technical > photography

First DSLR...

(1/10) > >>

fatneck:
So I like taking photos and have a decent eye for good shots (according to various uncertified sources) and reckon I'd take even better shots using something better than my phone. Particularly where any kind of zoom is required. It's my 40th in January and I'm thinking of asking for a Digi SLR, thing is, I haven't the foggiest where to start. There are a number of not half bad photo bods in the parish and would highly value your advice... Probably not looking to spend more than £300 and would consider second hand if advisable!

Thanks...

Lund:
I would pick canon or nikon, depending on which one you feel more affinity with.  Once you've picked a family, that's your family.  Barring divorce level ructions.

I'd pick them rather than the others - pentax, sony, etc. - as they are better at the top end, have more accessories/lenses, and are just, as a family, better even though you could argue for hours about specific models.

Once you've picked your family... pick the most up-market one you can afford, stick a kit lens on, and proceed until you have experience and know what you want.

This site is quite good for reviews and tech specs and things:

http://www.dpreview.com/

Ignore "ken rockwell", IMHO.

Lastly... you might note the canon EOS 100D.  It's very light, which might appeal to you as a smartphone user.  Bit pricey though perhaps, but only by 25 quid.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EOS-100D-Digital-Camera/dp/B00BYOY9EO/ref=sr_1_1/277-5278358-0310049?ie=UTF8&qid=1439217202&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+eos+100d+dslr

dave:
Assuming you also want a decent lens too you'd be looking at something a few years/generations old with a 300-sheet budget. You might be able to pick up a Nikon D90 and kit zoom for about 300 bananas. Might be worth buying from a dealer with guarantee, or someone you know, as some of these cameras will have seen a hell of a lot of traffic by now.

Be sure you want to carry something as big as an SLR around. Mirrorless systems like the Fuji X, Olympus/Panasonic m43rds etc are a very worthy (for most folk better), option these days.

General points - if you have the option then money is always better spent on lens than camera. Kit lenses can often be the limiting factor, no point putting a top notch body behind a shit lens. Consider a decent prime lens, contrary to they want to sell you, you don't actually need a lens that goes from ultra-wide to long tele straight away.

Dunno if its the case now still but Nikon's cheap kit lenses always had a much better reputation than Canon kit lenses.

Consider extra crap you need to budget for, memory cards, card reader, camera case/bag, batteries etc, especially if second hand cameras don't come with the original charger/leads etc.

Also, try to have a look at some shit in a shop first, try them out. The bigger the viewfinder view the better. The less often you have to delve into a menu to do anything the better.

cheque:
I just wrote a long reply then found Dave had written everything I was going to say (and more).  :lol:

You can search Flickr by camera model and quite often look in the "exif data" for each image that comes up to see what lens was used. This is a great way to reassure yourself that a camera is capable of taking pictures as good as you hope to create. You'll find it confirms what dave says about lens> body too.


--- Quote from: Lund on August 10, 2015, 03:34:01 pm ---Ignore "ken rockwell", IMHO.

--- End quote ---

:agree:

Paul B:
For your budget I'd be looking at buying a micro 4/3rds camera kit (prime and zoom) used.

Buy used.

Join talk photography and make 30 posts and last for more than one month and you've got good access to a buyers market for used camera gear (all dealing is to be done in post etc.)

A quick look on Harrison's used has thrown up a GF3 (admittedly not the best) body for £70!!!

http://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/Used/Used-Cameras.htm

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page