The best bargain out there right now is the Pentax K20D. You can have them as low as $650. It has 14MP, full weather sealing (as have a number of their lenses), one of the best viewfinders etc. The reason for the low price is mostly the launch of the new Pentax K7, which has more or less the same sensor, but is smaller but even better built and faster. Pentax makes some of the best lenses you can find, but they are mostly less expensive than Canikon.

Apart from that, all the DSLRs out there are good, although some will fit better in your hand than others.

actually it was you who got me to get the K20D. and I am crazy for it since .
also, I am basically just using one lense . the FA 50mm 1.4 ... also the one you recommended.

You don't know how incredible this lens and camera is to me. SHooting predominantly using EXtended Dynamic ISO . And most of the stuff are not even post processed other than the basic RAW photoshopping.

Thanks again Epixx !

Oh, and if sales at Fotolia keep up (Knock on wood ... more Extended licenses)...I will get that wide angle prime for my Christmas exotic tour vacation 

i think the reality will probably be that you won't know what you want until you've shot a bit more.... probably most people go along the 'buy the most reasonably priced entry-level dslr' route and then upgrade when they know what their needs are.

good point. But it doesn't have to be entry level. Getting last year's model of a prosumer DSLR would not cost much nowadays. Each time a new model comes out, the previous model half in price. So I would say wiser to get last year, or the previous years' model. example is the Olympus E series. the E300 I paid over 1.5K in 2005 is now no more than 300 dollars .

hi guys,
need some advice, my sony cam powershot dsc 650 has a problem with lenses, a lot of green pixels
I'm thinking now of a canon 1000 D , any advice regarding this one ?

hi guys,
need some advice, my sony cam powershot dsc 650 has a problem with lenses, a lot of green pixels
I'm thinking now of a canon 1000 D , any advice regarding this one ?

Not sure what you mean by green pixels. Can you put a shot here to demonstrate? Are you sure it's not the sensor, rather than the lense? Did you contact Sony Support on this? Perharps there is already a firmware to correct this.

Can I get advice on what the best (for stock pics) beginers camera would be?
Like the best click for your buck?

Pocket camera / compact = Canon G10, 14mp shoots raw, small enough tat you can use it for everything if you decide stock isn't for you. ISO 80 and shoots RAW if you decide to go that route. Basically all the functions of a DSLR but you aren't viewing through the lens. Under $500 new
http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3775&review=canon+powershot+g10

G9 $350 used, which isn't too expensive?

Canon 40D used and like people said get the 50mm "nifty 50" for a great starter lens. Under $700 I'd prefer this to the 50D and it takes just as good pictures.

What you'll find with a DSLR as people have mentioned is the camera is just the start. Good lenses will cost as much as, or more than the camera. You can get a used 20D or 30D for under $300 and a 70-200 Non-IS f/4 which is as sharp as the f/2.8 and if you don't need IS, it's a really nice zoom range, under $500. Around $800 for lens and camera. f/4 is not really a slow lens, it's just not a "fast" lens. 

Nikon makes similar models of the DSLRs if that's your flavor of choice. Parts, repairs and used lenses for Canon or Nikon are easy to find.

While full frame is nice, you can always move up after you test the market and see what you find. 5D will cost over $1100 used, without a lens. That's not budget in anyone's book.

Most of all, after all this, what are you planning on shooting? The equipment needs to match your subject. The above is a generic response.

Any P&S will not give you the control and options that you need for shooting marketable stock, especially for a starter. Understanding and controlling lighting is more important than the brand and model of camera you use.

I don't know Sony or Panasonic so I left that out, They may very well be the answer.

As for the "crop" camera, there's a misconception that the same lens with the same focal distance to the same film plane, somehow magically becomes a longer lens. Hey guess what, if it's a 300mm, it's still a 300mm! The sensor is smaller and "Crops" the image. If there's an advantage to the crop sensor, it's that you are getting the image from the center of the lens and won't get aberrations or soft edges as much as a full frame image.

What changes is the field of view, which appears as if it was a longer lens. You do not get more lens from a crop camera than a full frame, you get the identical image! It's just that you lost 60% of the edges.

