What level of photographer are you? (beginner, novice, expert, pro)
Novice

How "deep" into settings do you want to be? ("just point-and-shoot", I want full control over aperature and gain, I don't know much yet and will probably be mostly automatic, but I want a camera that I can grow into.)
Mostly automatic

What is your primary subject. (Wildlife, landscapes, portrait, sports, underwater, astronomy etc..)
People (including candid shots of kids) and horseback riding competitions

What is your secondary use or subject.
Landscape, indoors

Will you be shooting mostly in low light?
Not really. Low light only on occasion

What is your budget?
$1000-1500, give or take

What cameras are you considering now and what attracted you to them?
No idea. (I have a Fuji4700 which I compared to an equivalent Canon at the time. I really liked the vibrant colors of the Fuji better so I have a good experience with Fuji but it doesn’t look like they have much in the SLR arena.)

Rank what features are most important to you? (Image quality, low light, fast shutter speed, wide angle, zoom, low noise, flash system, image stabilization, movie modes, ease of use. etc.
Image quality, Fast shutter speed, zoom, image stabilization, ease of use, probably in that order.

What type of camera would you prefer and why? (SLR, Point and Shoot, TeleZoom)
SLR. Taking photos of horses in competitions usually means they are not particularly close and they’re moving fast and generally you’re trying to capture a specific moment (cresting over a fence, moment of suspension etc…), hence the desire for fast speed and zoom capability.

Do you have size preference? (Very small, small/slim, does not matter)
Small as possible

Do you have lenses or accessories that are brand specific that you want to use?
Don’t know. I do have an old Nikon film camera with a 210mm zoom lens though I’m clueless if this is even something relevant.

Other comments:
This is a great site

Olympus E-410 twin lens kit: tiny (very tiny), versatile, and it comes with a good zoom range (between two lenses), and you can buy longer telephotos if you need them. Look it up and tell me what you reckon:

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_s...sp?product=1294

Thanks for the info, it looks pretty interesting! I've been poking around websites for hours and hours now looking up stats and reviews on various cameras. After all that I've been leaning towards the Nikon D80.

How do you think it compares?

Welcome to DCI!

For that sort of money, you're well into digital SLR territory. The good news is that modern DSLRs can automate just about any area of their operation, to the point where they can be made to basically be big point n' shoots.

The best way to approach this is probably to determine what you need in a lens, select a relevant lens from one of the manufacturers and then pick a camera body to fit that lens.

In order to figure out what sort of focal length lens you need, there are some gaps that really need to be filled in. I'll give some examples of focal length and state my assumptions, but it'll be up to you to determine whether they make sense.

The first assumption is on the size of the subject. I figure that a horse that's 15 hands and a rider might be a total of 8 feet or so tall on average, so I'll work with that.

The next assumption is how much of the frame should be filled with the subject. I usually assum that the frame will be three quarters filled in height, but you might come back and say otherwise. For any given subject, filling more of the frame requires a longer focal length, and filling less is an easy way to back off that requirement.

Finally, we need to know roughly how far you'll be from your subject. Obviously, the further you go from the subject, the more powerful the lens has to be as a result.

I have no idea how far away you're going to be, but given the above two assumptions I can list a bunch of distances and the required focal lengths (in 35mm terms):

50 feet away: 150mm focal length required
100 feet away: 300mm focal length required
150 feet away: 450mm focal length required
200 feet away: 600mm focal length required

Those numbers are calculated with the focal length calculator here:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...mera-lenses.htm

The good news is that most digital SLRs have a smaller frame than 35mm film, and thus have a "crop factor" that works in your favour for long distances. For example, Nikon digital SLRs have a crop factor of 1.5, meaning that for equivalent results to a 35mm frame, they require a focal length of 1.5 times less. The 150, 300, 450 and 600mm examples above then become 100, 200, 300 and 400mm as marked on the lens to reach those distances.

So, which lens do you need? Well, knowing what sort of focal length you need would help. Also, you didn't mention whether the competitions are held outdoors or inside in some sort of arena. The former is definitely more desirable as there's a lot more light available.

One other thing to think about is whether you're looking for an optically stabilised lens. With these, as the lens senses the camera moving during a shot, it moes one group within the lens to counteract things, which results in less blur due to shake. This can't cure all ills, but does have a very noticeable effect, especially at long focal lengths.

The downside is that these lenses always cost more.

Anyway, assuming you're outdoors, then there are a few fairly inexpensive options available. If you don't have to go any higher than 200mm, then Nikon has a new 55-200mm lens with their Vibration reduction feature, which is their name for optical image stabilisation. That runs for about $250 or so (using B&H prices as a benchmark) and is probably a better deal than any non-stabilised 200mm lens.

