Any other beginners get a DSLR and regret it?

[twizzlebizzle22]

I bought a D3300 with a 35mm F/1.8 lens.
The kit is amazing and works brilliantly, quality is outstanding.

One problem, the damn thing is huge so barely use it unless my main purpose is to go take photos, I'm wishing I sprung for a smaller compact.

While it maybe an image quality sacrifice the size and ergo of these smaller cameras. I can leave it in my bag til in ready.

Anyone got any insight on a similar jump?

 

[Kaido]

To be honest, I mostly use my iPhone. We break out the Nikon & Canon for paid gigs & anything "important", but it's just not as convenient as whipping something out of your pocket & capturing an image immediately, especially with kids. I have a couple lenses for mine (macro/wide/fisheye & anamorphic) plus a variety of fun shooting & editing apps (Camera+, 645 Camera, Snapseed, LensFX, AfterFocus, etc.), so it's fun to tinker with, especially for editing, which is great if I'm commuting as a passenger or waiting in line somewhere. The quality is pretty good & you can do some neat things without ever having to touch a computer. I took this one at a farm the other day on my 5S, tweaked the color a bit, added a moon, etc...I would have had to bring along the SLR, mess with the settings, then import the photos for editing, etc. Instead it was just a quick snap & some tinker time when I was feeling bored:

I've toyed around with the idea of getting something more compact, but I think I'd run into the same issue - not necessarily pocket-sized & just another thing to carry around, especially since I'd want something really fun, like a superzoom or a Sigma. The only one I've seriously considered is the new compact Sigma DP3 Quattro fixed prime:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/dp3-quattro-compact-digital-camera

But eh...iPhone & dSLR makes a good combination.

 

[Syborg1211]

Kaido summed it up pretty nicely. Even the most pocketable cameras are still yet another thing you have to commit to bring with you everywhere. You either devote yourself to bringing the camera out or don't. Your choice. I'm more guilty of putting the work in to bring the camera out either just strap on my shoulder or in a camera bag, and then not even using it on an outing.

 

[jtvang125]

Yes, a compact or even a pocketable one will be something you'll need to take with you. But at least with a pocketable one you can just slip it in your pocket or purse when not in use. Any other type of camera will need to be lugged around the neck/shoulder or placed into a bag, another thing you have to carry as well. Add in another lens or two just incase and the bulk quickly adds up.

If it really becomes an issue I would suggest saving up and getting a pocketable one for the times you don't want to carry the full kit. The Sony RX series are well regarded and I've been thinking of picking one up to compliment the a7.

 

[Imp]

Started with pocketable with very small sensor, lots of noise. Jumped to full frame, difference has been so huge I hate going back. I do most of my shooting at home though. The logistics of carrying a $2000 camera around are a huge problem, I have to admit.

 

[VashHT]

I went from a mirrorless setup (OMD-EM5) to a nice compact (RX1002) and now I'm back to another mirrorless setup (Fuji X-T10) because the limitations of the compact got to me. It's really nice if you want to carry it around but I felt limited with it a lot of the time. The manual controls on the RX100 are pretty bad imo and that was one of the most annoying things to me, I felt like I missed some shots because I was diving into menus to change stuff. Also the lens becomes a big limitation, the newer RX100's have a nicer lens but it doesn't have much reach and the one on the MK1 and 2 the aperture drops off so fast when you zoom that it's not very useful unless you're out in bright light.

I went with mirrorless because they're a little smaller than DSLRs, M4/3 is bit smaller than the APS-C mirrorless even if you find those too big still.

As it is, I would recommend getting a nice strap so that you don't mind carrying the camera out of a bag, I use mine a lot more after getting a shoulder strap that lets me quickly bring up the camera into a shooting position.

 

[CuriousMike]

You either devote yourself to bringing the camera out or don't.

I see photography as "my hobby." Other people do RC cars, car audio, guns, video games, music equipment ... whatever floats your boat.

Since it's "my hobby", that means I carry it with me because I want to carry it with me.

Either
a) you don't find photography enjoyable (enough)
or
b) the size is verily you're limiting factor

Either
a) sell the gear and learn it wasn't for you
b) find another size-factor and go with it.

 

[CuriousMike]

The logistics of carrying a $2000 camera around are a huge problem, I have to admit.

I'd refer you to the thread I created a month or so back, "I've bought yet another camera bag", but I think this sums it up.

