I would like to upgrade to a better camera. I presently have a regular "Point & Shoot" Nikon Coolpix P80 with an 18 optical zoom. I have had moderate sucess with hummingbird pictures that I have taken using the "sport" mode, but, tho I usually can stop the hummingbird in flight, I still would like sharper pictures. I am able to get within 5' of the hummingbirds (actually about 3'). I think I want an SLR and have been looking at the 3 they have at Costco (I try to buy camera there because of their 90 day no questions asked return policy). At the moment they have 2 Nikons- a D5000 and a D60 and a Canon Rebel XSI. They all come with two lens'. The Nikon D5000 is on sale for $950 and the Nikon D60 for $800. The Canon is $850. I really don't want to go too much higher, but will if someone gives me a strong recomendation for something else. I know there are several REALLY good photographers on this site and I'm hoping one of you can help. It will be greatly appreciated. I have really fallen in love with these little guys and really love taking their pictures. Thanks in advance

Carla,

I'm far from being one of the "good" photographers on here, but I can tell you this much: for really good wildlife photography in particular, results are due far more to the lens than to the camera body.

Generally speaking, the lenses you get with a DSLR are fine for casual portrait work, vacation pictures, and so forth. They are probably better than your typical point-and-shoot, but they won't have the image stabilization or the incredible sharpness that characterizes the professional-level shots you see here.

Unless you're planning to make a career of nature photography, any of those camera bodies would be fine. The question for you is more one of availability of the kind of lenses you'll want to save up for. Or rent, as I do, when I'm on a birding trip.

Kevin Morgan
Baton Rouge, LA

Carla, I have a previous version of the Canon,the Rebel XTi, and I love it. I also have a 75-300mm and the 18-55 lens, plus the 100-400mm. I did also purchase the EF 300mm, and I tend to use this lens the most, along with the 1.4 EF Canon extender, due to the shorter focusing. Since you get close, this will work well. There are some other lenses I would also like, similar to some the other forum members are using, but they will have to wait.....

Patricia: The Nikon D5000 has video mode while the D60 doesn't. Also, I think both of the lenses offered with the cameras at Costco do have image stabilization. (Myself, I'd go with the D5000 or better yet the D90 that they offered before the D5000!)

Frank Janzen
Mountain Center, CA
Zone 9

My two pesos: I had the Canon 100-400 5.6 lens with image stabilzation and could never seem to get results I was happy with (sharpness issues) I tried it with both the image stabalizion "on" and with it "off". Sometimes I got sharper pictures with it "off". Go figure. I changed over to the Canon 400 5.6 (with out stabilzation) and am vastly more satisfied with the results. An important side benifit is that it is considerably lighter weight than the 100-400 so I am much more inclined to go on bird walks with it. If someone handed me a coupon and said "with this you can buy any lens you want" I wouldnŽt change. ThereŽs just nothing more powerfull on the market that IŽd be willing to carry around. As to the camera body I agree with Kevin and I think that xti model would be fine. Many have said over and over on various photography forums: spend your money on the glass.

I'm no expert either but will add my 2 cents. Maybe it would be of benefit if, like Kevin suggested, you could rent a lens and try it out. Patricia and Bud have the Canon 300mm f/4 lens as do I. It has Image Stabilization which is supposed to be a big help, though Peter said he didn't see the benefits. I would like a lens with more power, but then you are looking at possibly needing a tripod. I wanted something I could use in a yard or on a birding trip without a tripod and without being too heavy. If I had a bigger wallet I would like a 300mm 2.8 and then could use a 2X teleconverter to put me at 600mm f/5.6, but it's a heavier lens. I have the Rebel XTi and use the 1.4 teleconverter. I am just beginning to scratch the surface of what the camera and lens are capable of if the operator knew what she was doing.

Joan, my husband made me a 'monopod' out of a cheap tripod we purchased last year and has proven to be a great help.

Joan, my husband made me a 'monopod' out of a cheap tripod we purchased last year and has proven to be a great help.

Patricia, I'm going to get a Monopod myself. Right now I'm mainly taking pictures in yards from porches so we don't disturb the birds, so I scrunch down in a chair and rest my elbows to steady the camera. Peter, anyone can see (picture of the day) you know what you're doing and are getting the best out of your equipment. I need all the help I can get and advice from people who know what they are doing.

Thanks everybody for all the nice feedback. I think I had heard that the "base" didn't matter as much as the lens - so - I guess that is the info I want most - what lens to get. A couple of you have made suggestions, so I will be on the lookout for those lens'. Until then, I'll keep using my current camera. Pretty soon it will be set up on a tripod in the front window (I usually open the window) because I have a feeder in a bush about 4' away and that is where I have gotten my best pictures in the past. Since this camera is relatively new, I'll take my time on the next one. Thanks again.

Carla,

Just a bit of advisory: prepare for sticker shock on the lenses; a good-quality 300mm lens, say, for a Canon DSLR can run you north of a grand easily, and a really high-quality one can be more than double or treble that.

That's not to say you need any of those lenses now. I own a 75-300mm "consumer grade" zoom lens from Canon for my DSLR that was about $300, several years ago, and while I could never duplicate the pictures Peter gets with his 400mm/f5.6, or even Joan's 300mm/f4, I can get plenty of decent "ID" shots with it.

And as noted, when I travel, I rent a 300mm/f4 or the 100-400/f5.6 that Peter mentioned, although the 400/5.6 he mentioned sounds really tempting to try. From what I read, it's really useful in areas where there is good light year-round because that allows faster shutter speeds (and hence compensates for the lack of image stabilization).

Kevin Morgan
Baton Rouge LA