Newbie in need of a big hand!

[Phabyum]

Greetings everyone!

I'm a complete newbie in photography, I really am. Next to me, is my wife, who is also a newbie in terms of education related to photography, but with something that I usually call a "gift"?

She really loves to take pictures, she's passionate about photography, and damn, she really does a good job with the little knowledge and gear she has!

Now, its time for me to tell her to leave her shitty phone, or some borrowed 80€ shitty camera, and give her something to make her gift shine even higher.

But..I'm clueless. Can you guys help me out? Dont be afraid to explain me basic notions or terms about photography, I love to learn, and I want to know what I'm buying.

What we have: Cellphone - OnePlus One
Intentions: Landscapes and Nature Close-Ups
Budget: 500-700€

Appologies if there is anything missing or if I'm asking too much.

Thanks in advance!
Best Regards
Happy Couple!

 

[goodguy]

Not sure of prices in Europe but you can start with a Nikon D5300 and its kit lens and add a Nikon 40mm lens for your nature closeup.
If its too rich for your blood then you can skip the macro lens and use the kit lens till you learn more and know better what you want and then get more lenses and accessories

Good luck..

 

[waday]

With that budget, I'm assuming you're more in the Nikon D3300 range, which isn't bad by any standards. (Also assuming you don't have a brand preference?)

When you say 'nature close-ups', do you mean animals (need a good zoom to get that bird/snake/hippopotamus) or flowers/insects (macro--small objects to larger than life size)?

Don't forget to add a good tripod, remote shutter release, and possibly a few neutral density filters.. those will all help with landscape photos.

Do you have any concerns with size/weight?

 

[Designer]

Intentions: Landscapes and Nature Close-Ups
Budget: 500-700€

If you are talking about REALY close, as in "macro" you will probably want to obtain a lens that will focus in that range. Unfortunately, that one lens could conceivably use the entire budget, depending on which model.

Also for macro, you should plan on buying a good tripod.

If you are talking about filling the frame with a flower, then just about any lens will do that.

If you are talking about filling the frame with a bird, for instance, that is situated at some distance, then you will want a telephoto lens.

My first DSLR kit came with two lenses; the 18-55mm zoom, and the 55-200mm zoom, which is a good starting point.

 

[Phabyum]

Alright!
From what I've gathered so far, lens are key. Every single one of them is situational.

That being said, I believe my main goal would be to get a camera with a "stock?" lens included and only after that, think about purchasing a new one that suits my prefered style. Am I correct?

One more question regarding the lens specs (remember, I'm a complete noob here). Can you please explain what the first and second parcel on the "mm zoom" means?

I'm looking at Canon EOS 700D + EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM @ 723€ / 820$ - Is it a good deal?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Gary A.]

If you're moving from a camera phone to an interchangeable lens camera I strongly suggest a "mirrorless" camera. This is a rather new genre of cameras which utilizes electronics for the viewfinder instead of a mirror. Without the mirror, a camera can be made much smaller and lighter. Look into Panasonic, Olympus and Fuji mirrorless systems. If you are looking for Out-Of-the-Camera (OOC) images with minimal to no processing, Fuji cameras, arguable, delivers the one of the best or the best, (depending on your personal taste), OOC images of any camera manufacturer. I have professional Canon cameras (1Ds) and professional lenses (L lenses), and I prefer shooting with my Fuji system. My Fuji lenses are equally as sharp as my Canon lenses. For what I shoot and how I shoot there isn't any significant difference between the images captured with my Canons or with my Fuji. My Fujis are about less than half the size of my Cannons. (The Fuji 18-55 kit/stock lens is probably one of the best/sharpest lenses you can find in a kit.)

Mirrorless is the future of photography ... you might as well start now.

 

[Microbois]

You may want to consider a mirrorless camera. DSLR are pretty big and bulky, and they are quite old technology wise. The only valid reason to pick a DSLR today is if you do fast action photos, otherwise, they are dinosaurs. One of the best mirrorless camera you can buy right now is the Sony a6000. There's a lot to be discussed if you venture into mirrorless, but this is the way to go I beleive.

