Korean Job Discussion Forums

[suadente]

I know I'll get more responses if I put this in the General Discussion room, but I think people reading here will give more specific information.

After years of wanting one, I am finally going to go D-SLR. The technology and price have finally come to a level that I can be happy with.

The big question is: Which company do I go with?

I'm thinking that since this is my first SLR and I'm still relatively a novice, I'm going to get a relatively low priced body for now and start building my collection of lenses. Perhaps down the road, I'll get a better body to go with my lenses.

I've been looking a lot at Canon, and they look good, but the lenses seem to be significantly more expensive than any of the others. I looked at Nikon, but are they really good, or are they just the fad in Korea? I've also read a lot of good things about Olympus, but it seems hard to get accessories here. I'm also attracted to the low prices of Pentax--why are they so cheap?

So, What do you think about SLR's? Which company is the best to go with? I'm going to buy it in a month or two.

This could most likely be the biggest decision in my life. Thank you for your help.

[oskinny1]

I am also a beginner and I went with the Nikon D40 which I got for 500,000 won from a seller in one of the subway shops in Busan. It is a great beginner camera because it is so cheap and comes with a decent lens and it is light. I read lots of good reviews on it and am quite happy with the purchase.

[fizban]

I agree. I also entered the DSLR world with a Nikon D40. The starter kit with the 18-55mm lens is a fantastic introduction to the D-SLR World, especially if you don't already have an investment in lens.

The major players in quality and build in the D-SLR World are Canon and Nikon. Canon is the bigger company. And comparing the two is a lot like comparing PCs and Macs.

Nikon is generally considered the better camera in terms of build material.

Canon is generally considered better in their optics. As in sometimes their lens/body construction isn't as nice but they never skimp on the quality and precision of how their glass is aligned.

The other company considered in the top 3 is Pentax. They are a smaller company but their K10D is also an excellent introduction to the DSLR world. Unlike Canon and Nikon, I don't believe they manufacture their own lenses but I could be wrong about that.

Companies like Samsung, Sony, etc may make decent DSLRs but most prosumers use Canon or Nikon.

Canon also has a larger selection of lens.

[lotuseater]

I agree, I would go with a Nikon or a Canon both are wonderful cameras, both have their ups and downs but both are a lot better than comparable cameras from other companies. Despite diehards on both sides arguing that their side is better the quality that comes out of either of these brands is going to be very similar. Nikon does tend to be a bit cheaper (price not quality) for what is offered on the camera. Nikon also has better compatibility with old lenses, you can slap just about any Nikon lens on any Nikon camera and it will work. Canon on the other hand went through a total redesign a while back so older lenses won't work on new digital camera. Not really a big deal if don't already have a stock of slr lenses hanging around.
Canon seems to lead the pack in terms of new technology and honestly I think their image quality is a little better. I personally use Canon and have been nothing short of happy with the durability or set up of the camera but when I do get the chance to use a Nikon it just feels a bit better in my hands. The cheapest Nikon feels like a good quality camera, the cheapest Canon feels a bit like a toy.
You are on to something with buying a less expensive camera and putting your money into good glass, just be aware that once you get into SLR buyers mindset you will be able to justify a lot of expense that you could not even dream of now. I used to drop my jaw at the thought of buying a $500 lens. Now $1500 seems about right for a good quality lens.
So finally to answer your question. Canon or Nikon both are fine. Don't get talked into buying the older Nikon D40 though unless the dealer offers one heck of a price. The D40x is a better camera and the dealers won't want to take a loss on the D40 stocks they have quite yet. And be aware that there are grey market Canons from Japan, the kiss series is from Japan and as far as I could make out has no true warranty here, it is however about $100 cheaper than the legal 350D/400D that is marketed in Korea.

[Atavistic]

Nikon a trend? Um, no. ^^

I think PCs and Macs are fundamentally a bit more different than Nikon vs Canon, but in terms of the fanaticism of their followers, about the same.

I bought a Nikon D80. I was deciding between the Nikon D80 and the Canon Canon EOS 400D/Digital Rebel/Kiss Digital X. I used this website ( the "buying guide/side by side" feature) to help compare the two.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp

They are damn, damn similar. For me it ultimately came down to ISO, Canon's lack of spot metering (they have partial but not spot), my collection of Nikon lenses (far, far away, it's true) and the FEEL.

I like the weight, size, and shape of Nikon, and it just plain feels better to me.

My advice is to try and borrow a few cameras for a couple days. See how they feel, what the menus are like, etc. Buying a camera is like buying a good pair of running shoes...very personal.

[idonojacs]

i.i.

[cbclark4]

Excellent post from idonojacs. (loud clapping noise)

Please for a dissertation on other camera products brands and such.

For instance the point and shooter may want to know which P&S would
you recommend for casual sightseeing or for the beginning hobbiest.

Are Canon and Nikon still tops in these areas.

Where does Kodak rank in all of this, what about FujiFilm or Panasonic?

I don't ask about Sony because they seem too proprietary with so many
of their other products, am I wrong not to consider Sony?

(the reason I post questions here is because
dpreview forums won't let me sign up using my hotmail account????)

[ttompatz]

For someone who is interested in migrating from the "point and shoot" world to the SLR / DSLR world the NIKON D40 / D40X are good starters.

The cost of the D40 kit (now about 400k in Korea) is comparable to a decent "point and shoot" camera. It gets you started without breaking the bank and with the automated features you can even dummy it down to an auto PaS.

You can get a range of affordable glass to go with it as you grow and learn.

It has some room to grow with you as as you gain knowledge and when you are ready (in a few years time) you can move up to the THEN CURRENT equivalent of today's Nikon D80 or the Cannon 400D (or better).

[idonojacs]

..i..

[ttompatz]

My point was NOT which takes better pics (which is more about the photographer and lighting) but how to begin the migration process from P&S to SLR / DSLR.

As with anything there is a learning curve and a price to be paid.
The D40 on full auto is nothing more than a P&S with changable glass.

It has the ability however to go beyond that as you improve your skills AND knowledge and give you a good base of knowledge at an affordable cost.

When you are ready you can move up or go back and you haven't broken the bank in the process.

The school of hard knocks is a good teacher but she can be bloody expensive sometime.

[Atavistic]

Yes, you can get good pictures with a crap camera.

Yes, you can get crap pictures with a good camera.

The key to me is this: Are you buying an SLR or DSLR because you think "it" will take better pictures or are you buying one because YOU want to be in control of your pictures?

I could never learn photography the way I wanted to on a point and shoot. I couldn't control anything on a point and shoot.

Then again, my FIRST camera was an SLR, so I guess I am biased.

[idonojacs]

.il..

[Atavistic]

[Atavistic]

[idonojacs]

..li.