DSLR - Second hand vs New

[anna]

http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.p...highlight=DSLR

The topic has been discussed quite a bit in IB take a look at the above though as it covers the Nikon vs Cannon.

You will come down to the obvious. There isn´t much between them other then personal preference.

Get your hands on them both and see how they feel.

BTW Nikon owners are the best, but then so are curvey owners

Originally Posted by Lucas

I want to get a DSLR without spending lots of money so am looking into a Canon 20D on recommandations, cheap at £150-£200 on fleebay body only and will need another £150-£200 for a ok len, total £400ish. looking around at new DSLR, Nikon's D3000 inc lens for £380! with lots of function etc.

I know the Canon 20D is a older mid range camera but with well built metal body costing £1000 5 years ago, while the D3000 is a entry camera with lots plastic and the latest tech for only £380. Will the quaility of photos from both be similar? will I need all the techy functions on the D3000? Will I get better result from a older mid range camera? so if am to invest in a DSLR, which one should I go for?
cheers!

Originally Posted by boot

There's lots to check on a second hand DSLR, but if the shutter count is reasonably low, there's no hot/dead pixels and it looks like it's been well looked after, I'd probably go for second hand, having bought a 'lower in the range' new one and not had the reddies for better glass.

Shoot a white wall, and take a shot with the lens cap on. Study image for any pixels that might show up.

Might be worth checking online to see if there's a local online forum that you could buy from, where you can see the goods properly first, as opposed to ebay.

IMHO, and as boot said, fleabay might not be the best place to get a second (or third, or fourth...) hand DSLR from:
DSLRs have mechanical shutters with a limited life span (I'm not sure what's the rating on the 20D, but it should be something around the 50.000 - 100.000 cycle mark), and pixels being "free", people tend to shoot a lot more than they did with film where every frame came with a set price on it (film + processing + printing). It's not unusual to find used DSLRs with a shutter count in the high tens of thousands, and while shutters can be replaced, they're not cheap.
Dead pixels can be checked for using the method boot described. Just import your white wall images into your computer later, ramp up the contrast and any dead pixels should be obvious.
What's more, interchangeable lens cameras tend to accumulate dust in the sensor, and if you don't own it from new, you don't know how that problem has been taken care of. While proper sensor cleaning techniques won't damage it, not everyone knows how to do it and we all know a lot of people are all too happy to go gung-ho at things without proper knowledge...

OK, that's "the dangers of fleabay" out of the way, now for the cameras themselves.

As you said, the 20D is more than 5 years old. That's a lot in digital camera years, sensor and processing wise (hence the low price they're going for). The LCD is tiny by comparison with current cameras (even the D3000 "small" 2.5" screen). On the other hand, it's a prosumer camera with good build quality, magnesium body, etc, and that'll show when you pick one up. If nothing else, the weight will give that away. As another photo-geek con, it doesn't do spot metering. Depending on the technical level you're aiming for, this might be a problem with some stuff.

Now for the D3000. It's Nikons bottom of the line (with very decent build quality, but plastic nonetheless), and the truth is it's based on technology that's at least 3 years old now as it shares the sensor with the D200, D80, D40x and D60. It's a minor refresh to the very successful D60, just to try and get it up to speed with the current market trends (you can't have a 2 year-old model on sale as an entry-level camera, unless you slap a new badge on it...).
While I haven't shot a 20D so can't really talk about its image quality, I've shot a D60 extensively, and I wouldn't be surprised if it would be better than the 20D (with equivalent glass!). There's a reason why that sensor is still alive and kicking after all these years, and it's because it's a brilliant piece of engineering at low ISOs. Again, I don't have access to a 20D so I can't compare them in similar situations, this opinion is solely based on typical sensor evolution and my experience with the D60.
Another "hidden" advantage to the D3000s plastic build might be the low weight. Lugging a prosumer camera around all day gets tiring after a while...

Up to you now.

Okay, I'd also take a look at a new D5000 (brilliant little camera with the D90 sensor). Used D80's will be expensive and not really reliable on the metering front (very prone to blowing highlights in moderate contrast scenes), and while D70 and D70s were excellent cameras in their day, they'll be about the same age as the 20D.

Originally Posted by mr.anderson

I am no expert, but here's my 2p.

I have (also) just bought a D90, great, lots of functionality. My dad has a 4 year old D200 which is definitely superior.

Handling and build quality wise, yes. Image quality, no. Shot with similar glass, the D90 will blow it out of the water.

It's clearly apparent that the D200 is a pro camera, whilst the D90 is more of an enthusiast camera. Immediately perceptible as you pick it up and even more so with continued use.

Yup, that's the sad truth and the reason why I love my F100 so much (the D200 / D300 are based on the F100 body). They're built like tanks, weigh as much as one, and just feel amazing to shoot with. Slap a battery grip on them and you just don't want to put them down anymore.

EDIT: Not that I would ever reach the limits of my D90...

From the last stuff you published, you're well on your way.

Originally Posted by Spikenipple

Get a Micro four thirds camera like the Panasonic Lumix GF1. Performance of a DSLR, convenience of a compact!

And spend twice as much money.

Originally Posted by anna

Get your hands on them both and see how they feel.

BTW Nikon owners are the best, but then so are curvey owners

She's right, you know? On all accounts.

Theres a D80 for sale on the site i mentioned in my PM to you.

Rob.

