Camera/lens recommendation for a $500 or less budget

[HookdOnPix]

First of all, I'm a hobby photographer. My kids are in sports so I take a lot of pics there which means I use zoom a LOT and also need good action shots in both gym and outdoor settings. I've done a couple small weddings for friends and a few senior portrait sessions. Not in it for money, just to help friends/family out plus I love doing it. Also enjoy nature, landmarks, etc.

I just purchased a Fujifilm S8200 bridge camera in June 2013. I love it, and I'm probably not using it's full capabilities, but I'm looking in to biting the bullet and getting an DSLR camera. I am currently borrowing my cousin's older model, a Sony A230. I took both cameras out last weekend for some comparison shots, putting them side by side in collages to compare (I even wrote down the settings used on each pic). I do like the Sony pics better. He'd sell me the Sony for $100 but I'd want to purchase lenses/filters/etc but the main dealbreaker is it does not take video which I do use quite a bit. Don't want to carry two cameras.

Keeping my budget at $500 or less, I've been told Canon is the best. I'm looking at a Canon T3 or T3i. Is that a good choice?

I'm overwhelmed at the lens and filter options though. I love zoom, want pics with good bokeh, action shots. Where do I even start?

 

[jaomul]

Brand fanboys will give you the model of a particular make. 500 for a body and lens is entry level and most brands make very good entry level cameras now.

The Canon t3i is nice. I had the t2i and was very happy with that camera. I would recommend also to look at the Pentax k30. It is last years model so there should be good deals had. Also it has a good entry level spec with 6fps and weather proofing.

 

[table1349]

For your budget you are going to have a hard time to find a suitable camera and lens combination. Sports photography is one of the most demanding forms of photography both on the photographer and the equipment. For outdoor photography you can get something that works, but for indoor photography you need a fast lens, f2.8 or faster. Fast glass is expensive glass.

As for a recommendation I will let others give them to you. I shoot sports and about the only indoor lens that might fit your price range is a Canon 85mm f1.8. That lens alone will take of 2/3 to 3/4 of your budget new, so you would need to find one used.

 

[robbins.photo]

First of all, I'm a hobby photographer. My kids are in sports so I take a lot of pics there which means I use zoom a LOT and also need good action shots in both gym and outdoor settings. I've done a couple small weddings for friends and a few senior portrait sessions. Not in it for money, just to help friends/family out plus I love doing it. Also enjoy nature, landmarks, etc.

I just purchased a Fujifilm S8200 bridge camera in June 2013. I love it, and I'm probably not using it's full capabilities, but I'm looking in to biting the bullet and getting an DSLR camera. I am currently borrowing my cousin's older model, a Sony A230. I took both cameras out last weekend for some comparison shots, putting them side by side in collages to compare (I even wrote down the settings used on each pic). I do like the Sony pics better. He'd sell me the Sony for $100 but I'd want to purchase lenses/filters/etc but the main dealbreaker is it does not take video which I do use quite a bit. Don't want to carry two cameras.

Keeping my budget at $500 or less, I've been told Canon is the best. I'm looking at a Canon T3 or T3i. Is that a good choice?

I'm overwhelmed at the lens and filter options though. I love zoom, want pics with good bokeh, action shots. Where do I even start?

Well the first consideration you need to think about is that taking good action shots indoors generally requires what is referred to as a "fast" lens, meaning one that has a very low number for it's maximum aperture rating, allowing the lens to open up a lot and let in a lot of light. Thing is, if you want a fast telephoto, well $500 wouldn't really even be enough for the lens, much less the lens and the camera together. So with all things camera you need to look at making some compromises there.

So really the big question is, how much telephoto do you need? You mentioned you'd taken some shots already with your SB200 and with your A230, take a look at the EXIF data and see at what focal length most of them were shot at, and then we can go from there. Once we have a better idea how much telephoto range you need it will be easier to figure out what the best compromises will be for your situation and what equipment will best suit your needs within your given budget.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

I say stick to solid Nikon used gear. I love my new D7100.

