My photographer friend once suggested Nikon D40 or D80. I have never tried either of them but other people I know seem to love them. They are less expensive but work as well as Canon.

Hi Hello Baker

I second SingingHorse's and foodnerd's vote for the Nikon D40. It is the lowest-priced DSLR on the market at present and is equally as capable as the Canon XT and XTi. Don't worry about megapixels - many professional photographers LOVE the D40 for the very fact that it is 6 megapixels and not the 10, 12, 14 etc, of others. Why? The more megapixels, the more noise. Noise is what occurs in low light situations when the sensor struggles with resolving shadows. This becomes a huge issue on cameras with smaller sensors, i.e. the crop sensor group of cameras (which includes all of the cameras mentioned above) and especially becomes an issue on the fingernail sized micro sensors of the point and shoot cameras.

The Nikon D60 is also excellent, though slightly up the scale in price. You cannot beat a DSLR, especially for food photography or any kind of close up work. I second the recommendation to pick up the 50mm lens - the f/1.8 is an incredible value and an excellent lens for anyone on a budget. Once you have your DSLR body you can invest in many lenses down the line, telephoto, wide, macro, etc.

If you absolutely cannot spring for a DSLR, I would stick with Canon, Nikon and Sony for the point and shoots - and try to find the lowest megapixel camera possible with those (which is getting harder and harder as megapixels are being pushed). Anything higher than 10mp in a point and shoot camera is serious overkill.

One thing to consider is that the prices of the better point and shoots come fairly close to a Nikon D40 - I think it's worth waiting and saving to get into DSLR's rather than dropping a fairly big chunk of change on a point and shoot now - especially if you're able to borrow a good camera at present while you save up.

Happy shooting!

Speaking of the 50mm, you mean the cheapest f1.8 stop one, right? If so, I use a Canon Digital Rebel Xti, and that's the only lens I have, along with the lens that came with the camera which isn't that great. My question is, what would you guys recommend as the best settings to use the 50mm lens with..like AV, P etc..? Using Auto always gives me dark/unsharp photos as does the macro setting (GOD, I need a macro lens soo badly, but they're so expensive!!!). I have almost no natural light, so I use two Lowel Ego Lights, and that definitely makes a difference in settings with the 50mm. Any advice would be so appreciated, until I can move somewhere with lots of windows and no buildings blocking the sun!!!

Thans, Marika! Actually, it was sent back to the factory last February and adjusted, among a few other fixes (the lens that is - so I guess the camera needs it too). As for manual focusing, would that be the M setting? I read the manual berore I tore up my knee, and now I'm too out of it to read it again.... for now.

Thanks again so much, Marika. I just realized it might be the light in this place. Since, as you know, i have barely have any natural light to speak of, I use two Lowel Ego lights, but when I use them during the day, my photos come out unsharp and kind of dull. However, when I use them at night, they come out pretty sharp and bright. I'm thinking whatever small amount of light squeaks through the windows, has some kind of effect on my photos. Weird, huh? You'll see a difference in a soon coming post of a cinnamon, chocolate, raisin challah I made yesterday! *hugs*

If I correctly understand what you're asking, you're talking about Auto Mode (a camera function) rather than Auto Focus (a lense thing)

In my honest opinion, no matter the lense you're using, I would say that you should try to never shoot on Auto Mode (unless you're just taking happy snaps, then it's pretty convenient). If you're shooting in low light it will compensate by using the flash or changing other settings wich will effect the overall picture clarity and look. Also, with Auto Mode you lose all control over fun things like depth of field.

AV Mode is for aperture priority: This mode is great when you want to play with depth of field, you set the aperture you want (the smaller the number, ie. f/1.4 the more unfocused/blurry the background/surroundings will be, the larger the number ie. f/11 the more objects will be in focus) and then the camera will automatically set the shutter speed so that the pic has the correct exposure. This requires shooting in good light or having your camera on a tripod in low light.

