|
Elliotw2 posted:Strongly consider a M4/3 camera. The lower end Panasonic and Olympus basically looks and feels like a S90 except you can take the lens off. The NEX-3N/A5000 would also be about the right shape/layout/price for what you're looking at. Nice, thanks! The A5000 looks like something that'd meet what she's looking for; we've got a camera store less than half a mile away from work so I'm going to encourage her to head there to demo different bodies and see what fits best. I've also let her try out my XSi and she liked that too, so it'll probably boil down to the SL1 or something similar to the A5000.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
junidog posted:Thanks for replying, but is there a more technical answer? How is the filter changing the lightpath to increase FOV? I've tried googling around, but since they're garbage/newbie bait everything I can find is just people warning others not to buy them. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Nice, thanks! The A5000 looks like something that'd meet what she's looking for; we've got a camera store less than half a mile away from work so I'm going to encourage her to head there to demo different bodies and see what fits best. I've also let her try out my XSi and she liked that too, so it'll probably boil down to the SL1 or something similar to the A5000. A nice thing for someone coming from a point and shoot is that the A5000 has a control for power zoom on the shutter, so you can zoom the newer lenses fully on body instead of messing with the ring/rocker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:picture Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
just getting back into 'nice' pictures and away from point and shoot hell. Are there any new upcoming camera (bodies) I should really hold out for to get long life out of or just hit up the used market for older stuff. I'm playing with a 30D now to get back into the basics of things, and I was considering a cannon, but a lot of chat is leading me into other directions. I just want to take nice shots that can eventually go on a wall so i dont have to go to the stupid photo places in the mall for family pics, and take -really- nice shots of the stuff i own for internet cred. Im not looking into getting a dozen lenses, just a nice something for 99% of my general use, and maybe a telephoto lens for the future where my kids are doing stuff i care about from afar. cannon seemed to be the champ except with all the new stuff coming out, and the seem to be lagging behind, especially w/ mnirrorless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Get a Canon body that has a name that ends in i T3i, T4i, T5i These are the most-recommended Canon DSLRs in the Dorkroom. You haven't mentioned budget. If you can swing it - a camera body alone will be around $400 - you can get the much-loved 70-200/4L for around $700 and then plan on spending your kid's college fund on further examples of L-glass.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
budget was.. open. But considering i was thinking about getting 60D, I was figuring $700. I would probably look to spend $400ish only because I just want pretty pictures, not making a living around it The canon thread started to shy away from canon, which is whi i consider others out there. I'm not tied to any one brand atm
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:budget was.. open. But considering i was thinking about getting 60D, I was figuring $700. I would probably look to spend $400ish only because I just want pretty pictures, not making a living around it If you have no preconceived notions of how you want your camera to function or lenses, Canon is probably not the best choice if you want to jump in and do stuff like shoot RAW, because the Sony sensors others use give you much better RAW data. If you honestly believe you'll never do anything but shoot JPEG, it doesn't make a lick of difference because you won't see that extra dynamic range anyway, and you should just pick what feels more intuitive to you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
If you're open to any brand - you mentioned the 30D so I thought you might want to keep using the lens(es) you have - then your first step should be to go to a camera store and fondle the offerings. You'll probably find the current Canons the most comfortable because you're used to shooting one (I gather) and most manufacturers don't change the ergonomics very much over time; they keep a consistent "style" and general layout of controls. The big brands are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and Olympus. All make good cameras with good lenses that can be found for your budget. Any current-generation or a-few-years-old DSLR can be expected to last for many years; most cameras are rated for 100 000 shutter actuations which is enough for a casual shooter to spend 3-5 years (at least) working through. Once you figure out which brand is most comfortable in your hands and squashed against your face, browse on-line for second-hand deals. KEH.com is a good guide for price, Amazon and other on-line retailers frequently offer rather drastic discounts, and eBay is, as always, a crapshoot. You could also toss your local camera store a bone and buy from them, some bricks-and-mortar stores actually compete reasonably well against the internet, and can throw in some useful extras like prints or generous warranties. Obviously, don't get a