|
I've asked the same thing in the Canon thread, but I really could use some advice, so here I go again: As someone looking to buy his first DSLR, is it a bad idea to buy a 700D/T5i, even though the new rebels have been announced? I was looking at the 700d for a while and decided it's the right one, and now I'm torn... I think I probably don't need any of the new features, id rather go with better optics. Any advice/opinions? Also, how much do you expect the price to drop on the previous models, and when?
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:41 |
|
|
busfahrer posted:I've asked the same thing in the Canon thread, but I really could use some advice, so here I go again: If you're going to get a T5i at this point, I would get one from the Canon refurb store - you still get a 1 year warranty (same as new) and it will be significantly cheaper. The nicest part about the new rebels is the 7D/70D AF system - that is a pretty big step up. The fact that the 760D has servo in live view is also great (IF hybrid cmos 3 is as good as dual pixel - if it's not, that will be a useless feature, so maybe wait and see what the reviews say)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
busfahrer posted:I've asked the same thing in the Canon thread, but I really could use some advice, so here I go again: I would also look into the T4i since they are essentially the same camera. You may find even better deals on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
I got a Nikon D200 in pretty much mint condition with <10k shutter clicks for dirt cheap along with a Nikkor 28-80 G lens. Pretty basic and old piece of kit but my last DSLR was a Rebel XT which broke a long time ago so It seems pretty nice to me. I wanna burn a little more money but I can't decide if I should pick up the 50mm 1.8, or a YongNuo speedlight with a light stand and some umbellas. I try to do a little of all kinds of photography but in my heart of hearts, I love still life and product photography so I'm leaning heavily towards the lighting stuff. Thoughts? And while we're on that topic, what's a good Nikon lens for that sort of shooting?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
I have a budget of like $450 all told, what would be the best setup I could get? I'm willing to buy used. e: preferably something video-capable? I'm not super optimistic I can afford that judging by how expensive a used 5dmkii is, though. Nuclear Pogostick fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Feb 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
I want to buy my first DSLR. Is there any reason to not consider the SL1 if the size isn't an issue (I have small hands)? I played around with an SL1 and a T5i at bestbuy today and both of them seemed pretty comfortable to handle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
I don't keep up with rebels but I saw the SL1 on sale today for $299 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=14610 Wish my first was that cheap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Nuclear Pogostick posted:I have a budget of like $450 all told, what would be the best setup I could get? I'm willing to buy used. I'll speak for Pentax here. KEH.com has a K-30 in "Like New" condition with the kit zoom for $350, or with the 2-lens kit (18-55 + 50-200) for $450, or a K-5 with the 18-55 kit zoom for $500. They have a few K-30 packages at that price, differing in colour. The "best setup" is pretty subjective. Nearly all DSLRs from the last 4-5 years have video capability, though they differ widely in quality for that feature. The K-30, for example, doesn't have a way to attach an external microphone, but the K-5 does. If you get serious about video, that feature won't matter because you'll have dedicated audio equipment. What else do you think you'll use a camera for? Pictures of kids / pets? Vacation snaps? Your nerdy, nerdy hobbies in extreme close-up? Birds and wildlife? First, go to a camera store and handle as many different DSLRs as they'll let you - fondle at least one from each major brand (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and Olympus if you're feeling charitable  ). Control layouts and other ergonomic features tend to be pretty consistent within a brand, so mashing a new Canon T5i against your face will tell you a lot about how a used T3i would feel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
