Sold my DSLR set up. Not sure this is for me

jtyson

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
76
Reaction score
2
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I, like many, thought I'd love photography as a hobby. Turns out, I just spent a lot of money to take pictures that were only marginally better than the ones I snap with my iphone. I know it wasn't the equipment, but rather me. I'm impatient. Switching lenses, setting up shots, living for the picture just isn't something I enjoy. Carrying a big camera everywhere too is a real pain, even without all the extra lenses.

I went on a month long road trip, took probably 4000 pictures in total. When I got home this weekend and began reviewing them, I found many to be washed out, lack sharpness, and plenty completely out of focus. I didn't expect things to be of a professional quality, but at least pleasing to my eye. Some were, but the vast majority were not.

I was shooting with a Sony a55. Mostly using the kit lens because of the zoom range. Also used my 50mm 1.7 minolta, sigma 75-300mm and a couple shots with the 35-70mm w/ macro. Bottom line, I like my macro shots, but I'm unhappy with the rest overall. On a 6000 mile road trip, I wanted more oomph with my landscape photos, not just close ups of plants and birds. The 50mm wasn't producing anything more sharp than the kit lens, so I stuck with the kit lens mostly. Honestly, I didn't take the time to stop and set the camera manually for iso or the like, I just shoot in auto because that is the easiest for me to do.

So, irritated, I sold my whole set up yesterday. Got most of my money back out of it, so I'm not terribly upset, but I sort of feel empty. I want to enjoy taking pictures with a higher quality camera than my cell phone. I'm wondering if a pocketable point and shoot would fit the bill and please me, or if I will just end up angry with that too. I was reading some reviews and saw good things said about the Sony RX100. I've found a couple used locally for $300-400. I'm just not sure if it is worth dumping the money into another camera.

Anyone chime in on whether that Sony RX100 is quick and pleasing to someone who is impatient and probably has too high of standards for the amount of effort put into the shots? Or should I just stick to my cell phone and abandon the camera idea all together? I'm not looking to create photographic masterpieces. Just capture memories in a form that I can enjoy and share with others without them cringing or squinting at.
 
Thanks for sharing your story. I have several questions about how the camera was set up (JPEG-only mode?) and what the average settings were, as well as how you came to have such a complete d-slr set-up (so many lenses and stuff!), and how long you'd had it, and why things turned out so poorly. Not having seen a single frame, it's hard for me to gauge just how bad the results were. Again, a picture being worth a thousand words, it's tough to say much, except, well, thanks for telling us your story. Good to hear you got a good return on the sale out the outfit.

I've read good things about the RX 100, yes. SMALL, very pocketable, and allegedly a very good lens. As to the idea of a digital P&S versus just a cell phone camera...only you can answer that. Cell phone cameras have become very good; the new Sony Experia has a big sensor in it; the new Samsung Galaxy S5 is allegedly very good too. I dunno...I know whatcha' mean--at times a d-slr is a giant PITA. Maybe the small, pocketable camera would really be more to your liking.
 
Perhaps you should reconsider the DSLR path. Nothing great comes to you without a struggle. If you want to be published as an author, compete at a competitive level in sports, sculpt your body at the gym and in the kitchen, or do just about anything worth-while, you'll have to invest time and effort. If I pick up a guitar (I play piano and have never played a guitar in my life), and I take it on vacation to go play with insufficient practice, I can't expect to have fun playing my instrument on that trip. Your DSLR was an instrument, just like a guitar.

This might sound lecture-ish, but I was in the same position at you at several points over the past year+. When I first got my DSLR, I thought "Hey, I have lots to learn, but auto mode can't be that bad right? I can start out that way." I shot in auto for a day and thought my camera was defective the photos came out so bad. Then I learned how to use RAW, and to use manual mode. I started to get some okay photos. Then I learned about aperture-priority mode, and furthered my understanding of the exposure triangle so it became more or less second nature to me. The list goes on.

