What kind of camera do you reccommend?

[laurenvictoria]

If you're a hipster use these: Lomography

I'd go with disposable \m/

 

[2WheelPhoto]

If you're a hipster use these: Lomography

I'd go with disposable \m/

=)

 

[Derrel]

If you're a hipster use these: Lomography

I'd go with disposable \m/

Canon...use it once, then dispose of it! (I keed, I keed!). Ya know, USED cameras are a good way to save some money....let some other sap pay for the high-priced NEW camera, have HIM take the depreciation, and then you can swoop in and get a great deal. Same thing on lenses--I buy USED lenses 90% OF THE TIME. Nikon USA lenses come with a 5-year warranty, but I have only had ONE, single Nikkor lens conk out on me since 1982. As far as buying a used camera: RIGHT NOW, and I mean right NOW, the market is flooded with used Canon and Nikon bodies and lenses. Why??? A few reasons, named Canon 5D-III, NIkon D800 and D800e, and Nikon D7000. People are trading in or consignment selling TONS of gear to be able to step up to the new super-popular "enthusiast" cameras. Owners of older enthusiast models are trading "up"--AND, and this is the secondary bonus--right NOW is the premier period for the Canon 1Dx and the Nikon D4, so there are plenty of slightly-used "pro glass" deals out there...lenses that fetch $800-$1200 on the used market and were $1299-$1699 when new...being sold off to finance "the next best thing" for people who are always looking for "the next best thing". Canon 24-70, Nikon 28-70 AFS, Canon 16-35-L, Nikon 85/1.4 AF-D, 70-200 VR or IS-L USM older Mark I model lenses...that kind of just "one baby step behind" pro glass..it's being dumped to raise cash!

 

[Photographiend]

Thanks for all the info.

I am looking for a DSLR that will work like a standard film SLR maybe with some extra bells and whistles like Auto Focus that may come in handy from time to time. But I want to be able to set the aperture, shutter speed and get that precision focus. I know I want something that permits changing lenses. Even though I will likely not be buying any fancy lenses until I get familiar with the camera. I am not worried about flash equipment at this time. I prefer not to use a flash when I can help it.

I actually went out and looked at cameras this past weekend. There was an inexpensive Panasonic I played with but I seriously hated it. It had the adjustable everything but it didn't seem like it worked as you would expect it to. By which I mean a 400 ISO should have been adequate for indoor but even when I adjusted it to 1000 the images were still far too dark.

Which is where it comes in handy to get feedback on what cameras have worked for what people.

My little $60 point and shoot seems to do really well for still life. But is lacking in many areas.

Edit: Okay not still life. Looked that up and it is definitely not that. Is there a name for Pictures of Flowers and Leaves?

 

[pixmedic]

If you're a hipster use these: Lomography

I'd go with disposable \m/

Canon...use it once, then dispose of it! (I keed, I keed!). Ya know, USED cameras are a good way to save some money....let some other sap pay for the high-priced NEW camera, have HIM take the depreciation, and then you can swoop in and get a great deal. Same thing on lenses--I buy USED lenses 90% OF THE TIME. Nikon USA lenses come with a 5-year warranty, but I have only had ONE, single Nikkor lens conk out on me since 1982. As far as buying a used camera: RIGHT NOW, and I mean right NOW, the market is flooded with used Canon and Nikon bodies and lenses. Why??? A few reasons, named Canon 5D-III, NIkon D800 and D800e, and Nikon D7000. People are trading in or consignment selling TONS of gear to be able to step up to the new super-popular "enthusiast" cameras. Owners of older enthusiast models are trading "up"--AND, and this is the secondary bonus--right NOW is the premier period for the Canon 1Dx and the Nikon D4, so there are plenty of slightly-used "pro glass" deals out there...lenses that fetch $800-$1200 on the used market and were $1299-$1699 when new...being sold off to finance "the next best thing" for people who are always looking for "the next best thing". Canon 24-70, Nikon 28-70 AFS, Canon 16-35-L, Nikon 85/1.4 AF-D, 70-200 VR or IS-L USM older Mark I model lenses...that kind of just "one baby step behind" pro glass..it's being dumped to raise cash!

^^^Solid advice there. we have had very good luck with used gear, and only some of it is luck really..I prefer to buy in person, especially used, where I can inspect the equipment before buying. our D90 and a few lenses were bought new, but most we got used, in ex+ shape. You can limit your risk in buying used if you know what you are looking at, know what to look for, and know how it is supposed to perform.

 

[joshhuntnm]

Canon.

Camera does not make as much difference as lens, flashes and software. I would get a decent DSL, then get lightroom, then an external flash with diffuser, then a good prime, then upgrade that to a pro class lens, then get a better camera.

 

[enzodm]

Thanks for all the info.

I am looking for a DSLR that will work like a standard film SLR maybe with some extra bells and whistles like Auto Focus that may come in handy from time to time. But I want to be able to set the aperture, shutter speed and get that precision focus. I know I want something that permits changing lenses. Even though I will likely not be buying any fancy lenses until I get familiar with the camera. I am not worried about flash equipment at this time. I prefer not to use a flash when I can help it.