The other alternative for Nikon is their 18-200mm VR lens. This is stabilised and has good wide range. It's not cheap ($750 or more) and it's really difficult to find anywhere that has one in stock (good luck), but a lot of people buy this lens and then never take it off their camera.

At 300mm, there are a bunch of lenses from several manufacturers (including the third party guys like Sigma, Tamron, etc.) currently on the market.

There are several without any form of stabilisation, but they do vary widely in quality. For a cheapo lens in this range, I would probably go with Nikon's 70-300mm G partly because it's so cheap ($140 or so new) and partly because supposedly it's a fair bit better than Sigma's offering, and a whole load better than Canon's 75-300mm offerings. There are potential compatibility problems, though - more on that in a bit.

Given your budget, there are basically two 300mm stabilised lenses on the market that are available. Both Canon and Nikon make lenses in the 70-300mm range with each manufacturer's stabilisation systems:

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.ph...&productNr=2161
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...0&modelid=11922

The Canon has a little bit larger aperture at the 70mm end and costs $550 or so, whereas the Nikon is $480. Both are supposed to be good lenses and from what I've read, there's not much to choose between the two.

At that sort of price, there is also a Canon 70-200mm L series lens. It doesn't have image stabilisation but does have a constant f/4 aperture over its whole zoom range, which is a whole stop faster than the f/5.6 of the two 300mm lenses at their long end. I'm betting that the longer focal length plus image stabilisation is a better deal for that price, though.

Oh, and even if you determine that 200mm might be the maximum focal length you might need right now, it might be worth considering tthe extra cost of the 300mm lenses. They're a bit more flexible, but more importantly at 200mm, they're not at the limit of their range and will perform better than a cheap 200mm at its limit.

Assuming one of the latter 300mm lenses met your needs, you'd have about $1000 left (give or take) to spend on a body. If you went with Canon, then that would mean either an XT ($570 with the kit 18-55mm lens) or an XTi ($765). The resolution difference (8 vs. 10 MP) is completely irrelevant, but the added features on the XTi (bigger & better screen, sensor dust removal system, bigger image buffer, better autofocus system, various firmware tweaks for usability improvement) may well make it worthwhile.

In the Nikon camp, there are 3 contenders. The Nikon D40 ($525) is Nikon's current entry-level DSLR, and the D40X ($700) is its slightly revised bigger brother. The difference between these really isn't all that clear-cut - the D40X adds a 10 Megapixel sensor over the 6MP of the D40, and that's really about it. A lot of people questioned the point of the D40X - the resolution jump is more significant than the difference between the Canon XT/XTi, but a lot of people don't feel that $175 is really worth that.

The D40 and D40X both share another limitation where lenses are concerned. Nikon has traditionally driven the autofocus of some of their lenses with a motor in the camera body, which turns a screw in the lens to change the lens focus. This is completely missing in these cameras, so they are restricted to AF-S lenses (at least for autofocus) where the focusing motor is internal to the lens and is driven electrically.

Nikon reckons that most people buying the D40 would be newcomers to digital SLRs and wouldn't be interested in some of these lenses. The camera will still work with these non AF-S lenses, but they can only be manually focused.

The D40 will work just fine with the 70-300mm VR lens above. It's an AF-S lens and will be just fine on a D40. However, the non-VR 70-300mm G isn't an AF-S lens, so unless you want to only focus manually, that's not an option on the D40.

Don't get me wrong - the D40 is a really great little camera. So long as you understand the implcations of its lens compatibility and you don't mind that, it (or the D40X) might well be a great fit for your needs, especially as its low price point gives you that bit more to spend on a really good lens (which also costs a bit less than Canon's).

If these lenses are interesting to you, then short of manually focusing, the other option (when buying new) is the Nikon D80 ($1000). This is a slightly bigger camera that retains the focus motor and is compatible with all these lenses. It also has improvements in its autofocusing ability, image buffer size, usability and general build quality.

Personally, I just received a D80 last week, and I'm loving it. This is my first foray into digital SLRs, and so far I haven't been disappointed. It was the lens thing that did it for me - I wanted to get a cheap 50mm f/1.8 prime lens and didn't want to be stuck with manual focus. I felt that overall Nikon's lens selection was a better fit for my needs in the long term. At some point in the future, I'll either pick up the 70-300mm G or the VR version, but not right now.

Even my wife was impressed by the first few pics I took of my daughter, so it's already been worth it:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/691781...57600438245580/

It may not look like much, but that little 50mm lens is an absolute gem. It's completely divorced from your needs, but there you go.

