Would appreciate some advice for buying entry level ILC

tesla33 · Jun 8, 2015

Hi,

I could really use some help picking an entry level ILC. I have done a lot of photography about 20 years ago with Pentax and Nikon SLRs and I want to try my hand at digital photography beyond camera phone shenanigans.

I can get the following models in my price-range: (the prices are Malaysian market prices so they my vastly differ from other places). Price is Kit price with the standard lens.

Nikon D5200 (550USD)

Canon 1200D (600USD)

Nikon D3300 (540USD)

Sony Alpha 58 (600USD, 680USD with the 55-200 Lens on top of the 18-55mm)

What I want to do:

I do a lot of travel and and landscape/nature will be part of what I am doing but mostly I want to shoot my wife and kids (wait.. that sounds wrong). I want to be able to do good portrait and family pictures as well as getting the occasional spontaneous picture in a better quality than the average point-and-click pictures.

Things that matter to me:

I want to be able to do some manual and semi-manual control. I also would like to experiment with different common settings so it would be nice to have most of the standard functions on buttons or otherwise easily accessible. In general, the camera should assume I'm a beginner trying the depths of digital photography and not make it too difficult for a newbie to find its way around. Focusing should be fairly quick and easy without requiring a PhD when I want to focus somewhere else but the middle.

Low light and indoor without flash capabilities are important (I dislike using flash) HDR would be nice, as would be good battery life. I was told LiveView is really good to have but I don't know enough about it to say if it essential to what I am trying to do.

What I DON'T need:

Wifi, GPS, touchscreen and other related stuff. I also don't need video above average quality, neither do I care about weight and size, I like a good chunk of equipment in my hands. Availability of lenses is (for now) also of little concern.

Thank you for your patience and sorry for the long post, I was trying to give as much info as possible. And of course any advice would be greatly appreciate!

Cheers!

Designer · Jun 8, 2015

I have the Nikon D5000 and 4 lenses. Also a Nikon speedlight, some lighting modifiers and stands, as well as three tripods and some other items.

I recommend the Nikon D5200 assuming it comes with one lens. Later you will probably want to obtain additional lenses.

Low light photography needs a lens with a large maximum aperture. Live View is something you will not use very often.

Raj_55555 · Jun 8, 2015

Welcome to TPF Tesla, I'm a big fan of your work! :lol:

For landscapes and portraits, from the cameras that you've listed I'd pick the D3300. It's designed with the laymen's perspective in mind and has one of the best IQ in it's class at the same time. For landscapes and normal photographs you don't need the best focusing system in the world. Since you've done a lot of photography earlier, I don't think it'll take you too long to catch up either. It'll give you decent low light abilities, anything better and you'd need to go Full frame.
It doesn't have HDR though, the D5200 does. If you get a good deal on a used camera, buy whichever one's available and you'd be all set. Happy shooting

KmH · Jun 8, 2015

The key to "better quality than the average" photos is awareness and use of light, not the camera used.

For people photography that usually means using supplemental light from flash and/or reflectors so you have control over the light direction, quality, and ratio.

tesla33 · Jun 8, 2015

Thank you for the feedback, very much appreciated.

@Designer , thank you. I understand that Nikon has the wides range of lenses. right now though I'm ok with the kit lens. If I get into it I will probably buy a better body anyway, so I don't want to spend on additional lenses right now, especially since I don't want to lock myself into a brand yet.

@Raj_55555 , yep, big fan of the crazy genius

What you are saying is exactly the thing that is giving me the biggest headache. The 3300 is almost on par with the 5200 (I think) and they cost the same. Now the 5200 is supposed to be upper-entry, lower middle while the 3300 is clearly entry level but other than HDr and some minor things I can't see much difference between them. Am I missing something?

@KmH , yes, thank you for the valuable advice.

Raj_55555 · Jun 8, 2015

tesla33 said:
@Raj_55555 , yep, big fan of the crazy genius What you are saying is exactly the thing that is giving me the biggest headache. The 3300 is almost on par with the 5200 (I think) and they cost the same. Now the 5200 is supposed to be upper-entry, lower middle while the 3300 is clearly entry level but other than HDr and some minor things I can't see much difference between them. Am I missing something?

Well, D3300 has a more advanced processor than the D5200, it also lacks the AA filter (like the D7100), which is supposed to make the images sharper by 10%. D5200 has the swiveling screen and a better autofocus system. HDR you can learn to do manually anyway IMO, so I wouldn't factor it in my decision making.

raventepes · Jun 9, 2015

My wife uses a D3300, and I do most of the editing for her pictures. I really have no complaints about its image quality and I highly recommend it.

tesla33 · Jun 9, 2015

@Raj_55555 , thanks again. Thats good buying advise.
@raventepes , I think all of the cameras are basically good ILCs and I am starting to lean towards the 3300 as well

There are two more things to say: I really was hoping to get some feedback for the Sony A58 because I liked it a lot in the shop and from what I read in the reviews. But I understand it's basically a different system and probably doesn't easily compare to "normal" DSLRs.

