Photo equipment wants/needs has my head spinning

ZenMonkey · Mar 21, 2014

I'm somewhat new to dslr photography and have only shot with an old Canon Rebel xs. I bought a kit off ebay several years ago and was not happy with the system. I've taken some online photography courses, but I'm still very much new to this. I'd like to start over with new equipment. I no longer have the Canon kit. I take photos every chance I get, but with point and shoots and phone cameras. I want to learn more advanced techniques, so I need a more advanced system that I can grow into. There's no specific genre to shoot for. I shoot everything, but I am fond of landscapes and sports photography more so than say macro and whatnot.

My budget is growing and I'm willing to wait for a system best suited for my needs. I would prefer a weather sealed body/lenses simply because I want to shoot in varying weather conditions. I hike a lot also, so a smaller body is needed. The pentax k-3 seems to be one of the better options right now. I'd like to one day develop professional skills and earn a living from photography, though. I'm not sure if Pentax is the best option with that being said. Portraits, sports, and concert events are more my style for future photography goals. I refuse to shoot weddings. To date, my budget is minimal, but as I stated ... I'm willing to wait until I am able to purchase equipment that will suit my needs best.

I don't want to invest in Pentax, or Nikon, or Canon, or any other brand and then switch to another brand later. I want to buy into a brand and then stick with them. However, I need a system best suited for my present needs. Weather sealed and smaller, but with great IQ and fast in lower light situations for sports. I guess I'm looking a great all around camera system that I can grow into. To start off, I'd like a weather sealed body and quality lens that is reasonable in price. Call it my training camera. I can add more quality glass as my budget allows. Initial budget of say $2500 - $3200 is what I'd like to aim for right now (+ -) $500 - $1000.

I think the Pentax k-3 is an amazing camera spec wise, but I'm not sure where the Pentax division is heading in the future. It would certainly suit my needs now, but how wise would it be to invest in Ricoh Pentax for future professional use? Can a person shoot professionally with a Pentax system and still compete with others using Nikon's and Canons? What are your thoughts and recommendations? I simply don't know what to do at this point. My head is :lmao:. I need advice!

robbins.photo · Mar 21, 2014

Ok well pentax makes a very good camera but for both image quality and low light ability the nikon system is going to offer you both better abilities initially and later on for upgrade options.

My recommendation would be a d7100, and a 70-200mm 2.8

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

Derrel · Mar 21, 2014

Weather sealing is overrated IMHO. Protect your gear in the rain using camera "condoms" or ziplock bags, etc.,etc. I would look at the Nikon D5300 if you want a small, high-resolution 24-megapixel camera with decent video capabilities. camera. Nikon is ahead of Canon in small-sensor cameras for still photo use. Pentax uses most of the same sensors Nikon buys from Sony. Sports is a big, wide field. I'd buy a used D3s for sports.Prices are around $2,000 or less here in town.

I dunno...you could buy a Canon just as easily. The 5D and 6D series bodies are nice. USED 1Ds Mark II bodies here in town cost $1400 or so when they come in. I've seen a couple 1D Mark III (hopefully they are Mk. III bodies that focus properly) for $1750. Canon 60D bodies are so cheap if you look around that you could buy a PAIR of them affordably.

Used camera prices ON THE WEB from The Big Five dealers are ridiculously high. At real, walk-in brick and mortar stores, prices are so low you'll wonder why people even buy from The Big Five, except for convenience and the way they dominate web-based sales.

If you buy USED, somebody else has already taken the depreciation hit. Get some decent lenses.

tirediron · Mar 21, 2014

VERY few clients will know or care what camera a pro brings to a shoot unless you're working for big commercial clients, and even then, results talk louder than gear brands. Pentax is great gear; IMO, it is, and has always been the most under-rated name in the camera game. As much as I like them however, I'm not sure that I would recommend them for your stated purpose. NOT because they lack quality, but rather because the availability of lenses and accessories is somewhat limited when compared to Canon & Nikon.

The D71/7200 are good bodies, but I would be more inclined to recommend either a used D700 or 5D MkII; it will save you money and get you into the "full frame" game. Lens-wise, a used 24-70 and 80-200 would be a good start.