 

[Sheep]

When I tell people that one of my hobbies is photography but I don't own a DSLR, the common question is "why not?". The answer? I'm a lazy ass who doesn't want to deal with lugging kit on a hike in the woods. Or going up a mountain. Or on a kayak. Or onto a packed metro train. Or into a dank cave. Or through a crowded marketplace. Or through an airport.

DSLRs clearly win out on picture quality over any point and shoot but personally I'm willing to sacrifice that for portability.

 

[Imp]

I'd refer you to the thread I created a month or so back, "I've bought yet another camera bag", but I think this sums it
up.

I saw that. I'm way over bags now -- used to buy one for every accessory. Now I only use a $30 Jansport that everyone else has and use smaller bags that fit inside to cushion laptop/camera. Also, while I LOVE those Lowepro camera backpacks, to me, they are large billboards asking to be mugged.

When I tell people that one of my hobbies is photography but I don't own a DSLR, the common question is "why not?". The answer? I'm a lazy ass who doesn't want to deal with lugging kit on a hike in the woods. Or going up a mountain. Or on a kayak. Or onto a packed metro train. Or into a dank cave. Or through a crowded marketplace. Or through an airport.

DSLRs clearly win out on picture quality over any point and shoot but personally I'm willing to sacrifice that for portability.

I have a friend like that. Does tons of outdoors photography (middle of nowhere), but he uses something like a Canon G15 or S120. Every time I tell him to get a DSLR he tells me he doesn't want to carry it.

 

[CuriousMike]

I have a friend like that. Does tons of outdoors photography (middle of nowhere), but he uses something like a Canon G15 or S120. Every time I tell him to get a DSLR he tells me he doesn't want to carry it.

It's taken me awhile ( and a sore neck ) to back away from bringing the D610 with me on hikes.

I have an RX100, but ... I hate the controls. The quality is OK but I don't feel wow'ed by it.

The Olympus OM-D is seriously tickling my fancy - much lighter than the D610, and (IMO) much better image quality and headroom than the RX100.

There are other m43 bodies even smaller than the OM-D that you could suggest if this topic ever comes up again.

 

[shortylickens]

Nope. It was awesome. I saw it was big and weird and I bought it anyway.

 

[CuriousMike]

I saw it was big and weird and I bought it anyway.

Context is very important in a quote like this.

 

[dullard]

I believe that you have to match the camera to your needs. I use three cameras regularly.
1) A cell-phone to take a crappy shot when I have nothing else handy.
2) A Canon S110 when I want a good shot but don't want to lug a DSLR and lenses around with me.
3) A DSLR and lenses when I want a great shot. But I have to seriously consider if I want to lug it around or not.

Each camera is best in a different situation. When I need to quickly memorize something short term at work, like the rating plate of a piece of equipment, the cell-phone is perfect. It isn't like I'm going to carry around a DSLR 40+ hours a week in the off chance that I need to record something at work.

When I'm doing difficult hiking in the mountains, the compact camera is perfect. I don't want to carry another 10 pounds of bulky equipment when I'm scrambling up a mountain. A compact pocketable camera is the solution. I can pull a real camera out of my pocket and take the first shot faster than I can with my cell phone. And the photos knock the socks off of any cell phone photo that I've seen, especially when you need optical zoom or have low light. Wi-Fi ability makes it just as convenient as a cell phone.

When I intend to take great portraits or go do nature photography that doesn't involve strenuous hiking, I take the DSLR. The photos are noticibly better than the pocketable camera. Sure it is more work, but the results are worth it. I edit them up, put them on my phone for showing others. Every time, I get gasps of shock when oblivious people ask how a cell phone took photos that good. I just laugh as these are the same people who think an iPhone takes good photos.

 

[EOM]

I first bought mine in the beginning of last year. I got it since my friend had one and took way better pictures than my cell phone/p&S. He just had an older Canon 50D and a 50mm lens. It took a while to get in the pattern of carrying it around when I went out but eventually it became habit. I carry a DSLR with me almost everywhere I go, and like Syborg sometimes don't even take pictures. If you've seen my other threads, I got addicted to gear.... i regret some of those... but I enjoy pictures, it's a hobby for me .

 

[biostud]

Nope, very happy with my camera. I often carry a bag with my, so there's always room for my DSLR.

 

[elitejp]

when i got into photography dslr was the only real option for high quality photography. It still is a great option. If I was to do it again and had the funds to switch i would pick up a mirrorless sony a7 series paired with the 55mm 1.8.

