Suggestions for first d-SLR...

[gap74]

OK, finally in a position where I can upgrade, much as I admire how good my Fuji S7000 was for the money around 5 years ago.

Got a budget of around 800 quid. Knowledge of photography is OK, not advanced but I get the basics about aperture/exposure/sensitivity/depth of focus etc...

Camera will be largely used for internal architecture photos (cinema and theatre interiors mostly) so will be requiring a wide angle lens at some point down the line - suggestions for that also needed!

Am wondering, is it worth spending the bulk of the 800 quid on a higher spec body and save up for a WA lens later, or should I split it between a more entry level body, with a WA lens at the same time? Basically, is there really much of a difference between bodies at around the 400 quid mark and those around twice that?

Also, have heard it said that it's sometimes worthwhile investing in a decent, general purpose fixed lens with no zoom - anyone an opinion on this?

Secondly, any particular opinion on what make currently has any particular advantage? Presumably Nikon or Canon in most cases, but reading a lot of decent things about the Sony Alpha range.

Lastly, what filters would we consider essential? Quite interested in night photography and, along with a lot of interiors I've shot thus far, that would mean a lot of yellow lights I need to minimise the effect of!

Thanking any help in advance!

[Boxer6]

This is very much a case of going with what you know! I'm not aware of Fuji making a (good) DSLR, but there are many good makes out there. Nikon and Canon are the biggies, obviously, but Sony's Alpha range are very good too - and have the added bonus of being able to source a variety of new, used and aftermarket lenses that fit, at very reasonable prices.

Problem is, Pentax, Minolta, Olympus all make very good cameras, but each with their own pro's and con's! I think you have to go to a good camera shop and try them all out for weight balance, ease of use etc, and see what suits you best. I'm a Nikon fiend myself, but I know they're not everyone's cup of tea. Canon are generally reckoned to have good, reasonably-priced glass, whereas Olympus lenses are extortionate to buy, new at least.

Sorry to be so vague, but that's the way it seems to be unless you have your own specific criteria.

[scottwramsay]

On the subject of filters - I wouldn't spend any money on most of them since you can do colour correction in post-processing (though some programs are better than others). The tinted ones are really only useful for film, you can even do graduated colour tints if you have a minute to learn how to set up gradients in photoshop, but there isn't a work-around for graduated neutral density filters which would cut down the light coming from, say, the sky but not from the ground. Nor is there a substitute for polarisers which will let you exclude light that's basically bouncing off of anything very, very smooth and non-matte like metal, glass or water. If you were to get one you'd want a circular polariser which would let you use the exposure meter on your camera as opposed to deciding everything manually (careful - they're not called circular polarisers because they're shaped like circles, so if you buy one don't be fooled by round ones just because they're cheaper, it's probably a linear polariser shaped to screw onto the end of a lens).

[potatojunkie]

From a Canon perspective, if you're at all interested in shooting video it'd be worth spashing out on a 50D, though you'll be looking at about a grand for one with a kit lens.

If you're just after a stills cam, Jessops is doing the 450D for £470 and the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM (topper of a lens) for £430, meaning you could probably pick up both for ~£800 from somewhere less expensive.

Filters won't help you with sodium vapour lamps, unfortunately. It's monochromatic light, all you'd be doing is cutting it out completely.

[gap74]

Cheers for the comments so far - video isn't really a concern for me, I've a Panasonic Lumix TZ5 that I carry around with me that does OK video should I need it, and for everyday snaps.

A circular polarising filter was something I had been considering since watching a helpful guide regarding them on YouTube somewhere - was just curious if anyone else made regular use of any other kind of filter beyond your basic UV or if most folk got by with a bit of tweaking in PS or the likes afterwards.

Anyone got the Sigma 10-20mm lens then? Would they choose the same one if buying today, or would newer upstarts like the Tokina 11-16mm give it a run for its money?

[potatojunkie]

Ken Rockwell's all about that Tokina lens. He's a noted fandan, mind.