Am I being a total c*ck (Camera question)?

[Mr Panda]

I had exactly this question a couple of years ago when I thought of using my old Pentax K mount lenses on a DSLR. Yes they are compatible (well Pentax lenses are) in the sense that they fit the DSLR camera body but there are a multitude of other considerations due to technological changes.

For me, sensor size in the DSLR was the main issue, which effectively meant my favourite 20mm lens (SLR film format) would give an angle of coverage equivalent to approx 30 - 36mm in old money when attached to a modernish DSLR

That was the killer. Old lenses can fit but they don't perform to the way they were designed. Photo quality is fine, better some say, but you lose coverage and other DSLR features.

Sorry to say I've bitten the bullet and converted to DSLR kit plus a compact digital camera for 100% of my photography now. My 35mm stuff is either on a shelf, cos it looks pretty and feels right, or destined for ebay collectors :cry:

Another vote for the Nikon D50 and also the Pentax K2000 here.

Use a Lumix TZ18 compact as its the size of a fag packet and great features, but I just couldn't live withouts some type of slr capability. Looking at a LCD screen in daylight without any veiwfinder is a PITA

£200 should get you a decent s/h Nikon or Pentax kit with two lenses giving a 35mm equivalent of 24mm - 400mm or thereabouts, plus a few accessories

 

[KermitGKona88]

Hi Mr Panda

Those were the kinds of things I was worried about, and being a dilettante when it comes to cameras I am afraid these things may all be beyond me

I am currently back looking at bridge cameras and thinking about a Pentax X5

Cheers

Mark

 

[Mr Panda]

Bridge cameras - not really fond of them - had one at work for a while and it just didn't deliver. Bulky as an SLR but without the versatility. Better off with a decent compact IMHO. Again I'd recommend the Lumix TZ18 or TZ20, both of which can be picked up for under £100 on ebay.

Don't worry about DSLR complexity though, some of the early models like my Nikon D50 are really pretty basic and also "feel" like a proper camera in some respects. You can stick a polarising filter on too, yay!

If you could use an OM10 properly then you can use a basic DSLR easliy. Just my opinion though

 

[highlandsflyer]

The big DSLR makers all offer models with 'idiot' modes that allow you to use them as 'point and shoots'. Canon are particularly good in this respect. Generally bridge cameras have much smaller sensors, regardless of the pixel count, and slower autofocus. The disadvantages of a small p&s without the advantages!

You can pick up a decent consumer DSLR like a Canon 20D for less than £100 with warranty and mate it to a good walkabout lens for another £100.

 

[daugs]

Hi Mr Panda

Those were the kinds of things I was worried about, and being a dilettante when it comes to cameras I am afraid these things may all be beyond me

I am currently back looking at bridge cameras and thinking about a Pentax X5

Cheers

Mark

Mark, I wouldn't worry, I really knew nothing yet the Nikon D50 I think was a definite result compared to the Ixus 55 that we had before, and would echo Mr Panda, a couple of point and click photos after just got it........

 

[Archemist]

I've had a d50 since they first came out and traded my older nikon kit in (kept the better lenses), for a good starter SLR with a bit more they're very good (£60+ now)

The advantage of these older D series camera's is that they have hte AF drive motors built in - so virtually any AF nikon lense will fit and the lens will work fully automatically and focus.

Newer base nikons will work, apart form the AF, but rely on the drive motors being built into the lenses.

You can buy an AF 70-210 (the 'D' ones or the ones just before) lens for about 80 notes, this gives comparatively great quality and an effective 105-315 range.

The 18-55 G lenses are good enough or get an older 35-70 or even 50mm for point and shoots.