astr0man posted:I want to buy my first DSLR. Is there any reason to not consider the SL1 if the size isn't an issue (I have small hands)? I played around with an SL1 and a T5i at bestbuy today and both of them seemed pretty comfortable to handle. I bought an SL1 recently to have as a backup since it is so cheap right now. It does everything the T5i does, minus the flip-out LCD. With the shorty forty on it, it can fit into a coat pocket. I actually bought one of the white ones with the idea that, being white and small enough to pocket, I could take it places where people normally flip out if you pull out a serious business looking DSLR.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
If I wanted to graduate to my first DSLR, that would also do semi-respectable video, would I be going too far wrong with the Nikon D5500? I'd be using it to take pictures of architecture and the occasional bit of wildlife, if that helps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
I'd expand the budget by a tiny bit and swing for either a D7100 or a Canon 70D to futureproof yourself a tiny bit more, but the 5500 isn't a bad choice either. Also make sure you go to a shop and handle multiple bodies (Canon/Nikon/Pentax) and find out which one "feels" best to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I'd expand the budget by a tiny bit and swing for either a D7100 or a Canon 70D to futureproof yourself a tiny bit more, but the 5500 isn't a bad choice either. Thank you very much for the advice. To be honest, I'm still not entirely sure a DSLR is for me, I might look into mirrorless cameras too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Absolutely look into mirrorless cameras, too. It's pretty hard to buy a bad camera these days, just one that isn't as great *for you* as something else. Fondle all the cameras!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
If I was just getting photography today, I probably would get a mirorless system. It's more compact and good glass can be had for cheap (compared to DSLR). It also offers plenty of room to grow and there is no reason you can't get professional quality results from the cameras. In fact, a lot of pros and people from here have switched and I've yet to hear any regrets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Haggins posted:If I was just getting photography today, I probably would get a mirorless system. It's more compact and good glass can be had for cheap (compared to DSLR). It also offers plenty of room to grow and there is no reason you can't get professional quality results from the cameras. In fact, a lot of pros and people from here have switched and I've yet to hear any regrets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Haggins posted:If I was just getting photography today, I probably would get a mirorless system. It's more compact and good glass can be had for cheap (compared to DSLR). It also offers plenty of room to grow and there is no reason you can't get professional quality results from the cameras. In fact, a lot of pros and people from here have switched and I've yet to hear any regrets. I tried a friends Olympus PEN a while ago and quite liked it, though as I have pretty big hands, it felt a bit dinky. I am tempted by Mirrorless though. However... What is keeping me from abandoning the idea of a DSLR is the 1080p/60fps video. Based on working out what I want to use it for and my enormous ham hands, I'll probably go for a Nikon. Probably...
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
But basically every camera released in the past 5 years can do 1080p/60. If you're big time video, Sony and Panasonic are doing their best to court everyone away from the big Canon ones with 4k recording,
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
So I followed the excellent advice from the thread and went to my local camera shop to fondle some cameras, and talk to the staff who seem to really know their stuff (as you'd hope really). The Mirrorless cameras I tried all felt a bit small to me, and when the guy asked me what I wanted to do and what my budget was he recommended a Canon 700D, which is what I ended up buying as it felt so nice to hold. So, thank you very much thread, you really helped me out. I'll buy you a beer sometime.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
  Now go out and shoot a bunch of photos and post the good, the bad, and the ugly all here in the Dorkroom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:There are good reasons not to go mirrorless but for the vast majority of people those reasons don't apply. (one is if you need really long reach for sports or wildlife photography, there are very few long telephotos available for mirrorless systems yet) On the other hand, a shorter lens will get you farther on a mft sensor. And oly's 40-150 and upcoming 300/2.8 are nuts. And there's plenty of 43 lenses you can adapt if you don't want to wait (but then it won't be cheap either).
