what should one to buy the right camera for THEM

[ph0toe]

I know when i was first purchasing my first dslr, i just went with the best one in the market. i realised after toying around with it that there were a lot of things i could go without, and othertimes where my camera lacks the part where I needed it to thrive.

so for someone who is looking out for a new camera what should they look for?

eg. 24 megapixel camera vs a 50 megapixel. if print is important to you, go with the bigger option, otherwise useless


2) if lightweight is important, go mirrorless

2) if low light performance is important to you....

if anyone else can compile a list of the important things that one could learn from this thread would much appreciate it.
still learning as i go.

 

[Jeff15]

It all depends on what you want to photograph and how long is a piece of string..

 

[Warfarin]

I look for simplicity, which is why I shoot old film cameras. Modern digital cameras are so complicated. On thing I very much miss from the hey day of film is high ISO films. Highest color I can find is 400. B&W is 3200. Nothing even close to what digital can do. I have a Canon Rebel XSi and I still don’t know how everything works on that thing. Remember the three things you need for a good picture is the proper Shutter speed, proper aperture and ISO. When deciding what you need determine what You shoot the most. Action needs shutter speed, landscape needs aperture and low light needs ISO. Most digital cameras can handle any shutter speed you might need and ISO level. Your glass is going to handle aperture. So if that is your focus good lenses might be a place to put your focus.

 

[ph0toe]

totally. but what if you want pixel size because you want to be able to give larger images on screen.
or, crop sensor vs full frame?

with shutter speed image stablization is important if no tripod

for wildlife, continuous shooting might be important
so much little intricacies that most don't even think about...

 

[Warfarin]

With all the stuff you are considering I would suggest buying the best digital camera you can afford and then start collecting good quality lenses. Film is out. You are looking for way to many different things from a camera. You would be like me and carry 5 film cameras with you everywhere so you have one loaded up with the correct film (or as close as you can get) for the occasion. I’m not a huge digital fan but I think it would be the best route for you to take

 

[ph0toe]

with this post I am only asking what a beginner should look out for if they are looking to buy a digital camera
for someone with limited knowledge, what should they look out for?

 

[Rickbb]

Every beginner should first ask themselves this question, "what am I going to shoot?"

Defining what they are going to use the equipment for first will greatly narrow down what to look for.

 

[ph0toe]

I agree with you, rickbb.

so for someone who only shoot fashion. what are the important component along with equipment necessary to bring that to fruition

 

[flyingPhoto]

In the hey day of photography, bill board photos started as medium format negatives... shows the relative amount of enlargement that was possible.

The things that matter for serious work.

1. RAW
2. Sensor resolution
3. ISO

Other things dont really mean a damn thing until your talking sensor size.

 

[ph0toe]

why is sensor resolution important? care to explain?

yes, I am talking about sensor size.

also with iso, not all camera have iso that goes to 25600 and can still have quality images/videos without grain

 

[flyingPhoto]

why is sensor resolution important? care to explain?

yes, I am talking about sensor size.

also with iso, not all camera have iso that goes to 25600 and can still have quality images/videos without grain

Camera Resolution Explained

Although the megapixel race has been going on since the invention of the digital camera, the last few years in particular have seen a huge increase in resolution. The Sony A7RV has 61MP, a staggering number of megapixels for a full-frame camera.

photographylife.com

 

[Dao]

Here is my 2 cents.
- Do not think too much.
- Nothing wrong with entry level DSLR camera, mirrorless camera or even point and shoot camera. Get one you can afford if you have a limited budget. However, find one that allow you to shoot auto, semi-auto and manual mode. (better if the camera can use a external flash)
- Do not worry about too much on sensor tech nor camera tech, most of the modern digital camera are quite good. You will see or hear people say get this camera because it has the best full frame sensor on the market. Well, if you are into tech and stuff, then yes. But for photography, I am not too worry about it.

Once the beginner learn more about photography, things may change.

 

[ntz]

my could be something as this:

1) image quality first (24MP at least, those overpriced 20MP camers like D500 are absolute non-sense)
2) build quality inc. weather sealing + features like 2 card slots
3) available lenses and it should fit into my plans for future expansion
4) ergonomics and brand ...

now example from the real world .. when I was upgrading in 2018 from D7000 I was thinking a lot about FX, to go for a D750 but finally I went with new D7200 and never regret this choice .. ofc I had to fit into budget, that's implicit ...

your situation is however very different, you're considering your first DSRL (or MILC - mirrorless) so let me break that down:

1) all the smartest and best-looking photographers use Nikon so I assume you'd best stick with Nikon (haha) ... This is ofc a humour but I can share my opinion on it - it's ergonomics .. Nikon has great ergonomics with usually two dials and modifier buttons so you can change any settings with your camera stuck to your eye .. Competitors often have a dedicated and cool-looking dials for things like EV correction, ISO, even shutter speed - it's nonsense and annoyance, I have such a camera and I have some photographic buddies who are using other brands, for example Sony, which has imho ridiculous ergomics or Fuji, which is infamous for employing these dedicated cool-looking dials which are just cool looking and that's it ... Other option would be Canon, they have good ergonomics too but man, do you really want those white plastic lenses so everybody with camera around will giggle ... or do you wanna be like that Peter McKinnon guy , no, I don't think so ....

