I am interested in picking up a digital camera and getting into photography. About a year ago I took a class in high school on film photography which used manual everything cameras. I'm interested in digital photography and specifically a camera that allows for manual adjustments of aperture and shutter speed. I've read about DSLR cameras and such but am not sure if i should start with one. Below are some examples of pictures that I am interested in taking. I would like to read some suggestions for cameras, accessories that will be needed, places to buy, what to avoid, what to look for etc. My budget allows no more than 400 USD.


http://interfacelift.com/wallp ... eragoldensky_1024x768.jpg
http://interfacelift.com/wallp ... laciercanyon_1024x768.jpg
http://interfacelift.com/wallp ... 45_wildhorse_1024x768.jpg
along with many others on interfacelift.com

Go for an (D)SLR. You won't regret it, trust me.

With 400USD you should be able to afford a Nikon D40 for example.

I had started to look at the D40 but must admit, am confused with the auto-focus features. I should have been more specific in the first post. I'm looking for a camera that has BOTH auto and manual focus/shutter speeds. Does the D40 offer both options?

All dSLRs offer both manual & automatic focusing. You can even use older, MF-only lenses.

Most of them have the following basic shooting modes:

Auto: fully automatic
P(rogram): mostly automatic, tbh I'm not exactly sure how it differs from full auto
Tv aka Shutter Priority: you set the shutter speed, the camera calculates the rest
Av aka Aperture Priority: you set the f-stop, the camera calculates the rest
M(anual): you set everything (still autofocus if you have AF on, though)

I have the Pentax K100D and love it/would recommend it highly. The D40 is another great one, though I'm not sure I could do without the K100D's in-body image stabilization.

Go get 'em!

Thanks for that useful info, it helped. The Pentax K100D looks like a great camera. I'm going to look more into it.

In-Body Image Stabilization sounds like a great idea/feature!

With Nikons, you have to get a lens with VR (vibration reduction) for that. Which works great of course, but i guess i would be happy about it being "inside" of the camera already. When i use an old lens without VR, i tend to use a tripod with my D80.

Another argument for Nikon is the menu structures etc. They are great cameras to handle and adjust settings.

Most important when you buy a camera:
Don't buy it without actually seeing/testing it. Go to a shop and compare... ask them to let you take a few pictures... take the cameras in your hands and test them a little. Cameras are not all the same, which means it is a question of your own "taste". It is important that you feel comfortable with your camera.

For shots like your examples you'll need a polarization filter. That will reduce reflections and haze, so you'll get those vivid colors instead of the "fog-thatwasn't-there-when-i-took-the-shot" desaturated colors. It also makes water almost perfectly transparent.

Also take into consideration you don't really want to switch camera brands after a while. You can't put Nikkon glass on a Canon for example.

Quote from jibber :

In-Body Image Stabilization sounds like a great idea/feature!

With Nikons, you have to get a lens with VR (vibration reduction) for that. Which works great of course, but i guess i would be happy about it being "inside" of the camera already. When i use an old lens without VR, i tend to use a tripod with my D80.

Yeah, that's the coolest thing about the Pentax IS system... works on every lens you can fit to the camera, which includes Pentax MF lenses going back to the 60s and M42 screwmount lenses going well back into the 50s.

Nikon's VR lenses are very, very nice but also very expensive (at least to my budget). It's nice knowing I can pick up an old SMC-M lens and have VR by default.

I do a lot of landscapes with my D70 and I'd say all you need apart from the kit lens to get you going are a polarizing filter and a decent tripod (both mentioned above!). I like lenses with stabilizing features, but if I'm going out to take landscapes, I absolutely always take my tripod. Some shots require shutter speeds of more than a second and a tripod is the only way to get that kind of shot with any sharpness. I would be frustrated if I had a potentially really good shot that I couldn't get because I didn't have my tripod.

As far as which camera goes, I would suggest what others have, just try a few and see what feels most comfortable to you. They're all going to be great for what you want to do, so it just comes down to what you like the most. For example, when I was looking a few years ago, there was a pentax that was the lightest and smallest DSLR available at the time. I thought this was great, but when I went to look at one, it was too small for my hands and not at all comfortable. I tried holding the D70 and it fit perfectly. Once I found a few I liked, I went back home and tried to decide which would work best for me.

If most of the cameras will do what i want, what do you think is the cheapest one that will? I like to save as much money as possible

If you're looking just to use your images online, any number of megapixels will be fine. If you want to print...I print and have some pictures on the wall that are 11x14 inches and that's with a 6 megapixel D70. So don't be enticed into a camera purely because it has more than 6 megapixels (although a lot of them do now!) if you're not going to print larger than around 11x14.

Other than that, I am not sure really. I don't even use half the features on my D70 and I'm able to get some landscapes I'm really happy with (I've attached a couple). I think a lot of the extra features you get with the pricier cameras give you a larger advantage if you shoot a lot of action photography or something of that sort. For instance, shooting 10 frames per second is super cool, but not much help if you're doing landscapes!

I think the D40 or D40X (depending on what you decide regarding resolution needs) would suit you well, or a similar model from Canon.

K100D is indubitably the cheapest dSLR on the market right now if you can still find one. They're being phased out for the K100D Super, which is also quite cheap.