calling all enablers: need camera suggestions

[Bambi]

So I've decided that I need to start saving for a SLR camera. I like my current camera but I can't add any lenses or external flashes and thought that I just might be ready to take the next step. I would like to figure out what I want and then start the saving plan :D. but it's a big scary world of SLR out there. I am not going to be a professional but want to be able to take good pictures. HOw do I figure out what I need and how much to spend. I am thinking of staying within the $1,000 range.

so......what do the wise and experienced photographers of this board suggest?

[Iguanasan]

You are going to get a ton of recommendations so I might as well start and you can make up your own mind after you get deluged with them all ;)

Most photography courses that you might sign up for and most tutorials that I've seen, books that I've browsed, all reference either Nikon or Canon so I recommend you go with one of those. I chose Canon. You can get the prosumer Canon T1i for $1099 at Futureshop, Future Shop: Cameras & Camcorders: Digital SLR Packages: Canon Rebel T1i 15.1MP DSLR With 18-55mm IS Lens & EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 II USM Lens Kit Package (http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=BDL10003546&catid=26315&logon=&langid=EN) which comes with 18-55mm and the 75-300mm USM. It's 15.1MP and I think a sweet deal.

You can get less expensive gear if you go with something like the Pentax K-x, What's New Hardware: Pentax Kx. (http://www.futureshop.ca/LearnMore/ProductReviews/en/Pentax_Kx.asp), which is a full DSLR but a little less expensive since it's not Canon or Nikon ;)

Good luck and happy shopping!

[hodaka]

I went through the same thing last year. I had my trusty Pentax ME Super and a bunch of lenses, but it was time to go digital. I could buy a Pentax and re-use my existing lenses (all manual, though), or go Nikon or Canon and re-do it all. I chose Nikon for the following reasons:
1) great quality
2) huge support base
3) tonnes of nice lenses and stuff available
4) I could buy one locally from an actual photography store, and did not have to go to Future-ripoff or any similar box shop.
I actually never even really considered a Canon, simply because Walmart sells them, which means I will not be able to get professional support and accessories here. (once Walmart starts selling stuff, no-one else can get it).
If you are looking to spend around $1000, it gets a little tricky. I chose to go with the D60/18-55 and have some $$ left over, but now I am starting to miss a few features available in the D90 and higher (no, video is not one of them, and not really concerned about the higher MP ratings, either.)

[casil403]

You also might want to check out some good review sites:
Camera Reviews | Steve's Digicams (http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/)
Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ (http://www.dpreview.com/)
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/dslr_buying_guide_01.htm
http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-buy-a-dslr-camera
Personally I love my Pentax 200D...Am going to upgrade next year to K7 as a grad present to myself!

[Fortytwo]

First of all: there are no bad DSLR's on the market. Whatever you pick is going to be a really decent camera. Brand doesn't matter. Really, I'll give a six-pack of premium beer to anyone who can tell by looking at a picture which brand of camera took it. There is no diffence in image quality. The lens you pick with it is so much more important to the image quality...

Given your budget I'd go and try one of these:
Canon 1000D (don't know what's it called over there, the small one).
Nikon D3000
Sony A330 / A230
Pentax K-x / K-m

Just try and feel them all. See which one feels right for you. It's all just a matter of personal taste, there is no wrong choise here. Which body has the best grip for you, which menu makes you feel at home. There are small technical difference (like, Sony has the best live view to my opinion), but in the end nobody can tell what you've bought by looking at prints. So make sure you like the camera, and everything will be fine.

But remember, every euro/dollar you spend on the body can't be spend on a lens. And the lens makes the image, it's much more important than the body. You could buy a kit with an 18-50mm lens. That's a piece of ****, to be honest. It's all plastic and the image quality is just bad. You're much better of buying a body only and picking a decent standard lens. And don't be fooled by badges. The lens doesn't need to be from the same brand as the body. Third party lensen can be really great for a fraction of the price you'd pay for a Canon/Nikon/Sony/Pentax. High quality standard lenses for nice prices are:
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
Tokina 16-50mm f2.8
Combine one of these with any of the bodies mentioned above and you're en route to really nice pictures!

[tirediron]

Some great advice, especially from 42. One thing no one has mentioned yet is used gear. I'm a huge fan of used gear. Not always so much bodies, though if you can find one lightly used by someone who is upgrading, grab it, but lenses, most definitely! I wouldn't be shooting with a bag full of gold-ring 2.8 zooms and fast primes if I had to buy it all at Nikon's regular retail prices!

[Fortytwo]

So true. You can pick up wonderfull used lenses at bargain price sometimes. But you really have to know what to look for. Not every lens will fit your body (edit: camerabody that is. LOL). Even if they're the same brand. For instants, Canon switched mounts a while back. All the EF lenses will fit, but older ones don't. Also all M42 lensen will need an adapter to fit. But that's all information you can google. Or ask at the forums... ;)

[kat]

My warning is to make sure the body is capable of doing what you want. I have the Nikon D40x and as it was a wonderful choice when I first started I've outgrown it in the way that it can't do what I need it to do.

For example..it doesn't have auto bracketing.

So make sure you get the can's and can't do's.

[JAS_Photo]

Go to a camera store and ask them to show you the cameras. Most camera stores are happy to let you hold them, try them. Most camera store employees love cameras, gadgets and photography so are quite willing to explain everything to you. Here in Calgary we have the Camera Store, that although very busy has a lot of staff and they get someone to you or at least acknowledge you immediately. They will spend the time needed for you to be comfortable with the item as well.

Depending on the store, London Drugs can be quite helpful as well. My London Drugs knows me very well. I bought my D300 from them. I also bought my Canon Pro 9500 printer from them as a floor model for a little more than half price. They had the best prices of anyone including on the net at the time. I visited the D300 a few times before purchase. :) Finally I told the salesman it was calling my name. He said no it's not. It's screaming your name. Lol.

Good shopping!

[scorpio_e]

It is a loaded question *L* So many options out there !!!
You want to get a camera that you are comfortable holding and has the options that you need. Used is certainly a way to go. I bought two used lenses and never had any issues with them. I actually had problems with the new one *LOL*
If you go Canon then the Xsi and Ti would be worth a look. The used Canon 40D are going REALLY cheap now !!!!

