My wife and I both prefer the larger form and zoom lens on the DSLR. It's just easier and more intuitive to use. The downside is that she can't just throw it in her purse.

[Rickysa]

Very happy w/ the Nikon D5100...saw some crazy pricing recently w/ lens...I'll try to find it

[onewhippedpuppy]

I noticed that my local Sam's Club has several Nikon and Canon DSLR + lens packages in the $500-$600 range. That might be worth checking into if you are a member.

[Scott Douglas]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

One of the problems I have with my current point and shoot is it is so small. It always seems like it is about to slip out of may hands. I also have a tendency to touch the lcd screen alot with my thumb also. I like the ease of use of a point and shoot but just want something more (feel more involved in the shot like the 35mm days.)

My first digital was [still have it] a Coolpix 995. Talk about having to get used to a smaller camera. It took a while to adjust but I finally did.
My advice is go handle some cameras at a store, see what 'fits' you best. I only had to hold a friends D80 at cars and coffee one time to know I NEEDED to get one.

[Aragorn]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

I noticed that my local Sam's Club has several Nikon and Canon DSLR + lens packages in the $500-$600 range. That might be worth checking into if you are a member.

I am a member... Might be worth checking out to see if they come with good glass.

It seems that the Nikon's require AF glass that has the motor built in the lens. I remember reading something about certain Nikon's not being able to use legacy lenses and some models do. I remember also reading that the older lenses give the best pictures.

[Z-man]

MY $0.42:

These days, Nikon and Cannon are the big hitters in the amateur DSLR photography world. (They also have a huge presence in the semi-pro and pro world as well).

Sony, Pentax and Olympus are still in the amateur DSLR market, but do command as much of that market. To me that means less market support and product availability in the future.

So - if you want to keep your Pentax lenses, you may wind up pigeon-holing yourself into less availability of accessories in the future. There still is a market for film-based SLR lenses, but not much. Check with your local camera store to see if they will purchase your old lenses for store credit.

I have a Nikon S4100 point and shoot as well as a recently purchased Nikon D3200 DSLR. I'm keeping my point and shoot for the convenience of having something small that I can whip out and take shots. Both are terrific cameras, IMHO.

If you want something small but with more versitility than a point and shoot, then sometihng like a Nikon 1 may meet your needs. (It's a glorified point and shoot with interchangable lenses). But at that price point, you can get a very nice new but older model DSLR as well.

Hope this helps,
-Z

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

I am a member... Might be worth checking out to see if they come with good glass.

It seems that the Nikon's require AF glass that has the motor built in the lens. I remember reading something about certain Nikon's not being able to use legacy lenses and some models do. I remember also reading that the older lenses give the best pictures.

Correct, you need a newer lens that has the AF motor. On the upside, the reviews that I read claimed that the AF is very fast compared to the camera motor driven lenses. I read a little bit about the older lenses giving better quality, but that seemed to be 100% opinion. I figure it's going to be a LONG time before I am no longer the limiting factor, so my lenses are just fine.

[kaisen]

Used last-year's mid-range Nikon/Canon DSLRs are bargains. A friend of mine just bought a year-or-so-old Canon T2i with 400 shutter clicks for $350 including the kit 18-35mm lens.

If you like the Pentax glass, just buy an adapter to fit your Canon or Nikon. They're not that expensive and since your glass is full-manual anyway, it's no loss.

As you can afford to buy Canon or Nikkor AF/IS glass, you'll eventually want to sell your old Pentax glass anyway.

[Aragorn]

After seeing some of the choices out there and checking prices, Nikon looks like the choice. I already know the brand and am comfortable with the camera menus. Canon in the Rebel line may also be a consideration.

Didn't know you could use different brand camera lenses on different cameras with only an adapter.

I really wanted to keep in the Pentax family but I am starting to see the light that it is a small niche market company and will probably not have as much support.

