One of the nice things about Canon is that there are a lot of lenses to choose from and it comes with good software. I assume that the Nikons also have that. I don’t know if Minolta, Pentax or Olympus have software, but I know people who like those brands.
I was going to recommend the Sony Alpha Series; the Alpha DSLR-A700 actually has image stabilization on the sensor, negating the need for special image compensating lenses. It also has a much more substantial camera body and brighter display than other cameras in its nominal price range, and tends to run cheaper than list owing to Sony’s efforts to edge in to the saturated DSLR market. The A100 was a nice camera when it came out, but the A700 is a vastly different animal, arguably at the lead of cameras with otherwise similar features.
Nikon definitely makes some nice cameras, but they also charge a premium for the marquee (though their efforts to capture the prosumer range have had them providing some of their best premium features on the cheaper models). I’ve never liked Canons; although the image quality may be marginally better than the Nikon according to objective metrics (and similar the Nikon compared to the Sony) they’ve always felt cheaper, and somehow lenses tend to be more expensive than comparable lenses for Nikon, Minolta, et cetera. At this point the practical image quality mid-range DSLRs rivals the smaller large format film cameras (although purists will always argue that the natural grain of film is superior to bits and bytes…whatever); I think the difference between this is really only noticeable to a photographer who is good enough to consider moving up to a better grade of camera, or at the extremes of ISO ranges where even high grade film would give poor results.
Someone mentioned Pentax, which is also a good buy for the money, but somewhat more limited in lens selection (although, again probably not a real issue for a amateur/prosumer user). Although the Canon and Nikon are good cameras, I think you’re paying a premium for the name over features.
Sony bought Konica-Minolta a few years ago and has rebranded their line as an attempt to move into real DSLRs. Sony has been producing some very nice high grade P&S cameras and sensors since photography went digital, and provides the best displays to other manufacturers, so it was a natural move for them.
I’d be somewhat leery of good deals on a “factory refurbished” camera of unknown provenance; the majority of the cost in a DSLR, unlike a film camera, is the sensor, and unless refurbishment includes replacing the sensor you can easily have gotten one that is scratched or coated. I’d rather buy used lenses than a used camera body/sensor.
Stranger
WARNING: Not sure what kind of DSLR you have already but I know the Nikon D5000 doesn’t have an internal AF drive motor (I know the Nikon D90 DOES, and have no idea about the others). So if you plan on using an existing lens with it, it either must have a motor in the lens, or manual focus only.
Nikon D5000 is what I’m probably going with though. Been looking myself for quite a while and this is a brand new release. First shipment left Amazon.com Monday and your local Best Buy may have them already. Kit is running about $850 with a Nikon 18-55mm lens from B&H, Adorama, and Amazon. Costco usually packs their DSLRs with a regular and telephoto lens. I’m hoping I can hold out until they get a D5000 package (for less than $1000).
I’ve looked at many of the Nikons and Canons. I actually haven’t seen many details about the the new Sony T1i. I think Adorama was selling Refurb Canon 40Ds with a nice kit lens for $850 too. I highly considered it as the guys on DPReview.com were saying they were very high quality factory refurbs. Heard NOTHING but good things about the Nikon D90 but the price tag is just about one bridge too far for me personally.
To be honest I really can’t give you an exact reason I’m going with the Nikon D5000, but after looking at lots of options I’ve just always found myself coming back to it.
Extremely little. I’ve heard many say that unless you regularly blow up prints or crop your pictures, anything above 6-8MP is probably unimportant, possibly even harmful as your cramming more pixels onto the same sized sensor which may cause noise (I think the guys on DPReview nearly lynched a guy for suggesting this though ;)).
My 300 does too! From the link I posted:
SteadyShot INSIDE™ In-Camera Image Stabilization
Because image stabilization is built into the DSLR-A300, every lens benefits by an advantage of from 2.5 to 3.5 exposure steps. This allows you to shoot effectively with minimum blur even in low light without flash – or adjust exposure control for smaller lens aperture, to increase depth of field and bring both foreground and background into sharp focus.
I used it this weekend to take pics of a family memorial - the only blurry pictures were taken by my very inebriated step sister 
It’s good, but not DRUNK WOMAN good! Ha
The Rebel XS or XSi seem like the done thing to do.
