Recommendations for Newbie to camera world

[ShotsnCruises]

The hubby and I are interested in getting into photography, and since we have nearly a year to learn on a camera before our "vacation of a lifetime" in February 2017, I figured I would start here for advice.

 

I am looking for an entry level DSLR that will "grow" with us as we become better photographers. I could care less about video or wifi. I want to take high quality photos in varying light. The end goal (for the vacation at least) is quality photos of the scenery, sunsets, and beaches of the Caribbean. Beyond that, at home pictures of wildlife on our ranch, and winter scenes.

 

The starter budget is around $600, thinking camera, 2 lenses, UV filter, bag, strap, memory card, and extra battery.

I have currently been investigating the Canon EOS Rebel Sl1 with the 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens and 18-55mm STM Lens.

 

Knowing very little about these cameras, or other brands similar, and given what is stated above for our needs, any advice would be appreciated. Looking to buy in the next 3-4 weeks.

[4x4bob]

When you finally decide on what Camera you want look for an operating book for that camera. A good book will give you tips and procedures that will allow you to get the most out of the camera.

 

Also, most cameras will have a computer address that allows you down load the manufactures manual. That will be 50-100 pages. I put mine in a 3-ring binder.

 

What will come with your camera will be a pamphlet that will get you started and not much other information, i.e. push button, open tray door, insert memory card and battery. Turn on camera, point at subject and push the shutter release.

 

Bob

[pierces]

Instead of an entry level DSLR, you might consider the Sony A6000. I moved to the Sony mirrorless system from a mid-level DSLR a couple of years ago to reduce the size of the travel kit but the A6000 sealed its fate with the combination of reduced size, and performance equal to or better than most mid-level DSLRs.

 

There are quite a few users on the board that have been adding to an A6000 Q&A and tips thread here: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2215195

 

Worth a look.

 

Dave

[havoc315]

You won't go wrong with any APS-C ILC on the market.

APS-C is sensor size. ILC = Interchangeable Lens Camera.

The old conventional wisdom is that dSLRs are optimal. But today, shooters have the choice between traditional dSLRs and modern mirrorless cameras. Most shooters can do equally well with either, and with mirrorless having a number of advantages.

 

Canon and Nikon are the leaders in the traditional dSLR market. The SL1 is a bit old and due for a replacement. It is still a very capable camera, and has the advantage of being the smallest traditional dSLR you can buy. I would skip the 75-300 lens, which has a reputation of being the worst lens in the Canon lineup. Overall, Canon is known for its wide popularity for consumers to professionals, its consumer friendly features like touch screens, and its wide selection of lenses. Nikons are known for their very advanced autofocus systems, wide selection of lenses, and often for having the very best image quality.

Sony and Pentax are the less popular dSLRs (actually, Sony makes dSLTs), but they have loyal followings, and they have in-body stabilization, making every lens stabilized.

 

Fuji and Sony are the leaders in APS-C sized mirrorless cameras. (Olympus and Panasonic make mirrorless with slightly smaller sensors. Nikon has a line of mirrorless with a much smaller sensor. And Canon has an APS-C mirrorless camera but they haven't gone far with the system). I can't speak much about Fuji, which is known to aim more for enthusiasts.

I can speak of the Sony A6000. In my opinion, it is the best APS-C sized ILC on the market, in the price range.

The image quality will match of exceed any APS-C dSLR on the market.

It is smaller and lighter than any dSLR on the market.

In decent light, its autofocus system will match or exceed any similar priced dSLR (far better than the SL1) (but in very low light, a dSLR may be slightly better)

It can shoot 11 frames per second -- while all the dSLRs in that price range are more like 5-6 frames per second.

