First dslr camera for me

[mulak]

Hi

I want to get into photography and I don't know which camera suitable for me.

I want to do landscape, night, candid moments, macro and street/buildings. I would love to eventually in the future to sell fine art prints.

I don't really have a budget but can you suggest a camera in each price range and why?

Thanks

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[chuasam]

Nikon D810 with 24-70 f/2.8 VR II and a Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4
might as well start with the best since you don't really have a budget.

 

[Solarflare]

"Night" doesnt tell me anything. What do you want to photograph at night ? That could be all sorts of things.

Price Range 1 (lowest): Nikon D3300, AF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 VR, tripod
Entry level DSLR with kitzoom - the usual suggestion for a beginner. Among the four choices external flash, prime lens, telezoom or tripod I picked tripod since thats what apparently is the prime focus of the topics chosen (useful for landscape, architecture, macro). The 18-55mm allows a bit of macro already, though of course its not great.

Price Range 2 (semi-pro): Used Nikon D7100, Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, Tamron 90mm f2.8 VC macro, tripod, flash used SB800
Camera with all the bells and whistles to operate it quickly and professionally, and all advanced features. A really good standard zoom. A real macro lens. And again a tripod. And flash for macro (possibly also night).

Price Range 3 (lowend full frame): Used Nikon D610, AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5, AF-S 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR, Tamron 90mm f2.8 VC macro, tripod, flash.
The cheap full frame camera. Two lightweight and affordable zooms of decent quality for wide and long angle. A specialized macro lens.

Price Range 4 (midrange full frame): Used Nikon D800, Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 VC, AF 80-200mm f2.8 (rotating zoom), Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro, tripod, flash.
High resolution for cheap. Two very high quality but still affordable zoom lenses. A specialized prime lens that however lacks image stabilization or a silent internal autofocus motor. Warning: no green mode on the camera.

Price Range 5 (highend full frame): Nikon D810, PC-E 24mm f3.5, PC-E 85mm f2.8 micro, Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2.0/100mm ZF, Zeiss Distagon T* 2.0/35mm ZF, tripod, flash, Ricoh GR.
Current Nikon image quality flagship, a true workhorse, due to replacement though. High quality tilt/shift lenses. High quality Zeiss prime lenses. All manual focus.

Additional to Price Range 3-4: Depending upon personal preference, either the AF-S 28mm f1.8 lens (about $400) or the Ricoh GR (about $400 used) compact camera for candid photography. The GR is a wonderful little toy, almost completely silent and of very good image quality. Configured right, it can be extremely quick (snap focus).

 

[chuasam]

the D810 is no where near due for a replacement.
The D700 ran for 4 years.
The only possible thing I would add to it is: WiFi, ability to control radio flashes, put CF to rest and go full SD, 4K Log video, and Multi-Cam 20K autofocus module.

the D7100 is hardly semi pro. The D500 and D610 are semi pro.

Mid-Range Fullframe is D750.

Given his requirements, I would actually forego a DSLR and look at a Sony A7S II or a Fuji XT2

I'm not crazy about tiltshift lenses, I kinda like the Keystone effect in photographs.

 

[robbins.photo]

Hi

I want to get into photography and I don't know which camera suitable for me.

I want to do landscape, night, candid moments, macro and street/buildings. I would love to eventually in the future to sell fine art prints.

I don't really have a budget but can you suggest a camera in each price range and why?

Thanks

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

My recommendation? Look for a used D5200 with the kit lens, or if you want new look at maybe a D3300 with a kit lens.

My reasoning? Simple. "I want to get into photography". Yes, you can invest a ton of money on a ton of equipment if you want. You can get top of the line this and best of the best that.

Or you can start with something functional that you can learn all the basics on without investing a ton of cash, like a good used D5200. Then once you learn the basics you can decide for yourself what best suits your needs and upgrade from there.

If for whatever reason you decide photography isn't your bag, you'll most likely be able to sell whatever you buy for pretty close to what you have invested in it assuming you purchase used.