[hodaka]

My warning is to make sure the body is capable of doing what you want. I have the Nikon D40x and as it was a wonderful choice when I first started I've outgrown it in the way that it can't do what I need it to do.

For example..it doesn't have auto bracketing.

So make sure you get the can's and can't do's.

Looks like Kat and I are on the same page here ;)

[Bambi]

thanks guys, these are all great suggestions so far!! I know that the final decision is mine but you guys are definitely helping point me in the right direction!

:thankyou:

[Mad Aussie]

Looking through all that I don't really need to add anything. Most stuff is covered nicely.

I will confirm that all the top brands have good products so I agree that choosing by brand isn't the right way to go.

Being comfortable with the camera is important especially for women because of they tend to have smaller hands. I love my Canon 40D but some women find it a bit large to hold. And my daughter often out shoots me with my old 400D (Canon XT or similar) setup so it's not all about the camera.

You are liking HDR so auto bracketing of 3 frames is a must for you.

I'd say go narrow down your choices after visiting and holding a few cameras that fit your needs and then maybe ask again which we consider the better choice.

[Bambi]

Looking through all that I don't really need to add anything. Most stuff is covered nicely.

I will confirm that all the top brands have good products so I agree that choosing by brand isn't the right way to go.

Being comfortable with the camera is important especially for women because of they tend to have smaller hands. I love my Canon 40D but some women find it a bit large to hold. And my daughter often out shoots me with my old 400D (Canon XT or similar) setup so it's not all about the camera.

You are liking HDR so auto bracketing of 3 frames is a must for you.

I'd say go narrow down your choices after visiting and holding a few cameras that fit your needs and then maybe ask again which we consider the better choice.

very good advice. :thankyou:

[Greg_Nuspel]

One thing I love about my Nikon is the ability to use old lenses, I picked up a 55mm macro for $80.00 in mint condition. I'd love to find a 20mm for a good price.

[casil403]

I just wanted to also add Bambi that in some higher end camera stores, you can rent a camera for a day to try it out. The Camera Store here in Calgary allows for that and they let you apply your rental for 3 days w/in a 90 day period towards the purchase of a camera or other product.
Check around...there might be a store in your area that does something similar. :)

[Barefoot]

Since it’ll be your first, you won’t have to worry about getting something compatible with a lens you already own and that’s a big plus. Just do your homework and don’t rush into a purchase.

Image stabilization isn’t important when shooting from a tripod, but who shoots from a tripod 100% of the time? One of the choices you’ll be faced with is do you go with in-body or in-lens Image Stabilization. I chose in-lens IS (or VR in my case) and from what I’ve learned from others with in-body IS since then, I’m glad I did.

For what you’re looking to spend, I’d recommend the Nikon D5000. They say it’s real close to being a D90 in regards to its sensor and high ISO performance and that ain’t a bad thing. It lists most places for around $700 with the 18-55mm VR lens and that leaves you $300 to spend on a 55-200mm VR lens and a couple of 4gig SD cards. That’s a decent package for the denarii’s you say you can afford.

I cringe when someone says there’s no difference from one body to the next in any particular range of cameras and that the image quality is the same for all. In a group of cameras from four or five different manufactures (including Nikon and Canon) it might be difficult to tell which camera took which image when they are all shot at the lowest ISO the body shoots at, but when you get near the top of their ISO range and show me the worst image of the bunch in terms of noise, I bet I’d be able to tell you which two cameras didn’t take it. Now, if anyone wants to take that bet, I’m partial to Bass Ale. :)

[Mad Aussie]

Better performance at a higher ISO is the one and only reason I would look at upgrading my camera to the much, much dearer option. If that Nikon D5000 has all the usual, decent features of other cameras in it's price range but also has better high ISO performance then it sounds well worth looking at. And that's a Canon user talking.

[Vladimir Naumoff]

I don't really want to suggest anything. I will tell you how I would buy a camera. I usually go only for major brands because of the lenses and accessories that I can buy later for my camera. There are really 3 groups of photo cameras: expensive for enthusiasts, very expensive for enthusiasts and super expensive for pros. Give it or take I use my camera almost every day. I would say 8 out of 10 days. I sell my photos. This is not my main business but at list it buys me a lens or two a year. I don't shoot video with my DSLR. I do all types of photography including macro, photo, telephoto and super telephoto. My camera takes a lot of beating because I love to travel and it's on my neck all the time wile traveling. I use low light very often. I print my own pictures on my own printer. I use heavy lenses. I like it to be easy to use and my camera has to be very flexible for all sort of settings. I like ergonomic body so I can shoot with my right hand. I love to use viewer. I care about ISO a lot. I use flash at advanced level. I need a lot of power and sometimes I use external power source to avoid using a grip which adds pounds to a camera. Weddings for example. (Try to carry 5D with the grip for 10 hours with 24-70mm on it). I can go on and on what I like and what I need. Do a lot of reading. Based on that I would choose may be 2 cameras from major brand and then I will go and rent one for a weekend. At Henry's you can get a camera for a bout $45.00 per a weekend. Next weekend I will try the other one. Trying two cameras is very important because you will have something to compare against. If you buying your fist DSLR you can try different brads and here I like to make a statement when you pick your brand you may have to stay with it for a wile, because it would be very hard to convert to something else if you have all lenses and all accessories on hand. (Unless you are a Rockefeller). So that's how I would do my shopping. Don't listen to anyone who will say don't buy this buy this it's chipper and easy to use. Chip is always more expensive in the long run and if you want to learn how to use a camera may get one that you thing you need and start learning. Remember the upgrade process is much more expensive then buying good Right the way. It may take a bit more time to save but you will not regret when you will start using it.

[AcadieLibre]

I use a Canon and I looked, held it and saw the fit in my hand, had them put on a lens I would use on a regular basis to get a feel of weight and comfort, saw how the controls flow in m hands and how easy to to make adjustments. I looked at specs, lens quality and reputation. After lot of looking touching, playing I make my choice, No camera is right for everyone, read reviews, listen to what those here say and go touch them, play with them. Just my :twocents:

[Michaelaw]

When I first got into DSLR's I was on a budget big time. I ended up getting into Olympus starting with the E-500 and two kit lenses for around $900.00. Later I went with the E-510 for around the same price. My time spent with E system cameras is highly valued by me. In my opinion, the e-system cameras and Zuiko lenses are some of the best gear you'll ever own! The only downfall of their 4/3rds sensor is its ISO performance, you can (or could) only safely go up to around 1250 before the noise began. I really think they're worth a look. Of course this is biased info as I've never checked out other brands like Pentax, Sony etc but I've seen the results they produce, so you'd have a hard time going wrong with any of them. Having used Olympus over a three year period, I think it would be a shame to overlook the brand. :)

[Fortytwo]

High ISO performance seems to be the new buzzwords around. I don't get it. Really, I couldn't care less how my camera performs at ISO 6400. And I think very few photographers should care. It's the megapixelrace 2.0. Many people talk about high iso performance, and if you look at their portfolio, they take mostly landscapes or portraits etc.

