Digital SLR Advice?

[crumbum]

This is directed at any FOT who are into photography. I'm looking to finally buy a digital SLR and am having trouble understanding what features and equipment I really need.

I have a really basic understanding of traditional manual SLRs -- ISO, f-stop, all that stuff. I used to use an old Olympus film camera (and still occasionally do, although getting film developed is much more hassle than it used to be). I mainly used a 50mm lens but never really knew how that differed from other lenses and never much cared. I've been using point and shoots for a few years now and to be honest, while I know there's an across the board quality difference between, say, my iphone and a good SLR, the one feature I miss most is control over depth of field. I would like a flexible and relatively light camera that I can travel with. 

I'm finding myself very confused by salespeople and online reviews as I try to determine what I need and how much to spend.
So what's the best base level camera and lens(es) for a guy like me?


Update: I should have mentioned that I typically do your basic 'street photography' and shoot a lot of buildings. No great need for intense zooms or macro lenses.

[Mark in Helsinki]

You'd probably get a quicker answer from these people:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/landscape-cityscape/

[Andy]

If you stick with a major brand, they're all good. I have a Canon Rebel T1i that I like a lot, but I'm sure I would have been just as happy with a nikon or Sony.

[Trotskie]

There is a nice cheapish Ricoh out now that is point and shoot buy you have manual override for depth of field and focus.  Awesome view screen too.  No zoom.  Can't remember the model though, but you should be able to find it. 

I shot with it for a day, results were very good.

[SJK]

This is directed at any FOT who are into photography. I'm looking to finally buy a digital SLR and am having trouble understanding what features and equipment I really need.

I have a really basic understanding of traditional manual SLRs -- ISO, f-stop, all that stuff. I used to use an old Olympus film camera (and still occasionally do, although getting film developed is much more hassle than it used to be). I mainly used a 50mm lens but never really knew how that differed from other lenses and never much cared. I've been using point and shoots for a few years now and to be honest, while I know there's an across the board quality difference between, say, my iphone and a good SLR, the one feature I miss most is control over depth of field. I would like a flexible and relatively light camera that I can travel with. 

I'm finding myself very confused by salespeople and online reviews as I try to determine what I need and how much to spend.
So what's the best base level camera and lens(es) for a guy like me?


Update: I should have mentioned that I typically do your basic 'street photography' and shoot a lot of buildings. No great need for intense zooms or macro lenses.

Disclaimer, everything that follows is just my opinion and preference.
I like Canon cameras, I have a crappy film Rebel EOS from 1999 with a Sigma 17-35mm lens. The lens cost me twice as much as the camera body. The main reason I picked this lens, wide angle with minimal distortion. I like getting close to the subject, or rather being forced to get close to the subject to capture a moment. I was inspired by James Nachtwey. This photo in particular,

It seems to me he uses short lenses and gets close to take his pictures. He is a well known war photographer and if you are up for it, here is a trailer for a heart crushing documentary about his life and work,
War Photographer Trailer

If you have the spare cash, a full sensor DSLR would allow for maximum flexibility regarding depth of field. If your funds are limited, then a 2/3rds sensor would also be ok. Remember that your focal length will stay the same, just that the sensor won't be able to capture the whole field of view that the lens can see. Clear as mud, right? In bright sunlight, if you want to have a really shallow depth of field you can always put neutral density filters on what ever camera you are using, open the aperture all the way up. Bring a measuring tape in case you can't see the focus through the lens. You could also crank the shutter speed up forcing you to open the aperture, another cheat for shallow depth of field. There are pros and cons for these methods.

Camera suggestions.
Full sensor...
Canon 5D I'm just about to help myself to one of these...I'll be living in the cardboard box it will be delivered in for a few months. It'll be worth it. Below is a wonderful example of the 5D at work. The guy who did it had a fairly simple rig to help out with the motion during the time lapse capture...
Iceland, Eyjafjallajökull - May 1st and 2nd, 2010
Smaller sensors...
Canon 7D
Canon Rebel t2i
Canon Rebel xsi
I believe their Nikon equivalents would be equally as good. I've often heard that Nikon cameras offer sharper images. I shot some stuff for a friend using his Nikon D3...here, here, and here.

Some examples using film SLR with 17mm sigma lens..here, here, and here

Any questions feel free to PM me or post here.
Good luck.

[Big Plastic Head]

Considering what you are going to be using it for, Olympus and Samsung have a couple models out that are bridging that gap between point and shoot and DSLRs that are worth checking out.

Olympus EP-2
Panasonic DMC-GF1

They are nice and small that have interchangeable lenses and have better sensors than their point and shoot cousins. My big beef with them is that they only have digital viewfinders. Other than that, the images I have seen from the Olympus (Which my boss has) are very, very good.

The Canon G series (which I use daily) is also a good alternative. I like to travel pretty light and carrying around a bag of bulky DSLR gear all the time makes me shoot less often so it's a good choice for me.

If you do go big with the full on DSLRs, two things: 1) Go try it out. Nikon/Canon fan boys will talk till they are blue in the face about which is better but what it comes down to is what you feel has the most intuitive controls for you to use. And that will be subjective. 2) The camera body is only as good as the lens attached to it.

By the way, that's my brother-in-law rolling out the print on the wall (1:38) in the trailer for "War Photographer". He printed quite a bit of Nachtwey's gallery work around that time.

[SJK]

By the way, that's my brother-in-law rolling out the print on the wall (1:38) in the trailer for "War Photographer". He printed quite a bit of Nachtwey's gallery work around that time.

That is very cool! I sorta basically do a similar thing for a living, except I do it electronically with motion picture film. That scene in the movie (along with many others) has stuck with me all this time. A very moving documentary.

[Big Plastic Head]

By the way, that's my brother-in-law rolling out the print on the wall (1:38) in the trailer for "War Photographer". He printed quite a bit of Nachtwey's gallery work around that time.

That is very cool! I sorta basically do a similar thing for a living, except I do it electronically with motion picture film. That scene in the movie (along with many others) has stuck with me all this time. A very moving documentary.

Insider fact for that scene: Marc, (brother in law) rolls out the print on the wall. Nachtwey points out where he wants Marc to make changes in the print. Scene moves back to Marc in the darkroom making a new print. Then, Marc rolls out the new print to which Nachtwey says is much improved to which Marc agrees.

It is the same print rolled out both times. Marc and Nachtwey both knew this so it was all for the cameras.

Knowing this gives me a bit of delight in what is a serious effing film. It is a great documentary.

[johnintheuk]

Chances are you'll be perfectly happy with an entry-level DSLR. Unless you need the fancy features (high ISO, video, etc) then you should be fine with a Canon Rebel XS (aka 1000D) or something like that. The only issue I could see you having with the entry-level devices is most (all?) have a cropped sensor. It might not be a problem but it's something to look into before you make a purchase.

One thing you might want to consider is buying a pre-owned camera body and spending the bulk of your money on the lens(es). A good lens makes the world of difference, especially if you want to be able to play with depth of field.

Also, as BPH said, you could be well suited with a Micro Four Thirds system instead of a DSLR. I know a few good street photographers who have Panasonic's GF1 and I've never heard a bad word said against them.

[courtney]

(pssst! I'm selling my 3-year-old Canon Rebel xTi w/lens & accessories right now if anyone's interested!)