If you decide that you're going to become a dedicated shutter bug then it gives you the experience you need to decide for yourself what sort of equipment is best going to meet your individual needs and the kind of equipment that will benefit you the most in the shooting situations you encounter most often.

A D5200 would be a fantastic place to start, IMHO. Just my 2 cents worth of course, YMMV.

 

[BananaRepublic]

What you need to do is is to ignore the jargon until such time as you:

1 Decide a budget.
2 Think what might you primarily do with the camera.
3 Once you have posted up the answer to q1 and q2 people here will tell you what extra stuff you might need.

As for cameras the I started with a Nikon d5100, it wasn't the best money could buy but it was still very good for the money. I know nothing about canons or others dslrs but there all much the same like cars there are pros and cons with everything.

I would say a you need a tripod for all the things you mentioned but most of all night photos.

Post up a Budget

 

[BananaRepublic]

"Night" doesnt tell me anything. What do you want to photograph at night ? That could be all sorts of things.

Price Range 1 (lowest): Nikon D3300, AF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 VR, tripod
Entry level DSLR with kitzoom - the usual suggestion for a beginner. Among the four choices external flash, prime lens, telezoom or tripod I picked tripod since thats what apparently is the prime focus of the topics chosen (useful for landscape, architecture, macro). The 18-55mm allows a bit of macro already, though of course its not great.

Price Range 2 (semi-pro): Used Nikon D7100, Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, Tamron 90mm f2.8 VC macro, tripod, flash used SB800
Camera with all the bells and whistles to operate it quickly and professionally, and all advanced features. A really good standard zoom. A real macro lens. And again a tripod. And flash for macro (possibly also night).

Price Range 3 (lowend full frame): Used Nikon D610, AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5, AF-S 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR, Tamron 90mm f2.8 VC macro, tripod, flash.
The cheap full frame camera. Two lightweight and affordable zooms of decent quality for wide and long angle. A specialized macro lens.

Price Range 4 (midrange full frame): Used Nikon D800, Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 VC, AF 80-200mm f2.8 (rotating zoom), Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro, tripod, flash.
High resolution for cheap. Two very high quality but still affordable zoom lenses. A specialized prime lens that however lacks image stabilization or a silent internal autofocus motor. Warning: no green mode on the camera.

Price Range 5 (highend full frame): Nikon D810, PC-E 24mm f3.5, PC-E 85mm f2.8 micro, Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2.0/100mm ZF, Zeiss Distagon T* 2.0/35mm ZF, tripod, flash, Ricoh GR.
Current Nikon image quality flagship, a true workhorse, due to replacement though. High quality tilt/shift lenses. High quality Zeiss prime lenses. All manual focus.

Additional to Price Range 3-4: Depending upon personal preference, either the AF-S 28mm f1.8 lens (about $400) or the Ricoh GR (about $400 used) compact camera for candid photography. The GR is a wonderful little toy, almost completely silent and of very good image quality. Configured right, it can be extremely quick (snap focus).

New people don't need jargon.

 

[BananaRepublic]

the D810 is no where near due for a replacement.
The D700 ran for 4 years.
The only possible thing I would add to it is: WiFi, ability to control radio flashes, put CF to rest and go full SD, 4K Log video, and Multi-Cam 20K autofocus module.

the D7100 is hardly semi pro. The D500 and D610 are semi pro.

Mid-Range Fullframe is D750.

Given his requirements, I would actually forego a DSLR and look at a Sony A7S II or a Fuji XT2

I'm not crazy about tiltshift lenses, I kinda like the Keystone effect in photographs.

New people don't need jargon. but You have a point about mirrorless for his needs

 

[chuasam]

You'd actually need a few different cameras.

Street photography:
Spend: Sony RX1R II
Save: Fujifilm X100T
Splurge: Leica M with 35mm f/1.4 ASPH

Architectural:
Spend: Nikon D810 with TS Lens
Save: D5300 with kit lens and photoshop
Splurge: Maxback with an ArcaSwiss 8x10

Night Photography?
Isn't that just photos at night?
All the above cameras aren't solar powered and will function at night too.