I rarely take my camera off ISO 100. No matter which camera you take or how good it is, anything above ISO 200 is going to compromise image quality, even if it's just a tiny little bit. Upping the ISO is a last resort for everyone. It's much better to use a tripod, or (studio)flashes etc. The only people that really should care about high ISO, are sportsphotographers and journalist (and paparazzi), because they don't have any other option then upping the ISO. But if you're into landscapes, get a tripod. If you're into portraits, get a studioflash kit. You get te point. In my opinion, high iso performance is a selling point rather than a usefull feature. But I know a lot of people disagree with me... ;)

[Michaelaw]

While it may be the second megapixel race for the average joe, for me it's an important feature. I often work on projects which require me to shoot a lot of images in very large low light areas. I have no time to rig studio flashes to fill a seventeen thousand square foot space and one shoe mount wont cut it for obvious reasons. The ability to ramp the ISO to 5000 and capture the entire flavor of the scene with very little noise and then be able to throw that image up on a huge theater screen and have it hold together is a genuine gift to my work flow. If you try this with the Olympus E-3 you will lose! I don't really think you can just blanket high ISO performance across the board and say it's only useful for sports and paparazzi situations. The very reason I went there was because I worked with pros in genuinely difficult lighting situations where flash was not an option and at the end of the day, they had the image in the bag where I did not. I cannot afford image degradation when my work is 30' wide in a show situation, my clients would not accept it! If your images are degrading at 200 ISO, I'd begin to look for a better system, with all due respect:)

[Mad Aussie]

I don't agree there 42. High ISO performance is very handy for several applications. I shoot sports, so it's handy there as you mention. But I also shoot wildlife and birds and often in low light, so again it's handy. Even some portrait stuff where I don't want the perfect light covering the whole scene would be handy with a higher ISO. A tripod isn't always the answer if your model/subject can't/won't sit still enough.
Even flora can be a hassle if there's a breeze blowing but the ambient light is dark.
Often I'd rather have a higher ISO performance than have to use the flash.

I definitely would not compare high ISO performance to the Mega Pixel Myth.

[Fortytwo]

When it comes to sport, I agree MA. It's very usefull then. For wildlife I disagree. ISO 200 and a 2.8 lens is for 99% of the time more then enough. At least, that's my experience.

For large space's I don't have first hand experience and the pro's I know use camera's that won't go higher than ISO 400 and they rarely take it over ISO50. Flash is a must then, so is a very heavy tripod.

But I was actually talking about the average joe. This is a topic about "beginner DSLR's". I can understand it's an important topic amongs pro body's, but for camera's like the Canon 1000D or the Nikon D3000 it's not an issue in my opinion. Manufactures are trying to make it sound important, but in that class of camera it isn't. At least that's what I think of it...

I knew I was getting into something here. ;) Now offcourse everybody is free to disagree with me. I'm not the prophet of photography by a very long shot. And I could be very wrong here. But discussions like these can be very enlightning. For me as well...

[Mad Aussie]

We don't all have f2.8 capabilities on all our lenses we use.

And knowing the type of stuff Bambi is shooting, I can see that a higher ISO performance could be helpful at times IF a camera has all the other features she needs as well.

True that with the prosumer class of camera with the smaller sensors it's less important than the fullframe gear. But I'd still choose a camera with that advantage if I could because I know it would be helpful to me for the reasons I mention above.

[tirediron]

Dammit all... she needs to buy a Holga!!!

[Michaelaw]

So back in the days of film shooting you would have said ASA 100 would be the only film required? I shoot my fair share of wildlife also and on an overcast day, if you want a good sharp shot of a Chickadee posing in the underbrush (even if it's tired :) ) using a long lens, you are going to want to use a higher ISO with a modestly priced 70-300mm lens f4.5-5.6. A 2.8 will need a second mortgage on your house. The OP was not only about beginners DSLR but also within a budget. Obviously you see this differently than me and that's cool. I've recently noticed with my wildlife work and d700, my Fall/winter shooting day has been extended. With my Olympus I'd be heading back to the ranch a lot earlier due to lack of light.

[F8&Bthere]

getting a bit off track here but it is relevent to the OP in regards to ISO performance being a criteria to pay attention to (or not) in choosing her camera.

Just say if you could get an extra stop or more of shutter speed without adding noise, why wouldn't you want that ability? Any subject that moves, any windy day, any time you might have a hard time getting the depth of field you really want when shooting at wide apertures.... just a few examples.

I just finished reading the book Within The Frame by David Duchemin and he put some of his EXIF data with every one of his lovely images throughout the book, mostly shot with a 5D, many outdoor daylight shots of people in their environment. And I was amazed at how many were shot up around 400 - 800 ISO. I only bring this up as one example of a pro photographer who we can probably assume can afford all the tripods and flashes he could desire, and probably uses those tools at times, but I bet the ISO performance is crucial to him anyway.

And for the average joe the ISO performance of a camera may be even more important since they often blow their wad on a camera and a couple lenses and may take quite some time to save up for things like flashes and tripods. Not to mention that lugging around all that stuff all the time sucks. And their affordable first lense choices aren't usually the fastest either. My guess is that without IS or VR lenses, shooting any moving subjects or any indoors stuff with camera stuck on ISO 100 or 200 would produce a lot of blown shots for many a beginner or non-pro photographer.

[Mad Aussie]

I think the process is simple ... here's my take in a nutshell ...

