Good, cheap DSLR?

Can anyone advise me on a cheap, bottom-end DSLR model that is especially good for taking crisp, well-focused 'people' pix? Really got into taking people shots and totally frustrated that all my pics taken with my normal digital camera are invariably out of focus!
Doesn't need many frills and bells (in fact, the simpler, the better!) or the latest model and happy to go for a second-hand camera...in fact, saw an Olympus E-410 going quite cheap on Yahoo! Auction and it seems to get good reviews, even though its already 2-3 years old...
Cheers!

do you have long lens? because it will be convenient for you to take shot of people from long distance. maybe 200mm is enough and any DSLR is OK I think http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/ratings.php?ratingsGroup=SLR

but my advice for you is to shoot in black and white. and the best result of BW shot comes from film. you have to take a look at this link http://vivianmaier.blogspot.com/ I'm sure you will like it.

you can also ask this question to specific discussion for better answers, such as
http://www.flickr.com/groups/onthestreet/discuss/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/

Can anyone advise me on a cheap, bottom-end DSLR model that is especially good for taking crisp, well-focused 'people' pix? Really got into taking people shots and totally frustrated that all my pics taken with my normal digital camera are invariably out of focus!

Generally speaking, any DSLR will give you a better chance of getting good results over a point and shoot within reasonable conditions. But I am wondering what kind of shots you are taking and under what kind of conditions. Do you mean pictures of your family and friends or other situations where the people will hold still for you, or do you mean candid shots of strangers on the street where it is more opportunistic? If its the former, then more likely your shots are blurry from camera shake rather than out of focus, in which case even a point and shoot with some kind of vibration reduction (image stabilization, etc.) will be sufficient to get better pictures. If its the latter however, then a DSLR can be a big plus as they focus faster and there's no shutter lag, and pretty much any brand/model will do. I'd start out with something simple, like a Nikon D40 or whatever model Canon Digital Rebel is current and use the the kit lens that it comes with (usually an 18-55mm or similar) until you get the feel for it.

Also, to address the previous posters comments, longer lenses (such as the 200mm mentioned above) will tend to increase your number of blurry shots, so I don't think that in itself will help the situation. Also, B+W tends to emphasize out of focus or blurry shots meaning you'll have to pay more attention to getting them in focus in the first place. As for the film vs digital debate, my opinion is that digital gives you more opportunity, practice, and feedback allowing more photographers the chance to become better photographers more quickly and with less expense.

Clearly, Billy wants a DSLR not a film SLR. There's no point sooting in B&W on a DSLR, when if you really want B&W, you can just remove the color information later using Photoshop, etc.



The best value DSLR currently is the Sony Alpha 230, with 18-55mm & 55-200mm about 55,000 yen.

Pentax K-x, wit the two lens kit. (18-55mm & 55-300mm) 65,000 yen.

Nikon D3000 with 18-55mm & 55-200mm 68,000 yen.


If you want a DSLR with a single kit lens, there are a few that are good value:

Sony Alpha 230, with 18-55mm 45,000 yen

Pentax K-m 18-55mm 40,000 yen

Nikon D3000 with 18-55mm 48,000 yen

Both my friend and I have Lumix cameras (different models). His has a X10 zoom, mine has a X12. We set them up for anti shake, max pixels and everything else that we can adjust and we don't have blurry photos of people, unless WE involuntarily move a bit while taking the picture, even though our Lumixes don't have the face recognition feature that newer models have.
I took photos of the Emperor of Japan and the Empress on 2 different days, 2 different places, as they were walking, moving this way that way, and none of their pictures was blurry. obviously one needs also to know how to "trick" the camera if the subject has the sun right behind ...

I have and have had Panasonic Lumix "Ultra-zoom" cameras, which are good, but they are not DSLRs.

Oh, one point about the Sonys though, is that the menus ONLY come in Japanese, so I'd cross those off the list!!!

Thanks guys for your replies!

The camera is definately for candid shot-use, so really need something that is good for 'moving targets'.

I found the below comment very interesting, as its exactly what I found! I like taking photos in sepia and found when they are well-focused, they come out great, much crisper than colour. But you really need to make sure they are well focused in the first place, which is hard on a normal digital camera when the target is moving towards/away from you. I also noticed, using the zoom definately often makes pix come out blurry.

"Also, to address the previous posters comments, longer lenses (such as the 200mm mentioned above) will tend to increase your number of blurry shots, so I don't think that in itself will help the situation. Also, B+W tends to emphasize out of focus or blurry shots meaning you'll have to pay more attention to getting them in focus in the first place."

I went to Bic Camera for a stroll around yesterday and they recommended the Canon Kiss X2 (just as good as the X3 for a non-pro such as myself).

But I must say that I totally fell in love with the Lumix GF1!! Not as bulky as DSLR and wow, did it focus fast (and well)!! The guy said the sensor is not as big as DSLR, so its not great for shooting in light-sensitive conditions, but it seemed to take perfectly nice shots in the shop! The only problem is that it is pricier than the Kiss X2 and my budget is very tight...

Yes, the X2 would suit your needs. The twin lens kit with the camera can be found in Tokyo for around 65,000 yen.

http://kakaku.com/item/00490111111/

The sensor on micro 4/3 cameras (Panasonic GF1, G1, GH1 or the Olympus E-P1) are just as big as the Olympus DSLR cameras.

Sandy, you are right but it is the camera matter much less than the skill of the photograph.

I am concerned that what the OP call "candid shots" is actually unhealthy voyeurism! the blurring of the photos is more likely due to his guilty conscience than to the quality of the camera.

He said he wanted a DSLR.

"I am concerned that what the OP call "candid shots" is actually unhealthy voyeurism! the blurring of the photos is more likely due to his guilty conscience than to the quality of the camera."

There's always some self-righteous and oh so terribly concerned git around ready to pass quick judgement...

Until you KNOW EXACTLY what photos I take with my camera, your comments are totally uncalled for!