 

[Dave Colangelo]

The Hasselblad X1D aught to do it if you want a mirrorless...

If that seems to fancy for you the Nikon D3300 is one of the best entry level "fancy" cameras you can get. If you are ok with used stuff you can get a used 5500 or 5300 for about the same price, all will yield great images.

Regards
Dave

 

[beagle100]

the D810 is no where near due for a replacement.


I'm not crazy about tiltshift lenses, I kinda like the Keystone effect in photographs.

New people don't need jargon. but You have a point about mirrorless for his needs

yes, mirrorless seems to fit his requirements.
I have a Canon DSLR but like the small pocket size mirrorless models that can take any DSLR lens
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[mulak]

haha yeah .. that was quite a bit of jargon for me

I went to henry's today and the sales guy recommend the D5300 because he usually recommend for people who will grow into it and if they want to upgrade then do so in the distant future with a better body. But he recommends to try to get the best lenses first than upgrading the body because the lenses make a better improvement rate comparing to the bodies.

He said D5300 is suitable for me because of the swivel screen will help with the macro shots so I don't have to bend down as much. Also help with the street/candid shots if I positioned the camera at my stomach area so people won't know that I took a picture. Another point he made was the GPS to help locate the locations when I do landscape and street. It a little better ergonomically than the D3300.

He said the D3300 is fine but only for people who just want to move from their P&S to a basic dslr and be done with it. He said it most likely a problem for people who want to grow and they will grow quickly with the D3300 and want to upgrade already. So he think overall the financially may not best to go from D3300 to D5xxx in a short time. This is why he recommends the D5300, so people can grow in it and there is a chance that D5500 might be good enough for most people as their final camera as well.

I tried handling the D3300, it a bit small for me because my hands are big enough to hold a basketball with one hand lol

He also suggested D7200 if I want to push the budget and the build quality is better than D5300 because of the weather seal resistant. But doesn't have the swivel screen to help the macro, candid and unusual angle shots.

What do you guys think?.. I just hoped I got everything from the discussion from the sale rep

 

[Dave Colangelo]

What do you guys think?.. I just hoped I got everything from the discussion from the sale rep

The sales guy was pretty on point, for the sake of a complete discussion ill offer some counter points to his discussion as well as my experience with my D3300.

Images: In the end of the day the cameras are going to take the same images as they have the same sensor so what you are really buying is other features.

I have had my D3300 for about 3 years and spent a lot of time with it. Here are my thoughts on the features it does not have and when I may have wanted them. Hopefully this will help you make a solid decision.

GPS: From my reading the GPS chews up batteries although it can be shut off. I have always found that I know where I took all my pictures and geotagging is not really an important feature to me. I cant say I have missed it.

Swivel Screen: This is a neat feature and ill admit that there are times I would use it but I cant really say I have missed any shots as a result of it. This is great if you plan on taking self videos which can be hard to compose with out a flip around screen. Im not really sure that a flip around screen will help you with macro work. I use live view when doing macro work but generally the angles Im working at make the fixed screen more than useable. The unusual angle shot argument is a thing but plenty of great street photos have been taken with cameras that only have classic view finders. With that in mind the TLR has long been a popular street camera and has a classic top down viewing screen that may be where the idea in his mind came from I cant say its a "need" feature for street photography.

AF Points: The 5300 has more autofocus points this can be an advantage for many reasons. This is something I can say I would like. Ill admit I can live with out it but when I look at new cameras this is something I heavily consider as I have worked with pretty much the most basic AF to this point Im ready for an upgrade. For the record it took me about 3 years to really push it to the point where I can say "there are things this is not doing for me and issues its causing"

Build Quality: I have taken my D3300 in all kinds of conditions to the beach many times, had it out in the winter in well below freezing temps, light snow, wind, rain storms in Ireland (with a Storm Jacket Cover) and its still chugging along no problem. While it is plastic and some consider it "cheap" its a well made camera all things considered.

