Good DSLR camera for under 700$

[SaII]

My dad decided to get a new camera and wanted a DSLR for the rapid shooting and stuff.

but that's all we know about DSLR's

if you could, please recommend a camera that is more than 7 MP and has the rapid shooting feature.

thanks

[Jupiler]

Check out some guides and reviews at Dpreview, they're known for making excellent reviews and you'll find all the info you need regarding to cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/

[Grinch]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/

[SaII]

Check out some guides and reviews at Dpreview, they're known for making excellent reviews and you'll find all the info you need regarding to cameras.

http://www.dpreview.com/

oo, thanks

[Soulburner]

Is this the budget for the whole package or just the camera itself? Because you need to consider memory cards, batteries, charger, and the most expensive of all, lenses. You will not get the best results with the included lens on any SLR camera.

You can get a good DSLR for $700 but you will end up closer to $1000 all said and done.

I will also recommend www.dcresource.com.

[SaII]

wouldn't batteries and chargers come with the camera?

memory cards are cheap these days, so that's not included into the budget.

well lenses... i guess that should be in the budget...

I am right now eyeing

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/

cheapest one from from a trusty store is around 500$

I guess that leaves 200$ for lenses

[xpsentity]

Lenses are the most expensive part. A decent consumer grade lens will set you back from 200-600$.

350D is not bad at all for an entry level DSLR. I'd go, with that budget, a 350D or 400D(XTi). As far as lenses go, if you get the package with the "kit" lens, it's not TERRIBLE, just rather slow. Stopped down to F8, it's pretty sharp as well. If I were to recommend a walk-around, do it all lens, I'd go with the Sigma 17-70. It's an all around excellent lens, especially for the price.

My personal opinion is that Canon is the way to go. Not only for the bodies, which are quite good, but for the EF lens mount. There are SO many choices with the EF mount.

Oh, and I'd HIGHLY suggest buying from B&H Photo/Video. I've spent far too much money with them, and I've never had a problem. It's the highest recommended online camera store in the US. You won't be dissapointed

[Grinch]

my lens cost me $1400.00...my camera cost me $1100.00

[Soulburner]

wouldn't batteries and chargers come with the camera?

memory cards are cheap these days, so that's not included into the budget.

well lenses... i guess that should be in the budget...

I am right now eyeing

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/

cheapest one from from a trusty store is around 500$

I guess that leaves 200$ for lenses

Included batteries often leave something to be desired...and it is always a good idea to have backups. What will you do when your battery is dead? Your shooting day is over. You can add up to $100 just by getting an extra battery (proprietary) and a good SD card. My 4gb Transcend SD 150x cards only cost around $40 so I have two of them, and I use them both.

[SaII]

Included batteries often leave something to be desired...and it is always a good idea to have backups. What will you do when your battery is dead? Your shooting day is over. You can add up to $100 just by getting an extra battery (proprietary) and a good SD card. My 4gb Transcend SD 150x cards only cost around $40 so I have two of them, and I use them both.

I see O_o

[Sparky]

Lenses are the most expensive part. A decent consumer grade lens will set you back from 200-600$.

350D is not bad at all for an entry level DSLR. I'd go, with that budget, a 350D or 400D(XTi). As far as lenses go, if you get the package with the "kit" lens, it's not TERRIBLE, just rather slow. Stopped down to F8, it's pretty sharp as well. If I were to recommend a walk-around, do it all lens, I'd go with the Sigma 17-70. It's an all around excellent lens, especially for the price.

I myself wouldn't consider the 350D an entry level DSLR (I own one), maybe more entry to midrange. But if it is really technically an "entry level" then that just goes to show how much of a n00b I am with it then

Agreed on the lens, kit is OK but not stellar. Kind of like a stock heatsink that comes with a CPU I have a Sigma 28-105mm F/3.8-5.6, although the camera never goes below F/4 with it for some reason.

My personal opinion is that Canon is the way to go. Not only for the bodies, which are quite good, but for the EF lens mount. There are SO many choices with the EF mount.

Another canon fan I like them as well, as does my brother (really knows what he's doing with his DSLR! Has a good eye and knows his stuff).

Oh, and I'd HIGHLY suggest buying from B&H Photo/Video. I've spent far too much money with them, and I've never had a problem. It's the highest recommended online camera store in the US. You won't be dissapointed

Though you weren't directly recommending them to me, I'll keep them in mind for when I finally get around to getting a longer telephoto lens for my camera. Thanks

[SaII]

how much difference can you see from a good lens vs a stock lens?

I mean, if the difference is very little, than I would just skip the lens part right now and save that for later.

[Sparky]

Kit lens takes pics OK, the only real problem with it is the focal length is very short.

[xpsentity]

Kit lens takes pics OK, the only real problem with it is the focal length is very short.

Meh, it's nice and wide on the low end, and 50mm on a 1.6X crop sensor is long enough for a decent 'walkaround' lens.

That said, it's the kit lens. It's slow, the AF is slow and loud, and it's rather soft wide open. Even then, I've seen STELLAR photography with it. It's not so much the lens, though the gear of course does help, it's more the photographer.


Of course... who doesn't want nice gear eh?

[Grinch]

with a kit lens (18-55) you would have to stop it down to about f/8 to get some really good shots..

[Magnj]

Pentax K100d
Glass is more important than the body for the most part.
Buy a low-mid range body and buy great glass to back it up

[Grinch]

for me it was simple...I watch alot of sports...and I would always see BIG white lenses on the sidelines...only 1 brand makes those...canon.

[xpsentity]

for me it was simple...I watch alot of sports...and I would always see BIG white lenses on the sidelines...only 1 brand makes those...canon.

Funny, I always think that, but never really mention it when recommending cameras.

It is quite true though

[Magnj]

Oh and if you NEED rapid shooting...your gonna pay...entry level DSLR's won't shoot more than like 5 shots at 2-3 fps in RAW.

[Grinch]

eos 30d 5fps
my rebel xti 3fps

[Sparky]

My 350D will shoot a burst of 20 or so. The 300D doesn't shoot quite as fast and has a smaller buffer so it can't take as many in a burst.

[Ad1tya]

The Canon 300D/350D is a great choice!

Later on you can replace the Lens Kit too, and get even better shots .

[NWEng]

I'd go for the 350 over the 300. I had a 300 and it just didn't do it for me and ended up replacing it with a 20D. (Love it.)

[SaII]

thanks for all that information!

[Aerou]

would totally recommend Pentax K10D,
its fast, the new menu is great, has VR, antidust and is fast too, also nicely built, for the price best thing you can find,
I own a Nikon D200 myself, but I guess its out of your budget ...