|
Is there a mirrorless equivalent to a Nikon D3000 or Canon Rebel whatever? 90% of people that want something to "elevate her photography above just her phone" are going to be completely satisfied with whatever basic kit and maybe whichever cheapest telephoto and will never even think about trying to emulate film or what the dials feel like
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:25 |
|
|
Dog Case posted:Is there a mirrorless equivalent to a Nikon D3000 or Canon Rebel whatever? 90% of people that want something to "elevate her photography above just her phone" are going to be completely satisfied with whatever basic kit and maybe whichever cheapest telephoto and will never even think about trying to emulate film or what the dials feel like Nikon’s got the Z30 if you’re cool with no viewfinder, Z50 if you want one. That’s probably the closest for interchangeable lens mirrorless? Don’t know if canon has an equivalent
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:Is there a mirrorless equivalent to a Nikon D3000 or Canon Rebel whatever? 90% of people that want something to "elevate her photography above just her phone" are going to be completely satisfied with whatever basic kit and maybe whichever cheapest telephoto and will never even think about trying to emulate film or what the dials feel like I mean - to be clear, neither do I. I just care about easily swapping to a settings profile that isn’t too yellow or too blue or too <whatever>. The point is mostly that, if you spend a little time, you can streamline getting photos with good color profiles off the camera and skip the laptop stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:Is there a mirrorless equivalent to a Nikon D3000 or Canon Rebel whatever? 90% of people that want something to "elevate her photography above just her phone" are going to be completely satisfied with whatever basic kit and maybe whichever cheapest telephoto and will never even think about trying to emulate film or what the dials feel like Yeah nikon z50 is probably close, although its more equivalent to the 5xxx range than the 3xxx. The issue though is (at least right now) Nikon and Canon have both kinda abandoned aps-c, yes cameras have come out but they seem more aimed as stop gaps to get people into FF eventually where the margins are larger. So if anyone is gonna invest in a APS-C system fresh, I think its better to go sony or Fuji as they take that format seriously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
Uh, APS-C is more popular now more than ever. I would suggest looking at the Canon R10, R7, R6 mk 1, Fuji XT-4, XT-5, X100V, Ricoh GRIIIx. (I'm not familiar with the Nikon or Sony equivalents) If you want to go older, but still mirrorless. Canon M50, R, Fuji XT-3, X100F, Ricoh GRII or III. Philthy fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Feb 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:Is there a mirrorless equivalent to a Nikon D3000 or Canon Rebel whatever? The Canon R10 is basically the mirrorless equivalent to the Canon Rebel line. It’s a little more expensive, but also more capable. The Canon RP is a full frame mirrorless at the same price point, but the autofocus and sensor are older tech.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
Philthy posted:Uh, APS-C is more popular now more than ever. Canons new APS-S system has 2 native lenses. Nikon have 2 native lenses. Maybe Canon will end up beefing that up to a respectable amount but Nikon clearly just seem to be expecting people to either adapt older glass or buy FF glass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
I wasn't looking for suggestions for myself, just being a grumpy old man about advice for somebody upgrading from a phone being "spend $2000" and then pontificating about dials and film simulations. When I sold cameras you could get an entry level DSLR kit for well under $1000 and then whatever current telephoto for $250 and have way more camera than 90% of people would ever need. A majority of people aren't interested in editing photos and worrying about the ease of settings and getting frustrated at having to dig into the menu, they just want better photos of their cat or babby for Facebook Camera nerds are the people that make grandma cry because they set her camera to raw but the Fuji kiosk doesn't support raw yet so she can't make prints of the grandkids birthday My accidental gimmick is Kramering into threads about a hobby I enjoy and telling people to stop spending so much money chasing upgrades they don't need Dog Case fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Feb 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 22:07
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:When I sold cameras you could get an entry level DSLR kit for well under $1000 and then whatever current telephoto for $250 and have way more camera than 90% of people would ever need. I think this is just a fundamental misunderstanding of current prices, then. 1000-1200 dollars today gets you the equivalent of what maybe 700 would get you in 2016 or 2017 (a new entry level camera and a cheap lens).