Ergonomics: I have always thought the D3300 sat nice in my hand but thats me and my hand you may have a different feeling. Since the camera is going to be in your hand most of the time you are using it don't underestimate this aspect.

Lenses are arguable more important than the body but there are factors that make both matter. If buying the D3300 allows you to afford an extra lens that may be a serious consideration as it will potentially have more of an effect on your photography than a swivel screen and GPS (which I cant really say effect the image).

Just some thoughts...

Regards
Dave

 

[Solarflare]

yes, mirrorless seems to fit his requirements.

Correct. The EOS-M system you mentioned however only has one native macro lens and its very short in focal length, which kind of reduces its usefulness, though the builtin ringflash is a nice touch.

The Fuji X system also currently lacks a really good macro lens. Theres hopefully one coming now.

But he recommends to try to get the best lenses first than upgrading the body because the lenses make a better improvement rate comparing to the bodies.

Correct. But unfortunately Nikon "DX" (aka crop format aka APS-C aka 24x16mm sensor size aka "half-frame" even if people here complain thats a Ken Rockwell term but I think its very intuitive) doesnt have that much in respect to good lenses in the first place. Namely good wide angle and good prime lenses are sparse, and thanks to the crop factor using FX lenses often doesnt work well as a fix, either. Which is why everyone who actually gets enthusiast about photography tends to switch to "FX" (aka small format aka 36x24mm sensor size aka 35mm film aka full frame). Or to other systems.

He said D5300 is suitable for me because of the swivel screen will help with the macro shots so I don't have to bend down as much.

Yes, but only if you do macro with Lifeview, i.e. if you put the DSLR out of its SLR mode and use it like a compact or digital mirrorless - basically filming in the sensor and displaying the result on the monitor. Unfortuantely this also means that your camera will be using contrast autofocus - for which the lenses havent been designed, thus its really slow on all Nikon DSLRs.

Also help with the street/candid shots if I positioned the camera at my stomach area so people won't know that I took a picture.

Only if they are deaf or not hearing the shutter sound for a different reason, and also not looking into your direction. And again, using the monitor requires lifeview. Which means your camera will only focus very slowly, and very unreliably on moving subjects. This isnt a property of lifeview per se, but its a property of lifeview on a Nikon DSLR.

The discussion how to shoot street photography though is endless. In my experience even a super stealthy specialist like the Ricoh GR is always noticed - the GR really helps me with friends who are camera shy, though.

Another point he made was the GPS to help locate the locations when I do landscape and street.

Mostly it will simply drain your battery. Which is why Nikon skipped over GPS for the successor of the D5300, the D5500.

He said the D3300 is fine but only for people who just want to move from their P&S to a basic dslr and be done with it. He said it most likely a problem for people who want to grow and they will grow quickly with the D3300 and want to upgrade already. So he think overall the financially may not best to go from D3300 to D5xxx in a short time. This is why he recommends the D5300, so people can grow in it and there is a chance that D5500 might be good enough for most people as their final camera as well.

The D3x00 and D5x00 lines are basically exactly the same thing.

However, the D3x00 line only gets the cheapest of the cheapest ingredients. It is the "low end".

While the D5x00 gets a flipscreen and the "good" stuff, like a top performing sensor, and a better autofocus.

They are both entry level DSLRs though. For example, menu surfing is a quite regular part of using them, because they lack a sufficient number of external controls to avoid that. Advanced features are missing. Their viewfinder are basically useless to check if things are in focus. Etc.

If you want a camera to grow with and really want to get into photography, get a semipro camera - a used D7100 from eBay or alike, or the predecessor D7000, or the even ealier D90, or the current D7200. These cameras might be even all you ever need, especially if the reduced amount of lens choices doesnt bother you. Or they can be great crop cameras for you later, good for areas which benefit from crop factor - like wildlife (extreme telephoto needed) or macro (the smaller sensor is basically free additional magnification).

Or even one of the older, professional full frame cameras, like the D3 or D700. Mind though getting full frame cameras also requires getting full frame lenses - and those tend to be much more expensive. Except if you're open to the used market, an manual focus. Then you can get all-metal, high quality glas from ages past, for nothing short dirt cheap. Manual focus lenses are a lot of fun, however they also make moving subjects a true challenge.

