Suggestions for camera welcome

[Tiller]

Type of photography: 1-Wildlife, 2-Astrophotography, 3-Landscapes

Budget: maxed out right now would be $1650 roundabout. I can always save more if necessary but try not to go above $2000.

My thoughts: Either a Sony a65 or a77. With the 10 or 12 fps burst respectively, they seem like good choices from my limited research. But feel free to offer other suggestions!
Lenses: This is where I start to get lost. Much help needed.

Thanks!

 

[gw2424]

I would try to find a Canon 5d Classic, Canon 17-40mm f4, and a Sigma 100mm-300mm f4. 10 FPS burst is completely unnecessary.

 

[Tiller]

For wildlife photography? I thought fps was pretty important to get a good shot.

 

[gw2424]

You only need a couple good shots...not 10/second.

 

[ConradM]

Go with the a65. Same sensor as the a77. The a77 just offers more "pro" features. Should make much of a difference to the hobbyist.

 

[ConradM]

You only need a couple good shots...not 10/second.

If it's so unnecessary then why does FPS scale up with the cost of a body? (unless it's a Sony.)

 

[bc_steve]

In addition to a camera body you're going to want a telephoto for wildlife, a somewhat wide angle lens for landscapes, and a tripod for low light and long zooms. You are also going to need a memory card and a bag to keep all this stuff in.

Astrophotography can be quite expensive if you are looking to get a motorized tripod to compensate for the Earth's rotation. I'm not quite sure if that is what you are after. If you just want to go out at night and take some pictures with the stars and the milky way in them you can do that with a regular tripod. You'll be limited to exposures of 20s or less if you want the stars to show up as points. Long exposures will cause the stars to show up as streaks, which can be pretty neat as well. To take pictures at night you will find it useful to have a lens with a wide aperture (often referred to as a fast lens) because they allow more light to reach the camera's sensor.

It might be a good idea to just get an inexpensive kit lens (usually 18-55mm or something along those lines) to start with and as you use it you will get a better idea of how you want to upgrade your setup.

 

[2fastlx]

I have both the 65 and 77. They're both great. Skip the older 5d and go with the newer technology. They will both have better auto focus than the classic 5d which will help with wildlife. One other benefit for wildlife is the 1.5 crop factor. You will be able to shoot a bit tighter. I use the burst quite a bit for faster moving subjects. I would spend the extra money on the 77 as the extra features are well worth it. Not to mention its weather sealed.

 

[Tiller]

I've already got the Canon t3 with a kit lens and a cheap telephoto lens. My images just aren't coming out as sharp as I want them too.

 

[ConradM]

I've already got the Canon t3 with a kit lens and a cheap telephoto lens. My images just aren't coming out as sharp as I want them too.

Budget kit lenses and zoom lenses aren't going to be very sharp.

 

[stewdygert]

If you already have a body, the I would start upgrading lens. For canon something in the L line with be great. I also like the sigma lens, they are t quite as sharp but save some money compared to the L.

 

[2fastlx]

If you already have a body, the I would start upgrading lens. For canon something in the L line with be great. I also like the sigma lens, they are t quite as sharp but save some money compared to the L.

If you do stick with the body, a 17-40 or 24-105 may be good choices.