Looking for a beginner inexpensive DSLR, is this a good deal?

[Twiggy]

I came across this on local FB market place.

Looks like a good deal to me, and I will do some more research on this specific model, but does anyone notice anything wrong or worrying here, anything to watch out for?

Unfortunately, while I want to use film, I will need to figure out a decent source to get film which will take some time, plus it's 2024 as well, can't shoot only film literally all the time.

Buy or not?

 

[MattKing]

10 megapixel sensor size is small, and there has been a lot of useful improvements in the ~18 years since that camera was current.

 

[Twiggy]

I'm sure current cameras, are much better, but, I also don't have current camera money.

 

[MattKing]

I posted what I did to give you some perspective.
By way of comparison, the improvements seen in the last 18 years for digital cameras are significantly more useful than the changes that happened to film cameras in the 18 years before film stopped being in the mainstream.
If that camera is in good shape it certainly could be useful.
But the difference between it and something 10 years more recent and oriented toward the same amateur user would be quite obvious to even a beginner - even if the price might be somewhat similar.
One minor inconvenience - that model uses CF cards, and quite likely fairly small ones.
SD cards are more common now.

 

[Twiggy]

Alright, thanks for the clarification.

I'll look for "beginner DSLR Canada" and see what I can find.

 

[Twiggy]

Ok, this video sold me.

If you've seen any of the photos I have shared, my style is more objects, buildings, things like that. I don't care that the shutter speed cannot get extremely fast action shots. This seems amazing for what it is for the price.

Comes with lense, hood, bag, grip, 2 batteries, 2 CF cards, (can also buy SD to CF adapters), etc, etc. mostly importantly, the user maunal.

I am going to arrange a time to meet up with the seller.

 

[xkaes]

There are lots of great, older, DSLRs that you get get for very little $$$$. The main difference is that the newer, more expensive models have higher Mega-pixel sensors, and additional features -- that you might not need (Video, GPS, faster auto-focusing, more exposure options, etc.) There's a good chance if you buy a newer DSLR you'll be paying for features you will never use. Minolta and Sony have lots of older DSLRs that you can get for around $50 -- and you can use any Minolta-compatible AF lenses. You can get most of these for little more that the cost of postage. (It's the same with Nikon, Canon, etc.)

Be cautious with any FORUM "purchase" suggestion (this Forum or any other). It's very easy for even very well-meaning people to spend YOUR money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sony_α_cameras

 

[Anon Ymous]

The main difference is that the newer, more expensive models have higher Mega-pixel sensors, and additional features -- that you might not need (Video, GPS, faster auto-focusing, more exposure options, etc.)

Better high ISO performance is also a very likely and desirable characteristic. In this day and age, I'd skip the 400D and keep my money for something fresher. Not the latest and greatest, but 3-4 models ahead should give you something much better without too much more money, since money is an issue.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree that a bit more money can move up a few generations. The Rebels are very good, look for a new model around 16MP, it will have pretty good high ISO up to 800 or 1600. Saying that, I use a couple of Pentax K2000 for travel, the 10MP sensor is fine for web images my wife likes to post on Facebook. I print 8X10 and on occasion 11/14, not as much detail as higher MP sensor but still fine for my needs. ISO is good to 1600, autofocus is fast, will work with any KA or KAAF lens. What I like for travel is that takes double AA batteries, no need to bring a charger and adaptor when outside the US.

 

[grain elevator]

Alright, thanks for the clarification.

I'll look for "beginner DSLR Canada" and see what I can find.

Don't. You'll just find offerings that want to rip off beginners, why else would anyone claim a camera was specifically for beginners?
If you have no specific requirements, just research past models from whatever brand tickles your fancy, and go back enough years to fall within your budget. I'd avoid the most basic models simply because they tend to have very small viewfinders and just one control wheel while two would be better if you want to learn manual exposure. Better models from a bit longer ago should be just as cheap. Also no need to restrict yourself to SLRs, a mirrorless camera could be just as good for learning.

 

[Kino]

I don't do FB, so I can't see it, but I bought a Nikon D200 for peanuts and it is a reasonable DSLR that can use my Nikon F mount lenses with a bit of patience.

Dont' expect high pixel counts, high ISO sensitivity or video recording, but it's certainly capable of some good images under the right conditions.

 

[Twiggy]

I don't do FB, so I can't see it, but I bought a Nikon D200 for peanuts and it is a reasonable DSLR that can use my Nikon F mount lenses with a bit of patience.

Dont' expect high pixel counts, high ISO sensitivity or video recording, but it's certainly capable of some good images under the right conditions.

It's the Cannon Rebel XTI or 400D. WIth lenses, hood, bag, 2 batteries, 2 cf cards, user manual, battery charger, the whole deal, for only $100 Canadian.

Seller is away until June 3rd, so I have a few days to find a better deal if I can I guess.

 

[MattKing]

mostly importantly, the user maunal.