KmH · Mar 21, 2014

Weather sealing only enhances weather resistance. It doesn't make a camera weather proof.

Even entry-level DSLRs that have no weather sealing are quite weather resistant.
IQ is almost entirely about photographer knowledge and skill.

Pentax offers a lot and now that Ricoh owns Pentax I expect good things in the futur.
However be mindful there are inherent technical limitations that come with any in-the-camera, sensor-shift based image stabilization.

Image stabilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
One of the primary disadvantages of moving the image sensor itself is that the image projected to the viewfinder is not stabilized....
...Similarly, the image projected to a phase-detection auto focus system, if used, is not stabilized...

In-body image stabilization requires the lens to have a larger output image circle because the sensor is moved during exposure and thus uses a larger part of the image. Compared to lens movements in optical image stabilization systems the sensor movements are quite large, so the effectiveness is limited by the maximum range of sensor movement, where a typical modern optically stabilized lens has greater freedom. The required sensor movement (both speed and range) increase with the focal length of the lens being used, making sensor-shift technology less suited for very long telephoto lenses, especially when using slower shutter speeds because the available motion range of the sensor quickly becomes insufficient to cope with the increasing image displacement.

The K-3 does not have an AA (anti-aliasing) filter in front of the image sensor. Instead Pentax uses motion from the sensor-shift based IS to blur the image slightly to provide anti-aliasing, which defeats what is gained, image sharpness wise, from removing the AA filter in the first place. :scratch:

minicoop1985 · Mar 22, 2014

Whatever you buy, there's bound to be some gimmicky little "feature" things like art/scene modes, portrait modes, etc. Some cameras don't have them (my 7D doesn't). You'll probably never use these. After you learn about all the exposure triangle stuff (unless you already know since you mentioned the classes), shoot in manual for a while to get the hang of it/learn the relationships between ISO, shutter, and aperture, then go on and play with everything else. If you're like me, my camera almost never leaves Aperture Priority (Av for the grammar nazi Canon fans that there may be one of) intentionally. When it does, either the metering's doing something I don't like, or I bumped the knob on the way outta the bag. :lol:

CmazzJK · Mar 22, 2014

tirediron said:
VERY few clients will know or care what camera a pro brings to a shoot unless you're working for big commercial clients, and even then, results talk louder than gear brands. Pentax is great gear; IMO, it is, and has always been the most under-rated name in the camera game. As much as I like them however, I'm not sure that I would recommend them for your stated purpose. NOT because they lack quality, but rather because the availability of lenses and accessories is somewhat limited when compared to Canon & Nikon.

The D71/7200 are good bodies, but I would be more inclined to recommend either a used D700 or 5D MkII; it will save you money and get you into the "full frame" game. Lens-wise, a used 24-70 and 80-200 would be a good start.

Did I miss something? Did Nikon release a D7200? I wouldn't doubt it seeing as I bought a D7100 a month ago, lol. As far as the OP's question goes take my advice as a fellow beginner, and DO NOT stress about buying equipment. Photography is supposed to be fun, its not a job(unless it is a job I guess...). Go to a camera store and play with some different cameras/lenses and relax dude its going to be ok(unless it isn't...). Just my 2 cents. The D7100 is a sweet camera too btw. Enjoying yourself and making quality images will probably be a lot easier when you're not stressing about buying new "better" gear, I know because I was doing it too and until you really understand what makes a good picture and can make said picture it won't matter what camera you have. My new camera DID NOT make me a better photographer (I still suck...).

curtyoungblood · Mar 22, 2014

Why were you unhappy with your old camera? It sounds like your complaints are camera specific, and not brand specific, if you're looking to start in a camera system with the goal of becoming a professional one day, you should probably pick canon or Nikon. I'm a canon shooter, so it's all I can comment on. I would suggest either a 6d or 5d. I think you have two options on the lenses to go with and stay in your budget, either get the kit with the 24-105 or pick up a couple of prime lenses (some combination of the 24 f2, 35 f2, 50 1.4, and 85 1.8). That would be a solid foundation.

how often and what types of sports do you intend to shoot (this could change advice significantly).