 

[Designer]

Alright!
From what I've gathered so far, lens are key. Every single one of them is situational.

That being said, I believe my main goal would be to get a camera with a "stock?" lens included and only after that, think about purchasing a new one that suits my prefered style. Am I correct?

Yes, to one degree or another.

One more question regarding the lens specs (remember, I'm a complete noob here). Can you please explain what the first and second parcel on the "mm zoom" means?

The"mm" is millimeters, and the numbers in front are the focal length. If there is a range of numbers, then it "zooms" (kind of like looking at the scene closer or farther away).

I'm looking at Canon EOS 700D + EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM @ 723€ / 820$ - Is it a good deal?

Please post a hyperlink to the deal page. Some of us are up on prices, but I would not be one to say.

 

[Microbois]

Actually, I just converted your budget of 700€ into Canadian dollars and it's about 1000$ here. With this kind of budget, and assuming cameras are sold roughly for the same price in Europe, you could afford with your budget the Sony a6000 and a zoom 55-210mm f4.5/6.3 lens. With those 2 lenses only, you would have the equivalent in FF of 24mm to 315mm fully covered. This Sony a6000 packs a lot more advanced technology that you would ever find into any DSLR on the market now, has the same image quality than top of the line DSLR, and better yet, can still be used fully manual when no auto mode can nail the picture you want. It's also much easier to carry as it fits in a pocket, so much more likely to be with you when you need it.

Seriously, if you are starting into photography today, and you are not into high speed stuff where your autofocus has to be super quick and accurate like sports photography, I would highly recommend to stay away from all DSLR. They are a dying breed and they are bulky. Mirrorless cameras will reduce the bulk to a minimum without sacrificing image quality. They also have a lot of modern features that makes them much easier to work with. For instance, with many mirrorless models, you can sync them with your smartphone so it becomes an external monitor, or you can use it remotely to do your adjustments and take pictures.

If you're still not convinced, take a look at this video from Jason Lanier. There are also zillions of videos on YouTube discussing this very issue of DSLR vs mirrorless.

 

[waday]

Don't forget the other important things that will take away portions of your total budget, such as a tripod, memory card, etc. You could easily spend 100+ euros on memory card(s), tripod, and other accessories.

 

[Derrel]

Skip the Canon Rebel and get a Nikon D5300, or of you want a camera with a touch screen, buy the newer D5500 model.

 

[table1349]

This a big enough hand????

I'm a Canon guy, but what Derrel said.

 

[TCampbell]

The notion of mirrorless vs. a DSLR (which contains a reflex mirror) is a religious debate. I prefer cameras with physically large sensors -- which tend to have several advantages (better ISO performance -- meaning less digital "noise" in the image when shooting at high ISO settings in poor/low-lighting conditions) as well as tending to have better creative properties (e.g. the ability to create a naturally shallow depth of field to allow for a tack-sharp subject and yet still have a pleasantly blurred background.) BTW, getting these "shallow" depth of field shots usually requires a lens with a lower focal ratio than the stock "kit" lens often bundled with the camera.

It turns out, the true DSLR cameras (cameras with a mirror) tend to win in this department.

As for the Canon vs. Nikon... that's yet another religious debate. The truth is that generally every camera currently offered by a major manufacturer will take positively delightful images -- provided it is in the hands of someone who understands how to use the exposure settings creatively. This is a learning process. But the advantages of either Canon or Nikon (over less common camera brands such as Sony, Pentax, etc.) is that Canon & Nikon have exceptionally strong product offerings (lots of lenses and accessories) -- and not just offered by Canon & Nikon -- they have extremely strong 3rd party support.

The Canon 700D (which here in the US is marketed as the Rebel T5i) is a very nice camera and the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM lens is probably their very best "starter" lens (it is arguably one of the best "kit" lenses in the camera industry.) Canon started upgrading all their entry-level lenses to include this new "STM" focusing motor which is designed to be exceptionally quiet (so that it would extremely difficult to hear the sound of the focus motor operating when the camera is shooting video and the internal mic is used to record audio.) But when they upgraded the motors, they also upgraded the optics. The ability of these lenses to resolve fine detail is noticeably improved over their previous generation of lenses.