Even if it isn't the best choice, it may be a decent one. The grip is a definite plus - mostly usable with AA batteries.
I wouldn't fiddle with a CF to SD adapter.
Here is a link to the manual: https://canoncanada.custhelp.com/app/answers/answer_view/a_id/1035441/~/eos-digital-rebel-xti-/-eos-400d-digital-instruction-manual

 

[4season]

Buy or not?

That Canon is kind of a craptacular buy. IMO: I've seen first-gen Sony A7Rs selling for less than 200 USD from my local dealer, and that's a 36 mp, FF camera with loads of 3rd party support, including lens adapters. Base-model A7 is no slouch either. APS-C Sonys including NEX5, NEX7, and A6x00 can also sometimes be had for very little money. Antireflective coating used on some Sony screens tends to show lots of wear and tear if a screen protector isn't used, which lowers resale value, but they're still perfectly usable.

Also consider Micro 4/3s cameras which also sometimes go cheaply. And like Sony E-mount, M43 mount is still being produced.

 

[Twiggy]

Yeah,

I've tried looking for models from 2013/2014 but they all seem to be out of my price range.

 

[Twiggy]

That Canon is kind of a craptacular buy. IMO: I've seen first-gen Sony A7Rs selling for less than 200 USD from my local dealer, and that's a 36 mp, FF camera with loads of 3rd party support, including lens adapters. Base-model A7 is no slouch either. APS-C Sonys including NEX5, NEX7, and A6x00 can also sometimes be had for very little money. Antireflective coating used on some Sony screens tends to show lots of wear and tear if a screen protector isn't used, which lowers resale value, but they're still perfectly usable.

Also consider Micro 4/3s cameras which also sometimes go cheaply. And like Sony E-mount, M43 mount is still being produced.

Lowest price on Canadian ebay is $464 for a Sony A7R...

 

[xkaes]

Check out the Sony a100, a200, a300, etc. You can get these for little $$$$$, and have more features than you will ever use.

 

[Lee Rust]

You might give some thought as to which type of interchangeable lens system you'd be getting into. There are a lot of Nikons, Pentaxes and Canons out there. However, if you plan to stick with a 'standard' lens it won't matter which camera you pick. My own digital snapshot setup is a Lumix GX8 (micro 4/3) with only one lens... a moderately wide-angle 20mm.

 

[Twiggy]

I'm still primarily considering the 400D, so it's Cannon E and Cannon ES lenses.

Though, I don't see myself buying very many other lenses for it, as they seem pricey.

 

[Lee Rust]

That Canon setup you're considering should be fine. My first serious digital camera was a second-hand Nikon D70 kit with a 6mp CCD, which was plenty for most purposes and only cost $100.

 

[Twiggy]

Yes, and I saw somewhere it has film simulation options, and monochrome mode too, which I like.

 

[MattKing]

I'm still primarily considering the 400D, so it's Cannon E and Cannon ES lenses.

I think you mean Canon EF and Canon EF-S lenses.
The Canon EF lenses are also compatible with the Canon EF film cameras, some of which are really quite modern and inexpensive.
The EF-S lenses are, practically speaking, only compatible with the digital cameras like the 400D that use the smaller APS-C sensors.

 

[Twiggy]

I think you mean Canon EF and Canon EF-S lenses.
The Canon EF lenses are also compatible with the Canon EF film cameras, some of which are really quite modern and inexpensive.
The EF-S lenses are, practically speaking, only compatible with the digital cameras like the 400D that use the smaller APS-C sensors.

I'll take a look at that.

 

[koraks]

The EF-S lenses are, practically speaking, only compatible with the digital cameras like the 400D that use the smaller APS-C sensors.

Many of them are fine lenses, too, and some cameras (don't know about the 400D though) can compensate for their imperfections while recording the RAW files. For instance, I have a 7D with a 15-85 EF-S, which I find a lovely versatile lens, and its pronounced distortion is never noticeable because it's all fixed even before a file is written to the memory card. EF-S lenses have the benefit of being significantly smaller and lighter weight than their bigger EF counterparts. In fact, when my kit (Canon APS-C as well) was stolen a decade ago or so, I faced the choice of upgrading to full frame or sticking with the smaller APS-C. I opted for the latter also because of portability. Never regretted it, either.

@Twiggy pretty much any SLR from the past decade will produce mighty fine images if used properly. Heck, I was going through some old photos I shot with a Canon 20D (8 megapixels? IDK) while hiking in Scotland - they were gorgeous! Besides, if your budget is around $100, it's really a matter of whatever happens to be on offer at that price point. It's the bottom end of the price range in the second hand market for somewhat 'serious' cameras. If it gets you a 400D, then that'll be it. If it happens to be a Nikon D70, then go for that. Etc. I understand all the talk of "I'd go for X or Y", but really, if that doesn't happen to be available, get whatever you can get your hands on. Be opportunistic.

 

[Twiggy]

Yeah im going with the 400D.

David Hancock on youtube has a great 3 part video series on it as well, pretty much a video user manual.