pointless warranty for too much money from some big-box faceless corp. I'm most familiar with Pentax. For a budget of $700-ish for a camera body plus one walkaround, general-purpose lens I'd consider something like a K-5 ($400) and a Pentax 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 WR ($350). You might be able to get that combination for a few dollars less, the used market includes lots of plus-or-minus on pricing. Prices from a quick look on KEH Nobody makes a bad DSLR anymore, but some are better value than others and some have features that will be very appealing to some people but pointless to others. Spending a solid chunk of time getting confused at a camera store is a good way to form some fuzzy, vague first impressions that will seriously reduce the long and confusing list of options you face. You've said you'll be taking pictures of your stuff - big or small? cars or model cars? coins or furniture? - and of your child. Any DSLR from the past few years will be excellent in these roles, though you'll want to get a macro lens or at least some screw-on diopter magnifying filters if you're shooting small stuff. If your child plays team sports, a medium telephoto zoom, something around 70-200mm and with a constant maximum aperture of f/4 or f/2.8 will be very useful; many such lenses come with a kind-of macro setting that works for things the approximate size of model airplanes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Awesome advice all. I am only familiar with canon as that is what I borrowed to play 'big boy camera'. I honestly have to remember how to do all the adjustments i left up to automatic mode of my years in P&S. Good, cheap lenses are a plus, but as I only anticipate buying a couple, I'm open to all systems. Canons are what I can get local advice on, but if a Sony X gives better bang for the buck in a MODERN body vs a Canon, I am open to switching. i looked at recent mirrorless sonys, and the big empty dslr body is kicd of a turn off. But i should narrow down to specifics to be fair to the thread: - Raw is a big need. I feel if i am going to this level of camera, i should get all i can out of my pictures - Sensor vs megapixel. I know nothing here. I do know more MP is just numbers without the sensor depth to really use it. This is why older bodies are fine for my needs - Everything else I am taking as I see it. better LCD. Touch screen, etc. I expect to look through as thing and hit a button. back in the day with my higher end sony i took candid pictures of people / places that made for a wonderful 8x10 to give as a gift of hang on the wall. I know enough that the 1 out of 100 pics i took were the average get, so I am good on that respect. I am pretty interested in taking pics of family together, playing or otherwise, and using that as wall hanging material but 99% getting printed and given out. I am okay with the feel of the canon. I want -potential-, but I love more bang for the buck. the 60D is the top end and I'll never use 50% of it, or I can get a cheaper X and it will do 90% of what I want and I'll never notice what it cant. I am doing my research, so throw models at me. Question: lenses are per camera manuf right? i buy a sony lens or a canon lens, nothing is interchangable ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:
Natively, yes, but not necessarily. You can adapt some systems lenses to others (eg; you can adapt canon EF lenses to Sony mirrorless bodies, although the AF speed sucks dong apparently - I have not used this myself to see) Generally mirrorless sytems can adapt lenses from just about any old camera system, since you don't have to worry about registration distance (back of lens -> sensor distance) since you can mount as close or as far away as needed via adapter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
If you're interested in Sony, both their actual DSLR's and mirrorless systems are pretty cheap since most Sony shooters seem to be migrating to the A7(r/s/II) or the A77II. You can get a pretty good set up for less than $700 if you don't mind lightly used. Also, Sony only has one empty body camera, the A3000. The good (?) news is that it's not great and no one bought them, along with how cheap the second-hand market is means you don't even have to consider it. Karasu Tengu fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Dec 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Each manufacturer uses their own, proprietary lens mount, and lenses built for one system will not fit a camera from a different system without an adaptor. Adaptors are difficult, rare, expensive, typically degrade image quality, and are only at all possible for some combinations of lens <-> camera. I've seen a few Dorkroom Goons talk about using Nikon lenses on Canon cameras, so I guess that specific combination is a bit more feasible than most. For most mirrorless systems, this changes dramatically because most mirrorless systems use a registration distance (the distance from the back of the lens to the image sensor) that is much smaller than most DSLRs - that mirror takes up space and the lenses are designed accordingly. So most mirrorless cameras can take pretty much any SLR lens if the right adaptor is available, and those adaptors are typically cheap and abundant. They also allow you to mount old "orphan-mount" lenses on your new mirrorless camera, such as Contax/Yashica, Minolta, Konica, and Canon FD-mount lenses that no longer