Are there any good DSLR cameras under $100?
I am trying to find a DSLR camera but, all the brands are confusing me and I would like to get an older one. This price is body only. I like Nikon and Canon more than the others, but I don't know which ones would be good.
Any help is appreciated
Thank you in advance for any suggestions that are made.
Quote from Damian Camarote on June 21, 2024, 4:33 pmQuote from KankRat on June 21, 2024, 1:55 pmAre any of the other Nikon cameras from the time of that camera good as well, I just want to see all the options.
D300 is a professional, weather sealed body with really great autofocus. The D200 came before it. You could probably find that cheap. It has a CCD sensor some people really like that. Not sure why. I had one, it was okay. But I found the small LCD really annoying. I would go with the D300 over it for sure. Especially for $100 bucks?? That's crazy.
There is the D90, which is more the "enthusiast" body style, like D7000, 7100, 7200 that followed it. It has some more modern features, like video. I don't know how much better the sensor might be. I prefer the pro-style body over these features, but you may not.
A huge jump in image quality would be a D7000, which had contained a Sony sensor. When I got mine, I immediately sold my other cameras (the D200, a Canon 40D and Canon Xsi) because it walked all over the others for image quality. Sadly one costs about double your budget. I looked up Pentax K5 same sensor those are more $$ too.
I never got a D300 because I had the D7000 but everyone on the wildlife foruns said the AF on the D300 was better.
I think you should really start with the lens(es) and the budget for that not with the body.
What is it good for if you find a body for $100 but the lens(es) you want cost twice as much as with another system.
Although you said you like Nikon and Canon more, I still would recommend to take a look at the old Sony alpha DSLRs. The non-pro models are sometimes very very cheap and have native support for old Minolta AF lenses which can save you a lot of money if you don't need any uncommon lenses.
For example the DSLR-A350 I see being sold for $50 every other week complete set with the kit lens. It doesn't have the "pro"-build quality the Nikon D300 has but in terms of the pictures you can take with it it should be comparable, I think it even has a slightly higher resolution and it has IBIS (in fact all old Sony DSLRs have IBIS).
Or ofc you could actually spend the $100 only on the body and gets something like a Sony SLT-A57/A58/65. These have the electronic viewfinder tho and a translucent mirror (which does not flip away when taking pictures).
Quote from KankRat on June 21, 2024, 6:03 pmQuote from Damian Camarote on June 21, 2024, 4:33 pmQuote from KankRat on June 21, 2024, 1:55 pmAre any of the other Nikon cameras from the time of that camera good as well, I just want to see all the options.
D300 is a professional, weather sealed body with really great autofocus. The D200 came before it. You could probably find that cheap. It has a CCD sensor some people really like that. Not sure why. I had one, it was okay. But I found the small LCD really annoying. I would go with the D300 over it for sure. Especially for $100 bucks?? That's crazy.
There is the D90, which is more the "enthusiast" body style, like D7000, 7100, 7200 that followed it. It has some more modern features, like video. I don't know how much better the sensor might be. I prefer the pro-style body over these features, but you may not.
A huge jump in image quality would be a D7000, which had contained a Sony sensor. When I got mine, I immediately sold my other cameras (the D200, a Canon 40D and Canon Xsi) because it walked all over the others for image quality. Sadly one costs about double your budget. I looked up Pentax K5 same sensor those are more $$ too.
I never got a D300 because I had the D7000 but everyone on the wildlife foruns said the AF on the D300 was better.
You can get that Sony sensor in a Pentax K-50 for just about $150. The K-50 is a fantastic camera that doesn’t get the credit it deserves. It’s weather sealed, built like a tank, has pro style controls with two e-dials, focus peaking in live view, and decent noise handling. Pair it up with a DA* 16-50 SDM F2.8 and for less than $400 you have a very nice pro-ish level camera. The K-50 got a bad rep from the aperture solenoid failure issue, but plenty don’t have the issue and some resellers have fixed the issue. I’ve had one for over a year and it has been abused. Been through a lot and it just keeps working. Recently it survived nearly a 4 foot fall, lens first on to a stone paver. Aside from some scratches and a wounded ego it’s find. I can’t recommend the combo enough.
Uploaded files:
These are all great suggestions.
I agree about focusing some of your budget on lenses. Fortunately, all these DSLR systems have plenty options for the most common types of lenses. Some may be slightly cheaper/better performance than others, but they're mostly the same.
I have the least experience with Canon, but Nikon, Pentax and Sony all have great DSLRs under $100 in that 10-12mp range. Canon I'm sure does too.
Nikon:
D200, D90 already mentioned. D300 sounds like a nice upgrade.
Pentax:
K10D, K20D, K200D, maybe K-30/50 as suggested
Sony:
A100, A200
Though I will say I thought the A100 image quality was great but the viewfinder felt tiny compared to the Nikon and Pentax's.
There's a lot more especially if you're willing to go down to the 6mp DSLRs.
Quote from James Warner on June 27, 2024, 4:34 pmThough I will say I thought the A100 image quality was great but the viewfinder felt tiny compared to the Nikon and Pentax's.
Since I happen to have an A200 and a Nikon D40X here, I did a quick comparison and I can see no difference in viewfinder size.
The actual "window" to look into the viewfinder is slightly smaller on the D40X but the focusing screen appears to have the same size and image magnification.
I don't have the D300 anymore but I think it had a pentaprism (instead of a pentamirror) same with the K10D + they probably have higher magnification.
They were considered Professional or Enthusiast models while the A200/D40X are Entry-level.
The comparable higher end model in the Sony DSLR line would be the a700 which also has a pentaprism and likely higher magnification, magnesium alloy body, weather sealing and all that good "pro" stuff.
Prices of course are different around the globe but the Entry-level DSLRs from 2007/8/9 should be half the price of the pro models from that time.
Quote from James Warner on June 27, 2024, 4:34 pmThese are all great suggestions.
I agree about focusing some of your budget on lenses. Fortunately, all these DSLR systems have plenty options for the most common types of lenses. Some may be slightly cheaper/better performance than others, but they're mostly the same.
I have the least experience with Canon, but Nikon, Pentax and Sony all have great DSLRs under $100 in that 10-12mp range. Canon I'm sure does too.
Nikon:
D200, D90 already mentioned. D300 sounds like a nice upgrade.
Pentax:
K10D, K20D, K200D, maybe K-30/50 as suggested
Sony:
A100, A200
Though I will say I thought the A100 image quality was great but the viewfinder felt tiny compared to the Nikon and Pentax's.
There's a lot more especially if you're willing to go down to the 6mp DSLRs.
What about the Nikon D50?
Quote from Damian Camarote on June 28, 2024, 12:59 amWhat about the Nikon D50?
It's even older and also not a professional or higher end model. If you find one for cheap (with battery) sure, but its definitely not worth $100.
These links should help getting an overview when which camera was released and who the target audience was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Nikon_DSLR_cameras
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Konica_Minolta/Sony_DSLR_cameras
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Pentax_digital_interchangeable_lens_cameras
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_EOS_digital_cameras