 

[purbeast0]

i dunno, i got my SL1 a few months ago when my son was born and i use it quite a bit. we just went to the outer banks down in NC and i brought it down to the beach quite a bit and snapped a bunch of pics. i just have a camera bag i bring it in, and i also keep my portable bluetooth speaker in there too, which i was bringing down to the beach anyways.

granted, part of the reason i got the SL1 was due to the size being smaller than any other (as well as being beginner) so maybe it's not as bad for me as some other people since it's not quite as large.

 

[Rottie]

To be honest, I mostly use my iPhone. We break out the Nikon & Canon for paid gigs & anything "important", but it's just not as convenient as whipping something out of your pocket & capturing an image immediately, especially with kids. I have a couple lenses for mine (macro/wide/fisheye & anamorphic) plus a variety of fun shooting & editing apps (Camera+, 645 Camera, Snapseed, LensFX, AfterFocus, etc.), so it's fun to tinker with, especially for editing, which is great if I'm commuting as a passenger or waiting in line somewhere. The quality is pretty good & you can do some neat things without ever having to touch a computer. I took this one at a farm the other day on my 5S, tweaked the color a bit, added a moon, etc...I would have had to bring along the SLR, mess with the settings, then import the photos for editing, etc. Instead it was just a quick snap & some tinker time when I was feeling bored:

I've toyed around with the idea of getting something more compact, but I think I'd run into the same issue - not necessarily pocket-sized & just another thing to carry around, especially since I'd want something really fun, like a superzoom or a Sigma. The only one I've seriously considered is the new compact Sigma DP3 Quattro fixed prime:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/dp3-quattro-compact-digital-camera

But eh...iPhone & dSLR makes a good combination.

Great picture!!

 

[Rottie]

I bought a D3300 with a 35mm F/1.8 lens.
The kit is amazing and works brilliantly, quality is outstanding.

One problem, the damn thing is huge so barely use it unless my main purpose is to go take photos, I'm wishing I sprung for a smaller compact.

While it maybe an image quality sacrifice the size and ergo of these smaller cameras. I can leave it in my bag til in ready.

Anyone got any insight on a similar jump?

I have a Canon Powershot SX50 HS it looks a lot like dSLR but it is medium size I only use it at home. My iPhone 6+ have a better camera and great video. I can take it with me all the time.

 

[CountZero]

Started with a Canon SX40 for a couple years. Had a London trip where I'd be out for 2 weeks with just a carry on and the SX40 would be too big and so I picked up a SX710. Nine months ago I picked up an A6000 with the kit lens and a 55-210 lens.

Overall I am really enjoying the new camera. Better low light sensitivity, better manual control options, and the focus speed is just insane compared to anything I've used before. All that being said I still very much so miss the reach that those superzooms give. I've some times considered carrying the 710 in my camera bag but that also just seems insane plus I'm not sure I could take the mocking from my wife .

 

[Imp]

I have a Canon Powershot SX50 HS it looks a lot like dSLR but it is medium size I only use it at home. My iPhone 6+ have a better camera and great video. I can take it with me all the time.

I got an SX50 two years ago for the super zoom -- probably should have gone straight to the DSLR. The SX50 takes great stills and has reasonably good manual controls for me, but its sensor size is too small for the crap low-light (indoors, no additional light) video recording I do most of the time. Looking at it side by side with my Sony A7, it's about the same size -- the A7 would be smaller with a prime lens.

 

[Rottie]

I got an SX50 two years ago for the super zoom -- probably should have gone straight to the DSLR. The SX50 takes great stills and has reasonably good manual controls for me, but its sensor size is too small for the crap low-light (indoors, no additional light) video recording I do most of the time. Looking at it side by side with my Sony A7, it's about the same size -- the A7 would be smaller with a prime lens.

The MAIN reason I choose Canon because it has a vari-angle LCD but now I have seen other camera makers started to follow Canon's lead. I will look into dSLR with vary-angle LCD - not tilted LCD.

 

[Anticleon]

Looks like you bought the camera just for the idea of having a camera, not with the intention of some serious photography. In that case, yes you should repent.

 

[Imp]

The MAIN reason I choose Canon because it has a vari-angle LCD but now I have seen other camera makers started to follow Canon's lead. I will look into dSLR with vary-angle LCD - not tilted LCD.

Ya, the SX50's LCD is great, makes shooting videos easier. I don't even bother using the tilt-LCD on my Sony. Truth is, I can live without it and if I were to get a new camera, I'd prefer a fixed LCD.