1. Set the highest budget for a camera/kit you can afford/justify

2. Identify the better cameras/kits that fall into this budget

3. Identify which of those cameras/kits fit your criteria in terms of features you need

4. If one stands out and is among the top brands then that's your camera.

Hints:
a) Don't fooled by megapixels. Anything over 8 mp and certainly over 10 mp is plenty.
b) If 1 has better high ISO performance then that's an advantage.
c) More frames per sec can be an advantage shooting birds/animals/sports.
d) Auto Bracketing of at least 3 frames is important for HDR Merge work.
e) Having a camera that fits your hand well is an advantage but you will adapt to whatever you get.

[Bambi]

so lots of great advice and things to look for and I really appreciate it so
:thankyou:

now bear with me as I ask some real newbie type questions:
-how can I tell if it has bracketing?
-what is the ISO range I should look for given that I love to shoot landscapes and animal shots?
-so anything with a 10-12 megapixels should be fine? I was wondering if I should look higher.

Right now I am leaning towards the
Nikon D5000 Nikon Canada (http://nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?m=17500&disp=Specs)

Pentax K-x Future Shop: Cameras & Camcorders: Digital SLR: Pentax K-X 12.4MP Digital SLR Camera With 18 - 55 mm AL Lens Kit (http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10132033&catid=)

Canon Eos Rebel Future Shop: Cameras & Camcorders: Digital SLR: Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1MP Digital SLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit (http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10120034&catid=)

and/or
the Sony A500 Future Shop: Cameras & Camcorders: Digital SLR: Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1MP Digital SLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit (http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10120034&catid=)

but this is just some preliminary investigations...
then there's the saving..... although if I get a workshop in the new year that will help :fingerscr
Marko: I need that podcast! Or I need one of you to come and hold my hand. :)

[Mad Aussie]

Just looking through those specs on those cameras and the first thing I see is you are looking at all of them having between 12 - 15 mp ... so don't even consider mp to be part of your equation.

I see the Nikon D5000 mentions auto bracketing and I know the Rebel does. I'd say the others do also but I'd check with a sales person/expert first.

The Pentax says 'no' to colour space. I'm guessing you can't change that in camera which would bug me. I like to shoot on AdobeRGB seeing as it's so much bigger in terms of colours. Perhaps they just didn't have the info at hand for this review?

The Sony has great fps specs ... 5 frames per sec is impressive for this price range. The Nikon has 4 fps though so that's good too.

The Nikon and the Pentax both have 11 AF points over the 9 points for the others. That's nice also.

Several of them have movie function as well if that's of interest.

I don't know how good the expanded ISO performance is on any of these. That might take a lot more research to determine properly.

Something the Nikon has I love is the moveable LCD. They call it Vari-angle and I had it on an old camera of mine years ago and totally miss it! So handy for those low or high angle shots using the Live View.

I've been staring at the specs for these for the past 40 mins now and I'm biased to Canon because of what I use BUT I have to say the Nikon D5000 looks like a cut above the rest here.

If my daughter came to me and asked which to buy ... I'd have to tell her the Nikon. Which would be hard because we couldn't swap lenses then but it seems to me to be the best choice here.

[Bambi]

Thanks MA that is all very helpful. I would definitely not be buying from futureshop but getting advice from a camera seller. However FS is a good place to see the specs and get an idea as to price. I do like the idea of the movable lcd monitor on the back. My sony cybershot has that and I love it.

I guess it's now time to go and look at them in person.

[casil403]

Here's the reviews and specs from:Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ (http://www.dpreview.com/)

Pentax K-x digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Pentax/pentax_kx.asp)

Nikon D5000 digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Nikon/nikon_d5000.asp)

Sony Alpha DSLR-A500 digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dslra500.asp)

Canon EOS 500D digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos500d.asp)

Hope that helps!

[F8&Bthere]

Very solid advice from MA!

I consider myself to be somewhat neutral because I have Pentax and Nikon equipment, but secretly lust after a Canon 5D Mk II and a couple L lenses (if I could go back and start over). That, plus I've never really been brand loyal.

Some of the cameras have a movie mode, might be a cool bonus for some but there's a lot of debate over it's value.

I'm surprised to hear the Pentax Kx may not have any colour mode selection but I guess if you plan to shoot mostly RAW it may not be such a big deal. I've read a lot of great things about it's ISO performance, I and like the built-in shake reduction. I think Sony offers that too. Although it may not be quite as effective as the lens form of vibration control, it does work on every compatible lens and given Pentax's huge selection of older lenses that are fully compatible with their current bodies, that can save a lot of money on glass. The Kx is also quite a small camera which may appeal to some. Like MA and others here have said it's super important to hold them in your hand and try the controls.

Canon, Nikon and maybe others do have some very reasonably priced slower VR/IS lenses.

On the ISO thing, it's not so much the number range that you need to be concerned about. Say if one camera has the lowest setting of ISO 100 and the other is 200, I don't think that should become a decision criteria. And on the top end most of them go high enough to ISOs that are almost unusably noisy (unless you are lucky enough to afford a Nikon D3). You just need to read reviews and research online to see how each camera's performance is at higher ISOs like 800 and higher.

We've been bombarding you with feedback, maybe too much, hehe. But good luck in your decision!

[Barefoot]

While doing your homework, check out this (http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor/Camera-rankings) site.

I don’t want to keep beating a dead horse, but I think high iso performance should be one of the key deciding factors in the purchase of a new camera second only to dynamic range.

Bracketing? Bracketing is cool, but I had no trouble doing it manually with any of the other bodies I’ve had before getting the D90. In fact, it only brackets three frames and I typically bracket five –nine so I’m still doing it manually.

Megapixels? Anything ten and over will get the job done.

Frame Rate? I don’t know, whatdaya want, a machine gun? If you can shoot 3.5-4/sec. you’re gonna be alright.

Focus Points? I’d like to know what it would be like to have fifty or so of’em, but most people won’t have any trouble getting by on nine-eleven.

Upgrading from a body that struggled to produce usable image at iso 800 to one that shoots fairly clean at 3200 is like the difference between night and day. I got the three images below night before last in downtown Columbia during a little annual event known as Vista Lights walking around with on of my faster lens (60mm 2.8) shooting in what could only be described as low light conditions at f/3.2 and between 1/200 and 1/250 sec. at iso 3200. Straight from the camera (except to resize in CS3). I won’t ever use them for anything, but they’re clean enough for me.

