Which DSLR?

[NKrader]

Looking at getting a new dslr.

Narrowed it down to these

what you think and why?

ALSO.. I WILL NEVER BE SHOOTING VIDEO ON THIS CAMERA..

[duron]

with the above selection only D7000 stands out, a friend has it & it's one nice cam but video is so so
K-5 is also a nice cam.

[BeepBeep2]

D7000, no doubt IMO. Though, go ahead and read until the bottom of this post
The D90 is behind the D7000 in every aspect technically, I dont know why anyone would buy it unless you got a really cheap used price on it.

Both Canon's DIGIC 4 and Nikons Expeed 2 are neck and neck, but despite the D7000 being 2MP down on the 60D, it has about the same usable print resolution IMO, especially at higher ISO.
If you care about movie mode, the Nikon will let you autofocus...something the Canons do not.
Autofocus isn't perfect though, sometimes when tracking moving objects it will have to completely refocus itself.

Burst rates (If you care) between the 60D and D7000, the D7000 wins by a marginal 1.5 frames. About 6.5 to 5 frames.

If you can stand a few less AF points (this does matter a small bit, but you can tweak the position of the camera to help focus if handheld), a slower burst rate and a few less buttons, then the D5100 would be a substantial savings allowing you to buy better (and more) glass.

If you take the battery out at night, the ~600 shot range on the 50D or D5100 wont be a hinderance compared to the 1000 shot+ value of the other two cameras...I can shoot from 8AM to 8PM with my D5100 (albiet I've only had it 3 days :p) and still have a living battery enough to upload and edit on the PC. Of course it has the same sensor so as long as you pay attention to f stop, shutter speed and ISO you will come up with the same pictures.

D7000 also has a GPS unit for purchase, AFAIK Canon doesn't offer anything similar atm.


THAT SAID,
It's still up to you. All four cameras are great...the D90 is getting a bit dated though, a D5100 could easily replace it as long as you stuck to AF-S lenses.

NOW that said,
You'd be happy with any of those cameras, D90 included. What are you leaning towards?

[NKrader]

i also dont plan to shoot any video with it. having a dslr that shoots video kinda pisses me off.. if i wanted a video camera i would get a video camera.

im leaning toward 50D

[BeepBeep2]

i also dont plan to shoot any video with it. having a dslr that shoots video kinda pisses me off.. if i wanted a video camera i would get a video camera.

im leaning toward 50D

The video is convenient for people like me in rare situations like around the family on a trip or something...I'd rather prefer to snap pictures but people seem to be amazed by HD video.

...interesting. Not the video part, the fact that you are leaning toward the 50D. Unless its a used body I dont see any reason to buy it new...$1400 for 15MP and worse performance than two of the other cameras in the list doesnt make much sense.

I'd be happy with the D7000 or the D60, considering the D7000 has more "features" thats the road I'd go down. You just get more bang for your $.

[NKrader]

The video is convenient for people like me in rare situations like around the family on a trip or something...I'd rather prefer to snap pictures but people seem to be amazed by HD video.

...interesting. Not the video part, the fact that you are leaning toward the 50D. Unless its a used body I dont see any reason to buy it new...$1400 for 15MP and worse performance than two of the other cameras in the list doesnt make much sense.

I'd be happy with the D7000 or the D60, considering the D7000 has more "features" thats the road I'd go down. You just get more bang for your $.

right? it just seems so antichrist buying a dslr.. then getting stupid video with it.. i dont like video recording, only reason for it it online. youtube etc.. i want to shoot pictures lol..

then 60D perhaps.. im leaning toward canon as nikon as some bad rep going for them on customer service.. ive been a nikon guy for a while. just.. dont wana risk it.

[lkiller123]

Actually, go to a store and try them out. It is pretty important how the camera feels in your hand.

With that said, I would go for a used 50D and spend some money on the glass.

[NKrader]

Actually, go to a store and try them out. It is pretty important how the camera feels in your hand.

With that said, I would go for a used 50D and spend some money on the glass.

thats what i was thinkin. used 50D plus this little guy
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28mm-Wid...=1RWOLXTA6SLGO
with b&w filters

lookin at budget of around 1000$-1200$

[lkiller123]

You are going to use only that?

How about this instead of the 28mm?

[1ke]

That Sigma 30 is good but I've boycotted that company after the SD1 fiasco.

[masterg]

what was the SD1 fiasco? i actually just saw that camera a few hours ago and its specs say 46mp etc... i was like o-o

[lkiller123]

46/3 that is.

[BeepBeep2]

OT

46/3 that is.

I dunno, are there actual tests of this camera?

Foveon sensor does produce worse images than a true 46MP, however a test of the SD14 shows that the resulting ~4.6 MP image could be upscaled to ~12MP and retain most of the sharpness of a Bayer sensor:


I think the SD1 would be a totally usable ~32MP Bayer equivalent.

[Macadamia]

I voted D7000, but D5100/600D + great glass is the way to go. Don't consider the 60D imo- total cop-out on Canon's part.
Definitely get a ~20-24mm lens, whether it be zoom or not: that objective focal length is just natural and usable anywhere, probably your main lens.
Do get a tele range zoom, too: you might not need it as often, but you never know when it might be nifty.
Doesn't need to be a wide lens, just need to be stepped down (tripod is a MUST here), but you might grab some good scenery.

As for the SD1, it's the "second" D3x.
The latter is still way better balanced in terms of speed and handling, but Sigma's focusing on art-directed photography, outdoors or studio.
Needless to say if you're shooting the innards of your CPU case or your kids at a ball game, just pass this. In fact pass this unless you sell/commissioned your shots for a few thousand dollars each, and have been doing so for quite some time.

[Mescalamba]

Depends how much you have money.

Depends what quality you are after.

For similar price, I would get Canon 5D. Cause.. its full-frame and size matters.

[duron]

...BTW have you considered M43 or EVIL cameras?

[MaxxxRacer]

a thought on megapixels: they don't matter unless your photos are going in a magazine or a gallery. No one will ever see your full res shots other than you. Song long as you have 10+ megapixels you are set. 20+ megapixels are only useful for when you really need to crop a shot, but if you framed it correctly in the first place, only mild cropping should be necessary. For this reason the D3s is a much better pick for anyone except a studio photographer than is the D3x (not that they are cameras you are looking at, just saying)

[Kallenator]

Nikon:
A used D90, then the rest on nice glass. This camera is silly cheap nowadays and is just fine in just any technical aspect. Or if you want a bit more omph then the D300 is a nice upgrade.

Canon:
You could also look into a used Canon 5D mkI ("Cheap" Full Frame) or the 60D, maybe even the 40D. But not the 50D, you are going to hate the high and ugly ISO noise on that camera.