I shoot a 5d, and think that pairing it with a small prime makes for a fairly small, quite light camera.

tirediron · Mar 22, 2014

CmazzJK said:
Did I miss something? Did Nikon release a D7200?.

:er: No.. all you missed was my not paying attention. I was thinking D7000/7100; for some reason I didn't type that.

astroNikon · Mar 22, 2014

The more you learn about camera equipment (much less technique etc), the more you learn that you know less than you thought you knew, and it will take longer to learn what you thought you already knew.

So, it's just not your head spinning while learning. Most noobs have the same course. Someone posted a funny graph about this in another thread last week ... see if I can find it.

ZenMonkey · Mar 22, 2014

I've been researching the Canon 7d a bit today, which I can get used for ~ $750 - $850. It's weather sealed, 8 fps, and as I understand it ... pretty good in low light. I also like the Nikon d7100 or maybe the d7000, which cost a great deal less than both a used 7d and d7100 @ ~ $610.00 used. Out of these three cameras, which would you prefer for high school football and as a good all around camera? Once I choose a suitable body, I can get on with choosing my lens/s. A used body is preferable actually ... so long as it meets my needs. I'd rather spend more on lenses than the body right now, as the body will be replaced in 2-4 years. I'm not quite ready to go to an FX system, but it will certainly be an option my next upgrade.

Thanks ya'll! :thumbup:

minicoop1985 · Mar 22, 2014

For high school sports, I'd say the 7D. The 8FPS is pretty impressive. It does, on the other hand, have an older design sensor than a D7100, and the D7100 has better dynamic range, but the 7D is very easy to get used to and seems to have slightly better ergonomics, though I prefer the position of the power switch on the Nikon to the Canon (I have a 7D, so obviously I didn't care THAT much).

ZenMonkey · Mar 23, 2014

minicoop1985 said:
For high school sports, I'd say the 7D. The 8FPS is pretty impressive. It does, on the other hand, have an older design sensor than a D7100, and the D7100 has better dynamic range, but the 7D is very easy to get used to and seems to have slightly better ergonomics, though I prefer the position of the power switch on the Nikon to the Canon (I have a 7D, so obviously I didn't care THAT much).

I'm leaning heavily towards the 7d . I love Nikon, but Canon shoots faster, and although it's an older body I think it would be a great one to learn with and to take some hopefully great images in the process. It's cheaper than the d7100 also, which will allow me to buy better glass. Once I get comfortable behind the camera and once I hone my skills, I'll try to upgrade to a much better performing body. Until then, I can bracket and combine exposures to get higher dynamic range, right? I think Nikon may have better IQ being more MP, but the Canon seems to have a larger sensor (?) which may be better for noise issues. Besides, I've seen images taken with the 7d that are simply amazing when it comes to IQ. I'm not a pro, so the camera will be used for training and for personal photos. I'm thinking the Canon 7d may be my best option right now. It should work well in a studio setting also. I'll likely be taking portraits of friends and family for training purposes until I'm ready to shoot professionally.

I do have another question. I'd like to take some courses online, but my funds are limited. Does anyone offer affordable, or better yet "free" online courses?

petrochemist · Mar 24, 2014

As is usually the case with this sort of question the bulk of the answers seem to be people recomending the brand they use.

I've used Pentax & can saythat the K3 will be great for you. The range of lenses is just fine unless you want something very long or very exotic (ie. well outside your stated price bracket). However I suspect the best camera for you might be something different - one of the weather sealed micro four thirds cameras. They are even smaller than the K3 especially with lenses and give great IQ...

From the sound of it a budget second hand camera will be quite adequate for your current needs, by the time you've outgrown it new bodies will be available that will supass the current crop, at cheaper prices. It only really in low light performance that cameras from 5 years ago really show their limits.

Canon & Nikon do have better proffessional support, but from the cameras I've met helping out at our Photography workshop their menus systems are poorly designed, and build quality on their affordable bodies is well short of my sturdy K7.