A-Dep Mode is also for depth of field: This mode automatically adjusts so that as many object, close or far from the main subject, is in focus. This is good for group pics or landscapes, or if you want to take a pic of a set table and would like all the food/settings to be in focus. You need to shoot with Auto Focus on for this mode.

Then manual. All my photos are taken on manual and I would encourage others to shoot on manual as well. If you get to know how to use the camera, you can take any pic you like with manual mode because you'll know which settings to change to effect the picture. I'm using the most horrible old kit lense that came with my old film Canon 3000 on my current dSLR and I still get decent enough pics (with the exception of dramatic depth of field shots, due to the lense, unfortunately I never seem to have the money available for a new lense I'm sure the pros would see the lack of lense quality but I'm making do for now )

I would say that those would be the best modes to use for food photography, Manual & AV most often used and A-Dep for the odd occasion.

For a better, clearer, cleaner picture ISO 100 or 200 is best, these also require good lighting or the use of a tripod but really is worth it. With playing around with my Canon 350D (Rebel) I've seen noticeable noise when shooting using ISO 400 or more which is meant for lower light.

Finally, because you don't have a lot of natural light, I really would recommend you use a tripod. All my shots are taken on a tripod in natural light, I live in Ireland and it's often overcast and my kitchen doesn't get a lot of natural light but most of my pics look as though they've been taken in bright daylight, which is often not the case. At least half of my photos have been taken with a 1 second or longer exposure time, and if I didn't have a tripod they'd come out rather blurry because I don't have the steadiest hands. I <3 my tripod!

BTW, Auto Focus can be turned on and off with a switch on the lense.

I hope that I've helped and haven't confused things even more, lol!

As far as buying your own camera, I would absolutely recommend that you save up for a dSLR. I've never used a Nikon but I've also heard good things about the D40. I'm personally a Canon lover through and through but I understand budget restrictions.

The important thing to remember is that money should be spent on good lenses because you can keep those lenses when you upgrade the camera body, so you'll want lenses that are decent quality. Get a dSLR with a kit lense to start with, then slowly build up your lense collection.

lol i should start a donate to poor student fund so i can get a dslr
foodgawker still continues to reject me. it is looking down at my point and click!
ah well, if it snobs me i will snob it too. tastespotting although slower, did accept my submission. i had good traffic today!

audax, where did you go to get it for 400??????
about the light thingy, you can get a clip on portable lights and then just get some really thin paper or even some gauzy gift paper to wrap on it as a diffuser. they are dirt cheap, will probably set you back way under 50 aud rather than just getting real camera lights.

yes, macro lens will come in very handy indeed. It can zoomed in real close and works well for still life. how about a close-up lens? I might get one of those and stick it in front of my point and click. might work. going to experiment that with a magnifier glass first lol.

So I am going to jump into the world of DSLR cameras and am looking into 2 that I can afford. One is the Nikon D3000 and the other is the Rebel XS. They are both 10 megapixel. Any thoughts from anybody?
I am dissapointed that neither one takes video- I have become very spoiled with that feature on regular point and shoot digital cameras! I have a little girl and it comes in very handy... oh well
Any feedback would be appreciated

I'm saving to buy a DSLR as well.. in the meantime I use a P&S (point and shoot) Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H20/B 10.1 MP Digital Camera with 10x Optical Zoom which I got as a birthday present and its sold for about $370 in Amazon.com.

It does the job really, really well... see: www.sweetbitesblog.com

I get tons of compliments on my pictures and most people think I'm taking it with the more expensive camera equipment. I guess what they say is true... "you don't need expensive camera to take good pictures"

Most professional photographers say the same thing, it comes down to which you prefer to use.

Mechanically, they're the same, they take the same pictures.

So what you need to do is figure out which you prefer to use. Go try them out in the store, look through the menu functions, feel it in your hands, which one is easier for you to use?

One thing that could be considered a deciding point is that Canon have a far bigger range of lenses to choose from, that is, both budget and costly lenses. So if you would one day like to start investing in lenses, you'll find more options for a Canon.

Other than that, it comes down to personal preference.