If that doesn't explain it, imagine: you take a picture of a basketball on your crop camera and the ball is 1cm wide on the sensor. You take a picture with the same lens, same distance, same everything, on a full frame camera and the ball is still 1 cm on the sensor.

Crop cameras do not bring you closer to anything, it's a visual perception because the field of view is narrow.

Good point racephoto. I never thought of it that way, but you are right.
Also re aberration and edge vignette , barrel, pincushion... comparing a full sensor to a crop sensor, this no doubt emphasizes the need for more superior lens for a full sensor camera, isn't it?

Physics and light transmission theory, but I would assume you are correct. 

The pixel density doesn't need to be as high with a full frame to get the resolution into a larger space. Same reason why a P&S will often be X megapixels and the pictures are nowhere as clear as an identical resolution APS C and from another planet compared to a full frame sensor. Pixel size and density are more important than just counting them.

I've posted the chart so many times, but I can't find it now. Just figure that a P&S camera is 1/6th the size of a crop sensor, and a full frame is 60% larger than an APS. When some of the new cameras came out, say going from a 10MP to a 12MP resolution, it was pointed out that this was a 17% increase in resolution. Not a whole lot of difference to be paying for. In the case of a full frame, you could have the original 5D at 12.7MP vs the new 50D at 14.1 and the 5D still produce images with less pixel density and should be a sharper image. (although the 50D has a newer sensor design, so the comparison is scientifically flawed) The 50D is roughly the same as a full frame with an 8.6MP sensor.

Real simple, the used 5D MkI @ $118 per pixel should still produce better images than a new 50D @ $100-$118 per pixel. 

Quote from: RacePhoto on July 07, 2009, 18:50

I've posted the chart so many times, but I can't find it now. Just figure that a P&S camera is 1/6th the size of a crop sensor, and a full frame is 60% larger than an APS. When some of the new cameras came out, say going from a 10MP to a 12MP resolution, it was pointed out that this was a 17% increase in resolution. Not a whole lot of difference to be paying for. In the case of a full frame, you could have the original 5D at 12.7MP vs the new 50D at 14.1 and the 5D still produce images with less pixel density and should be a sharper image. (although the 50D has a newer sensor design, so the comparison is scientifically flawed) The 50D is roughly the same as a full frame with an 8.6MP sensor.

your reasoning is correct until the very end, I suppose it's a typo and you wanted to say that 5D mark II is the same as a crop camera with 8.2mpix sensor. full frame camera spreads pixels over the larger area. crop factor is a linear measure of increase. Canon crop sensor is a 22.3 x 14.9 mm. Full frame camera is 24x36mm. You see, each size of full frame sensor is 1.6 times larger than with crop sensor making it's area 2.56 times greater. 5d mark II has 21mpix, so it's pixels are as big as in 21/2.56 = 8.2mpix crop camera, so apart from  vignetting, fuzzy corners and such things that plague the outer areas of lens coverage, highest resolution dslrs today are no more demanding when it comes to optics than a Canon 20D, because they have the same effective resolution (meaning same number of pixels on the same surface area equals same pixel size) ! "It only want's highest class glass" is actually a myth, what's good for a 20D is good for 5DMkII apart from phenomenon I've mentioned (vignetting etc etc).

 Cheers too, Aetherial.

if you are really low on money, you could just pick one secondhand DSLR that is functioning, and just put your all remaining money on lenses. That'd give you much more flexibility. I have Nikon d50, and well, it works beautifully even after four years, and I have no problem microstocking with it.

Quote from: neversaynever on July 10, 2009, 17:39

if you are really low on money, you could just pick one secondhand DSLR that is functioning, and just put your all remaining money on lenses. That'd give you much more flexibility. I have Nikon d50, and well, it works beautifully even after four years, and I have no problem microstocking with it.

Hear ! hear! That has to be the best advice anyone can give to someone starting out. Well spoken !

thanks. Also if you do it my way, you'd better stay away from pentax or sony or etcetera, because you will need lens compatibility and diversity, and canon&nikon duo are the ones with most lenses. by sacrificing autofocus, you may get brilliant pieces of shiny metal-not plastic- quality hardware. in that way, stay away from anything that could narrow down your options, such as d40, d60(which cannot use AF in anything other than lenses with autofocus motor built in to lens, which are pretty rare.) I would buy nikon if I had to buy second hand, because in terms of build quality nikon seems to be far better and should endure longer getting into your hands with far fewer creaks.(IMHO about last part, canon's pretty good too.)