I watched others trying to use tripods with a few thousand drunks walking all around them. That was kinda funny. I left mine in the truck.

http://i781.photobucket.com/albums/yy94/CircleOfConfussion/DSC_6554.jpg

http://i781.photobucket.com/albums/yy94/CircleOfConfussion/DSC_6560.jpg

http://i781.photobucket.com/albums/yy94/CircleOfConfussion/DSC_6578.jpg

[Michaelaw]

Frame Rate? I don’t know, whatdaya want, a machine gun? If you can shoot 3.5-4/sec. you’re gonna be alright.

[/IMG]
LMFAO....Dman that's funny :D:D:D:D

[Mad Aussie]

I'm going to agree on most points here BF but I am going to debate just a couple because my experience is different. That's not a 'hey I'm more experienced' statement either ... I'm probably not more experienced ... but I do have different experiences :)



Bracketing? Bracketing is cool, but I had no trouble doing it manually with any of the other bodies I’ve had before getting the D90. In fact, it only brackets three frames and I typically bracket five –nine so I’m still doing it manually.
I think bracketing is important for HDR work. I do most of mine with 3 frames but do go to about 5 at times as well. The reason I like the bracketing is, on the Canon (hope other brands are the same), if I use the timer the camera takes the 3 frames in very quick succession. On a static scene this isn't important BUT, on a landscape with moving water or clouds it's vital or at least a handy advantage I think.



Frame Rate? I don’t know, whatdaya want, a machine gun? If you can shoot 3.5-4/sec. you’re gonna be alright.
I had 3 fps on the Canon 400D and for the most part that was plenty. Until I started shooting subjects like Kingfishers with Antz and his 6 fps Canon 40D. Shooting at the same time, the same subject, he often got better shots that I missed while my camera was 'breathing' between those 3 fps. I now have 40D's as well and love those 6 fps in situations where they are an advantage.
But as I said earlier ... 4 fps is not too shabby anyhow and good for this level of camera.


The rest of what you said I agreed on previously and do now :)

[Iguanasan]

Not sure what decision you may have made yet but I thought you might be interested to see this:

Cameras & Camcorders: Digital Cameras: Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP Digital SLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit | Best Buy Canada Web Store (http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0926INGFS10120034&logon=&langid=EN#)

[Bambi]

oh Iggy you are evil! :evil2::evil2:
This is definitely in the running. my next steps are to go to a store and hold them in my hands to see what they are like. I will be in NY next week and hope to find a camera store in Manhattan. Given that there's a Tack Shop there should be a camera store!

[JAS_Photo]

I think B&H has a little camera shop in Manhattan you might find interesting. :)

B&H Photo Video | Digital Cameras, Camcorders (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/) http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/Sparkle2/Smilies/smileybugeyes.gif

[casil403]

Oooooh :clap: I just got their catalogue this week.....sigh....so many toys.....so little $$$ :wall-an:

[Bambi]

I think B&H has a little camera shop in Manhattan you might find interesting. :)

B&H Photo Video | Digital Cameras, Camcorders (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/) http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/Sparkle2/Smilies/smileybugeyes.gif

that's just 4 blocks from my hotel!!!! I will journey on over there.

thanks Raiven!

[tirediron]

that's just 4 blocks from my hotel!!!! I will journey on over there.

... and she was never heard from again.

[Bambi]

... and she was never heard from again.

:laugh:

would you miss me?
:cry-an:

[Mad Aussie]

:laugh:

would you miss me?
:cry-an:
You're still here?? ;)

[Bambi]

You're still here?? ;)

:yell::
now my feelings are hurt
:cry-an:

I'm telling!

[Mad Aussie]

:yell::
now my feelings are hurt
:cry-an:

I'm telling!
"Marko!! Steve isn't acknowledging my presence!!" :rolleyes: You sound like my sister!! :headslap:

[Iguanasan]

Hahahahahaha... sheesh, you two should find a stage. I swear it's Abbot and Costello ;)

[Bambi]

Hahahahahaha... sheesh, you two should find a stage. I swear it's Abbot and Costello ;)

well he started it! :p

[Mad Aussie]

well he started it! :p
I did not! Besides ... She looked at me!! :mad: :)

[Greg_Nuspel]

I did not! Besides ... She looked at me!! :mad: :)

Would you two settle down, I don't want to have to turn this website around.

[Mad Aussie]

:) :) :)

[Bambi]

Would you two settle down, I don't want to have to turn this website around.

sorry Greg. I'll try to behave http://planetsmilies.net/angel-smiley-5100.gif (http://planetsmilies.net)

[Bambi]

I just wanted to give everyone a big :thankyou: for all the help they have been offering me on this purchase.

the one that I still have not made up my mind on yet :wall-an:

between this and the B&H store thread I am getting a lot of useful information.

it's just such a big decision..... :confused: so I want to make sure I've thought it all through.
still leaning towards the nikon......but the sony is nice...and then there's pentax, canon and olympus oh my!

although, Marko had a good point in his podcast on lenses, that the best place to spend good money is on lenses rather then the body.....

[F8&Bthere]

Yes, it's such a hard decision isn't it? At some point you just go with your gut and/or heart cuz the brain gets overloaded. Marko's point about the glass being the place to invest is a strong one, and since all the brands have strengths and maybe weaknesses, if you are serious about your photography long term and can see that passion leading you to accumulate a reasonable collection of lenses, then you might look more at the prices and selection of lenses in making your decision.

I've already made a case for Pentax in that regard, but their some of their new lenses have got quite expensive after some recent price hikes.

But FWIW if I was starting out again, from scratch, and if I wanted to stick with one of the big two brands (Canon, Nikon) for whatever reason, and if I was on a tight budget (under $1000, for example), I would probably go with a Canon digital Rebel and kit lens for now and then save for other quality lenses in the future. The reason I say this is that Canon L lenses are much more reasonably priced than Nikon's upper tier glass. And there is quite a nice variety. The top of the line Canon flash is also much more affordable than Nikons.

Remember, you always should budget for at least another $100 or so on top of your kit for memory and maybe even an extra battery. Plus you might need a bag, etc. It all adds up pretty quickly.

[Mad Aussie]

Marko's point about the glass being the place to invest is a strong one,

(under $1000, for example), I would probably go with a Canon digital Rebel and kit lens for now and then save for other lenses in the future. The reason I say this is that Canon L lenses are much more reasonably priced than Nikon's upper tier glass. And there is quite a nice variety. The top of the line Canon flash is also much more affordable than Nikons.