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
I get not overspending on things but it's so patronizing to just dismiss people's questions and tell them to just buy the cheapest option cause they won't understand the differences anyway. And really I think the difference and feel/controls between a Fuji and Canon/Nikon are easy enough to see as an amateur. Maybe OP's wife will think the retro thing is cool and fun. Maybe the more modern style SLR controls will feel better. The whole film simulation thing is all about not shooting in raw and having something out of camera that you like without doing raw processing. powderific fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Feb 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 23:34
|
|
|
powderific posted:I get not overspending on things but it's so patronizing to just dismiss people's questions and tell them to just buy the cheapest option cause they won't understand the differences anyway. I'm not dismissing the question, I'm dismissing the typical camera nerd advice that assumes that somebody asking for babby's first camera will have the same preferences that they developed over years of touching cameras. Nobody's asked if OP's wife is into retro stuff, they just started suggesting specific expensive stuff that they like
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 23:43
|
|
|
Hey I said go to a camera shop and try some in person
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2023 23:55
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:I'm not dismissing the question, I'm dismissing the typical camera nerd advice that assumes that somebody asking for babby's first camera will have the same preferences that they developed over years of touching cameras. You are studiously ignoring the fact that you have no idea what anything costs today, though. The first suggestions were the Canon R10 and the Nikon Z5, which are both new entry level mirrorless cameras. The R10 is literally the newest and cheapest modern Canon camera available on the market. The Nikon Z5 appears to be the exact same price and fill the exact same role. The Fuji guy recommended buying a used XT4, which looks like it runs about 1250 bucks, completely in line with the budget proposed and only slightly more expensive than those competing brand new entry-level models. I know that back in your day a hamburger cost a nickel or whatever, but we're living in a period of high inflation, pandemic related supply chain disruptions, and ever improving (and more expensive) cell phone cameras eating up any market for really low end stand-alone cameras. Nobody has suggested anything outlandish or bizarre, you just don't know what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:I'm not dismissing the question, I'm dismissing the typical camera nerd advice that assumes that somebody asking for babby's first camera will have the same preferences that they developed over years of touching cameras. OP specifically asked about Fuji, gave a budget, and asked about what major differences were between the brands. I think sharing what makes Fuji different and giving a suggestion within that budget is pretty reasonable. They aren't Leicas or something, they've got a full line of cameras that includes entry level bodies. It's possible that OP's wife doesn't care, but I still think that it's worth putting hands on them in a store cause maybe they do and you can go either direction without that much price swing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 00:06
|
|
|
Sorry sorry I'll just shut up. I'm mad at existing today, I'll go yell at a different cloud (Just get a cheap used DSLR that she can resell at cost once she figures out what direction she wants to go)
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
That's why I'm saying to spend <$500 on a canon PowerShot G series camera
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 00:47
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:(Just get a cheap used DSLR that she can resell at cost once she figures out what direction she wants to go) Even this advice sucks. Does any beginner want to navigate trying to figure out whether any old used DSLR is actually decent in comparison to whatever is on their iPhone, then worry about trying to resell it to recoup their costs? Plus, the OP said they already know what they want to do. If they do want a cheaper DSLR, buying some busted rear end old Rebel or whatever still hardly makes sense. Just get an Olympus Tough TG-6 for 500 bucks. It's waterproof (for real waterproof, not weathersealed), shockproof, and fits in your pocket. Lens has a decent zoom and decent aperture. 4k video, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
All I gotta say is I’m here for it  There are some smaller stores nearby, but we only had time to quickly stop into Best Buy and she got to check out the Canons and Nikons. Will continue searching, thanks for the tips and entertainment, open to more 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 01:34
|
|
|
Crazyweasel posted:All I gotta say is I’m here for it We've all got good cameras on our phones these days, so the trick is to think about the limitations on the phone camera that you want to upgrade beyond. An iPhone can take excellent portraits. Apple is well aware that this is sort of the standard use for those cameras, and they've built to account for that fact. Nobody buys a stand-alone camera these days for Facebook pictures, your phone does it really well. So what are the weaknesses? Low light performance. Zoom distance. Resolution. A flash can counter low light conditions, but that brings a whole host of drawbacks. A camera with a 50mm prime lens can take pictures in very dim conditions without sacrificing much of anything, no flash required. Your phone can zoom a decent amount, but you'll likely notice major losses to image quality. In the background, it is making adjustments to compensate for that zoom. A decent telephoto lens can get you range without sacrificing nearly as much as a phone. Or if you are willing to make some sacrifices, you can get some extreme range at a low price. Then resolution... does a photo that looks great on your phone's screen look good on a bigger screen? Probably... decent. But if you want to print up a landscape shot and hang it on your wall? That might be a step too far for even a really good phone camera. But with the right (pretty cheap) prime lens, an entry level modern camera can get you some great high resolution shots. If you're going to buy something cheap, it'll have a lot of the same limitations as your phone camera, you'll just have more control over it. So instead of your phone calculating in the background what the appropriate aperture and shutter speed are, you'll have to decide. But your phone also has a very expensive, modern computer in it, while a cheap used camera has a more specialized, cheaper, older computer in it. If you're going to buy something cheaper, just be aware that you aren't necessarily going to get much better shots than you can get from a newer phone. So then why do it? Get something with cool features, hence the Olympus suggestion. You can take a Tough TG-6 to the beach, get those volleyball shots in the sand, take it in the water and get silly pictures in the waves, or get a selfie with that fish underwater. But I think buying something cheap that lacks genuine features that your phone cannot compete with would be a mistake. litany of gulps fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Feb 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 01:55
