Best Camera for Beginner

[ceemac]

I'm not familiar with Nikon so I might be saying the same thing. Buy more camera than you think you need and learn you way into it. Fully manual incl ISO. Live view for awkward camera positions. Able to shoot RAW. Continuous shooting, exposure bracketing, WB selections, metering options are all things I'm learning about. I'd never heard of a histogram before ( I should use it more ). The ability to do HDR is great. Digital is so much different than film.
I bought a Canon T5i with 18-55 kit lens for about 800 can. It will be a while before I need more camera.

 

[davidharmier60]

All I've used prior to my Nikon Coolpix P60 point and shoot was 35mm SLR.
My budget is a mere pittance compared to $600. I hope for a 10mp Canon 40D body but will probably have a 20D in the end.
Get the newest camera you can afford.
Back when I got my EOS650 it was a revelation! AF and full program or manual control. But then film processing at drug stores went away.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[jccash]

For $600 I lean towards the Nikon D530 or Sony a6000.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TCampbell]

Given that you haven't listed a type of photographer that will push the capabilities of the gear to a limit... ANY entry-level DSLR camera (from any brand) will work.

But this wont get you better photos than what you can take with your iPhone.

To do that... you're going to need to invest some time to learn a bit more about photography (it isn't really about the gear). Otherwise your iPhone will probably be the better camera.

If you just buy a DSLR and use the "auto" mode ... you'll probably end up with photos which are roughly on par with what your iPhone does. Getting better images requires understanding a little bit about how things like aperture and shutter speed will change things like blur (deliberate blur) in an image. But also, different lenses will have a big impact (if they are the right lenses for the job.) Part of the point of having a camera will one lens can be removed and replaced with another is precisely because no single lens is "best" -- it really depends on what you're trying to do. Some lenses are fantastic for landscapes... but lousy for portraits.

“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it!”
-- Ansel Adams

The camera is a tool ... but it doesn't just magically create better looking images (no more than a hammer creates better houses) -- it's all about whether the person using the tool knows how to use it.

If you want to improve on your photography (above what you can do with an iPhone) then pick up a good book to get started.

A non-intimidating (good for beginners) book suggestion might be either the Scott Kelby "Digital Photography" series of books... or the Bryan Peterson "Understanding Exposure" book. (There are many others, but these are good starting points.)

 

[beagle100]

I'm not familiar with Nikon so I might be saying the same thing. Buy more camera than you think you need and learn you way into it. Fully manual incl ISO. Live view for awkward camera positions. Able to shoot RAW. Continuous shooting, exposure bracketing, WB selections, metering options are all things I'm learning about. I'd never heard of a histogram before ( I should use it more ). The ability to do HDR is great. Digital is so much different than film.
I bought a Canon T5i with 18-55 kit lens for about 800 can. It will be a while before I need more camera.

yes, Canon will have better "IQ" image quality and a larger and cheaper selection of lenses but also consider mirrorless - mirrorless cameras are smaller and lighter but can easily use all the DSLR lens ..... very nice !

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[gina5]

Given that you haven't listed a type of photographer that will push the capabilities of the gear to a limit... ANY entry-level DSLR camera (from any brand) will work.

But this wont get you better photos than what you can take with your iPhone.

To do that... you're going to need to invest some time to learn a bit more about photography (it isn't really about the gear). Otherwise your iPhone will probably be the better camera.

If you just buy a DSLR and use the "auto" mode ... you'll probably end up with photos which are roughly on par with what your iPhone does. Getting better images requires understanding a little bit about how things like aperture and shutter speed will change things like blur (deliberate blur) in an image. But also, different lenses will have a big impact (if they are the right lenses for the job.) Part of the point of having a camera will one lens can be removed and replaced with another is precisely because no single lens is "best" -- it really depends on what you're trying to do. Some lenses are fantastic for landscapes... but lousy for portraits.

“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it!”
-- Ansel Adams

The camera is a tool ... but it doesn't just magically create better looking images (no more than a hammer creates better houses) -- it's all about whether the person using the tool knows how to use it.

If you want to improve on your photography (above what you can do with an iPhone) then pick up a good book to get started.

A non-intimidating (good for beginners) book suggestion might be either the Scott Kelby "Digital Photography" series of books... or the Bryan Peterson "Understanding Exposure" book. (There are many others, but these are good starting points.)

Yes I agree. I was planning on doing my research and was actually going to pick up a book, so thanks for the suggestions.

 

[Shutterdog]

Nikon D3400 or Nikon D3300

D3300 OR D3400 OR D5500.

Is there a reason you guys recommend the D3400 and D3300 but not the d3200?

I tought the D3300 and d3200 were close to the same.

Besides AF-P not being compatible with d3200, is there another downside?

 

[benhasajeep]

The D3200 is a capable camera. I think they are leaving it out since its no longer available new or refurbished.

 

[goodguy]

The D3200 is a capable camera. I think they are leaving it out since its no longer available new or refurbished.

Exactly

 

[Derrel]

yes, Canon will have better "IQ" image quality and a larger and cheaper selection of lenses but also consider mirrorless - mirrorless cameras are smaller and lighter but can easily use all the DSLR lens ..... very nice !

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

Hilarious. Just a cut-and-paste from so,so many other posts. Canon has better image quality than what? Hilarious.