Remeber, you always should budget for another $100 or so on top of your kit for memory and maybe even an extra battery. Plus you might need a bag, etc. It all adds up pretty quickly.
Good points.

Bambi ... IF you know how long you are intending to keep this camera setup then that might influence your decision.

For instance, if you feel that this is a stepping stone, and in a couple of years you'll be looking at upgrading to better again then perhaps just getting the best kit you can for the money you can save is all you need to worry about. You can then totally change the setup in a couple of years and either sell this or keep it as a spare.
In this case, any of these options will serve you well in my opinion in this group. The Nikon has that better ISO advantage with the flip screen which I know you will use. However, the Pentax might still give you more options for still buying some cheap lenses to add to the arsenal during that time as others have mentioned.

However, if you feel that you will definitely keep this body you choose for many years and then gradually buy better lenses as years roll on, then you need to be sure of the body you are buying now.
In this case the Nikon D5000 is the most advanced I can see in this group. The downside, as F8 mentions is the price of some of the top lenses. But then I only buy Canon's L Series lenses when I have no other option for the features I want because I rarely see the difference in quality from their lesser range anyhow.
The Canon Rebels are just damn good all rounders. You wouldn't be unhappy with one.
I'm not partial to Sony but it's probably because I don't know a lot about them so the long term SLR brands like Canon, Nikon and Pentax, Olympus etc are more appealing to me.

Hope that helps to confuse :)

[JAS_Photo]

Not to mention the 100's of dollars in software! Ha! So what did you decide?

Here is a camera that no one even suggested and it is not truly a DSLR but it has had nothing but raves and when I replace my little Sony P&S will be what I want and that's the Panasonic Lumix. (http://www2.panasonic.com/consumer-electronics/shop/Cameras-Camcorders/Digital-Cameras/Lumix-Digital-Cameras/model.DMC-FX150K_11002_7000000000000005702)

They also have larger more DSLR like cameras as well except there is no mirror. (the reflex)

[Marko]

Just an FYI...this will be my next podcast and there's a chance I will record it today and release it tomorrow.

Thx - Marko

[Bambi]

Just an FYI...this will be my next podcast and there's a chance I will record it today and release it tomorrow.

Thx - Marko

:clap::clap::clap:
YAY! Thanks Marko! I can't wait to download it and listen.
I still really haven't made up my mind but am leaning heavily to the Nikon d5000.

Interestingly enough I just found out that I'm getting a nice raise at work and over a year's worth of back pay to catch up. So I might be able to get this camera in the next month or so :fingerscr:fingerscr

[Mad Aussie]

Interestingly enough I just found out that I'm getting a nice raise at work and over a year's worth of back pay to catch up. So I might be able to get this camera in the next month or so :fingerscr:fingerscr
http://www.mtbdirt.com.au/_themes/public/scripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/09moonwalk.gif http://www.mtbdirt.com.au/_themes/public/scripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/09photo.gif http://www.mtbdirt.com.au/_themes/public/scripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/09itsbeaut.gif

[Bambi]

Okay guys I am going out of my mind with this. I have it narrowed down to two. I think I've made up my mind and then, bang I have second thoughts. I swear that I am spending more time fretting on this one then I did over getting married. It's probably because I know I am buying into a system so once I make that leap then I am committed.

Here are the two:
Nikon d5000
NIKON D5000 W/18-55VR & 55-200VR (http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ItemsDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&departmentId=10404&categoryId=10429&itemID=262351)

Canon Rebel T1i
CANON REBEL T1I W/18-55 EF-S IS (http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ItemsDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&departmentId=10404&categoryId=10429&itemID=258003)

I will most likely be buying from Henry's because of what I heard about the customer service. :)

So the photos I want to take are landscape and animal shots. I would love to be able to get nice photos of birds and animals in motion but may not be possible in this price point. Or maybe it is with the right lens. :wall-an: I also want to play with HDR ('cause I think it's cool).

Canon lenses appear to be cheaper so that's a factor
Nikon has the lense stabilizer and Canon in the body. It may not make any difference in the pictures I take but I keep hearing diff't opinions. Much of the time I will be in the woods so either hand-held or put on something. I can't see me running through the woods with a tripod....(but may change my mind on that)
Canon has 15.1 mp, nikon 12.3. When I look online at direct comparisons, I can't really see a difference. But maybe I would once I printed out?

both weigh about the same and are similar in dimension. Nikon has the cool pop out lcd screen. I love that in my sony.

I care nothing about video.

my preference is to use li-on rechargeable batteries.

UGH! Why is this so hard. and why am i fixate when the money's not even in the bank yet?

can someone help me? I think I need someone to go to the store with me and hold my hand :)

[Marko]

If you don't have any existing lenses the choice is harder.

Both cameras look good to me but you are right, add 15-20% or so for Nikon lenses. Given this fact alone I might go with Canon if I were you.

BUT..... 1,000 bucks is still a lot of money and you need to feel, handle each camera. We all have different sized hands and shoot in different ways.

So at this point....if the extra 15-20% on lenses won't kill you I'd try both cameras and likely buy the canon if it felt the same as the nikon. If the nikon felt better I'd buy the nikon.

Hope that helps - Marko

[Bambi]

thank Marko it does. I think I will head in to the camera store and bug a sales rep :)

[Mad Aussie]

Canon lenses appear to be cheaper so that's a factor
Nikon has the lense stabilizer and Canon in the body.
No it's not. Canon uses Lens stabilisers like Nikon so no decision to be made there.

Bambi ... simplify this for yourself.

Firstly if price is a factor now and will be later ... go the Canon because of the lenses. That's a simple decision.

Can you live without the movable screen? Yes? Go the Canon.

12 vs 15 mp ...don't even consider this an option unless you think you want to blow the photos up beyond about 20 x 30 inches or think your compositions are so poor you need to crop half the photo away!

Nikon ... slightly better on frames per sec for animals/sport ... but really not enough to influence the decision.

Low light performance ... apparently better on the Nikon ... but again ... not much.


In specs ... I think the Nikon is a slightly better camera here ... but when it comes down to it ... does it really produce better photos. I've seen lousy photos taken with Canon's best ... it's up to you to get that bit right.