I looked at them, handled them at a retailer. I wouldn’t have been unhappy with either, I think. To echo some other sentiments in here…
I’ve owned Nikon before and loved it but wouldn’t buy one because they’re so expensive. I just knew that in the long run I’d want other lenses and wasn’t willing to go there.
Pentax seems built to take a beating. I really liked them and would have bought one before a Rebel.
I like the Sony flip out screen, think it could be useful, say, for ground level macro work. I have some Minolta MF lenses but I don’t think they’d really work with it. You have to stop down to meter, lose AF of course, etc. and the adapters can be expensive…might as well buy new glass.
In keeping with my latest philosophy that if it’s too big and clunky, I’ll probably leave it at home I went to the four thirds system: Olympus E520. It came with two lenses, giving me 28mm-300mm effectively, all for $550 (not a typo).
So far I really like it. It’s pretty compact. Detractors say the viewfinder only has three AF points and the optical viewfinder has a small image. I don’t care about the former and concur with the latter. But dayum, for $550 I’m pretty satisfied. Its Achilles heel, IMO, is that it struggles to AF in low light. There’s MF override of course.
Images taken with it over the last (almost) week are here (others before last Wed taken with PS cameras):
The Canon T1i is available for shipping on Amazon now. I’m ordering it tonight.
From the review on DCResource
All cameras do fine at ISO 100. It’s when you get to the higher ISO values that noise starts to show. Most current cameras can shoot up to ISO 3200 without showing any appreciable noise. The A100 is better then all P&S cameras, but lags behind the rest of the DSLRs, and as newer models are introduced it falls farther behind. One of the main reasons I’d buy a DSLR is low noise at high ISO, and that’s not a selling point of the A100.
As to why this is the case on Sonys versus the Nikon, I’m not sure. There’s a lot more to image quality then just the hardware, however.
You haven’t really mentioned a budget, leaning more to the capabilities instead.
Full disclosure: I’m a Nikon kind of guy.
I have a D-40, D-200, and D-300. The mid and uppper level bodies from Nikon and Canon are very similar to one another in capabilities, but I see less noise from my D-300, and it uses the same autofocus system on their $5,000 D3.
Also, I don’t like being limited to the AFS lenses (those with the focus motor in them); The D-200 and D-300 both have the focus drive motor in the body.
Another consideration is the kit lenses. They’re great individually, but consider the Nikon 18-200VR as a starter. Yes, the whole idea of the SLR is changeable lenses, but why do it if you don’t have to? I have many lenses for many situations, but this is a great walk-around lens and it’s money better spent on 1 lens rather than the 18-55 and 55-200.
My humble suggestion therefore, is a D-300 with an 18-200VRlens to start.
A little research should bring you down towards 2k, but this combo has a lot of value and will let you learn a great deal.
Sorry if I’ve blown your budget, but I’m looking at the big picture (hah) here.
Pro level body, no limitations, awesome Nikon lenses to grow in to.
YMMV
I have a Nikon D50. My only complaint is that it doesn’t shoot in B&W.
I bought it over the Canon equivalent because Costco offered a bundle that beat out everybody. It included a camera, a 28-80mm lens, a 70-300mm lens, an SD card, and a custom fitted camera case that stores everything very compactly – for $700.
Now they’re selling a D60 bundle with an 18-55 and 55-200mm lens, but no handy dandy carrying case, for $700. Through 5/2. That’s not a bad deal.
No DSLR shoots in B&W.
The sensor is a matrix of RGB photosites. The data coming from it is inherently Color. You are much better off using Photoshop to convert this RGB data to B&W - you can choose the conversion method you prefer, and even do some sophisticated processing, like creating Duo, Tri, or Quad-tones.
If cost is a big issue, you should know that Amazon has a smoking deal on a Nikon D40 – it’s only $430. It’s the kit, so it includes the 18-55mm lens. I got it last week – I upgraded from a point-and-shoot, so I can take non-blurry photos of my toddler.
Here’s a helpful opinion of the D40.
Acc to this article, others such as the Olympus E-330 and Canon 350D do.
