|
Stepping up to the speed and flexibity of
an SLR becomes more irresistible with every passing month, as
manufacturers continue to fight for the entry-level buyer with improved
performance and lower prices. Starting at about $600, complete with
lens, you'll find several high-quality SLRs vying for your attention.
Don't get hung up on the number of megapixels when choosing between
cameras. You'd be hard pressed to find anything lower than 10
megapixels from a name-brand manufacturer at this point, and that's
more than enough for large prints and cropping out sections of a photo.
In our lab testing, it's clear that higher megapixel numbers and better
image sharpness often don't go together. Even camera price isn't really
a reliable indicator of resolution performance. In our in-depth
analysis, we go beyond the megapixel spec to uncover the sharpness,
color flaws and lens distortion found in test images shot under tightly
controlled conditions.
One of the primary reasons to choose an SLR over a point-and-shoot is the availability of interchangeable lenses. While Canon and Nikon
have the most extensive lens selections available, we don't expect most
consumers will fail to find lenses that suit their purposes from other
manufacturers. You do have to keep an eye on lens compatibility,
though, particularly if you're hoping to use lenses you already own.
Budget SLRs generally require lenses with built-in autofocus motors for
full compatibility. You'll find full details on what works and what
doesn't on each maker's web site, and in our reviews.
Even low-cost SLRs offer the four basic shooting modes: program mode,
aperture-priority, shutter-priority and full manual exposure. When it
comes to additional options, though, it's a decidedly mixed bag. The Nikon D3000,
for example, offers just six preset scene modes, useful for newcomers
who want to adjust their cameras for particular shooting situations
(portrait, landscape, macro, etc.) without making extensive manual
adjustments. The Pentax K2000, on the other hand, offers fifteen.
This points to a peculiarity of the budget SLR category. When you move
up to more sophisticated SLRs, they tend to offer nearly identical
feature sets, and differ mostly in performance. At the low end, there
are certainly performance differences, but there are also significant
feature variations from model to model, and they come up in
unpredictable ways. The Nikon D3000,
for example, may skimp on scene modes, but it offers a wide range of
in-camera editing tools that are both fun to use and practical, where
the Canon Rebel XS offers hardly anything when it comes to editing, but
delivers Live View mode (see below) which others at the price lack. It
pays to read through the reviews to figure out which compromises you're
willing to accept.
A feature found on some entry-level cameras and not others is Live
View, which lets you line up images using the color LCD screen instead
of peering through a viewfinder. Live View seems intriguing, but it
often disappoints due to slow autofocus speed. An SLR uses different
autofocus systems when shooting using the viewfinder and when using
Live View, and the viewfinder version is consistently faster. We do
like having Live View available when shooting stationary objects: a
product to be listed on eBay, for example. If you're planning to take
pictures at a soccer game, though, you're inevitably going to have your
eye to the viewfinder.
Surprisingly, it doesn't take much additional investment today to buy
an SLR that shoots both stills and video. Until 2008 you couldn't shoot
video at all with an SLR and, when it did arrive (on the Nikon D90),
the camera cost $1000 plus the price of a lens. The migration of video
(and high-def video at that) to inexpensive SLRs has been surprisingly
fast: today both Canon and Nikon offer SLRs that shoot stills plus 720p video for $800 including the lens, and Pentax has announced the video-enabled K-x for just $650.
At this price level, you're not going to get the same video quality you
would with a dedicated high-def camcorder. At the same time, shooting
video is all about having the right gear in hand at the right time, and
with a camera that does double duty, you've doubled the chances of
catching your friend doing something stupid.
|
The Canon Digital Rebel XSi is an update to last year's XTi that ups the resolution to 12.2 megapixels and adds a bigger 3-inch screen, an improved autofocus system, and optical image stabilization in the kit lens. It's also the first Digital Rebel to feature Live View mode, which provides a point-and-shoot-esque live view of the subject on the LCD screen before shooting. The updates Canon has made under the hood seem to be paying off: image quality is improved over the XTi, with great color and plenty of detail. For more on the $830 XSi, read the full review.that follows.
|
READ FULL ARTICLE
Added on: Jun 01, 2008
|
The Nikon D5000 is a spanking new DSLR that offers video recording capability and comes equipped with a 12.3-megapixel DX-format CMOS image sensor and a Nikon EXPEED image processor. The camera also features a 2.7-inch 230,000-dot screen that expands Live View autofocus to include Subject Tracking AF. Other features include; Scene Recognition System with Face Detection, an ISO range of ISO 200 to 3200 and the Nikon exclusive 3D Color Matrix Metering II.
[Via DCI ]
|
READ FULL ARTICLE
Added on: Apr 14, 2009
|
The Pentax K2000 delivers a lot of photographic power at a low $599.99 price including lens and external flash. It's a fine choice for those stepping up from point-and-shoot cameras to their first SLR, but there's also surprising customizability for aspiring photographers.
|
READ FULL ARTICLE
Added on: Apr 17, 2009
|
The Canon Rebel T1i is one of the first video-enabled SLRs on the market. It can shoot 15-megapixel images and record HD video at 20 frames per second. In our lab testing, it had good color accuracy but poor sharpness.
|
READ FULL ARTICLE
Added on: May 22, 2009
|
The $600 D3000 boasts a resolution to 10.2 megapixels, fast burst mode speed and an optically stabilized lens. But we found that the quality of the captured images was dissapointing, with poor sharpness and color.
|
READ FULL ARTICLE
Added on: Sep 30, 2009
|
|