Not that you care about video, but unlike dSLRs, it can truly utilize autofocus in video

If you don't always want to use the viewfinder, the live view LCD autofocus on the A6000 is far far far far superior to the liveview LCD autofocus of any dSLR on the market. (The A6000 uses the same AF system whether using the LCD or viewfinder. dSLRs use a good AF system for the viewfinder, but a horrible system for the LCD)

Traditional dSLRs use an optical viewfinder. Mirrorless, including the A6000, use an electronic viewfinder (EVFs). EVFs from a few years ago got a bad reputation as small, low resolution and grainy. But a good EVF, like the A6000, can be superior to an optical viewfinder for many types of shooting. For example, when taking a landscape, you can judge the exposure in the EVF before you take the shot. With a dSLR, you take the shot, and then realize it was too dark or too bright.

 

But really, in the end, you can become serious about photography within any system. Within any system, as a newbie, you will find similarly available lenses at similar prices. And every type of photography you can imagine, you can accomplish with any modern ILC system.

[shootr]

As a Canon user for over 20 years until switching to the Sony a6000 last year - I can attest to the true enjoyment I get from my photography now using the Sony.

 

Not lugging around full size camera bodies and their accompanying lenses means I use it more because it's not a burden to carry just about everywhere. It really is something to consider, along with image quality, number of lenses that are available, etc.

 

My sunset pictures, scenery during hikes, and snapshots at family gatherings are better quality than what I was getting with a Canon T5i and a bevy of lenses.

 

Your timing is quite good if the Sony does interest you - they are on sale at many quality establishments due to the recent release of the much costlier a6300.

Edited March 20, 2016 by shootr

[gsrunyan]

Before you purchase a DSLR, you might want to consider a "bridge" camera. A Canon 50SX or the Sony HX400. They cost about half of your budget and can produce excellent results. For example:

 

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/116744117

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/154203615

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/144012394

 

After using a bridge for a while, then you can try a more expensive DSLR.

 

Glenn:cool:

[Oak Hill Cruisers]

Before you purchase a DSLR, you might want to consider a "bridge" camera. A Canon 50SX or the Sony HX400. They cost about half of your budget and can produce excellent results. For example:

 

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/116744117

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/154203615

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/144012394

 

After using a bridge for a while, then you can try a more expensive DSLR.

 

Glenn:cool:

 

following this up, check out the thread & posts on the Panasonic DMC-FZ200 and its successor DMC-FZ300.

[havoc315]

Before you purchase a DSLR, you might want to consider a "bridge" camera. A Canon 50SX or the Sony HX400. They cost about half of your budget and can produce excellent results. For example:

 

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/116744117

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/154203615

http://www.pbase.com/gsrunyan/image/144012394

 

After using a bridge for a while, then you can try a more expensive DSLR.

 

Glenn:cool:

 

Anybody truly interested in learning photography should not get a bridge camera. They are of rather limited use.

They are capable of decent results in great light.

They are incapable of teaching use of wide aperture, since the lenses have very small aperture relatively speaking. They are incapable of truly exploring background separation, due to their small sensors. Most do not allow for raw shooting. They look a little like dslrs on the outside, but truly do not have anything like dslr guts or controls. They are worthless in low light situations. Most have very limited long exposure capabilities. They lack phase detect auto focus.

 

They can be fine for learning compositional technique. But you can do that just as well on a phone camera.

[Oviedo32765]

I would suggest checking out any camera clubs in your area, even before buying a camera.

 

At a camera club you will find all levels of cameras and photographers. And the photographers will be more than eager to show off and discuss their equipment.

[pierces]

"And the photographers will be more than eager to show off and discuss their equipment."

 

Personal experience prompts me to discourage this or at least be careful dipping a toe into that pool. I have tried two and found them to be very evangelical Nikonians or Canonites who strongly advised me to get rid of my Minolta and later, Sony DSLR if I ever wanted to take "real" pictures.

 

Things may have changed in the last few years with Sony and others deeper into the market share but the experience left me with a bad taste.

 

Dave

Edited March 21, 2016 by pierces

[havoc315]

Personal experience prompts me to discourage this or at least be careful dipping a toe into that pool. I have tried two and found them to be very evangelical Nikonians or Canonites who strongly advised me to get rid of my Minolta and later, Sony DSLR if I ever wanted to take "real" pictures.

 

Things may have changed in the last few years with Sony and others deeper into the market share but the experience left me with a bad taste.