The Canon T6i/T6s (marketed in Europe as the 750D/760D) is the latest of the entry-line and has a newer image sensor with higher resolution and improved ISO performance. It is the most significant boost in the image sensor for their entry-level camera bodies in several years. It also has the ability to do auto-focus continuously while shooting video (few cameras can do this). It has a new 19 point AF system (basically it has a system nearly identical to the one previously used by the Canon 7D -- a sports/action camera.) It got a number of significant upgrades. Of course as the most recent offering in the entry range, it also has the highest price tag of any Canon model in the entry range.

 

[sashbar]

First, it would be helpful to see your wife's photos taken with those "shitty phones and cameras" to get a better grasp of the scale of her "gift". That may determine how much you would need to spend in the long run and what kind of system would serve her best.

Second, you need to make a strategic choice between DSLR and mirrorless systems. DSLR used to be the only way to a serious photography some years ago, but not any more. Switching between them later will be costly.

Beginners' DSLR will give you excellent image quality and creative potential, and are most cost effective. Skip Canon Rebel range and look at Nikon 3xxx or better 5xxx series. Pentax is also good. Beginners' DSLRs are cheap relative to their image quality, but bulky - even the entry level models. It is a limiting factor for a female who would be reluctant to carry a separate photo bag around.

Good mirrorless cameras are more compact and have simiral image quality, but be aware that some mirrorless systems use smaller sensors, which is a limiting factor image quality wise. There are some 4/3 system enthusiasts here, but I would recommend APS-C sensor size, it will give you more creative freedom.

Sony 6000 is very popular these days and looks quite versatile.

FUJI was mentioned here as well, and I would say it would be a very clever choice. X series will give you compact size and arguably better image quality than any beginnrs' DSLR, something like FUJI X-E2 with 18-55 "kit" lense would be a killer for very sensible money, ( FUJI "kit" is not really a kit, it is a modern top top quality glass). But if you will want to expand your FUJI lenses collection, it will cost you. There are no cheap XF lenses, even on eBay. Good news there are no bad FUJI lenses either.

Whatever you choose you need to be aware that your initial 700 euro spending is what it is - an initial spending. If your wife is more or less seriously into photography, be ready to spend three times as much in the next year or two. This is a reality. Factor in some money for a good editing software like Lightroom. Photography these days is as much about post processing as it is about shooting.

it would be heipful to post some of the images.

 

[Gary A.]

The notion of mirrorless vs. a DSLR (which contains a reflex mirror) is a religious debate. I prefer cameras with physically large sensors -- which tend to have several advantages (better ISO performance -- meaning less digital "noise" in the image when shooting at high ISO settings in poor/low-lighting conditions) as well as tending to have better creative properties (e.g. the ability to create a naturally shallow depth of field to allow for a tack-sharp subject and yet still have a pleasantly blurred background.) BTW, getting these "shallow" depth of field shots usually requires a lens with a lower focal ratio than the stock "kit" lens often bundled with the camera.

It turns out, the true DSLR cameras (cameras with a mirror) tend to win in this department. ...

That's not entirely true.

For clarity sake ... DOF and High ISO Performance hasn't anything to do with having or not having a mirror.

Shallow DOF is a combo of elements, some of which are aperture, size of sensor, focal length, distance between focused subject and background, et al. All else being equal, a FF dSLR will give you the very same DOF as a FF Mirrorless. An APS-C dSLR will give you the identical DOF as an APS-C Mirrorless.

High ISO Performance is not reserved solely to dSLR's, again, there are many factors which affect high ISO noise, pixel size, MP's, in-camera firmware, are more important than mere sensor size. The Sony A7S is a leader in high ISO performance and it is mirrorless.

Even my outdated and APS-C sensored Fuji X-Pro1 does a very credible job at higher ISO's.