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
I have a Nikon D90 that I've had for at least 5 years that has served me well but I feel like it's time to upgrade. I use it mainly for portraits / head shots (my wife is a dancer so I take promo photos for her and her friends), pet photos and holiday photos. I've got a Tamron 17-50 lens with a hosed up motor so it doesn't focus properly that I want to replace as well as 20mm and 35mm prime lenses and an old Nikkor macro lens I inherited from my mother. These days I pretty much solely use the 35mm prime because of how unfun it is trying to use the 17-50. So my first question is what is the best camera to go to from a D90? My local camera store has the D3300 and D5300 for AUD400 and AUD600 respectively which is an attractive price but at the same time I know that these cameras are already somewhat dated. The newer D5500 and D7100 are AUD800 and AUD900 respectively which I'd pay but I'd want to be getting a really good camera for that price. Similarly, what lenses should I be looking at? I want a zoom lens to replace the Tamron 17-50 and would love to invest solely in Nikon lenses but the fact that most decent Nikon glass starts at AUD1000 means I would be limited to buying one lens a year as a Christmas present to myself so are there any cheaper non-Tamron zooms out there?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
How about a second hand D7000, those can be found for reasonable prices. About $500, more or less. Less now that the 7200 is out. Which also means a second hand D7100 will be cheaper, too. If you like wide angle lenses, then there's always the Sigma 18-35. (And since you're shooting portraits, the nikon 85mm f1.8g is really good)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
This may be a really specific question, but hoping someone can guide me in the right direction... I have a D7200 body, with my AE-L/AF-L set to AF-ON for back button focusing. I have Auto ISO set up because it makes my life easier. I usually shoot in matrix metering because I'm unskilled. However, if I want to shoot in spot or centre-weighted metering... can I? I can't find a way of locking exposure in currently. I thought maybe half-shutter would do it, but it doesn't seem to (although I'm not used to the shutter on the 7x00 yet, it feels way different to my old D50). It's not a problem for anything other than the ISO because I shoot in M mode so I can just leave my A/S settings as-is, but the ISO is going to shift whenever I recompose. Is it just a case of locking in exposure on my subject, turning Auto ISO off, recomposing then shooting? It's a little long winded, but it'd work I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Hey total noob here about to go on my honeymoon to a bunch of exotic locales and want to get a nice camera to take with me. Is there any halfway decent beginners dSLR between $200-300?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Not new. But there are a ton of used DSLRs that are quite good that can be picked up for those kinds of prices. Or you could get a very good point-and-shoot that will probably do at least as well for you on your honeymoon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Not new. But there are a ton of used DSLRs that are quite good that can be picked up for those kinds of prices. Any specific model I should be looking out for on the used market? Any suggestions as to where I should look?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
https://www.google.com https://www.keh.com
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
I'm very happy to proseletize about Pentax, so that's what you'll hear from me. There are good options from Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Olympus, but I know very little about those. If you have the time to wait for a shipment from KEH, they're pretty good. Their customer service is really top-notch and their prices are solid. In decreasing reliability, Amazon, local Craigslist/Kijiji/Gumtree, eBay. If you're pressed for time, a local pawn shop is probably slightly less shady than a random Craigslist. Pentax on KEH: K-R with kit zoom $300. K-10 body only $150 K-20 body only $200 That kit zoom - I have one - goes for about $40 on KEH and works nicely with any Pentax DSLR. Other entry-level general-purpose lenses can be found for less than $100. You can look up reviews on every Pentax camera and every lens that can be put on a Pentax at PentaxForums.com. You don't even need to register on the site to see the reviews. I have a K-10 that's old and worn out, it was my first DSLR - though I'd had a film SLR for years - and it served me quite well. The K-20 is an upgrade from the K-10, basically the same camera with some tweaked and improved features; both spent some time as the "Flagship" camera from Pentax and can be considered "prosumer". The K-R comes from Pentax's line of "consumer" grade cameras, and lacks a few features compared to the K-10/K-20 - things like weathersealing and a second control wheel, but it's a bit newer and the sensor might be better as a result. Tiny differences in sensors from one year to the next rarely have a big impact on actual real-world photography, other things like the software to deal with high-ISO noise or the autofocus system are a bigger deal. And don't get lost in megapixel counting, it's really, REALLY not going to be a limitation you're going to run into, ever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
