which camera would be good for...

[grnmnks8u]

Hi, I am shopping for a camera to start on and am wondering what you guys would suggest. I am looking for a camera at a moderate price ($350 tops) I am wanting to take pictures of landscapes first of all and people secondarily (maybe have the ability to take pictures for weddings or senior pictures or if someone just wanted pictures of themselves or their family etc) I also want the ability to turn my pictures into pictures that you can hang on a wall like a painting, put a frame on it etc. im thinking fairly large maybe 2-3 feet wide. Of course I dont have much of an idea of what I am talking about, these are just ideas of things that I would like to do and if possible I would like a camera that supports these things that I would like to do. Anyways, any info or suggestions are appreciated. Also I am looking for resources that can help me learn about things like high contrast photos and wide angle lenses etc. Thanks alot!

 

[robbins.photo]

Ok, well I would suggest a DSLR - you can get something less expensive in the point and shoot category but if you want prints worth framing and you're hoping to take pictures and badly lit events indoors, DSLR is going to be your best bet.

But before I get to recommending anything, do you think this camera is something your just going to use occasionally or is this something you see yourself taking a serious interest into and possibly having this be a hobby you really are going to persue on a fairly regular basis?

 

[ronlane]

Welcome to the site. To be honest, as far as DSLR's go, I wouldn't put $350 as a moderate price. Ideally for landscapes, I would prefer a full-frame camera but those tend to start out north of $1500 even for used ones. (Unless they are older ones).

For $350, you are probably looking at used stuff in the Nikon D5100 or the Canon Tx or Txi camera. For landscape, you are going to most likely want a wide angle or ultra wide angle lens. For portraits, you are going to want something with a 50mm, 85mm, 100mm, 135mm in it (if you don't get one of those prime lenses.)

Good luck with your search. Stick around there is ton of information on here.

 

[grnmnks8u]

@robins.photo - I am looking for something to learn on and then later possibly save up enough money to buy exactly what I want (whenever i figure that out) and yes I very much plan on putting alot of time and effort into this

 

[grnmnks8u]

Nikon D3200 Digital SLR Camera w 18 55mm Lens 16GB Full Kit 018208254927 | eBay would this be something to look into?

 

[robbins.photo]

@robins.photo - I am looking for something to learn on and then later possibly save up enough money to buy exactly what I want (whenever i figure that out) and yes I very much plan on putting alot of time and effort into this

Ok, well in that case my recommendation would be the D5100. It will give you something easy to use and learn on when your first getting started, will have the more advanced features you want for later on, and it will give you some thing you can grow into rather than grow out of for the most part.

You can probably find one close to your price range used on Ebay. I use a D5100 myself, love the results. If you'd like to see some samples you can click on the link in red in my signature, it's just my flickr account but it will give you an idea as to what a D5100 can do in the hands of a so so photographer.. lol.

 

[grnmnks8u]

I read that the lens that comes with the camera doesnt capture images very sharply, is there any way to buy a better lens that would produce high contrast, sharp pictures if i dont like the quality of the lens that comes with it?

 

[vimwiz]

is there any way to buy a better lens that would produce high contrast, sharp pictures if i dont like the quality of the lens that comes with it?

Of course, the lenses on DSLRs are interchangeable (obviously only within certain different manufaturers/lines/models), if you dont like it, ebay it. The kit lens is probably fine though.

 

[robbins.photo]

I read that the lens that comes with the camera doesnt capture images very sharply, is there any way to buy a better lens that would produce high contrast, sharp pictures if i dont like the quality of the lens that comes with it?

I'd recommend you stick with the kit lens, at least at first. You can get some nice, sharp images out of them - it's mostly a matter of technique. Once you get that down then you'll be ready to decide what type of other lenses you might need or want, depending on the types of photographs you find yourself taking most often. But the kit lens is a good place to start, it will give you a pretty good range of focal lengths and cover you for most of your basic needs for a while.

 

[theother1]

I really like my Canon Powershot SX40HS- I think there's a newer version out now, though. It's easy to learn how to use, but it also gives you a lot of control when you are ready for that. Plus, it has an amazing amount of zoom for wildlife, portraits, etc. I think you can buy one for around $300 on amazon. Here's some example pics I took with it...

 

[robbins.photo]

Nikon D3200 Digital SLR Camera w 18 55mm Lens 16GB Full Kit 018208254927 | eBay would this be something to look into?

The 3200 is a very capable camera, and will take some very nice photos. It has a 24 mp sensor that is actually a little better than the 16 mp in the D5100, the reason I recommend the D5100 is that the 3200 is more menu driven, whereas you can set the D5100 up so you don't really need to access the menus hardly at all if you don't really want too - at first of course you'll most likely be using the menus and the automatic settings a lot, but later on as you start wanting to shoot in some of the more manual modes available and controlling your own settings that's where the D5100 will have the advantage over the D3200.

Don't get me wrong though, the D3200 is a fine camera and you can certainly use it in manual mode, aperture mode, shutter priority mode, etc - thing is the 3200 is really designed for people who like menus and who shoot occasionally in mind. Once you get more into the hobby and learn how to take control of a lot of the cameras features that's really when the D5100 starts to shine.