Anyway, unless you really feel strongly about those Nikon AF lenses, I'd say you should stick with the D40 or the Canon XTi for now. Even with the larger $500 or so outlay for a long zoom, that still gives you some (or plenty in the case of the D40) cash left to either sit in your wallet or to pay for a bag, filters, mono/tripod, memory cards, etc.

Thanks for all the info… it’s really helpful!

I think I’m going to go with D80 as the more I read/hear about it, the more I like the sound of it. Admittedly it may be overkill for me in some ways but I’m hoping to keep this camera for a while and am thinking that taking photos will be a lot more rewarding than with our old Fuji 4700 which takes great photos as long as nothing is moving lol.

I’ve been speaking with a camera store about the lenses since I didn’t necessarily like what I was reading about the 18-55mm kit lens. They suggested the 18-135mm was better but I was worried that wouldn’t give me the range I need for the horses. As I described what I wanted to do with the camera, they suggested an 18-200mm lens and specifically suggested a compact one by Sigma to lower the cost a little. For my old 35mm film Nikon I had a 70-210mm lens which worked quite well at the horse shows so it sounds like the 18-200mm will meet my needs in that respect. And at the moment I like the idea of not worrying about changing lenses for different situations.

I think the limitation on which lenses work with the D40 turned me away from it even though in reality it may be a non-issue for me at my level and use requirements. But it did bring to mind a question about my old Nikon lenses. I’m wondering if my old Nikon lenses will actually work on the D80? I’ve gotten the impression that they might though I’m such a nOOb that I can’t gauge how desirable this option is lol. Of course it’s been years since I’ve used that old Nikon and I don’t even know where it is… probably some box somewhere from one move or another but hey, it’s worth digging up if those lenses will be potentially useful for me.

I can just see it now… I’ll begin to really see my mundane run of the mill photos for what they are and soon I’ll be here for advice on taking better photos!

If you can find those old lenses, dig 'em out, post their details and we'll take a peek. Take piccies if need be and post 'em. I know Pup will like the idea - he's very much into the old-lenses-on-a-new-body scene, and there's no reason why not if you already have 'em.

Depending on which lenses you have, some will probably work with the D80. Here's Nikon's compatibility chart:

http://support.nikontech.com/cgi-bi...li=&p_topview=1

There is still a 70-210mm available new on the market, but it's manual focus only. Still, with the 1.5 crop on a Nikon digital body, that still works out to be a respectable 315mm, which as you reckon might be close enough. Still, it's only worth about the same as the 70-300mm G new, so replacing it with something vaguely equivalent wouldn't break the bank.

How much are D80 in USA? Lovely camera - but I assumed that, by the time you'd bought a lens, you'd be over-budget...

My ideal Nikon set-up involves:

Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8

Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 (ED version with two rings)

Nikkor 50mm f1.8

The fast aperture's a real must if the horses are indoors and you can't use flash, but you can get away with cheaper lenses if they're outside.

Expensive lenses to be sure. Assuming a fair distance from the horses, I'd go start saving up for a second-hand 80-200mm (on a good day £400 here in UK, maybe cheaper elsewhere). Smeghead's 18-70mm is a bargain second-hand, and an excellent budget alternative to the 17-55mm.

I'm not a big fan of manual focus zooms on digital cameras - the primes are far better optically, and digital sensors are unforgiving with the less good quality glass that one tends to find in zooms...

If you wanted telephoto cheap, consider a manual focus 200mm or something similar.

I got my D80 body for $890. It's $1000 with the kit lens.

Those are about $100 down from what they cost as recently as March/April. I have a text file that I was using back then to add prices up on various options, and the body was $999 back then.

Well, I guess my budget wasn't a hard number and I'm sure I'm blowing it but that's typical for me. ; )

Amazingly I found my old camera. I have a Nikkor AF 70-210mm 1:4-5.6 D and a Nikkor AF 28-70mm 1:3.5-4.5 D (body was N4004S).

So based on this, it looks like I'm in luck with regard to my old lens.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/7021056.htm

So I guess the question is, do I gain anything with the Sigma lens (other than the convenience of not changing lenses I suppose)? I believe the Sigma is this one only for Nikon, Sigma - Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Aspherical (IF) Lens for Canon)

Thanks tons... and I'm glad I found this site!

Congratulations on having a useable zoom! Now, I'm not a big fan of all-in-one zooms like the Sigma/Nikon offerings. How about buying a camera, and seeing how get on with two lenses? If you really hate changing lenses, you could buy the Sigma or, alternatively, a second-hand Nikon D70 to stick the other lens on...