My office wants me to pick out a DSLR to produce basic publicity materials. Besides taking headshots and event photographs, we'd like to use it to video record interviews. What are some solid options for a model that supports an external microphone at $500 or less?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Hey all, I've been using a D70 for the past three years and the poo poo performance at high ISO is killing me. Given that a good flash is ~£100/$100, I'm going to buy a new DSLR. The only lens I have is a 50mm f/1.8D, which I'd probably sell once get I get a new camera. I've used both the D3200 and D5200 and the VR tech is very appealing to me. It'd primarily be used for tourist photography and the occasional portrait session with friends. I can buy gear in the UK or the US, wherever is cheaper - my budget is ~£200-£300 ($300-$450)
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
I'm the same boat in that I can buy gear in U.S. or UK due to family, but after I add the taxes/shipping/slight inconvenience of using KEH (US) the prices at MPB are often fairly comparable. All depends on what you're getting of course, but presuming you're generally UK based and the exchange rate is pretty bad right now, you're not going to gain much from the U.S. in a lot of circumstances. Also, have you looked at the Yongnuo flash guns? Less than half the price of the £100 ones you mentioned and generally get excellent reviews. Planning on picking one up myself soon. With regards to ISO, I jumped from a D50 (so comparable to your 70, which I would use up to 800 unless I had no choice) to a D7200 recently and yes the low light is definitely better - but it's not worlds apart. I'll shoot up to 6400, but the noise does bother me and the dynamic range takes a hit for sure. Going full frame seems to be the 'obvious' choice for low light performance, but it was almost twice the cost and I couldn't use any DX lenses going forward, so it was a no go for me. My plan is to get one or two Yongnuos and learn good flash photography to keep the photos looking natural, and to get out of hitting those higher ISOs whenever I can. E: resale rate on your lens isn't huge - I have a 50/1.8 either d or g, I can't remember, and I paid £60 for it delivered from memory. It's a fast, sharp prime - keep it. The nifty-fifty is really well liked. I didn't think the 15mm different between it and my 35/1.8 would make much difference, but it's clear as day in my portrait stuff. I wish I could redo all my 35 stuff at 50 now. EL BROMANCE fucked around with this message at 16:45 on May 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
The 1.8D requires a camera with a focus motor, which the D3200/D5200 don't. I'd be planning on replacing it with a 1.8G. I start to see noise with my D70 at anything higher than 640, which doesn't work well for me and my shaky hands at all. I'll look into the flashes though.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Ah gotcha. I always forget about those damned internal motors, so made sure I picked up a body that had it or I knew it'd bite me down the line! Surprises me to this day just how featured the 50 was and what's missing from the 3k and 5k series compared to it. Noise reduction in software always surprises me, but I'm in agreement about how annoying it is. I'd rather get the shot than not, but most of my high ISO stays in Lightroom and goes no further. And I'm also a shaky shooter, it's something I plan on working on (as well as pick up a VR lens at some point, like you advised in your previous post).
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
So I'm in HK and I want a DSLR or SLT (whatever they're called now) to play around with. I don't know if things have changed in the past year or so, but it seems that I'd only save 70-100 dollars on say a t6i/750d and external sources I've read state that scams are abundant. Given this, I currently have no lenses and wouldn't mind going with a different company. Have things just changed over here and it isn't that good of a value? I don't really want to drop close to 1k for a body and lens with no international warranty to save 100 bucks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
It isn't a DSLR or SLT, but if you don't have any lenses yet, Sony's mirrorless alpha series of cameras are pretty great. Good sensors, and the low number of lenses is somewhat ameliorated by a couple of good ones and the ability to adapt most anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 10:17
|
|
|
If I don't find a good deal here, those look great and I'll probably grab one, but they're cheaper in the US. /e - How's this for a deal http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Mirrorle...nts=p_89%3ASony Submarine Sandpaper fucked around with this message at 12:26 on Jun 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this is the best thread to post in, since I'm asking about my second camera, and it also might not be a DSLR. Let me know if I should move to the general thread or something. Here goes. I came to this thread four years ago asking about my first DSLR, and ended up with a Canon T2i. I've been using it ever since, almost exclusively with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 lens. After four years, it's in need of a replacement, and I've learned quite a bit more about what I regularly shoot. The following are my camera use cases, along with opinions of my current gear: 30% - Outdoor travel (landscapes, hiking, waterfalls, etc.). For this I want good general image quality in bright light at wide angle. The T2i with Tamron at 17mm has been fine for this, and my circular polarizer has helped as well. I have a lightweight tripod that I'd like to use for long-exposure waterfalls, but haven't yet as I never got around to buying neutral density filters. For hiking specifically it would be nice to have a smaller, lighter camera. The T2i isn't big for a DSLR, and a BlackRapid strap helps a lot too, but perhaps something more pocketable would be that much better. 