Camera people

I'm amazed no-one seems to have an opinion on the Sony a380. Or am I only allowed to ask about Canon/Nikon?

Nowt too revolutionary, a second sensor for live view if you like that sort of thing, plasticky build quality, soft jpegs with the kit lens, poor High ISO performance and doesn't have the video capabilities (should you want them) of the (albeit more expensive) canikon alternatives.

Why should we be so excited? I know its outside this price range but the Canon 7D is a lot more interesting…

Plasticy quality = light weight. Soft jpegs = jpeg compression algorithm not lens issue, surely? The live view focusing thing is the reason I might want it.. I tested a few cameras for speed in the shop and I found that by the time you've framed the shot it's alredy focused, so there was zero AF shutter lag.

And the price range is £5-600. Why should I care about the Canon 7d?

It's maybe the Oly E620 or the Canon 500D as alternatives. The canon had superb low light performance in the web review I read, but the Oly has a great moveable screen (a feature I use a lot on my compact).

Pentax K20D is a very nice camera with some excellent lenses available

The Samsung GX20 is almost identical and often available a bit cheaper

Definately give the E620 serious consideration – I opted for it in preference to the Nikon 5000 & Canon 500D and haven't been disappointed.

If I were starting again, I'd buy a second hand body and spend the rest of your budget on good quality glass for the front of it. Bodies depreciate like, well, bikes but good quality glass will not lose much money or even appreciate. (A second hand Nikon D80 with a 50mm f1.8 and if you can stretch to the 18-55 kit lens as its rather good and the 55-200VR lens for a tele or a cheaper 70-300 if you want more reach would be my choice for your budget)

If you want a light weight camera and live view (shooting from a screen rather than using the viewfinder to frame your shot) is important then go for the latest bit of electronica, as their live view function will be better, and that sony's will probably be best of all.

Me, I rarely use the live view on my Nikon D300, unless its macro photography of a still subject and I want to zoom in to check my focus on a very particular point. But this is less than 2% of my work I'd say. Everything is through the viewfinder, as i find framing, focusing and composing the shot is a lot easier this way.

The weather sealing of the D300 is important to me as I shoot outdoors in all weather a lot. It's ability to control flashes wirelessly off camera is also a god send (the D80 or even its predecessor the D70 all do this) and this makes shooting mtb's in dark forests a lot easier!

Also, think about getting a good tripod, it quickly becomes a bit of kit I rarely leave home without.

I like those cameras where you can superimpose a clowns face on the person you are taking a picture of

The camera doesn't really make much difference, it's all about the glass. A great lens is always a much better investment than upgrading to the latest camera body.

Review here[/url]

Buy a Nikon or Canon instead ?

2nd the advice on considering the Pentax option due to the compatability with the older (and most often excellent) manual focus lenses.

Sticking with Pentax was an easy choice for me because I already had lenses from my film days, but I've been happy with the decision. The only camera that tempted me away from the system was the Canon 5D, due to the full-size sensor, but the performance differences between the APS-C sized sensor cameras weren't that relevant and I preferered the handling of the Pentax anyway.

The a380 isn't much different to the a350, just a repackaging job and dumbed down controls. So if you're in the market for the a380 take a look at the a350 too. If you only want the live-view as a nice-to-have you may want to look at the a200 too. It lacks live-view but because of that it has a better view finder and can be had for £250. Or… the a700 can be had for £500-odd as it's being discontinued (ironic as it just won the ePHOTOZINE group test against the Pentax K-7, Olympus E-30, Nikon D300, and Canon EOS 50D).

In body stabilisation (so stabilised primes and fast wide-angle lenses), lots of second-hand minolta glass and an upgrade path to a cheap full frame camera with the new a850 make the Sony pretty compelling if you don't already have an investment in another system. The only downside is that the jpeg engine isn't considered as good as others. Not an issue if you shoot RAW (and why anyone would buy a DSLR and shoot jpeg is beyond me).

I have live view on my Oly E420. Hardly use it tbh. Maybe I'm missing something by not using it but I've been finding it slow responsewise. Probably good for Macro or portrait work though.

From reviews I've read of the A380, the build quality is not great and it didn't handle well.

2nd the advice on considering the Pentax option due to the compatability with the older (and most often excellent) manual focus lenses.

If you're looking for manual focus – the Olympus four thirds system will allow a multitude of lens to be fitted due to shorter designed focal distance between lens and sensor (Nikon, Pentax K, M42, M39, Olympus OM, Canon(?), Yashica all fit).

Can't comment on which to go for – for you as it's a rather personal choice.

I went for Olympus due to smaller lighter camera and lens. (E420 with a pancake lens). Downsides being a 2x crop factor (wider angles are harder to come by), noise creeping in at comparatively lower ISO's, less digital lens choice and dedicated flash choice.

i don't think live view is much use outside the studio, never use it on the D300

if i was buying again from scratch i'd be looking long and hard at the olympus stuff

The thing I don't like about the Olympus system is the small sensor size and the effect that has, primarily on the cost of wide angle lenses.

I have live view on my Oly E420. Hardly use it tbh. Maybe I'm missing something by not using it but I've been finding it slow responsewise

That's exactly it – live view on the Sony isn't slow, it's really fast due to the second sensor.

Live view on its own isn't something I'd care too much about; real-time focusing live view PLUS a movable screen is a big deal do me because it means you can hold the camera at funny angles and get the shot – like close-ups of flowers etc (which I quite like) or with the camera high overhead to look over a hedge, tree or whatever. You can do a lot more like this than with a viewfinder. I have that facility on my compact and I do find it very useful.

Read a few reviews though and the low light performance of the Sony might well be an issue. I read the review of the Canon 500D and saw the sample pictures – I thought the Canon was only a bit better til I realised that the Canon ones were taken at 12800 iso and the Sony at 3200…

So now it's Oly (for the movable screen) or Canon for the image quality.. even though it's £100 more.