have current-production cameras to fit - these are all manual-focus lenses from the 70's and 80's, and in some cases can be bought for a song. There are some problems within manufacturers, too, because some companies have changed their lens mounts over the years. Canon, for example, abandoned their FD-mount when they started making autofocus cameras in the late 80s / early 90s. Sony bought their camera business as a single complete piece from Minolta about 20 years ago, when Minolta had already switched to a different mount for autofocus much like what Canon did. Nikon didn't completely revamp their mount, so many modern Nikons can mount old Nikon lenses going back to the 70s; Pentax didn't change their mount at all except add some electrical contacts so all modern Pentax DSLRs can mount any Pentax K-mount lens going back to the 70s, and they kept the registration distance the same back in the 70s when the previous round of new tech developments happened - the switch from screw-mount and non-automatic-aperture lenses to bayonet-mount* lenses that stay wide open until the shutter is tripped; this means it's easy to put a screw-mount lens from the 60's on a modern Pentax camera. I confess I don't know enough about Olympus to say anything about their lens-mounts. * Canon FD and a few other manual-focus lens mounts are breech-mount, not bayonet-mount, a distinction that makes no difference in a discussion of modern DSLR capabilities and compatibilities. Then there are the third-party manufacturers. Sigma and Tamron are the big guys these day, though back in the 80s and 90s everybody and their dog was cranking out cloned lenses on any mount spec. they could get their hands on - fuckin' JC-Penny produced a line of lenses! Tamron makes only lenses (and probably some obscure accessories I've never heard of), Sigma makes a few cameras and their own proprietary lens-mount but nobody uses those cameras **. Sigma and Tamron make nearly all of their lenses in mounts to fit Canon, Nikon, or Sony (this is why when somebody says they're selling a Tamron in the Buy/Sell thread the next post will almost always be "for what camera?"), and with some exceptions for Pentax (  ). This means you can get a modern-tech lens from Sigma or Tamron for less than the price of a similar lens from the manufacturer of your camera. There are many, many complexities I'm simplifying in how this works.** Mr. Despair bought a second-hand Sigma camera and converted it to IR. I like his pictures. I should get back to work and stop postin' on teh intarwub, but instead I'll talk about megapickles. I had this photo printed at 18 x 24 inches and 300dpi to give as a gift about a month ago, the largest print I've yet made. I took the picture on my K10D, a camera with a resolution of 10.2 megapixels, and post-processing included a bit of cropping, reducing the size by a bit. The print was fine, that size did not overstretch the resolution of the image.  SD 120 Ice Crossing Riverhurst 33 by Execudork, on FlickrMegapickels don't matter nearly as much as the marketing would have you believe. You've already got experience printing at 8x10, and I can assure you that significantly larger than that is just fine from any DSLR of the last 8 years or so. And yes, shoot RAW.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Each manufacturer uses their own, proprietary lens mount, and lenses built for one system will not fit a camera from a different system without an adaptor. Adaptors are difficult, rare, expensive, typically degrade image quality, and are only at all possible for some combinations of lens <-> camera. I've seen a few Dorkroom Goons talk about using Nikon lenses on Canon cameras, so I guess that specific combination is a bit more feasible than most. Nikon F has a 2.5mm greater registration distance than EF, so it's doable. They make adapters with a little slider lever on them for aperture control. FD is 2mm shorter than EF, so no go there unless you use an adapter with optics (or lose infinity focus), or have the mount custom converted at great expense which is not worth it unless you own some super expensive exotic FD mount lens for whatever random reason, instead of a 5$ 50mm that you bought at the flea market.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
I think I am finally ready to purchase a DSLR. I have been shooting on film with some old Nikons for a few years and want to make the jump. I also have a bunch of cool old lenses but from what I have read they are not compatible with anything now? This being my favorite. These are the two setups I am considering. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FDW07Q2/ref=gno_cart_title_0?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A13BNE3P7C8THK http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-DX-Form...-1&keywords=d90 http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-300m...17942082&sr=1-7 Main uses will be outdoor photography that would include everything from landscapes to snowboarding(maybe), though I do want something that will work well in low light situations. Being able to mount old lenses a plus. I ain't scared of shooting manually. Budget is around $500.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
KEH will do you a second hand D7100 for less than $500. More if you want the newer D7100. The general consensus in the Nikon thread was to skip over the D5xxx series. I'm pretty sure the D7xxx will give you better compatibility with your existing lenses too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