 

Dave

 

I understand where you are coming from, but going to a camera club, while taking everything with a grain of salt,can be valuable.

Yes, it may be predominated by CaNikon evangelicals who believe it is impossible to take a good photo with any brand other than CaNikon. So watch out for those evangelicals.

We also have a new breed, who will preach that dSLRs are a dead technology and that they are useless compared to mirrorless. (I've heard so many Sony diehards say things like "nobody would ever want to use an OVF after experiencing a Sony EVF"). So if you go to a camera club, and hear any of this nonsense from diehards, you can ignore that stuff.

 

But a camera club would be a chance to handle some of the gear, see some different lenses. Unfortunately, it is harder and harder to do that in brick and mortar stores. I live in a populace affluent area, but there isn't a single decent camera store in the entire county. I know 1 "camera store" that carries a handful of APS-C cameras and lens options, but they have nothing full frame, minimal mirrorless, etc. I have 3 Best Buys in the County, but their camera departments have been reduced to minimal. I have to commute into NYC if I really want to see camera options in person.

 

So if you are lucky enough to get a good mix of people in a camera club, you may find people who can objectively discuss lots of different options, show you the cameras, etc.

[pierces]

Any "only this or that" positions have been rendered moot by the vast assortment of fantastic imaging devices available form virtually every manufacturer. After taking photos with almost every type of camera for all but the first ten years of my life has taught me that "The One That Works For You" is the best brand and "The One You Have With You" is the best type of camera. Though I have converted to mirrorless, I recognize that some people simply prefer other types of cameras or even phones. The biggest challenge in finding a great camera these days is choosing one from a thousand great cameras.

 

Sadly, even if a decent club is found and wonderful advice is given, the initial camera purchased will inevitably be the first in a long list of them if photography becomes important to a newbie. :)

 

As for the camera stores, we have no one to blame but ourselves. The quest for the best price led me to mail order from B&H long before the internet. I am sort of a compulsive researcher and most tech decisions (barring TVs) are made without the need to touch and feel. Even the people with the need to touch and feel share some of the blame. Going to a store, checking out the equipment and going home to order from Amazon still means no sale to the store and without sales, the resulting closures of small to medium local shops and the department shrinkage in the superstores was inevitable.

 

Even with all this drama, it's a great time to be a photographer!

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Any "only this or that" positions have been rendered moot by the vast assortment of fantastic imaging devices available form virtually every manufacturer. After taking photos with almost every type of camera for all but the first ten years of my life has taught me that "The One That Works For You" is the best brand and "The One You Have With You" is the best type of camera. Though I have converted to mirrorless, I recognize that some people simply prefer other types of cameras or even phones. The biggest challenge in finding a great camera these days is choosing one from a thousand great cameras.

 

Sadly, even if a decent club is found and wonderful advice is given, the initial camera purchased will inevitably be the first in a long list of them if photography becomes important to a newbie. :)

 

As for the camera stores, we have no one to blame but ourselves. The quest for the best price led me to mail order from B&H long before the internet. I am sort of a compulsive researcher and most tech decisions (barring TVs) are made without the need to touch and feel. Even the people with the need to touch and feel share some of the blame. Going to a store, checking out the equipment and going home to order from Amazon still means no sale to the store and without sales, the resulting closures of small to medium local shops and the department shrinkage in the superstores was inevitable.

 

Even with all this drama, it's a great time to be a photographer!

 

Dave

 

TVs I can buy without touch and feel!

IMO, touch and feel is very important with a camera. For example, while I very much like my A6300... Had I gotten to touch and feel it before buying it, I would have realized how horrible the EVF is, while wearing glasses. It likely wouldnt have stopped me from buying the camera (the pros outweigh the cons), but this is the type of thing that I was unlikely to find with internet research.

For a newbie particularly, touch and feel can be critical. Research can tell you that a mirrorless is smaller and lighter... But only by getting those cameras into your own hands, can you decide subjectively how much those differences mean to you. A newbie buyer might think that small and compact sounds great, but then once in the hand, realize the larger grip of a dSLR just feels better in the hand.

