"2Bdecided" wrote in message
...


So, my question is, if I'm to take the leap into the world of DSLR,
what should I consider? I've looked at the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X
on dpreview. These reviews don't seem to focus on what I really care
about - they didn't mention the fantastic lack of red eye, or the

Red-eye is far less likely to be a problem with any DSLR because the pop-up
flash is much farther away from the lens axis. That's what causes red-eye:
the flash is too close to the lens axis, which is usually unavoidable with
compact cameras because of their small size. So practically all compacts
require some sort of red-eye fix, either in the camera or done later in
software.

DSLRs not only have the advantage of the built-in flash being farther away
from the lens axis, but also have provision for mounting an external flash
which is better still, in that and several other respects. Most compact
cameras don't have the hot shoe for an external flash so you're pretty much
stuck with the red-eye problem.


annoying flash recycle time problem with the 400D for example. How am
I to learn about these things before buying the camera? I don't want
to make an expensive mistake.

My Nikon DSLRs haven't given me any problem with long recycle times the
relatively few times I've used the built-in flash. But it's very possible I
just haven't taken as many flash shots that way as you were doing. You had
probably run down the camera battery to a considerable degree. Mostly I use
an external flash anyway, which saves the camera battery as well as having
many other advantages -- more power, fast recycle time, tilt and swivel for
bounce light, and a lot of other features.


I can't imagine wanting to change lenses. The idea of exposing the
sensor to dust doesn't appeal anyway! I seem to have enough bad luck
with cameras as it is.

That's nothing to be concerned about at first anyway. Later on, you may or
may not want to buy one or more other lenses. Many 35mm SLR owners never
bought any other lens than the one the camera came with, and I suppose DSLR
users may be much the same. Think of it as an option that's there for you if
you should want to expand your hobby that way in the future, but not
something you're obliged to do.


Alternatively, if there's a point-and-shoot which can match the speed
and safe exposure of the 400D, and yet still fit in my pocket and show
me everything on an LCD, I'd like to hear about it.

I doubt very much you'll ever find a point-and-shoot that will give you
overall results equal to a DSLR. I have three Nikon DSLRs and several Nikon
Coolpix compact cameras, and I love them all -- some of the Coolpixes are
much too large to be pocketable and were originally quite expensive, too --
but the DSLRs are just an entirely different breed of cat.

I'd go for the D40 or D40x if I were you. (Of course as one of the Nikon
faithful I would say that, but one of my DSLRs is a D40 and I really love
it. And its kit lens is generally regarded as much superior to Canon's
equivalent product.)

Neil