The D7000/D7100 will not work with non-AI lenses, which that one appears to be. The aperture feeler doesn't flip up like it does on older Nikon film cameras, so you can't mount those lenses at all. Edit: If you have a big bag of pre-AI glass, a D3xxx/D5xxx actually makes some sense, since you can mount those older lenses without any obstruction. You lose any metering, automatic modes, or aperture indication in the finder, but you can put a Gossen Digisix in your hotshoe to compensate, or just look at the histogram. Honestly, if your subjects are moving or you expect to be in changing lighting conditions, this route is a pain in the butt. The D90 was a good camera, but it's really ancient at this point. As already noted, the D7000/D7100 are better choices, but you'd have to invest in newer AI or AF lenses, too. TheJeffers fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Dec 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:The D7000/D7100 will not work with non-AI lenses, which that one appears to be. The aperture feeler doesn't flip up like it does on older Nikon film cameras, so you can't mount those lenses at all. Yeah. Too bad. I have some nice lenses but all non AI. I have not seen a 7100 for under $700 though... Is the 7000 pretty much the same? Can it mount this type of lens? http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-105mm-Ai-S-Manual-Focus/dp/B00009XV7G/ref=pd_ybh_5 sporklift fucked around with this message at 07:20 on Dec 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
sporklift posted:Yeah. Too bad. I have some nice lenses but all non AI. I have not seen a 7100 for under $700 though... Is the 7000 pretty much the same? Can it mount this type of lens? 7000 is 16mp, 7100 is 24mp. There are other changes too. They can both mount ai lenses. But why do you want to mount that one, unless you already have it? Also you could have a the same model of lens be pre-ai, ai, ai-s, or ai'd (of varying quality), so make sure you know what you are buying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:7000 is 16mp, 7100 is 24mp. I figured its a newer version of the lens that I love and I can buy it cheap? If I can mount it on a new camera... sweet? New versions cost up to $800.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
sporklift posted:I figured its a newer version of the lens that I love and I can buy it cheap? If I can mount it on a new camera... sweet? New versions cost up to $800. To reiterate. I have about $500 to spend on a DSLR. Would like a lens or two. (willing to pay a bit extra) I really dig Nikon. Nostalgia talking though. Tons of Nikkor poo poo I don't want to go to waste.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 10:50
|
|
|
Can't you get pre-AI lenses converted for a pretty reasonable price?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
Nikon used to offer a conversion service when AI was a new thing, but they don't anymore. You can still find the conversion kits on eBay from time to time; any competent repairperson should be able to install one. There are people out there who will cut an AI ridge into a non-AI lens, but that's the backyard mechanic way of doing it. sporklift posted:Yeah. Too bad. I have some nice lenses but all non AI. I have not seen a 7100 for under $700 though... Is the 7000 pretty much the same? Can it mount this type of lens? The D7000 is the same basic camera, with a lower-res sensor and fewer AF points. That lens will work, as it's an AI-s lens. Be aware that the field of view will be more like a 150mm lens on a D7000/D7100, though. You'll also have to set the focal length and maximum aperture manually in order to get Matrix metering. TheJeffers fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Dec 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
d7100 (or 7000) vs a 60D Im not invested in lenses or brand, but I'm trying to narrow choices to jump when i'm ready to buy next month or when a good deal comes along. 60D is tugging me, but rational thought shows the 7xxx stuff is showing some cool new things I may want to take advantage of as a completely novice picture taker who will just fart around 99% of the time. rational thinking says grab older stuff which is also fine, but i like to not be 'obsolete; day one. I know my choices are stupid, but if i knew why, i wouldnt need to make them :/ I just want bang for buck.. convinced the wife we -need- this  Real talk: when investing in lenses, realistically just having one general macro / portrait / oh look at that pretty thing lens for a long while, which is the better overall system ? I will buy used / referb / 3rd party
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
They're basically the same price, and the two lens systems are pretty comparable, so go lay hands on some cameras. Both should be on display at basically any store more upscale than Walmart.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:d7100 (or 7000) vs a 60D Im not invested in lenses or brand, but I'm trying to narrow choices to jump when i'm ready to buy next month or when a good deal comes along. step 1: buy a d7100, step 2: rip the '/' key out of your keyboard and throw it away. step 3: realize it doesn't matter what camera you use and just buy a copy of understanding exposure to figure out what you're doing. step 4" regret all the money you invested in the camera body instead of lenses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 08:06