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:Canons new APS-S system has 2 native lenses. Nikon have 2 native lenses. The entire RF line works absolutely fine on all the Canon mirrorless cameras without any adapters needed. The crop specific lenses only exist to be smaller and more affordable. They don't have an inherent advantage otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
Philthy posted:The entire RF line works absolutely fine on all the Canon mirrorless cameras without any adapters needed. The crop specific lenses only exist to be smaller and more affordable. They don't have an inherent advantage otherwise. It’s been a minute since I looked into the RF ecosystem, but a couple years back it was very expensive - not enough in the $300-500 range, at least from memory. This was also a reason I jumped over to Fujifilm and haven’t looked back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
Sony a6000 on auto will do the job and has lots of affordable third party lens options that cover one prime and a walk around zoom
NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 08:52 on Feb 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 03:14
|
|
|
I'll never put effort into talking someone into switching back to canon, but the RF lens situation has gotten a lot better. They have a beginner oriented 24-105 under $500 and a handful of neat primes. They aren't as cheap as canons EF-S offerings once were but I think the price increase is comparable to how everything has gone up the past few years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 03:23
|
|
|
harperdc posted:It’s been a minute since I looked into the RF ecosystem, but a couple years back it was very expensive - not enough in the $300-500 range, at least from memory. This was also a reason I jumped over to Fujifilm and haven’t looked back. The RF ecosystem is still pretty weird. There isn't much in the way of cheaper lenses, and it isn't always clear how the cheaper RF lenses are actually better than the old EF lenses that filled the same roles. The cameras are way better, though, and they work perfectly well with the old EF lenses. If you have a bunch of EF lenses, buying a 100 dollar adaptor and a new camera body gives you access to the new autofocus systems, better sensors, etc etc without any need to replace all of your old lenses. Some of the new lenses are really interesting, too. I've got an F/11 600mm and F/11 800mm, for example, that give me an absolutely unparalleled reach and quality for the price. Edit: That F/11 800mm was 900 bucks, it's lightweight and relatively compact. I took it down to the local pond the other week and was practicing tracking small birds in flight at a distance, this is a typical unedited JPEG. 
litany of gulps fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Feb 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 03:24
|
|
|
The pricing on RF lenses these days are cheaper than their competitors generally. You might find Tamron and Sigmas offering some decent fast lenses for cheaper, but for native lenses from Fuji, Nikon, and Sony, they're either the same or a bit more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 05:21
|
|
|
Philthy posted:The entire RF line works absolutely fine on all the Canon mirrorless cameras without any adapters needed. The crop specific lenses only exist to be smaller and more affordable. They don't have an inherent advantage otherwise. So they want you to buy FF glass, which is usually more expensive and heavy than APS-C glass. Which is what I said. Both Sony and Fuji have a ton of native glass designed specifically for their APS-C cameras, they also have lots of third party glass (especially Sony). Canon and Nikon have very little. That's not to say their options are bad purchasing choices, they make sense if you have a lot of glass to convert over or if you have dreams of going FF in a few years when you have more money. But if I was starting fresh with nothing, then I think the ecosystems in Sony and Fuji are better for APS-C users. But cmon, the Nikon Z50 released with 2 lenses, now after 3 and a bit years it has...2 lenses. That's crap support and I say that as a lifelong Nikon user. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 09:47 on Feb 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 08:46
|
|
|
I wasn’t sure if this thread or the cannon thread was the best place to ask but I’ll start here. I got sucked down into a YouTube black hole and I kinda want to buy a PowerShot G7 X Mark II. I realize this camera is quite a few years old and people are still asking a premium price for it. It’s $559 on the cannon refurb site or $629 new. I have an iPhone 13 but I really want a point and shoot camera that gives me some zoom and takes good pictures. A lot if videos say that the mark 2 is still relevant in 2023 so how bad of a buy would it really be? Every video I saw sung the praises of the camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 11:24
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:I wasn’t sure if this thread or the cannon thread was the best place to ask but I’ll start here. I got sucked down into a YouTube black hole and I kinda want to buy a PowerShot G7 X Mark II. Did you get talked into due to it's filmic grain?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:I wasn’t sure if this thread or the cannon thread was the best place to ask but I’ll start here. I got sucked down into a YouTube black hole and I kinda want to buy a PowerShot G7 X Mark II. very good for what it is. made some good photos with it. contrast falls at the long end, as expected, but sharpness is pretty good considering the package. if you're looking for that sort of camera, it's the one to beat. absolutely better images than an iphone. (i got rid of it because i wanted to make large prints again, which it can't quite handle)
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
Thoren posted:Did you get talked into due to it's filmic grain? lol yes. JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:i used to own one Ok thanks! I actually found a used one on offer up for a decent price but the guy hasn’t gotten back to me. It just seems like a steep price to pay new for a camera that really is old at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
yeah it looks weird, but there's so little development in the deluxe point and shoot (or whatever you'd call that type of camera) that older models hang around. especially since the G7's resolution is still sorta standard for smaller cameras. i sold mine to a camera reseller for $400, which really surprised me
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:31
|
|
|
FWIW I've got a regular G7X (I guess it's mark I) that I bought used 7 years ago and it's still going strong. I think it's a solid choice if you're looking for a fancy point and shoot for whatever reason (such as being too lazy and/or cheap and/or ADHD brained to want to bother with lenses for what you use it for).