 

[HookdOnPix]

I don't have my EXIF data notes with me, but I know the 18-55 lens on the Sony does not have near enough zoom for my liking. My Fuji S8200 has 40x optical zoom and I love that feature.

Ok, so I realize my budget won't get me a fast lens for excellent gym action shots.

How important is the image stabilization feature? I keep seeing that on cameras I'm comparing online. I THINK it's something I want. ?

How about a 2x telephoto lens attachment, UV filter, polarizer, lens hood...those are all things I've discovered in my search but don't know if I should get them, or are they a waste of money.

I'm trying to keep the budget low, especially since I haven't even had my Fuji S8200 a full year yet. It's hard to justify an upgrade already.

Let's say I get a Canon. Are there other brands of compatible lenses/accessories I could look in to for cost savings?

 

[TheNevadanStig]

I vote D3200

 

[robbins.photo]

I don't have my EXIF data notes with me, but I know the 18-55 lens on the Sony does not have near enough zoom for my liking. My Fuji S8200 has 40x optical zoom and I love that feature.

Ok, so I realize my budget won't get me a fast lens for excellent gym action shots.

How important is the image stabilization feature? I keep seeing that on cameras I'm comparing online. I THINK it's something I want. ?

How about a 2x telephoto lens attachment, UV filter, polarizer, lens hood...those are all things I've discovered in my search but don't know if I should get them, or are they a waste of money.

I'm trying to keep the budget low, especially since I haven't even had my Fuji S8200 a full year yet. It's hard to justify an upgrade already.

Let's say I get a Canon. Are there other brands of compatible lenses/accessories I could look in to for cost savings?

For action shots image stablization is not really a feature that you will get much use out of, in order to capture good action photos you need a fast shutter speed. If your already shooting at high shutter speeds this cancels out camera shake, so IS/VR/VC/OS (the various forms of image stablization available) really won't make any difference. They will only prevent camera shake when your shooting at lower shutter speeds, they allow you to shoot at low shutter speed without a tripod or monopod and avoid camera shake.

Ok, well if 50 mm or so is not going to be enough zoom for you that is going to limit your options quite a bit. You'll probably wind up needing to go with a zoom lens in the 200 mm to 300 mm range and unfortunately the only thing your going to be able to afford within the $500 budget is going to be slower glass. That will mean your indoor shots (such as the gym) are going to be more difficult to take and require higher ISO's (which means more noise).

The 2x telephoto lens add ons that screw into the end of your lens are not worth investing in, at all. The image quality on them is garbage. A true teleconverter can come in handy but they usually won't do you much good without a fast telephoto lens. They aren't designed to work on short to medium range telephoto for the most part, and they also decrease the amount of light coming into the lens. As a result a 2x teleconverter on most standard zoom lenses cut the light level down so much that they won't even autofocus on most cameras. They work ok with faster glass - but with the slower glass it's not worth purchasing one for the most part. Sadly there just really is no such thing as cheap telephoto.

No matter which camera you finally settle on there are lenses out there made by companies like Sigma or Tamron for that particular camera mount that you can buy to save some money on. I will tell you that it is very unlikely I'd recommend a Canon for you, unless you absolutely had your heart set on one and even then I'd probably try to talk you out of it. Don't get me wrong, Canon makes a nice camera, but if your going to be shooting indoors at high ISO with slow glass Canon is not going to be your best choice. The models of Canon that are going to be in your budget range do not have good low-light abilities, and they do not do well shooting at higher ISO's when compared to their competitors.

Ok, so far I think your best bet is going to be a slower telephoto, something in the 200/300 mm range - it shouldn't be too much of a problem in good lighting conditions, but a zoom lens in that range is probably going to eat up a good portion of your $500 budget, which will limit your camera options a bit as well. Next question, do you have any objections to buying used/refurbished or should I only consider new equipment when making my recommendation?

