Rentering Photography after 40 years

Hi everyone,

This is my first post.

When I was in college, I shot B&W with sn SLR and developed in my own darkroom. I am looking to rediscover photography in a mild manner with a camera/lens at under $500. I am looking for some suggestions on the following:

1) Should I purchase a camera with a fixed lens or one with an interchangeable at this price level. It is basically goingg to be a re-learning camera that I can use to take good portrait and outdoors photos in B&W mode. Ease-of-use and portability is a plus.

2) I will be doing minimal post-processing. Maybe cropping and some light tonal work. I don't even have a Windows PC (I use Chromebooks and Androids). What online sure can I use for this type of processing?

Thanks for any suggestions!

 

Hello and welcome......Good luck whatever you choose......

 

I think there is quite a choice of Fixed Lens cameras on the market now days, but for $500 it might be an idea to Google some to get an idea of prices.

 

I would get an entry dSLR, because that is what you used, and likely to be familiar with. This stuff comes back fast. The dSLR allows you to change lenses as you advance and want to do so.

Example, this Nikon D3400 would fit your budget.
https://www.adorama.com/inkd3400k.html

Also a reconditioned Olympus EM10 (note the EM10 is a mirrorless camera)
OM-D E-M10 Mark II 16MP Digital Camera, Wi-Fi, Interchangeable Lens System | Olympus​

But really, a fixed lens P&S would do you fine.

Personally, I have both dSLR and P&S cameras, they fill different roles. Example I can stick the P&S in my pocket, for easy travel, or take to a party. So don't think that they are mutually exclusive. Though the bridge cameras are kinda in-between, like an entry level dSLR with a fixed lens. Though some are impressive.

 

Welcome back. I would definitely recommend the Nikon D3400 with 16-55 kit that ac12 has posted. Because I feel that you will quickly outgrow a fixed lens camera. The fact that you have a history of film and darkroom means that you might catch the bug again and the Nikon D3400 kit is expandable enough to keep you happy for years.

 

BTW, the capabilities of camera phones have increased significantly in the last few years, such that many P&S cameras have been made obsolete.
I ran into a high school photo teacher that has the first part of the year where the students use their camera phones. This is to teach them that it is NOT the equipment, but their eye that makes the photo. Composition does not care that you are using a $50 P&S or a $5,000 high end dSLR.

So this is yet another option.
Just use your camera phone, until you run into and identify an obstacle that needs equipment to overcome.

 

Hi, and welcome!

1) How "mild"? You could go either way on that budget, and be comfortable for a long time. I have a DSLR, and I also have a pocket-size fixed lens camera. I use both, depending on how involved I want to be. For $500, you could get a fairly good "point and shoot" (P&S) that you can carry around nearly anywhere, and just take photos for fun and relaxation. Or for that budget, you could get a used DLSR in good condition, and start to enjoy the various settings, and possibly get a second lens someday.

2) Sorry, I am not well acquainted with editing apps.

 

​

I recommend this specific kit because, I do not like the standard 2-lens kits. The long lens in those kits are selected to keep the price of the kit down, not for usability. The long lens in the kit, usually does not have Vibration Reduction/Image Stabilization (VR/IS). But it is the long lens that needs VR/IS more than the short lens. For this reason, I would buy a ONE lens kit, then get a STABILIZED long lens later.

 

For and old SLR film user I would think that for $500 I would look at a used Nikon D300, the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens and a third party flash head. You might even be able to add the 50mm f/1.8 D lens as a slightly better portrait lens, or wait and pick up the 85mm f/1.8 lens.

 

I "get" this suggestion...but the sensor capabilities of the D3400 are so much better than the D300's sensor. For a person who wants to do absolutely minimal post-processing, I think the ISO invariant, low-noise, wide-dynamic range, high-megapixel, thoroughly modern sensor of the D3400 beats the D300's better build quality and nicer control set and AF and AF-D lens autofocusing capabilities (which the D3400 lacks).

Still..the D300 is so low-priced now on the used market, and the low-cost DX- AFS Nikkor 35mm f/1.8, and a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D, and an 85mm f/1.8 prime lens...that lens kit would make a very nice, traditional three-prime-lens kit...and the camera body is made very nicely, and has that higher-grade build type that the D3400 lacks.

 

Thank you all very much. This information has been extremely helpful. The insights are wonderful and provide me with lots of useful information.

I have come across mirrorless cameras which I it's a brand concept for me. I roughly understand the pros and cons and I was wondering whether I should be considering them along with the other suggestions that have been kindly given in this thread. Thank you again for your very helpful advice.

 

I personally like mirrorless cameras for their physical size.
My Sony NEX is like having one of those old rangefinder cameras just sitting in my pocket ... handy ... or on hand.