But the real cannard that beagle keeps putting on TPF, directed toward noobs, basically every time is this : that a mirriorles camera can "Easily use all the DSLR lenses"

NOT actually true. "easily" and "all" . Huh. No autofocusing...with modern AF lenses, the focusing ring's throw from Infinity to about 10 feet is a mere 3 to 10 degrees of focusing ring movement, meaning many times, as in MOST times, a beginner will FAIL to be able to achieve focus on things reliably, since, focusing from Infinty to 10 feet is a hair-trigger operation--an operartion designed to be done by a micro-motor, and a computer, on the lens's native DSLR camera bodies.

Modern, autofocusing lenses are VERY DIFFICULT FOR MANY PEOPLE to focus accurately, especially in challenging light, or in action scenarios. Even on their native system D-SLR cameras. AF lenses are designed and manufactured to be focused by an autofocusing system...an entire AF system!

Once agin, we have beagle, spreading a very specific bit of total misinformation about the "easy" use of d-slr lenses on mirrorless cameras. Those of us with decades of experience KNOW how tricky it can be to achieve focus when we use an AF lens in manual focusing mode! The lenses themselves are NOT designed to be focused by hand-and-eye, but, again, by a micro-motor in the lens itself, or in the camera body, with a highly sophisticated computer determining the exact, precise focusing distance. Jeebers!

We are not talking about 1960's-1990's manual focusing lenses...we are talking about "DSLR lenses", which means autofocusing lenses, with hair-trigger, and or sloppy, loosey-goosey, low-friction, crummy manual focusing feel and action, in 90% of cases.

Hell...I have 40-plus years of photo experience: my Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 AF-D macro lens is a royal bugger to focus manually...I MISS focus, at least a little bit, with it in manual mode at any distance longer than 6 feet, perhaps 30% of the time. My 70-300 AF-S Nikkor is a PITA to focus at long range, accurately. My 24mm/2.8 AF-D is very difficult to focus indoors. Almost ALL wide-angle lenses with f/2.8 apertures are a PITA to focus by hand-and-eye, indoors.

 

[Derrel]

There is a HUGE difference between being able to MOUNT a lens on a mirrorless camera, and being able to use the lens "easily". The idea that "all DSLR lenses" can easily be used on a mirrorless camera is an outright falsehood.

Basically, ANY and ALL cameras work best with their very-own, system-specific lenses. Autofocusing cameras work best with AF lenses. Simple fact. AF lenses are not designed to be focused precisely by a human, but rather by a computer, a micro-motor, and an entire AF system, with focus squares, color-sensing, distance-sensing,etc.,etc..

System-native, camera-maker lenses are typically the very best lenses available for any camera model. Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Fuji all design and manufacture good to great lenses for their OWN cameras.

Using system-native, camera-maker lenses, or high-grade third-party manufacturer lenses which were designed for a specific "type" of camera, is the absolute best way for a beginner to get into photography.

Being told that any mirroless camera can "easily use all of the DSLR lenses" is an outright falsehood. Mounting a lens is a far,far,farrrrrr cry from meaning that lens will be easy to use. Sure. Drop that 1999 Chevy 350 cid engine into that Ford F150 pickup. It's easy.

 

[davidharmier60]

For my 35mm EOS650 I have a Phoenix 19-35 and a Sigma 28-105 That both work very well. That's why MY plan for a beginner DSLR is somewhere around a 20,30 or 40D. That and saving up enough money to get anything newer probably will never occur. And I know a 20, 30 or 40D will not do night shots much if any better than my EOS650 but that's ok.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

20D,30D,40D, all available VERY low-cost these days! I still have my 20D around. No, it's not "great", but it still makes photos.

Canon's 20D has some very nice SOOC images when you shoot RAW+JPEG and select Monochrome, with Sepia toning, and then Yellow for your Filter Effect. The .CR2 file (the raw file) is in full-color, but the .JPG file is processed in B&W, and the filter effects, sharpening, and tone curve can all be user-customized.

I made a LOT of nice pics with the autofocusing Canon 20D and a Canon 50mm autofocusing lens, as well as a Sigma 18-125 autofocusing DC lens.

Some of the earlier 2000's era DSLR cameras can make decent images in good light, with good exposure settings, especially at base ISO levels.

The best "beginner camera" has a camera-maker lens on it, of the type the camera was DESIGNED TO BE USED WITH.

 

[davidharmier60]

Fact of the matter is by the time I save enough money to get a DSLR it could be that 60, 70 or 80D will be cheap enough.
I got plenty of nice shots with my Phoenix and Sigma on film and can't see any way an actual Canon lense could be that much better.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[TCampbell]

Derrel, while Canon’s “mirrorless” line has their own set of lenses (“EF-M”) they also make an adapter that lets the camera use any EOS lens. Since there is no reflex mirror, the lens mounting flange is closer to the sensor focus plane. Canon’s adapter basically resembles an extension tube... it basically just holds the lens at the correct distance and also passes through all the electronic signals between body & lens so the auto-focus, aperture control, etc. all work fine.

I don’t own a mirrorless body myself, but in the Canon system, their mirrorless cameras can use any EOS lens (if the owner has the adapter) and everything works.

I don’t know if that’s true for 3rd party lenses. (E.g. could I use a Sigma ‘Art’ lens designed for Canon EOS mount on a Canon EOS-M body with the adapter? I’m sure it would “fit” but I don’t know if all the functions would work correctly. Of course I also don’t know that they wouldn’t work correctly either.)

“Better IQ” is a bit too general. That varies ... and mostly by lens.