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:yeah it looks weird, but there's so little development in the deluxe point and shoot (or whatever you'd call that type of camera) that older models hang around. especially since the G7's resolution is still sorta standard for smaller cameras. Ok thanks! I’m not quite sure I can justify the $600 price tag for a new one but there are quite a few used ones in LA in the $300 range which I would feel a lot more comfortable with. Emily Spinach posted:FWIW I've got a regular G7X (I guess it's mark I) that I bought used 7 years ago and it's still going strong. I think it's a solid choice if you're looking for a fancy point and shoot for whatever reason (such as being too lazy and/or cheap and/or ADHD brained to want to bother with lenses for what you use it for). Yeah at this point I don’t really want to bring a big bulky camera around just something small that I can have readily accessible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
Yeah I still have a G7 mk1 and occasionally actually use it when I don’t want to bring a DSLR. I’m not sure where I could tell you it’s the absolute best choice in the quality/convenience/price/use case matrix but if you want something flexible, pretty high quality, and jacket pocketable it’ll definitely do the job and gives (imo) a pretty good user experience. I particularly like the dedicated exposure compensation dial , not sure if the mk2 has it but I use it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:lol yes. I sold a guy a ricoh GR locally who had one and he watched that same Ulysses Aoki video. (He's selling the G7X and keeping the GR.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
Thoren posted:I sold a guy a ricoh GR locally who had one and he watched that same Ulysses Aoki video. It’s a good video! I also saw a video from a professional photographer who said he always has the g7x with him because it’s just a solid little camera. https://youtu.be/ULVAu5foMRw If I can get one for $300 I am definitely going to snag one. Edit: gonna go pick up a practically brand new one for $300 from offer up! Much easier pill to swallow vs trying to get a new one. Thanks for the help everyone! MarcusSA fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Feb 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:But cmon, the Nikon Z50 released with 2 lenses, now after 3 and a bit years it has...2 lenses. That's crap support and I say that as a lifelong Nikon user. I’ve shot at least one Nikon DSLR since 2007 and I’ve never been less inspired by the brand. I have not yet made the jump to Nikon mirrorless for a few reasons, but the two main ones are it would cost me thousands out of pocket to switch (like how a basic nifty 50 went from $219 for F mount to $629 for the Z. Yikes.) and outside of the Z9, which costs a fortune, the body options are kinda boring. For example, where is a D500 equivalent? So I sit in the Nikon DSLR La Brea Tar Pit and the camera I take with me most often is my little Fuji X-T30 with the pancake lens. It’s fun as hell and makes me want to take pictures. I haven’t felt that way about anything new from Nikon in a while, but I’m so invested in the system I don’t see myself leaving.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 03:35
|
|
|
I'm with you. I'm still rocking a D7500. I went into a camera shop the other day and almost picked up a used Z6 but ended up walking away with the Sigma art 18-35 used instead (it's big, heavy but God drat is it sharp) because I just can't see how I can migrate without spending a fortune and I'm not sure where Nikon are taking the brand. I thought we would see more 3rd party by now too but so far it's just tamron and while Nikon is being more open than canon I don't like the wording of their recent announcement "3rd party will be allowed when it compliments the lineup". That to me sounds like "anything that competes can't come in" Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 10:22 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 09:11
|
|
|
Brrrmph posted:I’ve shot at least one Nikon DSLR since 2007 and I’ve never been less inspired by the brand. I have not yet made the jump to Nikon mirrorless for a few reasons, but the two main ones are it would cost me thousands out of pocket to switch (like how a basic nifty 50 went from $219 for F mount to $629 for the Z. Yikes.) and outside of the Z9, which costs a fortune, the body options are kinda boring. For example, where is a D500 equivalent? I started out with a Nikon D800 a few years back. Although I loved that camera I found it was too massive to lug around so I hardly used it. Sold all my Nikon gear and bought a Fuji X-T30 and an X-T3 and couldn’t be happier with this choice
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 11:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:25 |
|
|
It’s tempting to fully switch to Fuji, but I shoot a lot of my kids sports and some theater and the Nikon D5 setup that I have is hard to beat for those situations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 15:17
|
|