The other thing (and I forgot to mention that in the initial post, sorry!) was that in my SLR times I was always a bit unhappy with the Nikon type system of settings in the menus. I used to play around with various exposure settings (white balance, ISO etc..) for the same shot and changing those setting used to be a bit of a hassle in the Nikon via menues, while the Pentax and Canon I owned usually had those easily available at a button or wheel. So yeah, thats still a bit of a concern.

jaomul · Jun 9, 2015

Sony a58 is nice. I only know one or two people that use sony and they do nice shots (photos more about photo grapher etc, but what I mean is sony dslrs are well capable) but that there is the problem, only one or two. Sony seem to be pushing camera specs and boundries more than any other company but they dont seem to make many dslrs or lenses specifically for dslrs anymore. There line has seemed to focus on there alpha mirroreless more. Not that that may be an issue with the minolta lenses available but it might be better to buy into a longer established system.

goodguy · Jun 10, 2015

I will go the backwords path to explain my recommendation, what I would recommend and why.
First let me start by saying all the cameras on your list are fine and all can produce good results but............

1.I wouldnt recommend the Canon 1200D because it has an old sensor on it, very avarage low light performance and not very impressive dynamic range.
2.I wouldnt recommend the Sony 58 because Sony doesnt seem very serious in regards to its DSLR or as they call it their SLT line, not a lot of available lenses and the ones you have aint cheap. Still if all you want is the one body and one kit lens without ever considering upgrading or adding lenses then I guess the a58 is an option, to itself the a58 is a rather nice camera but I think the Nikon offers more (camera body and lenses).
3.Nikon D3300 is an excellent choice which might have slightly better image quality then the D5200 because of the lack of AA filter but nothing you will really see unless you are using top of the line glass and you really pixel peep. Comparing the D3300 to the D5200 there is one area where the D5200 has a big advanatge and thats the Auto Focus system.
The one on the D3300 with its 11 AFP is ok but not as good as the 39 AFP on the D5200
Low light performance these 2 cameras are almost same, maybe the D3300 has again a slight advanatge but its too small to really make any big difference.

4.So we are left with the D5200 and thats the camera I would suggest.
It has excellent low light performance, very good AF system, excellent dynamic range and in avarage taking into account all its merits it has the most balanced offering from all the others.
Add to that Nikon's huge new and used lenses selection to choose from for all your needs and thats the camera I would chose for myself or recommend.

Good luck

tesla33 · Jun 10, 2015

Thank you @jaomul , that is indeed insightful.

@goodguy , I very much appreciate your feedback and the way you present it. I have finally removed the Canon and Sony from my list (although my heart bleeds a bit for the Sony, but there is really more that speaks against than for it compared to the Nikons)

I have read a review and assessment of entry level DSLrs and there was a comment that the D5200 focus system, while advanced can be a bit complicated to be used. Now, if I am NOT planning to do sports photography, or try to shoot birds mid-flight ("Hehehehe...") - would the D3300 a better choice?

beer!

Raj_55555 · Jun 10, 2015

tesla33 said:
Now, if I am NOT planning to do sports photography, or try to shoot birds mid-flight ("Hehehehe...") - would the D3300 a better choice?

beer!

And if you're not trying to do a lot of macro, then Yes! I agree with goodguy mind you, if I was to pick one between D3300 vs D5200 I'd pick the D7000 :lol:

, but my priorities are different!

tesla33 · Jun 11, 2015

Nope kind Sir.. the D7000 is really out of budget

Raj_55555 · Jun 11, 2015

tesla33 said:
Nope kind Sir.. the D7000 is really out of budget

Not really, you can easily find a very good used copy below 600 dollars, I just don't think that's the right camera for you right now given your requirements.

jaomul · Jun 11, 2015

Don't over think your choice. You say you don't need sports or flight birds etc, the d3300 is a fine camera that is affordable. If however the d5200 looks to complicated I wouldn't worry about that. The af system can be made simpler until you want it more complex. I had my af points set to 11 on my d7100 from 51 for the most part because it suited me.

Check out Flickr, type in these cameras on a search and see the shots people can make with them. You probably wouldn't be disappointed with either. But as said above its down to light and ability more than camera.

Personally I'd go d5200 which seems available at a bit of a bargain. Team this up with an 18-105mm lens and you have a great initial set up