30% - Indoor travel (architecture, museums, churches, etc.). For this I'm looking for something more inconspicuous and quiet, with good low-light performance. My current gear is not that suitable. The T2i doesn't have great image quality in low light, even with a faster lens like the Tamron. Images at ISO 3200 generally look pretty poor. Having a DSLR hanging on my shoulder in a museum that doesn't allow photos (we've all been there I think) invites criticism even when I don't use it (and, let's face it, I occasionally do). The shutter is also super loud, which might be a problem with the T2i or just my particular refurb model. 20% - Outdoor local (local park, botanical garden, zoo, etc.). - For the former I want good subject isolation with macro, and for the latter a bit of reach. My current gear has done pretty well for flower macros. Things are decently sharp (though less so than when the lens was newer), and the bokeh is sufficient. On the other hand, it's not great for animals/zoos. I don't expect great shots like I might get with a 300mm lens, but maxing out at 50mm is still pretty limiting. A bit more reach would go a long way. 10% - Nighttime long-exposure (cities, stars). Whenever I'm in a new city, I like to spend some time to find a good location and take some skyline photos at night. I do the same regarding the night sky when I'm far from any light pollution. For this I'm looking for a wide angle and wide aperture (and obviously my tripod). The T2i and Tamron have done alright, but my night photos tend to be less sharp than I'd like. It could be a cheap-ish gear problem, or a skill problem, but either way I'd like something capable of taking great nighttime long-exposures and I can work on improving my skill later. 10% - Hanging out with friends. I get together with a group of long-time friends once or twice a year, and usually take photos. For some, these are the only photos taken of them all year, so I like them to be decent. For this I need to be able to take hand-held shots in low light, with good quality images at higher ISO. Subject isolation is also nice to have for candid portraits. My lens allows me to hand-hold in low light, and has fine bokeh, but as mentioned above, does not have the best image quality at higher ISO. Other important notes: - I don't enjoy post-processing. Right now I take most of my photos in RAW and edit them in Lightroom, but I don't like doing it, and often put off editing for months upon months. I don't have much interest in being a pro photographer or a real artist; if I could be happy with the quality of my camera's jpegs, that would be wonderful. I don't know if this is actually possible. - If you've read this far, you might be wondering why I haven't previously gotten a telephoto lens for animals or a better astrophotography lens. The answer is that it turns out I don't have much interest in changing lenses. When I take photos locally, I take my camera without a bag, and have no way to carry extra lenses. When I travel, I'm carrying enough things already that I don't want to add extra lenses to the mix. And I've found that on the couple occasions I've actually brought an extra lens with me, the act of switching in the moment has seemed like too much of a hassle, or has taken too long, to bother. I'd rather get a nice all-around lens (or a non-interchangeable camera) and stick with it. - I have small hands. Yep. - The budget for my next camera is pretty flexible. The impetus for looking now in particular is that I'm owed a gift from my company of around $1500. I'm totally fine with spending less, or chipping in myself and spending more. I'm also okay with waiting a month or two if the best choice is about to be released in the near future. So, I now need to determine the direction in which to go. I could get a better DSLR, which would give me the jump in quality I'm looking for (70D with 17-55 2.8 is the closest step up from my current gear, and beyond that, full frame is sure appealing), but would be a step back in terms of size and weight, and also might not make sense if I don't want to take advantage of having multiple lenses. I could get a compact camera like the RX100, which is nice and small, but is perhaps not flexible enough for my use cases. I'm not sure if the low-light performance would be better, and I know the subject isolation is limited. I could go mirrorless, which I know very little about in general. This could give me an improvement in both size and quality with the right pick, and I'm sure there are good all-around lenses, but I don't know enough about that world to know its current limitations. I know in a sense I'm looking for an impossibly perfect camera, so to be clear, that's not the goal. I'm aware that there will be compromises in whatever direction I go towards. I'm just looking for the option that minimizes those compromises while satisfying my needs. If anyone has some input on the direction I should take, with maybe some recommended options to look at, it would be very much appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
If you're familiar with the Canon system and generally enjoy using your T2i I'd suggest a refurb 70D or 6D plus $800 worth of nice lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Either upgrade to a cool APS-C body of your choice (keep using the same lens) but canon sensors are kinda meh right now, or get a fuji kit. This has the advantage of producing cool jpeg OOC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:41 |
|
|
If you really loathe carrying and switching lenses maybe one of the 1" sensor superzoom cameras is for you? (Fz1000/rx10/whatever the new canon they just announced is) - you're going to get just as good or better image quality out of one of those as you would with a silly 16-300 superzoom on an aps dslr
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2015 00:04
|
|