 

[BananaRepublic]

yes, mirrorless seems to fit his requirements.

Correct. The EOS-M system you mentioned however only has one native macro lens and its very short in focal length, which kind of reduces its usefulness, though the builtin ringflash is a nice touch.

The Fuji X system also currently lacks a really good macro lens. Theres hopefully one coming now.

But he recommends to try to get the best lenses first than upgrading the body because the lenses make a better improvement rate comparing to the bodies.

Correct. But unfortunately Nikon "DX" (aka crop format aka APS-C aka 24x16mm sensor size aka "half-frame" even if people here complain thats a Ken Rockwell term but I think its very intuitive) doesnt have that much in respect to good lenses in the first place. Namely good wide angle and good prime lenses are sparse, and thanks to the crop factor using FX lenses often doesnt work well as a fix, either. Which is why everyone who actually gets enthusiast about photography tends to switch to "FX" (aka small format aka 36x24mm sensor size aka 35mm film aka full frame). Or to other systems.

He said D5300 is suitable for me because of the swivel screen will help with the macro shots so I don't have to bend down as much.

Yes, but only if you do macro with Lifeview, i.e. if you put the DSLR out of its SLR mode and use it like a compact or digital mirrorless - basically filming in the sensor and displaying the result on the monitor. Unfortuantely this also means that your camera will be using contrast autofocus - for which the lenses havent been designed, thus its really slow on all Nikon DSLRs.

Also help with the street/candid shots if I positioned the camera at my stomach area so people won't know that I took a picture.

Only if they are deaf or not hearing the shutter sound for a different reason, and also not looking into your direction. And again, using the monitor requires lifeview. Which means your camera will only focus very slowly, and very unreliably on moving subjects. This isnt a property of lifeview per se, but its a property of lifeview on a Nikon DSLR.

The discussion how to shoot street photography though is endless. In my experience even a super stealthy specialist like the Ricoh GR is always noticed - the GR really helps me with friends who are camera shy, though.

Another point he made was the GPS to help locate the locations when I do landscape and street.

Mostly it will simply drain your battery. Which is why Nikon skipped over GPS for the successor of the D5300, the D5500.

He said the D3300 is fine but only for people who just want to move from their P&S to a basic dslr and be done with it. He said it most likely a problem for people who want to grow and they will grow quickly with the D3300 and want to upgrade already. So he think overall the financially may not best to go from D3300 to D5xxx in a short time. This is why he recommends the D5300, so people can grow in it and there is a chance that D5500 might be good enough for most people as their final camera as well.

The D3x00 and D5x00 lines are basically exactly the same thing.

However, the D3x00 line only gets the cheapest of the cheapest ingredients. It is the "low end".

While the D5x00 gets a flipscreen and the "good" stuff, like a top performing sensor, and a better autofocus.

They are both entry level DSLRs though. For example, menu surfing is a quite regular part of using them, because they lack a sufficient number of external controls to avoid that. Advanced features are missing. Their viewfinder are basically useless to check if things are in focus. Etc.

If you want a camera to grow with and really want to get into photography, get a semipro camera - a used D7100 from eBay or alike, or the predecessor D7000, or the even ealier D90, or the current D7200. These cameras might be even all you ever need, especially if the reduced amount of lens choices doesnt bother you. Or they can be great crop cameras for you later, good for areas which benefit from crop factor - like wildlife (extreme telephoto needed) or macro (the smaller sensor is basically free additional magnification).

Or even one of the older, professional full frame cameras, like the D3 or D700. Mind though getting full frame cameras also requires getting full frame lenses - and those tend to be much more expensive. Except if you're open to the used market, an manual focus. Then you can get all-metal, high quality glas from ages past, for nothing short dirt cheap. Manual focus lenses are a lot of fun, however they also make moving subjects a true challenge.

Those sarcasm shoes do get hot on their way around the dance floor.