And according to this article the D90 not only has monochrome setting, but it has filter and toning effects built into the camera. (Scroll down about 5/8 of the way down to “Black and White”)
Eep! That’s not a camera, that’s a mortgage payment.
As it turns out, I ordered a D60 and the 18-55 and 55-200 VR lenses, plus an SD card and UV filters for both lenses for not much more than that 18-200 lens alone.
If nothing else, I have a friend who is a professional photographer who shoots Nikons, so there is a (probably awfully slim!) potential to borrow lenses. I’m guessing the next lens I buy will be a 50mm prime.
Now to patiently wait for the UPS truck to roll up…
The thing to look at in a refurb , is the warranty. Its possible that what your buying has been pre-purchased and then returned, thus they cant sell it as new, but dont want to repackage it and sell it as used. Second is trade ins that can be refurbed and will probably work well enough for the hobby shooter.
Its the warranty that matters in this case, how long do you get and what does it cover and what is the price relative to a new purchase. If the price ratio is closer to a new buy then whats a few more pennies for peace of mind.
Everyone else
One thing I noticed about the rebels ,was the weight. Those suckers are feather light compared to my 10d. Im not sure I would trust putting some of the more heavier lens on the rebel for fear that the mounting thread would crack or something like that , probably just paranoia on my part.
Declan
They may have a “mode” that simulates B&W, but the camera isn’t shooting in B&W. As I said, you are much better off using Photoshop.
With larger lenses, the lens becomes heavier than the camera body, so you carry the camera holding on to the lens, the tripod mount is on the lens, and it’s a question of where the lens can support the camera body. (And, of course, in normal use it can).
Oh man, am I having a **huge **wave of buyer’s remorse, and the camera hasn’t even arrived yet.
Now, I want a Canon XSi and a good lens such as their EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM beastie. I know that I can return the D60 when it arrives with no penalty other than the cost of shipping, so no harm there.
I’m thinking VERY strongly of ordering up the XSi with a kit lens now, just so I have something to shoot with, and then get that 24-105 in a couple weeks, on the assumption that it will be in Canon’s spring rebate. From what I understand, the Rebel line doesn’t get rebates - just the EOS pro line and some of the “L” lenses. That lens was in their winter rebate program, so I can only hope that it will be in the spring rebate.
I probably should have said earlier that I like to buy things once. I really hate buying a so-so thing and then realize that I ought to have spent a few more bucks and get the better thing in the first place.
GOD DAMN IT, DON’T SAY THAT! Every time I convince myself I’m going with the Nikon D5000 I keep telling myself, “Well that XSi has similar features and is a steal at Costco at the moment.” Then I convince myself to go with the Nikon, then I start thinking I get more bang for the buck with the XSi. Round and round I go, occasionally throwing in consideration for an older model (currently the old Nikon D200) to just prolong the agony. :smack: 
You don’t want a 24-105 as your everyday lens on an XSi. 24mm on a crop sensor body is not wide at all. Approximately a 38mm equivalent on a Canon body. Unless you’re getting one of the full frame bodies (Canon 5d, 5dMkII, 1Ds series, Nikon D3, D3x, or D700) 24mm is going to be very frustrating. There’s a reason why all the crop-format zooms start at 18mm (or 17 or 16).
If you’re going to get buyer’s remorse over the D60, do so because of it’s relatively simplistic AF features, or the lack of a DOF preview button, or something. Inability to mount a lens intended for use on a film camera isn’t terribly relevant. And Nikon is decidedly not lacking for quality mid-range zooms. The 18-105 VR is an extremely capable lens for it’s rather low price point, the 16-85 VR is the widest mid-range zoom around and have very nice optics, and the 18-200 VR is the original crop-format superzoom and still has better optics than most of the competition in its class.
I can see D700 buyers being jealous of the 24-105 IS, since Nikon’s 24-120 VR is reputedly kinda crappy, but I can’t even imagine wanting to mount such a lens on my D40.
+1
My walkaround lens on my Canon is a 17-55, which feels pretty wide, but not as long as I’d like. Or as wide as I like, so I also have a 10-22 which is just fine. I’m still saving up for that 70-200 F2.8, so I make do with my 75-300 F4-F5.6 IS, which is a goddamn telescope.