From this sentence, I'm not sure you know that dSLR is not a generic name for a camera (vs. compact cameras, point&shoot, bridge cameras). It's a specific kind, and always allows to set aperture and shutter speed, permits changing lenses, look through a real viewfinder where you see what is seen by the lens, etc. While AF comes handy often, not only time to time. Manual focus, in particular if your budget is tight, is feasible but often not easy due to the dark and small viewfinder of entry-level dSLR.
Also mirrorless cameras allow the same class of actions, except the true viewfinder.

I actually went out and looked at cameras this past weekend. There was an inexpensive Panasonic I played with but I seriously hated it. It had the adjustable everything but it didn't seem like it worked as you would expect it to. By which I mean a 400 ISO should have been adequate for indoor but even when I adjusted it to 1000 the images were still far too dark.

What does "inexpensive" mean? 100$? not a dSLR. 400$: bridge, or maybe mirrorless. As far as I know, Panasonic does not have dSLR among their models, if you are really looking for a dSLR. However, nornally Panasonic cameras are fairly good in their categories.
In this case, 400ISO or 1000ISO (though the latter is an unusual value you typically don't want to use) is 400 or 1000 everywhere, so if 1000 was not sufficient to expose correctly, even other cameras pictures come out dark, left equal all parameters. It's more the photographer than the camera (in particular if you are looking for control).

 

[Photographiend]

I really do appreciate much of the feedback on here.

Now, pardon me for a moment because I am about to come off as a complete

-hole.

I don't appreciate your implication that I:

1. Don't know what an SLR is and
2. don't know how to use a Camera

Now, I am going to get myself a good SLR camera (not today, by the sounds of it all the good sales will be in late Sept early Oct). But of the models I look at, if they don't pass the in store inspection they will be ruled out. Just as I wouldn't buy a pair of shoes that were too small or a car that I couldn't get out of the parking lot. That is just being sensible. And while I may not instantly pick it up and handle it like a pro I can promise you I am going to learn.

 

[enzodm]

Just as I wouldn't buy a pair of shoes that were too small or a car that I couldn't get out of the parking lot. That is just being sensible. And while I may not instantly pick it up and handle it like a pro I can promise you I am going to learn.

You are posting on a public forum, so you should be open to others interpretation, in particular if given with the aim of helping.
Let me translate your previous post in shoes term, and try to take it with a smile.
The first section tells something like "I am looking for a pair of shoes that will work like oldtime shoes maybe with some extra bells and whistles like rubber sole that may come in handy from time to time. But I want to be able to walk, run and even stand still. I know I want something that permits inserting the foot in them."
Translation: all DSLR allow that.

The last part tells "I actually went out and looked at shoes this past weekend. There was an inexpensive rubber boot I played with but I seriously hated it. It had the walk run and stand still features but it didn't seem like it worked as you would expect it to. I had to insert half leg inside instead of the foot only."
Translation: no DSLR in Panasonic line now: if you wanted a DSLR, you looked at the wrong kind of camera.

Regarding learning, it's the best thing to do before spending money, you are on the right way.

 

[Photographiend]

As much as I can appreciate your sense of humor here. 'Cause lets face it that was kinda funny. There are a lot of cameras out there that have adjustable features and are NOT SLR. Also, as my experience would have it, these features don't produce the same results as Film. That is my point. I want the settings to work as they would with an old "FILM" SLR. For which I am familiar with the different ISOs, Shutter speeds and what not. This is kind of a big purchase I am not interested in going out and getting something that falls short.

 

[starzgem]

I'm by no means an expert, but I have always been under the impression that the same settings on a film SLR would be the same you would use for a DSLR, is that not the case?
From skimming back thru the comments I see you tried out a Panasonic(which apparently does make a DSLR under the Lumix name), what other camera's have you looked at? If I missed that information I am sorry. But I think that information would help the other members who are much more knowledgeable than I am to give you better advice.

 

[Karloz]

Here is a link you may find useful - tis confusing buying camera gear - so many option to choose from - Good luck

 

[SoCalTiger]

What does "inexpensive" mean? 100$? not a dSLR. 400$: bridge, or maybe mirrorless.

Well, it is possible to get an entry-level DSLR for ~$400 if you buy one of the bundles and sell all the lenses that come with it. My T2i cost $400 after doing this. I later lowered my cost to $0 by buying and parting out a second bundle. But... that is a "lot" of work and the bundle sales have kind of dried up right now. Really depends on how patient the OP is and how much effort they would put in.

 

[enzodm]

Well, it is possible to get an entry-level DSLR for ~$400 if you buy one of the bundles and sell all the lenses that come with it.

It was a totally different issue: as far as I know, there aren't current Panasonic DSLR cameras. So the OP was not looking at a dSLR (and thus criticising something that is not a dSLR).

 

[starzgem]

Well, it is possible to get an entry-level DSLR for ~$400 if you buy one of the bundles and sell all the lenses that come with it.

It was a totally different issue: as far as I know, there aren't current Panasonic DSLR cameras. So the OP was not looking at a dSLR (and thus criticising something that is not a dSLR).

Apparently there are Panasonic DSLR's but they are marketed under Lumix, so would that be the same thing? Digital SLR | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global