|
|
|
The differences in quality among current-gen cameras across manufacturers are too small to matter. One might have *slightly* less noise at a given ISO, while another might accurately autofocus on the model's eyes in a studio 99.9% of the time rather than 99.8%. These comparisons are meaningless. There is ZERO risk that you'll be disappointed in your camera in 6 months because the other option you're looking at TODAY is secretly, magically a million times better. There are no differences among current cameras that really matter. Actual differences among cameras: Layout of controls. Size and weight (within fairly narrow ranges). Cost of accessories like batteries. Availability and average price of a particular lens used for a particular purpose (this ONLY applies to fairly specialized pro-level lenses, not walk-around zooms that most people use most of the time, and what I mean by "availability" is NOT yes or no, it's Get It Today vs. Order It and Wait 2 Days). Nikon, in their infinite wisdom, uses a lens mount that turns "backwards" compared to the other manufacturers (somebody please confirm re: Sony). That makes switching from, say, Canon to Nikon a little weird for the first day or two of shooting, then you get used to it and it no longer matters. If your goal is snapshots on facebook, use your phone. And stop using your phone to post here. If your goal is "good" pictures (your own personal definition) on your website / blog / flickr / whatever, get a DSLR or a mirrorless. If your goal is big prints (8x10, 11x14, etc.) to hang on your cousin's wall, get a DSLR. If your goal is really big prints, get a DSLR and a high-limit credit card and the phone number of a loan shark. If your goal is ART, shoot large format, throw out your back, and sneer dismissively at the dabbling digerati. Live in a trailer in the desert.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:If your goal is really big prints, get a DSLR and a high-limit credit card and the phone number of a loan shark. This is one one situation where Nikon has a clear advantage, given the insane pixel density of the D800. Your bank account will hate you no matter what. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
If you take a pictureyou like with the camera then you have a good camera. Professionals only uses professional camera gear. http://petapixel.com/2014/09/08/pro-camera-really-need-shoot-like-pro/
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
so a buddy lent me his solid old 20D, and i finally got a new card reader to pull off the pics i took while just farting around. HOLY poo poo. I didnt compose anything, fix lighting or do anything besides hit a button, but these are quality pictures i havent seen in a long time in P&S land. I can already kick myself for missing out on even better pics by not playing with f stops, but without a flash taken under my normal lights is something I have never done without getting just crap. http://i.imgur.com/hmALc9y.jpg http://i.imgur.com/7DogehN.jpg I briefly played in lightroom and got some exposure bumped up and other basics, but this was was raw cronverted to jpeg in lightroom as is. Yes, i am a novice with a poo poo eating grin on my face, but this makes me want to pick up a body and kick as lens asap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
I'm looking to order a DSLR for my girlfriend for christmas as she's seemed pretty interested in one after seeing her aunts over thanksgiving. I've pretty much avoided looking up photography stuff because I knew it was always something I could get really really into and I already have more hobbies then time. That said, I'd still like to get her a decent one for a beginner with no real experience. Worst case, if she doesn't like it I can always take fun pictures of my car or music poo poo. I did a bit of research, and I've narrowed it down to probably either the Nikon D5300, or Pentax K-50. For some reason I haven't really liked any of the Cannons in the same price range. Is either of these a smarter choice over the other? Video isn't a huge concern, and she'll probably be doing portrait stuff or random pictures. Are the kit lenses a good jack of all trades to sort of get a feel for what she likes? Also, what straps/cases aren't complete poo poo? I don't really care to get a camera branded case because that just seems like someone would end up stealing it. Any other accessories worth checking out?I'd like to keep stuff to max of $700-$800 bucks, but I can stretch it up to about $1000 if it's worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Thorpe posted:I'm looking to order a DSLR for my girlfriend for christmas as she's seemed pretty interested in one after seeing her aunts over thanksgiving. I've pretty much avoided looking up photography stuff because I knew it was always something I could get really really into and I already have more hobbies then time. Get a fast prime, around 35mm, besides the kit and she is set quite nicely. I wouldn't bother with cases, just a generic "brand name" strap. If she feels the need for this kind of thing she can get later on. Acessories in general are the kind of things you buy as your personal necessities arise. Oh, don't forget the memory card and open the box and charge the battery beforehand. Nothing worse than getting a shiny gift and nothing being able to try it out thanks to empty batteries...
