p987yow

I'm looking for a small, light weight DSLR for travel that takes great pictures. Video capability is subordinated to still. My first choice is the Panasonic micro 4/3's GH2 with the 14-140 lens. Although slighty bigger and heavier, the Nikon 5100 and Canon T3i, both with 18-200 lenses, are second and third choices. I think the trade off is small and light vs. flexability (len options). Any comments on the GH2 or recommendations on other choices would be appreciated. Thx

Bill N

I don't think small and light go with your 18-200 mm lens choice. Generally I have liked the Digital Camera Resource Page at http://www.dcresource.com/ for reviews and product information. For Nikon, check http://www.bythom.com/

The Stig

Dpreview.com is a great site too. IMHO it's between Canon or Nikon at the consumer level. I wouldn't bother with any other brand.

petee_c

You didn't mention budget

I'm a Canon guy. I would look for a 18-200mm new on sale as a travel lens. Buy a body used on kijiji. Bodies seem to lose like 30- 40% value in the 1st 18 months.

I took it to Disney with a 30D in a top loading 'zoom' bag. Wore it with a harness, (think Baby Bjorn carrier). Worked great. I also had the uber expensive 18-55mm f2.8IS with me too, but usually left it in the hotel room, unless we were out after dark.

I have 2 30D's, the 2nd one was used.

Disney
http://www.pjbj.ca/disney_2009_1/

http://blog.peterchangphotography.com/

p987yow

Budget is $1500 +-. Good suggestion on buying a used body. Thx

Braden996

If your keen on an 18-200 lens then you might want to consider a nikon body. I have used (and still use) both systems and the quality of the nikon 18-200 is slightly better. The GH1 and GH2 take fairly good videos form what I have seen, but not sure about picture quality. The canon T2i is a great deal. There isnt really any noticeable improvements with the T3i over the T2i

sarje-944.2

Ditto on Dpreview.com. Canon and Nikon are THE two top quality DSLRs. Canon has slightly better colour rendition and Nikon has slightly better lenses for sharpness. I use the D90, although not full-frame, the DX lenses are adequate for versatility and it shoots HD video (use a tripod).

hoffa

I bought the T1i... first introduction into DSLRs. The stock lense was crap. I bought an IS 18-200 canon lense, which was about $700, and the results are astonishing. It is so much better. I'd like a smaller F/2.8 lense right now, but I am too busy spending money on the car

jasonintoronto

you can't go wrong with either canon or nikon. i suggest going with what your friends have - that makes it easy to borrow lenses, flash, etc.

if you go nikon. i would suggest the new d5100 which comes next month - same sensor as the d7000 and the latest video features. unfortunately, it's video that is distinguishing SLR's apart these days.

petee_c

Yeah, you both canon and nikon make good cameras..... I've had pretty good luck with Canon (since high school and my hard earned EOS 650, still holding on to the nifty fifty from that era)....

To the OP; I really don't think you will need the latest, greatest camera. Cause the way things are moving in the camera world, in 2 months, your latest greatest will be on clearance to make room for the next latest, greatest.....

I recommend "Understanding Exposure" available at your local library to go with your camera purchase, whatever you get.

P

TurboS

If you do not mind the slightly larger form factor of a proper DSLR, then my recommendation is a 60D, I believe it's about $100 more than a Canon T3i.
Also cameras with an articulating screen, big plus. After using the G12 this past Sat. my next DSLR will have that screen, it's very handy.

The Stig

Spend money on the glass (lens) not the body. It seems Canon/Nikon upgrade and improve bodies every damn week (like HP with printers or Blackberry). You can never have a cutting edge body, unless you pay up for a full frame sensor. Sadly, the prices on these are still very high. And relegated to the pro shooter or unless you are really into it. I'm a decent photo hack, but neither my wife nor I can justify a $5k full frame body.

Buy the most inexpensive body that gets you the features you need. In two years it will be a throw away. Or buy used. But do spend money on the lens. If you take care of it, it will for many many years. It's what makes the difference in your shots, not the number of Megapixels.

seanmcr6

Canon Rebel can't be beat. or the Nikon D5100(?)

I'm a canon shooter so I don't know Nikon equivalent.

Either one will be plenty of camera for you. Go to the store and play with both. Which ever one feels more natural to work with...and has the best price...buy that one.

R6XTERRA

I have the Canon EOS 7D with a portrait lens and a Canon EFS 18-135. This camera is super slick and takes absolutley incredible pics. Even an amateur can't screw up. Although its over your range, I was looking for long term. You will also need a hood for the lens, filters etc. Lens cleaner and a case.

I would do some shopping around for the best deal and Henrys will match price it for you. I like Henrys because there staff is extremely knowledgable and must be enroled in photography before they can work there.

I have friends whom have the 2ti and are extatic with the camera, I am assuming the t3i is even better which will fit in your price range.

Jeff

pontifex4

I don't recommend the micro 4/3 system. That's a tiny sensor, and, crucially, it shoots images which are too square to fit on a 4x6" print without cropping.

I second that it's worth buying whatever your friends have, so that you can borrow (or buy) their flashes or lenses, as needed. For outdoor use with average quality lenses, digital SLRs have been "good enough" for three years, so there's no real penalty in buying a clean used one. Pop over to Henry's or Vistek and see whether they have any good sub-$1000 used kits which look clean. They'll give you enough warranty on them for you to make sure that everything works well.