My feeling is you would like that 20% saving on lenses in the future and the Rebel will definitely do all you need. Only on rare occasions would the Nikon actually be a real advantage. You'll happy with either camera.

[Greg_Nuspel]

One thing a friend of mine found with his D5000 is that his hand keeps hitting the control on the back of the camera. Mind you he has big hands.

[F8&Bthere]

More excellent level headed advice from Marko and MA!!!
The Canon lens selection/variety is good too. for example if i recall correctly in their L line of high end lenses you can choose a 70-200/2.8 or a 70-200/4
I would love Nikon to do that if it would bring their new version down closer to $1500ish- I would consider the f4
Canon also has some lenses (same or similar focal length ranges) in both stabilized and unstabilized versions.
Canon has at least three tilt shift lenses, Nikon only two, neither of which are very wide angle even on full frame. I'm slowly coming to learn that tilt shift lenses are not only for architecture. For example in the last Canadian outdoor photography mag a look at Darwin Wigget's must haves in his bag were all three of the Canon tilt shift lenses.
And so it goes...good variety.
I don't think Canon has a nicely matched trio without overlapping focal lengths like Nikon (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, all at 2.8) but no big deal. That trio costs upwards of $6000 anyways at today's Canadian street prices.

[casil403]

Just because you asked in another post, I use a PentaxK200D...I wouldn't count Pentax out either B. I think it's a great model of camera considering the price...and it has a weather resistant body which is great for me the last few weeks in the cold and snow......not a problem. :)
I just thought I would throw that in as well.. and again, why not try renting a few for a day or two to help you decide if possible? :)

[Bambi]

Right, thanks for the kick in the pants MA. You are correct, I will be happy with either one. I just need to go hold them (again) and make my mind up. I don't normally dither but....

I think I know what I'm going to do :lightbulb

[Michaelaw]

"I'll take door number one...No wait...Door number three...No Door number one!" :D

[Bambi]

"I'll take door number one...No wait...Door number three...No Door number one!" :D

:laugh::laugh:
It's funny because it's true :headslap:

[Andrew Boyd]

Canon or Nikon. Although there are lots of other good cameras out there, these are the two 800-lb gorillas out there with the professional systems to support whatever you end up wanting to do, photographically.
I have a post (http://thediscerningphotographer.com/2009/11/26/buying-your-first-digital-slr-camera/)[/URL] that looks into this initial purchase, you might want to check it out.
Good luck!
Andrew
[URL="http://thediscerningphotographer.com"]The Discerning Photographer (http://thediscerningphotographer.com)

[JAS_Photo]

Canon has at least three tilt shift lenses, Nikon only two, neither of which are very wide angle even on full frame. I'm slowly coming to learn that tilt shift lenses are not only for architecture. For example in the last Canadian outdoor photography mag a look at Darwin Wigget's must haves in his bag were all three of the Canon tilt shift lenses.
And so it goes...good variety.


Yep, Darwin uses all three tilt shift lenses and he uses them to make mini panoramas as well but tilt shift lenses are highly advanced lenses and Darwin makes a living using them.

Nikon - 5 year Canadian warranty on all lenses.

[F8&Bthere]

Just FYI, looks like Futureshop has a 2 day online boxing sale with the Nikon D5000 with kit lens at $699

[TimeLapseTulsa]

I've been looking for my first DSLR too, and the DPreview review of the Pentax K-x is absolutely glowing. Not just video, but also in-camera HDR processing (although probably a pretty basic version). And the statement that it's the best low-light performance this side of full frame. And on top of that, US$550 with the kit lens at Amazon. $520 if you sign up for an Amazon Visa card. :-)

On paper this appears to be the best deal, by a good margin. But, it's not a Canon or Nikon, and I just wonder if it makes more sense to stick with the big two.

[Mad Aussie]

Somewhere further back in the thread there were some very good arguments for going for the Pentax brand I think.

Frankly, I think that in the pro-sumer market that we are talking about here, its hard to buy something that won't perform really well if you know what you are doing.

[Fortytwo]

I've owned a Pentax as long as I know. I've never regretted not owning an Nikon or Canon. Not for a single moment. A Pentax does the job just as wel... ;)

[F8&Bthere]

I somehow found myself immersed in two systems, Pentax and Nikon, and in some ways that sucks. I want to focus my attention and finances on one system, yet I can't seem to find the way to back out of either brand. My point is that I have both and use both, and I've never really felt that anything was lacking with my Pentax kit in comparison to Nikon. As MA says the current crop of DSLRs, regardless of brand name, are all very capable.

Now, if you are wanting to do a lot of travelling light, street photography, or anything where a very compact kit would benefit you, the combination of the Pentax Kx and one of their DA Ltd "pancake" lenses would be an awesome combo.

Good luck in your decision!

[Bambi]

IMO, cameras are like dogs, cars or men: there's not one that's right, there's just the one (or two) that are right for you :)

[Mad Aussie]

IMO, cameras are like dogs, cars or men: there's not one that's right, there's just the one (or two) that are right for you :)
So ... two men huh Bambi? ;)

[Bambi]

So ... two men huh Bambi? ;)

:angel: :evil2:

[Wicked Dark]

Well, if you haven't made a decision yet, Bambi, I'm going to throw my 2 cents in.

Handling the camera is very important. Ergonomics, access to controls, weight, balance...all are important. If you can't physically manage the thing with ease, it really won't matter what it is on the inside. B&H is an IDEAL place to do so because they carry everything.

Second...a word on ISO and noise. A lot of it has to do with sensor size because large sensor are typically more forgiving of underexposure. Underexposure is a killer when it comes to noise. We all know about blown highlights and a digital camera's tendancy to overexpose, but most people who complain about noise (in the 4/3rds world anyway) are victims of underexposure. That's not to say it doesn't exist, but sensors have come a long way and unfortunately the Canikon crowd still persists in the idea that there is a VAST difference in modern cameras when proper exposures are made. Just not true. Yeah, I'm an Olympus user and so have to bang the drum a bit, but I really get cheesed off when people say you can't do "professional" work with anything but a Canikon. I'm not saying larger sensors aren't better at high ISO, but when viewing images at less than 100% it is far less promient or problematic than made out to be.

Olympus makes some of the finest glass in the world period. They also put superior components and features into cameras and lenses right down to the entry level models. They are innovators and engineers first, not marketers unfortunately, and so get lost in the hype.