Quote from: neversaynever on July 10, 2009, 18:01

thanks. Also if you do it my way, you'd better stay away from pentax or sony or etcetera, because you will need lens compatibility and diversity, and canon&nikon duo are the ones with most lenses. by sacrificing autofocus, you may get brilliant pieces of shiny metal-not plastic- quality hardware. in that way, stay away from anything that could narrow down your options, such as d40, d60(which cannot use AF in anything other than lenses with autofocus motor built in to lens, which are pretty rare.) I would buy nikon if I had to buy second hand, because in terms of build quality nikon seems to be far better and should endure longer getting into your hands with far fewer creaks.(IMHO about last part, canon's pretty good too.)

Oops, not sure if I agree on this part with you.
Pentax lenses are back compatible with the K20D all the way back to the older lenses. Also , the K20D has the body stablization as opposed to Nik and Can which has stabilization in the lenses.
I don't know about Sony, but I did remember the salesman saying the Sony is back compatible to Minolta lenses as well.

Unless you mean something else when you say lens diversity and compatibility.

neversaynever that's a misinformation what you said about Pentax and Sony..

here's an extract from Peter Spiro , a photographer with Istock.
taken from his webpage: http://ca.geocities.com/spirope/pentlens.html
===========

One of the great things about the Pentax system is that every bayonet mount lens ever made by Pentax (going back to 1975) can still be used with a high degree of functionality on the most modern Pentax SLR. These lenses can be focussed manually, and used in aperture priority automatic exposure. (Nikon is the only other brand which has allowed its older lenses to be used on modern autofocus cameras, but generally with less metering capability then Pentax.) Hence, it is worthwhile keeping track of the tests of the older lenses. Lenses last much longer than cameras, and many of the older lenses are available in the used market.

Pentax autofocus cameras even provide focus confirmation when used with older manual focus lenses: a green diamond lights up in the viewfinder to indicate the point of correct focus. In the first generation autofocus bodies, the SF series, there was even an arrow that showed what direction the focus ring should be turned in manually to attain focus.

(One important point that should be noted: some non-Pentax brand K-mount lenses have protrusions that will cause them to get stuck when put on an autofocus camera. Ricoh program lenses are especially dangerous. No non-Pentax lens should be put on a Pentax autofocus camera until it has been carefully examined.)

As of December 2004, Pentax has two digital SLR models on the market. They should be given credit for maintaining a greater degree of lens compatibility than any other manufacturer. Any K-mount lens made since 1975 can be used to give aperture priority auto-exposure on a Pentax DSLR with an extra push of a button.

Why is this important? For some kinds of photography (still lifes, scenics, architecture), manual focussing is still ideal, and if you are going to focus manually, it is preferable to have a lens that its designed for it. Nothing beats the smooth precision of the focussing ring on a Pentax M or A lens. Autofocus lenses are made with a much looser mechanism, in order to allow the motors to turn them easily. For this reason, the lens elements are often less well aligned, and optical quality is lower as a result. You won't find any manual focus lenses you can put on a Canon SLR. You can put some older Nikon lenses on a Nikon DSLR, but the exposure meter won't function. This backwards compatibility is a unique and important feature of the Pentax DSLRs. ===============

this article is quite dated but it still applies with the latest K7 pentax and it's predecessor 14.6MP K20D.

repeat:

You won't find any manual focus lenses you can put on a Canon SLR. You can put some older Nikon lenses on a Nikon DSLR, but the exposure meter won't function. This backwards compatibility is a unique and important feature of the Pentax DSLRs.
(quote/unquote: Peter Spiro , Istock contributor)

I've posted the chart so many times, but I can't find it now. Just figure that a P&S camera is 1/6th the size of a crop sensor, and a full frame is 60% larger than an APS.

I'm not sure if one of these has the chart you are talking about, but it shows the size differences for sensors:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0210/02100402sensorsizes.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor%20sizes