So much of camera design really comes down to the ergonomics - how it fits in your hand, can you find options easily etc. I like all my Panasonic cameras but on some the buttons are a little too easy to catch by mistake with my large hands. There's really nothing like feeling the camera in you hand & trying it out. No amount of on-line opinion will tell if it fits your hand well.

grafxman · Mar 24, 2014

ZenMonkey said:
I'm somewhat new to dslr photography and have only shot with an old Canon Rebel xs. I bought a kit off ebay several years ago and was not happy with the system. I've taken some online photography courses, but I'm still very much new to this. I'd like to start over with new equipment. I no longer have the Canon kit. I take photos every chance I get, but with point and shoots and phone cameras. I want to learn more advanced techniques, so I need a more advanced system that I can grow into. There's no specific genre to shoot for. I shoot everything, but I am fond of landscapes and sports photography more so than say macro and whatnot.

My budget is growing and I'm willing to wait for a system best suited for my needs. I would prefer a weather sealed body/lenses simply because I want to shoot in varying weather conditions. I hike a lot also, so a smaller body is needed. The pentax k-3 seems to be one of the better options right now. I'd like to one day develop professional skills and earn a living from photography, though. I'm not sure if Pentax is the best option with that being said. Portraits, sports, and concert events are more my style for future photography goals. I refuse to shoot weddings. To date, my budget is minimal, but as I stated ... I'm willing to wait until I am able to purchase equipment that will suit my needs best.

I don't want to invest in Pentax, or Nikon, or Canon, or any other brand and then switch to another brand later. I want to buy into a brand and then stick with them. However, I need a system best suited for my present needs. Weather sealed and smaller, but with great IQ and fast in lower light situations for sports. I guess I'm looking a great all around camera system that I can grow into. To start off, I'd like a weather sealed body and quality lens that is reasonable in price. Call it my training camera. I can add more quality glass as my budget allows. Initial budget of say $2500 - $3200 is what I'd like to aim for right now (+ -) $500 - $1000.

I think the Pentax k-3 is an amazing camera spec wise, but I'm not sure where the Pentax division is heading in the future. It would certainly suit my needs now, but how wise would it be to invest in Ricoh Pentax for future professional use? Can a person shoot professionally with a Pentax system and still compete with others using Nikon's and Canons? What are your thoughts and recommendations? I simply don't know what to do at this point. My head is :lmao:. I need advice!

First of all, I shoot in all kinds of weather and, like Derrel said, you can use a plastic camera cover. That's what I use and they work great. Here's what I'm talking about:

Ruggard RC-P18" Rain Cover for DSLR with Lens up to RC-P18

The only thing that's gets any water at all is the front element of the lens. I'm not a professional photographer however I have shot quite a few photos over the years. From what I understand professional photographers prefer a full frame camera. I have been using a full frame Canon 6D which is a tiny bit lighter than my APSC Canon 7D. When I bought the 6D I realized that the lens selection is extremely limited compared to the lens selection for the 7D. Furthermore some of the lenses available are less than stellar performers. Since you don't appear to have a lot of experience I suggest you get an APSC camera such as a Canon 7D or 70D or an APSC Nikon then get a lot of experience taking photos under a wide variety of conditions, i.e. outdoors, indoors, bright light, dim light, close up, far away, etc. There's quite a few skills that need to be acquired before anyone can expect to get decent photos in a wide variety of situations.

A new Canon 7D body is $1500 at B&H and a used one is a bit under $1000. A new Canon 70D body is $1200. There's a huge selection of lenses available for all APSC cameras. If you think you might be interested in shooting video then get the Canon 70D with the autofocusing 18-135mm STM lens. For general all around use I find the Sigma 18-250mm macro to be terrific. I've taken thousands of photos with mine and it's never let me down. It's only $350. Either camera/lens combination is under $2,000. Use this combination for a year or two and practice taking photos under all sorts of conditions. If you need a wide angle lens then look at the Tokina 11-16mm or the Sigma 12-24mm. The Sigma 12-24mm can be used with a full frame camera. Do not get hung up on getting fast lenses. I've shot plenty of photos in low light situations without requiring a fast lens. You'll probably be stopping down the lens to somewhere around f8 anyway since that's usually the "sweet spot" for most lenses to get the best photo. It's all about holding the camera steady and gently pressing the shutter button. I hope this helps. Good luck.