Can't really go wrong with either though, they both are very good cameras.

 

[robbins.photo]

I really like my Canon Powershot SX40HS- I think there's a newer version out now, though. It's easy to learn how to use, but it also gives you a lot of control when you are ready for that. Plus, it has an amazing amount of zoom for wildlife, portraits, etc. I think you can buy one for around $300 on amazon. Here's some example pics I took with it...

I had an SX50 for a while, they are nice little cameras but the two biggest advantages to the DSLR is image quality and low light capabilities. The SX50 I had you could get usable 8 x 10's out of, anything much larger you could pretty much forget it. Just not a large enough image file to start with to print anything bigger than that with any clarity at all. The other thing about the SX50 is it worked fine outdoors in really good light, but it's lowlight performance was awful. The SX40 has a little bit better lowlight, but even so much over ISO 800 and the image get's so noisy it's almost unusable. I can go to ISO 3200, even ISO 6400 on my 5100 and still maintain a usable final image. That and the fact that the DSLR has a much, much bigger sensor than a bridge so really I'd have to push a bridge camera to ISO 800 in conditions where the DSLR would still be able to manage the same exposure with much less than that, Probably ISO 200 would be sufficient for the DSLR. Makes a huge difference in shooting low light.

Don't get me wrong, bridge cameras are nice if you need a long telephoto reach, are shooting outdoors in good light, and are planning on viewing the images on a computer screen or printing 8x10 or 4x6 - but anything over that and you start to see their limitations pretty quick.

 

[JoeW28]

Okay, there are a gazillion cameras you could learn on (new or used). There will be no one best option for you but a lot of good options. Also, I'm a long-time Nikon shooter so that's what i'll talk about b/c I don't know Canon or Sony as well.

1. You want to shoot landscapes. Than it's going to be much more than just the camera. Ideally you'll want a wide angle lens. And you'll want a tripod. You can get cheap tripods for $50--don't waste your money. You want a tripod you can put a DSLR on for 2 seconds and it will be rock-solid stable. A $40-$70 tripod is designed for videocameras so you can pan smoothly, not for a slow exposure. And that's what you're talking about with things like...star trails, blurred waterfalls, early sunrise/sunset and "blue hour" (dusk) photos.

Here is the equipment that I think you'd need to do most landscape photography: DSLR, tripod, polarizing filter, wide angle lens. Unless you buy them used, that's going to be tough to do for $350. Do NOT waste your money buying a cheap tripod--that's worse than no tripod at all.

2. You can actually get some decent used cameras and I suggest you look at those options. For instance, if you could pick up a used D70 or D90, they'd each do a terrific job for landscapes and they're good cameras to learn on. Here are the negatives: D70 is terrible at low light (compared to more updated cameras) and it's big. Pixel count isn't as good as the D90 or more recent cameras so it wouldn't be as good for poster-type photos. But you could get a good lens, a used D70 in good shape and a okay tripod (you'd probably pay the most for the tripod) for $350. A D90 gives you a higher megapixel body, better range for low light and a reputation as a camera body that just keeping on clicking forever and ever and ever. I have yet to run in to someone who had a D90 who found it to be a lemon. I know a professional wedding photographer who's backup body/second body is a D90. Both the D70 and D90 are big clunky bodies.

3. New cameras--I'd start with the D3100. Small body (b/c the autofocus motor is in the lens, not the body so if you're going to use AF you need a lens with an AF motor in it). More megapixels than a D70 or a D90. Smaller body so it's easier to carry around. Solid camera to learn on. It will probably cost you $350 with a kit lens that will work for landscape photography.

4. You'd talked about hearing some kit lens weren't sharp. Here's the deal: all kit lens are compromises. They're usually zoom lens and none are pro quality. For a budget of $350, you can't buy even just a professional lens. And that's okay b/c for landscape photography, you can afford to put your camera on a tripod, use a slower exposure and not require an f2.8 200mm zoom. Sharpest lens will usually be prime lens but they almost never come with kits. And the cheapest wide angle Nikon lens I know of (35mm f1.8) will cost you $175 new (it's a really good bargain though). So you're probably going to be shooting with a kit lens initially.

 

[grnmnks8u]

Thanks all! Alot of good info, I think I am leaning towards the d5100, maybe buy a kit (probably will spend a bit more money but i think thats allright) what is your opinion of the d5100 joew?

 

[Designer]

grnmnks8u; if you're buying a used camera, the lens that might be included is something to consider as well. I'm going to guess that if someone is including a lens with a used camera body that it will not be anything more than the usual "kit" lens, which is perfectly adequate for most photography, and especially for learning with. But do make sure that the used camera includes a lens or you will have to purchase a lens immediately, so be sure to budget for them both if not included.

Either camera will suffice for your first DLSR. I usually recommend a new buyer stretch his purchasing budget as far as he can, because he will be using the body for several years, while purchasing additional lenses as his hobby progresses.