The point is that at each bump in the road, I stop to look at what I want to do, what I'm doing, and what I'm getting out of what I'm doing. If I want an amazing landscape shot, I think I've taken something nice, and I get home and it's not nice, I'll look at what I did wrong. If a shot comes out dull, I'll look at my shutter speed, my aperture, and my ISO. I'll also look at how I focused. I did have one faulty lens which made the learning curve difficult at the very start. I made it my priority to know how to get sharp photos first and foremost as a beginner, and that took months and months of practice (since you'll run into so many different scenarios that bend or break the rules that you thought you had mastered). In the end, everything is so simple, but you have to go through the learning process to really truly experience each mistake and get it.

After I learned how to get sharp images, the next step (and it's still a struggle) is getting the best exposure. First, shoot in RAW always. If you're not editing your photos as RAW photos (Lightroom is what I recommend), then that's probably 50% or more of your problem right there. Shoot in RAW, never in Jpeg. It's digital photography, not pretend-film... don't listen to anyone who ever tells you to shoot in Jpeg unless if it's for a situational reason. Think of Jpeg like extended auto mode... not good unless if you want to cut corners.

Here's a few specific examples of what discouraged me:
Scenario #1: I tried doing landscape shots and just couldn't get the whole thing in there. The landscape looked beautiful to me, but I couldn't go wide enough, and if I zoomed out the image looked flat. What I got out of the camera was okay, and I could tweak the colors in Lightroom to make it look better than a phone camera, but that wasn't much.
Solution: There's so many solutions to this problem. The first is the framing. Here's a great cookie-cutter formula for framing a landscape shot: Make sure you have a distinguishable foreground, a distinguishable midground, and a distinguishable background. Assuming you're shooting without a tripod, pick a point of focus, but shoot with a wide enough aperture (f8 is a sweetspot for a lot of lenses and is a good aperture). Make sure your shutter speed is fast enough, and if you're blasting your ISO above 1600 you could encounter less than desirable photos (3200 is usually my max if I can help it and that's not for landscape). There could be an interesting set of rocks in the foreground, then the midground might be a valley, and the background could be houses or trees in the background with clouds above. Make sure you pay attention to the rule of thirds as well for framing it up, and make sure you have some leading lines. When you play around that way, you can shoot at any focal length. You can play with panoramas, HDR, and long exposures as well, which gets into a whole different set of territory (that's what I'm getting into now)... a lot of the impressive shots you see require filters and/or stacked images (effectively HDR) in order to get all that color and detail you see.

I realize that I'm ranting on a little too much now, but hopefully you get my point. You could pick up a new hobby, but it would all the same require mastery. If you are looking to get marginally better pictures than an iPhone camera, the Sony RX100 in auto mode will provide you with better photographs. I wouldn't pick up the RX100 as a "replacement" for the DSLR. You won't get the amazing shots you dreamed about, regardless of the camera that you use, unless if you build on the foundations of photography. If you just want to record your experiences, go for it. There definitely is a difference between practical just-for-you photography (an auto mode point and shoot), and artistic hobbyist photography (getting the shots that impress yourself). You aren't likely to ever impress yourself when shooting in auto with a point and shoot, but the point is to record the memories of course. Two very different things.

One final thing that's worth noting is that when I walk around with my DSLR, I know there's two types of photos which I'm going to be taking. I know I'll sometimes record memories. That will mean bad photos of a landscape that are snapped without framing up artistically. That will also mean photos that are shot wherever I'm standing of a family member, or an interesting object I see by me. Those are memory photos, and when I get home to edit them, I don't expect to publish them online in any way. Then there's the artistic photos (which can also be memory photos). Those are the photos that you take because you want other people to see them and enjoy them as art.
 
Last edited:
And yet, people scoff when you want to charge them for photography services when anyone can pick up a camera and do it. Amirite?
 
My P&S doesn't get used anymore .. my iPhone takes better pictures. but then my dslr take far better pictures than my iPhone can.
Sometimes it's the equipment
Sometimes it's the person using the equipment.
 