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Get a fast prime, around 35mm, besides the kit and she is set quite nicely. I wouldn't bother with cases, just a generic "brand name" strap. If she feels the need for this kind of thing she can get later on. Acessories in general are the kind of things you buy as your personal necessities arise. What Primo Itch said. As for brand, either is fine. Pentax is a bit easier to get cheap old lenses for than Nikon, but not by a huge margin and that only matters if she (or you) decide to go glass shopping at a flea market or pawn shop with a sub-$100 budget. The Pentax will be weathersealed, meaning she can shoot in the rain / snow / dust / whatever without worrying about it. By reputation, it's not as good at video. Each camera will feel a little different in her hands, but if you want to surprise her taking her to a camera shop and asking her to hold those cameras and tell you what you think is going to ruin it, obviously. And yes, definitely open the box, charge the battery, and slip a memory card - 32GB Class 10 - inside the box where she'll find it. Batteries take twice as long to charge when you're eagerly waiting to use them. EDIT: If you're set on a bag, buy a LowePro, Kata, Crumpler X Million Dollar Home (where X is a number that corresponds to size - 1 is small, 7 is huge), or some other brand of camera bag. Make sure it's big enough for the camera, additional lens (buy that ~35mm prime), and enough spare room for either another lens or a flash unit (those two things are roughly the same size, typically). Cost breakdown (very rough) $500 Pentax K-50 plus 18-55mm WR kit zoom lens $150 Pentax DA-35mm f/2.4 lens $20 Memory card $100 A good bag $770 Total Save the bag money and deal with that later. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 07:11 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:What Primo Itch said. Thank you for your guys insight. I ended up picking up the k-50 camera and lens, and the additional lens and memory card. Got her a couple extra batteries and have everything all charged up and ready to go. I grabbed an Amazon basics camera bag as we're taking off to her sisters house rear end early and I'm sure she'll want to get pictures of her niece and nephews Christmas. Also picked her up a copy of Understanding Exposure. I can't wait till Christmas morning! Thank you guys for your help.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
So, uh, my mom heard I was looking for a camera to buy as a Christmas present to myself and went ahead and bought this for me because "QVC said it was on sale only for a short time and I can just pay her back!": http://www.qvc.com/Canon-Rebel-T5-18MP-DSLR-w-18-55mm-&-75-300-USM-Lenses-&-Accs..product.E226862.html She spent ~$575 for a Canon T5 with 18-55mm & 75-300 USM Lenses. Up to this point, I've used my uncle's spare Canon 40D for a vacation and loved it, but I wasn't ready to pull the trigger on anything yet. (She's a bit of an impulsive shopper.) I've looked around and it seems like she paid the normal retail price for a Canon T5 plus the lens, maybe saving $20 overall? The lenses themselves seem pretty meh, as the lens I was borrowing from my Uncle had two focusing rings, one for macro and one for more fine-tuning. Not sure what the technical terms are, exactly. But neither of these lenses that came with the Canon have two focusing rings and I am having to rely on autofocus for closer shots, which I really dislike. I like having more control. At this point, I'm wondering if it is worth returning the whole kit and just buying a T5 (or something else) along with a better lens with the dual focusing rings. The T5 seems like a good body, but the extra cost just to get a mediocre lens doesn't seem worth it. Anyone got any input? Is it worth returning? Should I just go out and buy a better lens and just eat the cost of the crappy 75-300 lens? Also, what's the technical term for a lens that has two focusing rings? Bazanga fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Dec 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Just return the whole thing and buy something that isnt a t5 because the t5 is the third most hateful canon body around (t3 and eos-m being the other two). It exists so canon can sell you (even more) ancient poo poo and bundle in free bags and garbage and then moms buy it because "its a real camera"
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
Welp, that's what I figured. Thanks for the input. I'll start the return process now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
Bazanga posted:The lenses themselves seem pretty meh, as the lens I was borrowing from my Uncle had two focusing rings, one for macro and one for more fine-tuning. Not sure what the technical terms are, exactly. But neither of these lenses that came with the Canon have two focusing rings and I am having to rely on autofocus for closer shots, which I really dislike. I like having more control.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Yeah, what he said. Your Uncle's lenses sound like they're higher end stuff though, all the more entry level autofocus lenses have a garbage focus ring on the very front of the lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
Bazanga posted:So, uh, my mom heard I was looking for a camera to buy as a Christmas present to myself and went ahead and bought this for me because "QVC said it was on sale only for a short time and I can just pay her back!": http://www.qvc.com/Canon-Rebel-T5-18MP-DSLR-w-18-55mm-&-75-300-USM-Lenses-&-Accs..product.E226862.html She spent ~$575 for a Canon T5 with 18-55mm & 75-300 USM Lenses. Up to this point, I've used my uncle's spare Canon 40D for a vacation and loved it, but I wasn't ready to pull the trigger on anything yet. (She's a bit of an impulsive shopper.) Return it and buy a used 60D, perhaps with a used lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 10:23
|
|