Or if you are comparing a Canon Rebel with a Nikon D3300/5500, internet research will really only show you nitpicky differences... Touch screen, a 4mp different in resolution, etc. But if you have a chance to feel the cameras and use them a little bit, you may find you really prefer the ergonomics of one, over the other.

 

Yes, you are right -- we have ourselves to blame. Retail is really basically dead. I see so many empty storefronts, nobody wants to lease retail space anymore. It's often cheaper and easier to just buy from the internet. Amazon considers me a VIP, I spend thousands of dollars per year with them.

But it's consumers and retailers that are both to blame -- Many retailers failed to up their game to compete. The Apple Store does great retail, despite being a tech product -- because they offer a great retail experience.

Amazon knows how to offer a retail experience superior to most brick and mortar stores. I got my son a Chromebook laptop. It was defective within a couple of weeks. I got Amazon customer service chat within 30 seconds. Amazon e-mailed me a return label. They refunded my money IMMEDIATELY (even before I returned the product).

On the other hand, I went into a brick and mortar shoe store a few months ago. Asked to try on a particular shoe in my size.. they didn't have it in stock, but they could order it. Asked for a different shoe.. same story. (And I'm a pretty normal size). Thus, they weren't offering any experience superior to internet shopping -- in fact, it was an inferior experience.

 

.... anyway... this is really going off on a tangent...

 

My point is, trying out cameras can be critical, combined with research. And generally speaking, trying it out for 5 seconds in a store still won't add enough real information.

[pierces]

TVs I can buy without touch and feel!

 

I was mostly referring to "see". ;)

 

Huge variance in picture quality across brands and models. Got picky about this after working for Pioneer for six years.

 

 

IMO, touch and feel is very important with a camera.

 

I guess dealing with new tech for the last thirty years has left me ergonomically agnostic. My main concern is the performance and final result. Since most decent cameras have a lot of set-it-once features, memorizing the location of the few semi-frequent menu settings isn't that much of an issue (though the original NEX tile menu was an abomination). To each their own, eh?

 

I am curious about your issue with the viewfinder and glasses. I wear glasses and don't have any problem with the Alpha EVFs.

 

Apologies to the OP...we are so off track! :o

 

Dave

[peety3]

I am looking for an entry level DSLR that will "grow" with us as we become better photographers. I could care less about video or wifi. I want to take high quality photos in varying light. The end goal (for the vacation at least) is quality photos of the scenery, sunsets, and beaches of the Caribbean. Beyond that, at home pictures of wildlife on our ranch, and winter scenes.

 

The starter budget is around $600, thinking camera, 2 lenses, UV filter, bag, strap, memory card, and extra battery.

I have currently been investigating the Canon EOS Rebel Sl1 with the 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens and 18-55mm STM Lens.

I'd shy away from the Rebel SL1. It's old, and I don't recommend buying anything that was released >24-30 months ago. It's also specifically made to serve the tiny hands crowd. Take a look at Rebel T6 variants instead.

 

I'd also recommend skipping the 75-300 lens. It's junk IMHO. No image stabilization, poor optics, so unless you already have strong skills at exposure management or you confine yourself to beach climate mid-day shooting, you'd be disappointed with this lens. I recognize that anything better costs more, but this is one you almost can't give away if you decide to buy it then replace it. Consider the 18-200 as an all-in-one, or one of the 70-300 lenses with IS, or perhaps the 70-200 f/4 with or without IS. Many of these could kill your starter budget alone, so consider renting this piece for your trip. We regularly rent for our Alaska trips, and only recently got to a point where we'd only rent one lens if we were heading there tomorrow.

[zackiedawg]

I am curious about your issue with the viewfinder and glasses. I wear glasses and don't have any problem with the Alpha EVFs.

 

I admit, I don't find any issue there myself. I wear glasses, and always do when I shoot - I shoot through my glasses and the EVF (some folks adjust their diopters so they can pull up their glasses to shoot with their eye - I prefer to shoot with the glasses on)...and have never had any issue with the A6000's finder. I switch between an OVF DSLR and the EVF A6000 throughout the day, and find really no difference between the two at all.

