Recommendations for a good SLR camera please

[777Captain]

Hi
I am looking for a good SLR camera to take pictures of airplanes. I would like to have one that comes with at least a 200mm lens or maybe a little less. I am willing to pay maximum 350$. Any recommendations?
Thanks a lot

[Gulfstream1291]

Sorry to say this, but a good SLR unused cost upwards of $850.00, about $700.00 used, what kind of photographing are you going to use it for? Because if you're subject is closer a good point and shoot with lots of zoom will work just as fine.

[Gulfstream1291]

But if it is a Film SLR than a Canon Rebel 2000, or Nikon N80. I was unsure whether you meant a Digital or Film SLR. Film SLR's shouln't cost more than $300.00. And you can find deals for SLRs at ritzcamera.com with 75-300mm lense packages. Hope this helps.

[indian airlines]

I bought my SLR from a Ritz camera showroom near my house.

It's a Minolta Maxxum 5, with a 25-90mm and a 100-300mm lense. I think all in all it cost me $450 approx.

[FlyingPhotog]

If you want a film camera, I highly recommend the Nikon N80. I use it with a 70-300mm lens for spotting. It's quite capable! I shot this with the N80 from about 200 yards. ISO-400 Kodak Tri-X film.

[Airbus_A320]

Film.... whaaaaa??? Dude it's the 21st century .

hehe, j/k :P .

Seriously... if i were you i would get a Point and Shoot digicam, some Olympus's C-700 series cameras would fit your price range. If you want to waste alot of time, get sub-quality pics and not know how your pics turned out... get film. If you get a P&S digicam for about the same price you'll be much better off .

[777Captain]

Gulfstream you helped a lot thanks.
I want to get a film SLR because I need the zoom, I cant afford a DSLR.

[Airbus_A320]

there are alot of mega-zoom point and shoots out. go to www.dpreview.com.

[Leftseat86]

A good film SLR, with good lenses, will beat a point and shoot digital anyday. You'll need a way to scan them if intending to upload of course, but most labs will do it for you. A Canon Rebel with 28-80 and a 75-300 III is about 400$.

Film.... whaaaaa??? Dude it's the 21st century .

Alot of proffesionals still prefer slide film and medium format to digital...wonder why?

-Clovis

[777Captain]

Thanks a lot for the useful replies guys! I think I might get the Nikon N80 which comes with a 28-80 lens which is not bad but when I need a stronger lense I can use my dad's 28-200 lens. Thanks again!

[b777]

Thanks a lot for the useful replies guys! I think I might get the Nikon N80 which comes with a 28-80 lens which is not bad but when I need a stronger lense I can use my dad's 28-200 lens. Thanks again!

Good choice, I recommend the Nikon N80 as well (or a second hand F100). It's better when compared to Canon's or Minolta's offerings at that price range IMO.

[CheckSix]

Film.... whaaaaa??? Dude it's the 21st century .

hehe, j/k :P .

Seriously... if i were you i would get a Point and Shoot digicam, some Olympus's C-700 series cameras would fit your price range. If you want to waste alot of time, get sub-quality pics and not know how your pics turned out... get film. If you get a P&S digicam for about the same price you'll be much better off .

Film is said to be about the same as 10+ Megapixels. Hmmm... explains something doesn't it?

Yes, Kodak offers a 14 MP Pro DSLR, but... it's 5,000USD, obviously way out of reach for the general public here.

Shoot slides and get an extremely good slide/negative scanner--boom, you have some of the highest quality digital prints.

Why spend 5,000 (except for instant image viewing), when you can get a great SLR, with great lenses, and an excellent slide scanner for less?

Reason why most people shoot digital? Easy to use, you can see your results, no film developing costs etc. etc. etc. etc.

Film? High quality, inexpensive cameras. I have considered a film SLR as a second camera to go with my F717, but decided not to.

However, I think that if one is beginning photography--digital is the way to go because of the margin for experiments. With film--you pay for your experiments gone bad. Perhaps you might get comfortable with photography, then learn with your digital--and get a film as the main camera.

But the hook with film is the developing costs--I think that's why many people are discouraged to go back.

[Airbus_A320]

I actually heard it was about 5 mp... my aunt has a film rebel and my pics with the C-740 came out better than hers in print. And anyways..... a negative/slide scanner costs money too. And as for getting the pics on CD. I did that once and the pics came out horrible. Mabey i've just had bad experiences with film.... but to me digital is the way to go. And with film you don't know how anything comes out.... for example when i had my C-740 i was messing with different things... so i would learn more and at that point getting instant results really helps. Also i like to mess around the house and take foolish pictures just to try stuff with the flash, shutter speeds, ect, with film all that crap would be developed and that costs money and is a waste of film, with digital i just format the card when i am done.

-Reasons why I like digital better than film
P.S. what i posted a few replies back was intended to be a joke.... don't take things so seriously

And who said anything about a $5000 camera

[Stephen Toernblom]

I highly recommend the Nikon F100 or the Nikon N80. Great film cameras.

[G-MIDY]

I would say digital because it is more flexible and simple for the newbie, developing and stuff like that can be complicated for someone without some knowledge of it. Worst thing about film imo is not knowing what your shots have turned out like.