I'm wondering if a pocketable point and shoot would fit the bill and please me, or if I will just end up angry with that too.

Hard to say. I don't know you or how tolerant you are.

I suspect that the reason you got angry is because you expected better results, which your A55 was perfectly capable of producing, had you taken the time to learn the basics. It's going to take time and effort, so if you're not open to that, not even a simpler camera is going to help.
 
I got into photography to get sharp pictures of my hamster Poof. I have gotten to a place where i can, but my pictures are not consistently sharp, so i have still a ways to go to turn out good work.

Poof 5 by miranfoto, on Flickr
 
Well really no matter what kind of camera your using your not going to get much better results without actually taking some time to learn how to use it properly. Equipment just can't substitute for a lack of technique I'm afraid. The vast majority of what I shoot is "shot from the hip" if you will. I don't carry a tripod or monopod with me normally, I don't generally have the time to deploy or setup - almost everything I shoot is handheld and the good majority of it I generally have the camera setup going in or when needed I make adjustments on the fly.

However I took the time to learn how to use my DSLR, what techniques I needed to accomodate my shooting style and the situations I find myself in when shooting, and as a result I don't miss a lot of shots the way I did when I first started out. If you find carrying a DSLR is too much for you then there are smaller, more compact options available - Point and Shoot, Bridge, Mirrorless, etc - thing is that without taking the time to learn how to use them then you'll simply be right back where you started from with the DSLR.
 
Get a cheap P&S with a 4x or 5x zoom that you can conveniently wear on your belt. Set it on Auto and you're set. It'll shoot better pictures than phones and you'll be able to see better in bright light and its easier to operate than phones. When you travel you won't be burdened with a lot of weight and bulk and you'll enjoy your vacation more. Your wife will complain less too. Here are P&S photos taken over the years with various Canon P&S's I wore on my belt. https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/sets/72157627614472967/
 
One thing I notice is that a few I know buy expensive cameras and have a fair idea about aperture priority and set their cameras to that for mostly everything. All ok so far.

Many don't know what raw is. Does this mean they are wrong? No. But the same people often say the only editing they do is cropping.

The problem here is that they have their camera set up for jpegs but leave the settings as when the camera came out of the box. Many cheaper cameras seem more vibrant and have more contrasty photos that look more pleasing to the eye. Dslrs generally were designed with photographers in mind who would either post process or get it right in camera. Each takes a little time and knowledge.

As an example if a Canon dslr is set to faithful picture style, the jpegs are very muted. Nikon have similar settings as I am sure Sony do.
 
In all honesty, photography isn't for everyone. DSLRs aren't the easiest thing to master. Being able to admit that it isn't for you is a pretty big accomplishment-there's tons of "professionals" that honestly should have admitted that long ago (look in your local Craigslist-there's bound to be some).

The RX-100 is a pretty impressive little camera, from what I understand. If I recall, Hasselblad even rebranded one as the Stellar. As much as rebranding is lame, the fact that it caught Hasselblad's attention should tell you something.
 
Without knowing your history and level of knowledge, it sounds like you bought a camera and expected good pictures because it was a DSLR.

Cameras take a decent amount of time to learn and get good with. Even if you buy a point and shoot, you're still going to have to learn how to compose a shot and make sure it's properly focused.
 
Some REALLY GREAT replies in this thread! I think that almost every single thing that needed to be said was stated eloquently by one poster or another, either briefly, or at length! An amazing thread!
 
Wow thanks for all the responses. I'll try and skim through and respond to everyone.

I purchased a Nikon d3100 a few months ago, but wanted something with an articulating screen, so I traded for the a55. It came with the kit lens, the 50mm and the 35-70mm. I purchased an old minolta maxxum that had the 75-300 lens, the body was trash so I tossed it and kept the lens. All together I paid $405 for everything. Now that I think of it, that means I actually made money. I sold it for $450.