Olympus has the only proven effective dust removal system for digital sensors.
They were the first to employ Live View in an SLR and new SLR innovations keep coming.
They have weathersealed components for way less money than others.
In body image stabilization works with system and manual legacy glass from several manufacturers depending on the adapter you get.
Bang for the buck you can't beat their system kits. The new E-600 and E-620 kits are amazing values and you'll LOVE that flip and swivel screen.

ok ok ok...I'll quit it. Sorry if I got a bit emotional.

[Marko]

This is Excellent info WD, and it will be appreciated by future visitors :highfive:

I believe Bambi did indeed buy a new DSLR...Canikon...

Thx - Marko

[Bambi]

This is Excellent info WD, and it will be appreciated by future visitors :highfive:

I believe Bambi did indeed buy a new DSLR...Canikon...

Thx - Marko

lol, yes I bought a nikon (the ta-dah thread has it listed). No offense was intended in the choice though :)

[Kawarthabob]

all are good comments as stated above. The advise I can give is Go to the store and try them all out. Get one that is comfortable to carry. Look at what is available in upgrades in your area. I choose canon due to a few main reasons. Price, available items that I can add (i.e. lenses etc) from where I live as i don't but stuff over the net. I like to buy locally to support my neighborhood. And features offered like autobracketing ( as mentioned above). I bought my gear brand new for about $700.00. And stores like Henry's offer endless add ons both new and used.

[david74656]

I have a Pentax k10d with 4 autofocus lenses and have had Pentax for 20+ years. I also have 3 Sony point and shoots and my camera phone.

Most of my "keeper" pictures have been ones of oppertunity.
Sigh the most liked picture was of an Olymic tourch hand off done on my phone :headslap:

So I think you need to start at the beginning and decide your motivations and audience maybe you don't want the bulk and the lens / accessory addiction that comes with SLR film or digital

So the camera you're going to have ready is the camera you'll be most happy with

[snazzytoes]

I have to say, I am another newbie about to buy and I am reading this thread with interest, because I already know which body I plan to buy. I have used the Canon Rebel, 40D and also my man's newer even better one (I don't even know which one, but it is Canon).

I got to use a 40D in a Canon workshop for 2 hours at Grand Canyon and really liked it because the settings were easy to navigate and I learned about bracketing. Because we have a Canon in the house, we are thinking lens-swapping will work better for us if I also get Canon. Although, if he was smart he's discourage me so I would leave his stuff alone!

The rebel has a smaller LCD screen and the 40D is more weatherproof, according to my resident expert. He is pushing me to get the 40D and I have to agree that I like the screen size better on it. I know Henry's sells used equipment with a 30-day lemon policy and you can get 3 years warranty where they will replace or repair your camera body anywhere in the world for just $75 extra.

Since I have body figured out, my question before I buy is which lens will be the best for a first buyer? I plan to shoot landscapes, in the woods with wildlife and waterfalls, and family shots. I need a good all purpose lens, but one that isn't too heavy. I found lugging a camera with grip and large lenses makes my arm hurt after a couple hours. I found the posts about ISO interesting.

[Mad Aussie]

Having one lens to cover everything is a very difficult ask. Landscape requires wider focal lengths in most cases and wildlife often requires longer focal lengths.

There are lenses out there that cover a very wide range of focal lengths but usually you will pay more because of the range they cover. Some say quality is compromised too much on these lenses as well although I haven't used one myself to see.

Canons top lens in the range you are asking for is the EF 28 - 300 f3.5-5.6L IS USM ... an amazing range but at a big price. Last I looked it was about AU$3500. This is a very heavy lens though. The 40D is heavy enough but add this to it and you are carrying some serious weight around.

There the EF-S 55-250 f4-5.6 IS lens which is much lighter but the 55mm will be restricting for the landscape, and the 250mm only just getting long enough for wildlife shooting.

There is also an EFS 18-200 f3.5-5.6 IS which might be a good choice. It doesn't have the USM (smooth, quick focusing via an UltraSonic Motor) but it'll do the job fine. No idea of the price of this though.

I have 40D's and apart from wishing they had the better ISO qualities of the latest cameras these days I love them. I bought my wife a EF 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM because she had the same requirements you have ... a do all lens that was light to carry.
She does well with landscape but does struggle with wildlife. A Teleconverter (Extender) could help here if you can find one 2nd hand as well but it will make the 128mm end of the lens a bit slow (will need good light) as the teleC adds a stop or two. So the lowest you may be able to go at 128mm will be around f8.

You may need to consider 2 lenses to cover what you want here.
I'd be looking at something in the 18mm - 55-ish range (even wider if you can afford it) and also something that goes out to 300mm.

Not sure what other brands like Tamron or Sigma offer as I tend to stick with Canon myself.

[Fortytwo]

Big zoom lenses (like a 18-200mm) are always a trade-off. You're trading in image quality and max aperture for a large zoom range. I've found that not many people who want to get serious with photography are satified with this in the long run. You're spending a lot of money on a very good body, but you'll never see it's true quality due to the lens.

It's safe to say I'm not a big fan of 'superzooms' on a DSLR. Changing lenses isn't hard to do, it's just a bit getting used to. With a little practice it's just a matter of seconds to do. But if you don't practice... ;)

But you don't need tons of lenses though. Considering what you want (landscapes etc), a combination of a standard lens with a wide angle sounds best I think.
If you've got the cash to spare, I'd go for a Sigma 10-20mm (wide angle) and a Canon 24-105mm L (standard). This gives you a nice zoom range with a nice wide angle and superb image quality. If the Canon is out of your price range (it is expensive), you might consider a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Less zoom range, but still loads of quality. You can add a telezoom to it later if you want, but this is a very nice basis to start with... :)

Good luck making you pick... :)

[Mad Aussie]

The 105mm isn't going to be anywhere near long enough for wildlife shots.

[Fortytwo]

Wildlife in the wood is very difficult and almost requires a very expensive lens. All the "cheap" telephoto lenses offer f5.6 or f6.3 as max aperture, which will almost guarantee hunting in low light conditions.
Looking for a second hand 300mm (f4.0 or f2.8) prime might be something affordable, but it's going to be a big investment. I'd wait with this until she's sure photography is her thing... ;)