[rictus01]

Nothing wrong with 20D at all, be more camera than you need for a fair while and don't worry about Megapixel count, I've had prints done at 47" without any problem, and how often are you going to do that

the main apparent difference between the 30D and 20D is indeed the rear screen size, but apart from that they are pretty similar to each other (yes I know there are other differences), they both have a wonderfully intuitive control whilst up at your eye saving dropping the camera away to change settings, which I like, and have the BP-511(A) battery, which I've had over 500 shots out of before now,the 20D's smaller screen will obviously extend this, things like white balance are set on a graduated scale rather then preset menu options although it does provide an example setup and an auto function as well, so plenty to learn if that's what you want, but also options to take decent shots straight away, but cost wise the 20D can be had as a bargain these days if you can find a nice one this was the top of the range cropped sensor cmaera of it's day a proper pro bit of kit and it shows, solidly built and as indestructible as a DSLR can be, my 30D has taken a fair few knocks that I'd have expected to have damaged it, but didn't.

But to be fair just about any DSLR will be good enough, the bit in front (Lens) and bit behind (operator) make more difference than the middle bit most of the time.

Here's some shots of my 20D and 30D (funnily enough the lens on the 30D is actually what was supplied on the 20D when it came out) for comparison.

Cheers Mark.

Originally Posted by rictus01

My backup for the last 3 years is/has been 20D, if this isn't imminent you're more than welcome to borrow it for a few days to have a play although it only currently carries a kit 18-55mm lens, but it should give you some idea on what it's like to use.

Cheers Mark.

Thanks Mark for the offer I had a good play with both the Canon 20D (a mate at office uses one for work) and Nikon D3000 (at Jessop while they do the hard sale talk ) I also tried the Canon 1000D but didn't like it much as it had a toy feel about it while costing £400! the 450D & 500D are nicer but costly.

I like the feel of the 20D in hand, more solid and a nice weight to it. The D3000 is light, compact and handy but don't feel as comfy to hold as grip is shorter (my little figer floats under the camera) but at £360 feels as good as the Canon 450D/500D.

I plan to take the DSLR on holiday/bike trips and don't want to worry about it too much if it gets knocked or bundled into a bag or getting scratch!

Based on everyone's input, I think I'll go for a mid range second hand.

The Canon 20D is in my price range (£200), i'm happy with the spec + the sturdy metal body with good sized grip. What's Nikon's equivalent, it is the D70-90s? I want to try them out too

I'm still confused by Canon and Nikon's lens system, are all Canon len's driven by the motor in camera body hence lens are a bit cheaper? while Nikons got both system

thanks!

I would go for the 20D. I'm Canon biased as I prefer the menu's but if it was a choice of say 450D or 20D, I'd still probably go for the 20D as its better built and has more functionality to hand rather than running through menu's all of the time. I can only echo the others to say get the cheaper camera and buy the better lens. Lenses make the bigger difference to photographs, not pixel counts. My 17-85mm lens is better than the 18-55 kit lens but in the long term I want some sharper glass. They have just released a 15-85mm which might just fit the bill...

Originally Posted by Lucas

The Canon 20D is in my price range (£200), i'm happy with the spec + the sturdy metal body with good sized grip. What's Nikon's equivalent, it is the D70-90s? I want to try them out too

Originally Posted by the guy that obviously writes so much his comments get lost in the haze

Used D80's will be expensive and not really reliable on the metering front (very prone to blowing highlights in moderate contrast scenes), and while D70 and D70s were excellent cameras in their day, they'll be about the same age as the 20D.

I'm still confused by Canon and Nikon's lens system, are all Canon len's driven by the motor in camera body hence lens are a bit cheaper? while Nikons got both system

Every Nikon DSLR will take every Nikon lens with AF written on it (and I guess every AI, but need to check compatibility charts).
Nikon DSLR without built-in motor (D40, D40x, D60, D3000 and D5000) will only auto-focus with AF-S lenses.
Nikon DSLRs with built-in motor (D70, D70s, D80, D90, D200, D300, D300s, D2x, D2xs, D3, D3s and D3x) will auto-focus with every AF lens (AF, AF-D and AF-S). I'm only naming the last 2 or 3 generations, as those are the ones you're more likely to find.

Dont know if this is right thread to ask this, sorry for any derail, is there any free websites that are good for photography tips etc.
Just bought a D90 and wanna learn techniques not just about settings of the camera, ie basic rules of picture taking depending on subject, conditions etc etc

Phil

right, thanks everyone for great info! I'll be going for a Canon 20D, now fishing for a good deal

Is the standard kit lens that comes with the camera any good? would I be better off getting a body only then look for a better matched lens? Can anyone recommend a good everyday lens 18-50? (for a budget £150 New/second hand)?

cheers

[jambo]

Hi Lucas,

The 20D will use any canon EF and EF-S lens. I use a canon 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS EF-S. This is a very nice bit of glass for general purpose shooting.

The trouble is this may well not fall in your budget, so I might recommend the 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS. The non-IS version that came with my 400d wasn't brilliant for what I used it for (though the images were perfectly good). I tend to end up shooting a lot in low light / inside, and found the IS a God send. My dad got a Canon 1000D with the 18-55 IS, and the IS version of the 18-55 is just better built, the IS works well and in the dpreview write up the optics and build were listed as being better than the non-IS version.

18-55 IS
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p5-5p6_is_c16/

17-85 IS
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p6_is_usm_c16/

Jambo