I did have the camera shooting in jpeg only mode. I read that unless I'm going to be doing editing after the fact, that RAW wouldn't make any difference other than taking up more space on my SD card. Apparently that was wrong. As for settings, all I ever shot was in the various auto modes. I have very little understanding of the settings and didn't take the time to learn how to adjust aperture and ISO and the like to my advantage. I knew where the settings were in the camera. I knew how to change them. I just don't know what any of it means, and I'm sure the learning curve for someone who has little time to put into it couldn't figure it out in just a few months.

I didn't post any pictures because I guess I feel I don't really have the eye for it. I've already gone through and deleted everything from my trip that was fuzzy, so the real bad ones are gone. I will attach a few of the shots I thought were okay. Ultimately, I know composition is a huge factor, and I really don't have the eye for setting the scene. I see things I like and I take pictures of them. **EDIT** Sorry the statue of liberty is sideways. It isn't like that on my computer so the forum must have turned it. I don't know how to flip it up right.

As for re-adopting the DSLR idea, I don't think that fits my desires at this point. I am infinitely impressed by the photos that so many people take with them, however, I am just not able to put the time into learning and perfecting everything. I have no desire to become a professional photographer, I don't aspire to wow people with a flickr feed, and honestly I felt like I was missing out on living in the moment in trade for capturing it on camera on multiple occasions while I was on vacation. That to me is the biggest factor. Lugging around a giant camera and accessories made the whole deal less convenient. Essentially I was set up to go on a photography vacation, which was not my intent. This is why I feel a smaller, more pocketable camera may be more suitable for my needs.

I totally understand about people not wanting to pay premium for the service. Without having tried this deal myself, I never would have understood why the costs are what they are for professional photography. I could grasp the expenses for equipment and the like, but from an artistic point, until trying it myself, I wouldn't have been able to really understand why professional photographers charge so much. Now, I do.

It is definitely not the equipment. It is me. I am well aware of this. That is why I sold the Sony a55. I know that I won't put in the time to learn how to use it properly, so it is overkill for me.

I wasn't completely disappointed with all of my shots. Of the 4000 I took, I really like about 25% of them. I don't feel they are of the quality that a serious hobbyist would produce, but I like them. So would I be unhappy with a higher end P&S camera? I don't know. Would it do better than my phone just on basic auto mode? Surely. It would definitely be easier to carry, so I'd take it lots of places I'd never take a DSLR, however, all those places, I will also have my phone. I have an iphone 5 now. I'm considering getting a galaxy s5 for the improved camera, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I don't want a designated camera as well. It does suck to be taking a picture and have a call come in. Or not be able to take pictures because I have to save my battery for an important phone call I'm expecting.

I'd say overall, I'm impatient but not unreasonable. I like photography. I don't like it enough to put aside my work or other hobbies for it, but over time, I'm sure I could improve and learn a bit here and there. Obviously I'm willing to put some time in as I joined this board to find reviews, easy techniques, terms, etc.

Everything I shot was "from the hip". I wasn't going with the intention of capturing fantastic photos that people will drool over. I wanted to capture memories as clearly and crisp as possible and have something to show my family and friends back home. I took a tripod with me, but never took it out of the truck. The camera itself was cumbersome enough to annoy me walking through NYC or on the train in Chicago. I wasn't even going to bother with trying to haul a tripod too.
 

Attachments

  • $DSC05974.JPG
    $DSC05974.JPG
    2.1 MB · Views: 173
  • $for forum 1.jpg
    $for forum 1.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 148
  • $DSC05369 (2).JPG
    $DSC05369 (2).JPG
    2.6 MB · Views: 179
  • $for forum 2.jpg
    $for forum 2.jpg
    2.1 MB · Views: 157
  • $for forum 3.jpg
    $for forum 3.jpg
    2.5 MB · Views: 137
  • $DSC05723.JPG
    $DSC05723.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 157
  • $DSC06535.JPG
    $DSC06535.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 153
  • $for forum 4.jpg
    $for forum 4.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 152

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top