2) Nikon F-mount (DSRLs) is probably the most widespread camera mount in the world .. the most of avail lenses, new and used in the world. They also have same mount on all cameras with interchangable lenses, FX and DX so you can be upgrading only body and you can use FX lenses on DX body (and it will even usually give you better quality) ... Canon have different mount for DX and FX - however Canon would be also a good choice because the amount of avail lenses is huge (ofc if you don't me what has been said above ... haha)

3) now the thing to consider is FX Vs DX and MILC Vs DSRL ... just to make a long story short ... mirrorless is probably future and dsrl is past so perhaps go for a MILC ...however Z lenses are really overpriced and there are not many around so take this in consideration - it will hit your budget .. DSRLs are relatively cheap (you can buy some used body) and there are a lot of lenses for nikon F-mount ... all and all together, I would recommend as a new camera Nikon Z50 in kit with 16-50mm and 60-250mm (it's DX so it's equivalent of 24-75mm + 75-375mm on FX, crop factor is 1.5) for just $1200 .. it's imho the best deal on the market now .. you can additionally buy FTZ adapter and use all those nikon F-mount (dsrl) lenses .. If you want to go for a DSRL then depends on your budget - with high budget, go for some FX, with mid-low budget just go for (used) D7200 - it's probably best DSRL camera in the meaning of IQ .. only drawback that hurts a lot sometimes is that it doesn't have a flipping/tilting screen but you can live with that .. avoid overpriced 20MP nonseses like D500 or D7500 .. OR as noted above, go for some Canon cameras (you can always use black fix to overpaint those funny white lenses and don't mind if people will be giggling that you're like McKinnon ... he's not that bad guy ... only bit disco ..)

cheers, ~d

 

[Grandpa Ron]

One of the things I never considered is camera bulk.

For years I used a small Olympus C-740 with a 6.3 mm to 67 mm non removable zoom, it is small and compact, but only 3.2 megapixels (that was a lot at the time). I still use it from time to time because you can drop in into a jacket pocket.

I replaced it with a Canon T6 Rebel which open a lot of photography adventures, plus the manual settings are far more versatile and allow me to utilize my film camera lenses.

The down side is, the interchangeable lenses are like a millstone around your neck. Good lenses are heavy and bulky to use. they do not tuck neatly into any piece of clothing. If I am just roaming or walking the dog, I will sometimes use my smaller 55 mm film lens. It formats to about 80 mm digital.

There is not free lunch.

 

[Geenphoto]

When I bought my first DSLR ergonomics were most important to me. I studied the Canon offering and the Nikon offering. For me, the menu system of the Nikon D70 felt better and more intuitive. That was the deciding factor between two specific camera bodies.

What is your intent with the camera? For me, I was interested in a good camera that I could take to Hawaii with me. FX cameras were only available in the professional grade offerings then. The D2 had a price tag in the middle 4-digits. After talking with a news paper photographer who was using a Nikon D70, I researched that model. The D70 was light weight, I bought it as a kit with the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 and bought the 70-200mm f/3.5-5.6 and a simple camera bag. That was the beginning of my addiction.

What are you going to do with the images? Most of mine are just background or screen-savers on my computer. I print family photos for the wall but most are 11x14 or smaller. I do make occasional prints to 16x20 or 16x24. I find the 12Mpix of the D700 FX camera up to the job. Don't get hung up on MP ratings if the biggest thing you are going to print is 4x6.

Is low light photography important to you? This is usually a question that cannot be answered with your first camera. When I bought the D70, I had no interest in low light capabilities. It was not until much later where image quality of low light photos became important to me. That is when I upgraded to the D700.

I consider upgrade path to be important. Much like NTZ stated, the Nikon F-mount lenses may be used through its entire lineup of DSLR cameras, DX and FX. That means I can use the lenses that I bought with my D70 (DX) with my D700 (FX). With an eye towards the future, I never bought another DX lens after my initial purchase. With the Canon offering, I would need to buy an entire new set of lenses to move from DX to FX. That was important to me. If you are thinking mirrorless, the Z-mount lenses fit both DX and FX sensor sized camera bodies.

Yes, DSLR is on the way out. At least is seams so. I would think mirrorless. F-mount lenses are plenty and any AF-S will work on a Nikon mirrorless with the FtZ converter. I have some non-AF-S lenses but it would not kill me to let a few old lenses go (35mm, 50mm, and 85mm). I have all those ranges covered in good quality zooms but these primes are lighter and I prefer them when doing portraits.

Are action shots important to you? Is getting a picture of a fast moving object (or child) important? This may the be one case where DSLR outshines mirrorless consistently. The Z7, may have fixed that, though.

I did not mention Sony as they were a newcomer to the market when I bought my D70. I have nothing against them at all. Had they been a mature product at the time, I might have given them more consideration. Buying Minolta and rebranding it does not make you a camera manufacture. They needed some credentials which I think they since earned.