[Rabies]

Planning to do some travelling later on this year and looking to get some good photos along the way.  Having only ever owned compacts myself I have been considering buying an SLR for some time.  Have used mate's SLRs over the years, mainly Canon/Nikon and I have always preferred the feel of Nikon SLRs.  For a novice is it worth going for the D60 over the D40? The D40 is a right bargain at the moment in terms of price but the D60 gives me the option of progressing in the future.  Although having just read Paul B's thread on starter SLRs now I am not so sure!!  I don't see the point in buying a D40 if in a couple of years I want to buy additional lenses etc..

Any advice would be great. Cheers 

[cofe]

this thread is a good read for a start.

[Darren S]

If you are planning to do some travelling then for this I would not recommend getting any type of SLR. Its either over your shoulder saying "steal me, I'm a twat" or in the bag which means you will miss the shot, or cannot be bothered getting it out for a photo.

I would recommend that you looked at the canon G9/G10 or similar.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/

see http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/G9-Japan.shtml for a good review of the G9 versus an SLR and an M8 at that.

or a forum thread http://www.prophotohome.com/forum/compact-cameras-used-pros/74159-canon-g9-perfect-travel-camera.html

for the newer G10

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091702canon_g10.asp

[dave]

To be fair, if you're the kind of person who's not going to be bothered to get a camera out of a bag to take a photo then I would question the logic of buying a camera anyway.

For the money, and if you only intend to use AFS kit lenses (or don't mind manualy focussing older lenses) then the D40 is astounding value for money - same sensor as the D70, which despite being older will still smoke a G9 at higher ISOs simply by virtue of the extra real estate, not to mention the handling. A D40 is pretty much as small and handy as an SLR is going to get, and in a small lowepro zoom bag is pretty unobtrusive. however, yes you will feel more vulnerable to theives, even if the camera is only half the value of a G10. you can help the matter by using a non-branded strap, and covering up the nikon logo on the camera with gafertape, makes it a bit more low profile - or the ultimate theif deterent, photocopy a Canon logo and stick that on it. If you really want to keep yourself of theives radar, buy a 1970s film SLR.

[Rabies]

Cheers for the advice people.  Some good points to think about. 

[slackline]

Money is best invested in quality lenses over the body as the later will be superseeded far more rapidly than the former, which will basically last for ever.

Cutting down you choice of AF lenses if you go for a Nikon D40 or D60.

If you go with Nikon your first lense should be the 50mm f/1.8 its a brilliant bargain.

[Darren S]

To be fair, if you're the kind of person who's not going to be bothered to get a camera out of a bag to take a photo then I would question the logic of buying a camera anyway.

Sometimes the time taken to get the camera out of the bag means you have missed the shot.
It all depends on what you are going to use the photos for.
If you want a record of your travels, get a quality compact but one with some technical control .
If you want to have big, by big I mean A3+, prints then consider an SLR, but remember that the quality of the lense is the most important thing so budget accordingly.

And finally remember whatever you purchase you will have to carry it around with all your other bits and bobs whilst travelling.

[dave]

To be fair, if you're the kind of person who's not going to be bothered to get a camera out of a bag to take a photo then I would question the logic of buying a camera anyway.

Sometimes the time taken to get the camera out of the bag means you have missed the shot.

True. It all depends on if you're purely shooting as a reaction (in whihc case you'll almost certianly miss stuff, by deffinition) or anticipating oppurtunities. If you;re into street shooting style of travel photography youll want something faster than a digital compact and lower-key than an SLR anyway, like a rangefinder. Its also worth remembering that although you may lose time taking an SLR out, once its in your hand there is no lag or dely releasing the shutter, no delay waiting for the "live" LCD to show you whats happeneing, zooming is as fast as you can physically do it, and there's generally no need to have your head down looking into menus to change settings. once its out, and SLR is generally always faster to use.

[Darren S]

Yeah I agree that a SLR is overall the best tool for photography, thats why I have owned so many over the years.
As someone who is lucky enough to own a 5D with a selection of Canon 'L' lenses I know the difference between using an SLR and a compact.
I still miss the simplicity of my Olympus OM-4, wish I had never sold it, 2 front covers of OTE with that baby.

BUT for the OP and this goes for 99% of people travelling a quality compact will, I believe, be of more use and get more use.

In the end it is up to you yourself what you buy, just don't believe that an SLR will make you into the new Helmut Newton, even Rankin couldn't reproduce that.


A useful link for prices: http://camerapricebuster.co.uk/