 

[HookdOnPix]

Lots of great information, thank you! I'm new to SLR's and trying to learn all I can!

When I'm looking at lenses, are there numbers that tell me if it's "slow glass"? What do I look for?

I'm open to other brands. I just have two local professional photographer friends who both said Canon was the "only way to go, for several reasons" but we didn't discuss further. Since I was familiar with the brand, I went with it and that's what I've been looking at to this point. But one also told me to go further up and get a 60D or something like that. I can not, and will not, spend that much money on a hobby when I have a family that comes first. $500 +/- is a lot of money for me to spend. I know I could get more bang for my buck to buy used or refurbished, but that scares me. Someone could rip me off and I wouldn't even know it because there's so much I don't know. So I'm up in the air on that one.

What about a 50mm f/1.8 lens - what kinds of things would that be a necessity for?

 

[HookdOnPix]

Also, what numbers/specs do I look at to see if it's good for low light/indoor photos?

 

[Robin Usagani]

IMO Canon is the best with used market. You will see used Canon equipment more than any brand. Nikon comes second and Sony is probably third.

That is not necessarily mean Canon is the best. If I had the money to start over and don't mind buying most things new, I probably buy a Sony.

 

[robbins.photo]

Lots of great information, thank you! I'm new to SLR's and trying to learn all I can!

When I'm looking at lenses, are there numbers that tell me if it's "slow glass"? What do I look for?

I'm open to other brands. I just have two local professional photographer friends who both said Canon was the "only way to go, for several reasons" but we didn't discuss further. Since I was familiar with the brand, I went with it and that's what I've been looking at to this point. But one also told me to go further up and get a 60D or something like that. I can not, and will not, spend that much money on a hobby when I have a family that comes first. $500 +/- is a lot of money for me to spend. I know I could get more bang for my buck to buy used or refurbished, but that scares me. Someone could rip me off and I wouldn't even know it because there's so much I don't know. So I'm up in the air on that one.

What about a 50mm f/1.8 lens - what kinds of things would that be a necessity for?

The F/1.8 number is the stat your looking for, it's the aperture rating of the lens. On the 50 mm example F/1.8 means that the lens has a maximum aperture of 1.8. !.4, 1.8 and 2.8 are all good apertures for indoor/lowlight shooting when you can't use a flash. Some lenses will have a range of apertures listed, like F/4.5-5.6. You'll find that on zoom lenses, what it means is that the aperture changes (decreases) as you zoom in, letting less light in to the lens. So a 70-300 mm zoom lens that is F/4.5-5.6 will start at F/4.5 at 70 mm, and as you zoom all the way in to 300 mm it gradually reduces in aperture until it reaches F/5.6.

The higher the F number, the smaller the aperture and the less light that the lens is allowing through to the camera sensor. It seems backwards but Fstops are actually fractions, that's why as the number goes up the aperture decreases.

As to what is a "Fast" lens, anything 2.8 and below is fast. F4 is reasonably fast, F/4.5 and up is what I would consider to be a slow lens. Those aren't "official" numbers of course but I think most people would agree that it's a pretty good starting point to work with.

Ok, so given your budget constraints I would probably look for a used nikon D5100 and maybe a sigma 70-300 mm zoom lens. The D5100 has good lowlight abilities for a crop sensor, and it has an articulating screen which will be very nice for when you shoot video.

I would also probably look at a Pentax K-30 with a 70-300 mm of some sort for it, that should also allow you to stay within budget. The pentax doesn't have quite as good of high iso/low noise ratio but it's pretty close and it shoots a little faster which is nice for sports.

Either should give you really nice pictures of the outdoor sports, the indoor you are going to have to deal with some noise but on your budget that really can't be avoided. If you go with the Nikon I'd look at saving up for an 85 mm F/1.8 for it, it's a good lens for indoor sports and it's not nearly as expensive as something like a 70-200 mm F/2.8, they run around $450 or so for the 85 mm. It really is a remarkable lens, takes great photos.

