Which older DSLR for backpacking trip with a limited budget?
Hi everyone,I'm going travelling for around 6 weeks in May, and would like to take a DSLR with me. Around 2006, I had a Canon 350D, which I was pretty impressed with at the time (with supplied lens kit).
I have a limited budget, and want to go down the route of buying an older DSLR, instead of a new 'all bells and whistles' new one, so that I don't mind if it's stolen, but is also good enough quality to warrant taking instead of a compact camera. My budget is as cheap as possible, without sacrificing too much quality of picture.
Does anyone have any particular recommendations? I don't know much about Canon but if it's cheap you're after there's a Canon EOS 400D in the classifieds here:For Sale - Canon EOS 400D plus 18-55 lens-good starter kit
Last price drop was to £90. Grab a Nikon D300 and 50mmD lens.That's all you need.. Brilliant setup, even today.
Ice Nikon D300 is a good shout. Also consider the D3300/3400. The D300 is an older semi pro level camera and as such will be better built and have more features. However, with the D3300/3400 being a much newer camera the sensor is much better and as a result your final image may be noticeably better. The D3300/3400 has better dynamic range, better colour depth, better high ISO noise performance, and is 24mp vs 12mp on the D300.
It depends if you want the more pro build and features, or happy to sacrifice those for getting a potentially better final image. I think the D300 is a much better bet, especially with all the lenses they could use later if the kept the camera.Again it's built like a tank... Way better than the newer D3400.And, unless they are printing big the 12 meg will be more than enough.
Buddy picked up a D300 plus 50mm for less than £300.... And I bet it will outlast any of these newer plastic Nikons!
Get the D300.... You will Not regret it.
Ice Depending on your budget I would probably have gone with one of the older Canon xxD series,assemi pro they are more robust and have some level of weather proofing. I would start at the 40D as a minimum but 60D if you can afford it is probably the best bet. Another cheaper alternative on the cannon side is the 550D, great mid entry level camera with effective the same sensor as the 7D, similar performance/features to the D3200/3300Nikons. Finally have a look at the 100D, small body version of the 600D iirc, add to this the 40mm f2.8 pancake and you have an almost pocketable dslr.
A Slightly left field choice may be the Pentax K30 (don't laugh), decent crop sensor camera but is fully weather sealed and you can get a half decent weather sealed walkabout lens for it as well. Add onto that the fact that you can use M42 manual lenses I think it becomes a potential solution for some cheap, good quality manual prime lenses. You can even get it in Stormtrooper White, in that finish no one would want to steal it so it improved safety as well Thanks for the input so far guys. Basically, I played around with ISO settings etc when I had the 350D, but am not sure I'd like to make a habit of it while I'm travelling. I usually set the round dial on the top to mostly automatic settings, or changed it to the landscape option for landscapes etc.
With that in mind, would you say the 3300 or 3400 is a better option for me than the 300, or are they all user friendly in that sense? There only seems to be around £50 difference between the 300 and 3300 it seems. Sorry... I've only just seen the last 2 replies. I'll have a look in to those options as well! Too much choice haha  Check this out... Might help!
Ice Why are the lenses on the D300 any different to those for the D3400?