[Rickysa]

Aragorn, I just made the jump to digital after 40 years in Nikon 35mm and having amassed mucho glass along the way...can't use TTL metering w/ old lenses, so I just sucked it up and spent the money for a quality Nikkor AF (18-200mm) on the 5100 body.

I still paw through my old camera bag and lament not being able to "use" that stuff...but then I remember my 9th grade computer teacher (in 1977!...just teaching BASIC programming ) lamenting how he could now by a super fancy lacquered bamboo slide rule for nothing b/c Texas Inst. had just released the TI-55 pocket calculator...

progress

[kaisen]

Also, consider a 4/3 mirrorless like the Panasonic Lumix GH2......every bit as good at photos and WAY better at video than a Nikon cropped-sensor or Canon EOS/Rebel

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

My questions are these:

1 - Should I use the fact that I have a few good non-auto focus lenses as a factor in this equation of which brand I buy (most AF lenses cost anywhere from $50 to $1000's based on brand and specification)?

2 - Do non AF lenses work well for sports photography and landscapes in a DSLR or am i going to want a fast AF lens for sports?

3 - Is there another choice out there that will be a good starter DSLR (I have seen a few Canon and Nikon DSLR's in the same price range for the body only without lenses which can also use legacy lenses.)

4 - Should I just go ahead and buy a new Canon or Nikon and forget the Pentax.

1 - maybe; it is a cost issue - if you had $30,000 worth of Nikon glass for your old film cameras it would be an easy decision

- what year were your Pentax lenses made?

2 - AF will work better for sports; race cars, any action photography, even photo-journalism

3 - I am a long time Nikon guy (having switched from the Olympus OM system when the things crapped out on me after I had skied them pretty far into the wilderness for some work in the 1970s - never again). But I like the Canon pocket cameras over Nikon.

Nikon D3000 series is good and IIRC is their starter system

I like the Nikon D5000 series as it has a back LCD that tilts and hinges so you can put the body on the ground and see what you're looking at - I'd prefer a back that came all the way off and used WiFi to communicate with the body.

The newest (5200?) doesn't add much over the one before it, so buy a used body or refurbed body. A friend likes the D300 series but he is semi-pro and willing to spend a lot more on a body.

Nikon & Canon are pro systems and you can do almost anything with them - even rent really high-end lenses for your next helo based aerial shoot. Nikon is a true system - a 1959 lens will work on the latest (pro) body. Also, as you move to newer bodies over the years, the switches, knobs etc. tend to stay in the same place, so you waste less time relearning things. The key is to have the camera fully integrated into your hands and mind. Your liking the menu system, etc. is important.

4 - maybe - I'd do it.

[foxpaws]

I just got a Nikon D5100 at work - great camera - we need the video option here.

However - if you are willing to 'go rogue' I bought a Nikon D80 camera body with less than 2000 clicks for less than $200, added a couple of lens for less than $200 and have a great system. Professional quality - the shots are amazing, the stills are better than the new D5100 we just bought at work, and I didn't need video.

[LWJ]

Ok. Good thoughts above. My wife is in the canon camp. I have bought 4 used lenses and a 5d body on Craigslist. All have been great. Just picked up a 300mm f4 L on Saturday for $425.

My point? Bodies plummet in value. Lenses are where the cost is. Older well cared for lenses are fine.

Also, sensor SIZE is far more important for resolution than pixel count. Large high quality sensors give much better pictures. You will pay for this. This is why I bought the 5d.

Point and shoots are amazing today as well. What they lack in lens quality and sensor size have very sophisticated processing. Unless you are very talented, most point and shoots will yield better results than a DLSR. I am certain that would be true for me. I am not talented!

You might buy converter rings for the manual focus lenses that you want to keep. They will be fine for landscape. You absolutely need AF for moving targets.

Looking to the future? I believe the 4/3 format is most likely where the industry is headed. There is no reason for a mirror on a digital camera.

Good luck and have fun!

Larry

[slodave]

For those that say that large sensors are best are mistaken. It depends on what you are shooting. Landscapes - full sensor.
Birds - small sensor is better.