 

Remember though, each person's face, and eyesight, can be quite different - think of some folks who might have a flat or round face, a small nose, no brow to speak of, etc - and compare to someone with a narrow face, a long or large nose, a deep brow - there can be a great difference in how well that viewfinder may work with different facial structures, and add glasses to that list, and you have to consider where the glasses sit on your face, how far the eye is from the glasses lens, etc. So it is possible some folks may have greater difficulty not just with an EVF specifically, but the specific design of the viewfinder and its relief from the camera, eyepoint, etc.

 

 

And agreed on being off topic to the OP - apologies. Good news is: no matter what interchangeable lens camera you decide to start with, no matter the brand, no matter if DSLR or mirrorless, it will be an immensely capable camera that will give you plenty of room to grow and learn...most people shooting with interchangeable lens cameras today don't have the skill or experience to even push the camera to 50% of its abilities...usually the camera is far more capable than the user behind it until you get to serious enthusiast/professional levels of photography - and even then, it's rare the camera will be holding you back. So don't get too stressed about what to start with because at least you won't be getting a bad camera.

[havoc315]

I was mostly referring to "see". ;)

 

Huge variance in picture quality across brands and models. Got picky about this after working for Pioneer for six years.

 

 

 

 

I guess dealing with new tech for the last thirty years has left me ergonomically agnostic. My main concern is the performance and final result. Since most decent cameras have a lot of set-it-once features, memorizing the location of the few semi-frequent menu settings isn't that much of an issue (though the original NEX tile menu was an abomination). To each their own, eh?

 

I am curious about your issue with the viewfinder and glasses. I wear glasses and don't have any problem with the Alpha EVFs.

 

Apologies to the OP...we are so off track! :o

 

Dave

 

It's the hard eyecup. On my dSLR, there is a flexible rubber eyecup, and I can press my glasses deep against the viewfinder and still get a good view. With the hard eyecup of the A6300, the glasses keep me pretty distant from the image inside the viewfinder. The image looks far away and angled, almost like I'm looking at the viewfinder from a few feet away. It is probably a more significant effect for me because I shoot with my right eye, so my face isn't centered with the camera when using the viewfinder.

 

The EVF is magnificent when I lift my glasses and use the diopter adjustment. But I find it is nearly worthless with my glasses.

[pierces]

It's the hard eyecup. On my dSLR, there is a flexible rubber eyecup, and I can press my glasses deep against the viewfinder and still get a good view. With the hard eyecup of the A6300, the glasses keep me pretty distant from the image inside the viewfinder. The image looks far away and angled, almost like I'm looking at the viewfinder from a few feet away. It is probably a more significant effect for me because I shoot with my right eye, so my face isn't centered with the camera when using the viewfinder.

 

The EVF is magnificent when I lift my glasses and use the diopter adjustment. But I find it is nearly worthless with my glasses.

 

That explains a lot. I seldom use the eyecup after the first week or two...when it's almost inevitably becomes lost. :)

 

Dave

[TruckerDave]

Whatever you decide on (dslr, mirrorless, bridge etc etc) hold one in your hand and play with it a little BEFORE you buy it. A camera can have all the bells and whistles in the world and every feature you could want and possibly need but if it doesn't feel good in your hand you wont want to use it and drag it around take pics. (years ago I had my heart set on a Canon..downloaded manuals, read reviews, had specs memorized etc etc. Then, before I bought it, I went to my local (at the time) camera store and held it and played around with it.....HATED how it felt in my hands. Ended up buying a Nikon D90 a couple weeks later after I saved up a little more cash. It just felt better in my hands. (have since traded that in for a D7000 and then again for a D610))

[MAJPLO]

There is some benefit to owning a brand that friends or family members own- you can borrow lenses from them [emoji4]. I myself chose Pentax. Two big reasons were in body stabilization and weather resistance. Check out the dpreview website for great info, reviews, side by side comparisons on multiple brands.

Edited March 23, 2016 by MAJPLO