Of the two I'd probably lean toward the Nikon, the used market is generally a little stronger than it is for Pentax and if you do decide to upgrade later on it will give you more choices as far as available APS-C bodies. But the Pentax would be a good choice as well, you couldn't really go wrong with either.

 

[robbins.photo]

Lots of great information, thank you! I'm new to SLR's and trying to learn all I can!

When I'm looking at lenses, are there numbers that tell me if it's "slow glass"? What do I look for?

I'm open to other brands. I just have two local professional photographer friends who both said Canon was the "only way to go, for several reasons" but we didn't discuss further. Since I was familiar with the brand, I went with it and that's what I've been looking at to this point. But one also told me to go further up and get a 60D or something like that. I can not, and will not, spend that much money on a hobby when I have a family that comes first. $500 +/- is a lot of money for me to spend. I know I could get more bang for my buck to buy used or refurbished, but that scares me. Someone could rip me off and I wouldn't even know it because there's so much I don't know. So I'm up in the air on that one.

What about a 50mm f/1.8 lens - what kinds of things would that be a necessity for?

Oh, one other thought - if buying used or refurbished is a little scary go with Adorama, KEH or B&H photo. They all have stellar reputations, all sell used and refurbished equipment, and I've never had any problem with anything I've ever purchased from any of them. On the Nikon refurbishd equipment they generally offer at least a 90 day warranty, and even on the used stuff if you go through KEH they have a warranty period on it where you can send it back in if you have any issues.

So if that's a concern as long as you go with one of the three you should be just fine, I buy almost everything used or refurbished myself.

 

[HookdOnPix]

I'm still reading lots of threads on here and researching, trying to make a decision...

Just to recap: I take action/sports shots both inside and outside, but also stills of people, nature, landmarks, etc. So basically I want it ALL on a $500 budget. That's a laugh, right?!

What if....I get a Nikon D3100 with a f/1.4 teleconverter? I found a used Sigma 1.4x AF Teleconverter for Nikon AF on B&H for $39.95. But all the others are over $100 so I don't know what the difference is. It doesn't give details. Used Sigma 1.4x AF Teleconverter for Nikon AF 821306 B&H Photo

I would also still want a decent zoom lens.

 

[robbins.photo]

I'm still reading lots of threads on here and researching, trying to make a decision...

Just to recap: I take action/sports shots both inside and outside, but also stills of people, nature, landmarks, etc. So basically I want it ALL on a $500 budget. That's a laugh, right?!

What if....I get a Nikon D3100 with a f/1.4 teleconverter? I found a used Sigma 1.4x AF Teleconverter for Nikon AF on B&H for $39.95. But all the others are over $100 so I don't know what the difference is. It doesn't give details. Used Sigma 1.4x AF Teleconverter for Nikon AF 821306 B&H Photo

I would also still want a decent zoom lens.

A couple of quick things on teleconverters, the cheap ones are just that - cheap. Generally if your not spending at least $100+ even used, it's not going to be worth having as your IQ is going to be pretty bad in most cases. Teleconverters are only designed to work with some telephoto lenses - a lot of short to mid range telephoto won't even mount on a teleconverter, you'll find they generally only work on longer telephoto lenses.

The other issue with teleconverters is that they lower the amount of light coming into the camera, on a 1.4x it's 1 full Fstop. As a result if you have a slower lens, such as an F/4.5-5.6, you need very good light (basically full sunlight) or the lens won't autofocus, or if it does autofocus the autofocus is slow and it has to hunt a lot because the AF system just isn't getting enough light. That's why you see so many negative reviews on teleconverters out there, a lot of folks just really don't understand their limitations.

So really teleconverters work best with fast telephoto lenses, F/2.8 and F/4. I generally recommend you do some research and see if you can find something that specifically mentions that your lens will work with a particular teleconverter before purchasing one, though admittedly this can be hit and miss.