Musing over getting a new DSLR!

[uk_dave&gill]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

That is a nice looking package..

Interestingly, as a camera and lens only, I've just noticed that they are going for around £250, which means if I can sell my EOS350D for around £100 (which looks feasible!) then the upgrade might be a "mere" £100

The Nikon does look nice. It's got the flippy LCD screen, which I think is a must for us (low shots without bending, high shots without standing on a chair). Also, the screens these days are much bigger, which is a bonus. The D3200 doesn't have a touchscreen, which is a shame but not a deal breaker. However, need to be sure that you can actually use the screen for composing shots (ie, most of the time, use the viewfinder, but on occasion, use the screen). Is there a terminology for this?

[uk_dave&gill]

Originally Posted by clf

The d3200 is quite 'old' too, I am canon too. But don't be put off. How often will you be down on the ground, using the flip out screen? The flip out screen is very fast for what it is, and you won't get many better, however it is an age when compared to the viewfinder.

Not worried about older technology, so long as it works well and is a reasonable price!

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by uk_dave&gill

Interestingly, as a camera and lens only, I've just noticed that they are going for around £250, which means if I can sell my EOS350D for around £100 (which looks feasible!) then the upgrade might be a "mere" £100

The Nikon does look nice. It's got the flippy LCD screen, which I think is a must for us (low shots without bending, high shots without standing on a chair). Also, the screens these days are much bigger, which is a bonus. The D3200 doesn't have a touchscreen, which is a shame but not a deal breaker. However, need to be sure that you can actually use the screen for composing shots (ie, most of the time, use the viewfinder, but on occasion, use the screen). Is there a terminology for this?

I seem to remember Woof25 has a Nikon D3200. If you send him a pm I am sure he will be able to tell you how he finds it. Perhaps he might see your post or do you a deal

[coolcat]

If I remember rightly and Alan will certainly know, when your using the screen rather than the viewfinder on a Dslr it uses a different method for focusing and is much slower to lock onto the target.
This can make moving subjects difficult to capture.

I believe the mirror less cameras don't have this problem therefore if you intend to use the screen for most compositions a mirror less camera may be the way forward for your chosen style of photography.

Paul having just gone from a Dslr to mirror less I'm sure will be able to advise further as well

[Rocket]

I agree Jeff. My older Pentax DSLR uses different focus methods for through the viewfinder and the rear screen. (Phase detection and contrast detection)

My new Mirrorless uses both types of auto focus all the time.(when paired with native lenses)

Older mirrorless will most likely have one type of autofocus.

Older DSLR may well do better focusing in low light.

The DSLR and Mirrorless are geting closer together all the time in overall performance.

This area is a little hard to make general statements covering both systems and it is a must to look at each camera, as the performance of individual cameras can vary a lot in both systems.

I would Hazzard a guess that in the next couple of years both systems will be able to perform to a similar level and the main choice will be size/weight and viewfinder type.

[clf]

Jeff is correct. Although mirror less and DSLR, use similar 'live view' focussing methods. They are both slower that the full mirror system.

The live view relies more on contrast which is where low light and low contrast can slow things up. Imagine a black lab, in a room lit with a table lamp, tgat is the type of thing. Out doors it is not much of a problem except at night. Mirror less cameras have better development on this. But will still not out perform even your 350d low contrast situations.

I only mentioned it in the first place, to manage expectations. Shooting shiny cars is not much of an issue and you will likely not notice. But that was not what was mentioned in if op

I have a mirror less camera, as well as a couple of DSLR. (And another 10 or compacts, and a hundred or so film cameras) they all have their uses. But if shooting pets is he main use, seriously consider the DSLR over a mirror less for the speed and convenience.

Mirror less cameras have come on quite a lot, but for tracking (a running dog) it will never beat a DSLR at the moment.

If you go to test either, point the camera at two dark items, one slightly in front of the other so there is an edge to focus on. Fill the frame with the items. And see which one focuses first. Also if you do go to test them, try the Nikon first. It is 'back to front' just as a Canon is 'back to front' for a Nikon user. One of my most frustrating parts of my job, was demonstrating Nikon cameras lol.

Just before Jessops closed down (I did get reemployed when Peter Jones bought them over also) I won a Sony mirrorless NEX5 camera, widely regarded as one of the best at the time, but I sold it and bought a Samsung NX20, simply because I thought they were as good a camera but half the price. Plus it sat better in my hand, (which is also important) and it focused just as quickly as the Sony in real world situations.

[uk_dave&gill]

Lots of stuff to think about here!

Appreciating the ongoing advice gents!

[clf]

Originally Posted by uk_dave&gill

This bit... As 90% of what we take photos of is our dogs (!) a fast auto-focus is probably essential!

Do you know how fast the Nikon D3200 linked to above is by any chance? (or where I can find the stats! )

Remembered today that we used to have Nikons at work before I left (Medical photography) so I do know a bit about them

The lenses in that link, the black ones with the red rim, are converter lenses, and best thrown into the bin. Not only will they damage the Nikon lens because of the weight (I have seen a few damaged with them) they will soften the image.

The camera itself is pretty decent but the 700D would be superior. The sensor in the 700D is the same that was used on the 7D semi pro/enthusiats camera! In low light, at the time, it was regarded as the best sensor in the enthusiast range. The D90 would have been a better comparison to the 700D.

As far as technology goes, I referred to them as being 'old' more to make you aware of them being older models, and maybe better deals could be had. The technology is still very very good, even your 350D is still good today. (I preferred the 350D over the 400 and 450d cameras which superseded it, it was only the 500D which came after, that I was willing to forgive the build of the body because it had the 18MP sensor - which is in the 700D )

[coolcat]

My Canon 7D and grip maybe up for sale soon if anyone's interested!
Got the urge to go to a 1D mk4

[Rocket]

Anyone want a pentax KR

Lol