Tax Return = 1st DSLR

[Kendall9991]

So I have been using ~$150 P&S camera's for the last few years.

Finally going to buy a DSLR this year with my tax return!

I am so excited...The kit I found that I'll probably get is This Nikon D5200.

Comes with 2 lenses then I'm looking at possibly buying my uncles Opteka 600mm-1350mm Telephoto lens (not auto focus though) for about $150.

I feel like my cheap P&S have been doing nothing but holding me back.

Now, the worst part though....waiting...but it will be just in time for spring I guess.

Anything I should read up on, control wise? I decently understand Aperture, shutter, ISO etc

 

[darkchild]

Have you looked into purchasing a used camera?
There are a lot of people that pay a lot of money for their first camera to end up not liking the features on it, or even not liking the hobby enough to justify the money spent.
I recommend buying a cheaper used camera(you might even find the camera you listed for a better price) and experimenting with it. Find out what you like about it and what you don't like about it, then do lots and lots of research until you know exactly which camera you want.

Thats just my 2¢ though.

 

[Designer]

Anything I should read up on, control wise? I decently understand Aperture, shutter, ISO etc

I'm excited for you! That is a good choice!

For reading material, you could start by downloading the user's manual and you'd have a head start when you get the camera.

Also; practically anything on photography currently being published. Visit your local library to see what is available.

And there are scads of videos on youtube about photography. You will never run out of those.

 

[Overread]

Comes with 2 lenses then I'm looking at possibly buying my uncles Opteka 600mm-1350mm Telephoto lens (not auto focus though) for about $150.

I'd pass on the Opteka lens unless he's going to sell it for $15.
These lenses are very very cheap because they are poorly made. It's likely a 600mm f8 lens so already at its normal state its got a very small maximum aperture (smallest f number). Couple that with lowgrade optics and no af and you've got a fiddly lens to use. The 1350 mode is a converter added to it which will decrease its aperture further (much darker image) and also magnify all its optical flaws to increase the focal length.
This is to say nothing of the fact that once you start getting to 1000mm in focal length you start to get atmospheric degradation of your photo which causes some reduction on image quality on its own, regardless of the lens used.

What you will have is something "that works" but won't work to a high standard of image quality. Good for record shots in very good lighting, but otherwise really not anywhere near what a DSLR can perform with.

I know that focal length is expensive but I'd honestly say consider saving for things like the new 150-600mm Tamron or Sigma lenses and pass on the Opteka as a serious option.

 

[Mr.Photo]

Comes with 2 lenses then I'm looking at possibly buying my uncles Opteka 600mm-1350mm Telephoto lens (not auto focus though) for about $150.

I'd pass on the Opteka lens unless he's going to sell it for $15.
These lenses are very very cheap because they are poorly made. It's likely a 600mm f8 lens so already at its normal state its got a very small maximum aperture (smallest f number). Couple that with lowgrade optics and no af and you've got a fiddly lens to use. The 1350 mode is a converter added to it which will decrease its aperture further (much darker image) and also magnify all its optical flaws to increase the focal length.
This is to say nothing of the fact that once you start getting to 1000mm in focal length you start to get atmospheric degradation of your photo which causes some reduction on image quality on its own, regardless of the lens used.

What you will have is something "that works" but won't work to a high standard of image quality. Good for record shots in very good lighting, but otherwise really not anywhere near what a DSLR can perform with.

I know that focal length is expensive but I'd honestly say consider saving for things like the new 150-600mm Tamron or Sigma lenses and pass on the Opteka as a serious option.

Not to mention that the Opteka lens has no electronics what so ever and will not meter on the camera. The exposure (shutter speed/aperture/ISO) all have to be set manually to get a properly exposed image.

 

[TCampbell]

I think you'll love the Nikon, but I agree... ixnay the Opteka lens.

There's little point in owning any lens that can do 600 to 1300mm focal lengths if you don't have a solid tripod -- and $150 would buy a decent first tripod.

I can think of a lot of low-cost accessories that I could spend a $150 on that would be far more useful (neutral density filters, a circular polarizing filter, extension tubes, an entry-level prime lens such as a "nifty fifty", a low-cost shoe-mounted flash, etc. etc.)

 

[manny212]

NO OPTEKA!

 

[astroNikon]

So I have been using ~$150 P&S camera's for the last few years.

Finally going to buy a DSLR this year with my tax return!

I am so excited...The kit I found that I'll probably get is This Nikon D5200.

Comes with 2 lenses then I'm looking at possibly buying my uncles Opteka 600mm-1350mm Telephoto lens (not auto focus though) for about $150.

I feel like my cheap P&S have been doing nothing but holding me back.

Now, the worst part though....waiting...but it will be just in time for spring I guess.

Anything I should read up on, control wise? I decently understand Aperture, shutter, ISO etc

Yeah, forget the Opteka. I looked into those years ago. The cheapest long lens I would buy would be a NIkon 500mm Reflex around $300 or so. Fully Manual. And if you think you truly understand Aperture Shutter and ISO it would be no problem. BUt this isnt' one that you handhold, sturdy tripod needed.

 

[Tinderbox (UK)]

Depending on the type of photography you intend to do, if you need to compensate in photoshop or lightroom for an under exposed image by increasing the exposure by 3 stops or more you may see the horizontal banding problem that the D5200 sensor has, otherwise it takes beautiful photo`s just it`s best to know about any negative issues before you spend your money.

John.

 

[UltraLuxe]

The Nikon D5200 is a great choice.
It's the same camera that I have.
The D5200 has the same image sensor as the D5300, and the new D5400, and it's also the same sensor that's in the D7200.

I also wouldn't buy the camera with the kit lenses.
I actually sold the 18 to 55mm lens that came with the camera, and got a 50mm f1.8, and then I sold the 50mm and got a 35mm f1.8.

So I suggest just buying the body only.
And then get the lenses separate.

Here are the lenses that I recommend.

Nikon 35mm f1.8g
Amazon.com : Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras : Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo

Sigma 17 to 50mm f2.8
Amazon.com : Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital DSLR Camera : Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo

 

[Kendall9991]

I have no issue paying that much for a camera. I enjoy taking photos.

The biggest thing that kill's me about my current camera other than the horrible quality is the shutter delay.

The types of photo's I take are (* are the most common)

• Random family photos
• Street photography
• Macro (mostly insects)
• Wildlife (birds, deer, etc)
• Landscape
• Automotive - Planes - Trains etc

I have taken some moon photos but my current P&S will only do 8 second exposures so stars etc never quite worked out for me.

My brother had a Nikon D5000 this last summer and that took great pictures (and I've only seen the jpeg's of them)

The only reason I don't want to buy used is for warranty purposes. I did think about going to Rockbrook Camera in Omaha, NE and looking at their refurb's. I just felt that D5200 package was perfect to get going. $599 didn't seem to bad either.

 

[Overread]

Star/astro photography doesn't have to be done with super-long exposures. In fact because the sensor heats up whilst active, doing super long exposures is often not practical and puts the camera at risk. There are those who do use a DSLR for super long exposures but they tend to spend a small fortune super-cooling the setup as well.

Look up stacking/image stacking because that is a method that astophotography uses a lot - letting you take a series of shots and then stack them up into a single composite. If you use a tripod head mount that lets you rotate with the Earth's rotation you can get clear sharp shots - whilst if you keep the camera fixed you can get the long curving star-trail effect.


That said DSLRs are certianly going to give a better working platform - and as you're after no shutter lag they are fantastic for that as well.