Getting into photography

[norseamd]

Why? Because Pentax embarrasses entry level Canon and Nikon cameras with beautiful pentaprism viewfinders, weather sealing (like the pro D4/1Dx) Sony sensors (like Nikon) and built in image stabilization Pentax is not the popular choice, they are kinda the Subaru of cameras...many valid reasons to get a Pentax, different doesn't mean bad.

well it was more of just a general opinion that there were not in the top end of the market

nothing on specific model and the comparisions to other cameras in the price range

she did not say they were bad

 

[GTaudiophile]

The camera is the cheap part of the investment. Camera bodies come and go; lenses are forever. I personally find that Nikon DX and Canon EFS lenses are a waste of money. All the more reason to skip the APS-C format and go directly to full frame.

 

[bradly1101]

In those weather conditions, it sounds like you need something that can take it:

http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/compact-cameras/panasonic-ft5-1122655/review

http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews...s/compact-cameras/olympus-tg-2-1149450/review

http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews...meras/compact-cameras/sony-tf1-1171052/review

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-wg3

 

[iGas]

The camera is the cheap part of the investment. Camera bodies come and go; lenses are forever. I personally find that Nikon DX and Canon EFS lenses are a waste of money. All the more reason to skip the APS-C format and go directly to full frame.

I agree. If the OP seriously wanting to get into photography, then it make perfect sense to start out with a FF body such as a used Canon 5D and a 50mm lens.

 

[Syborg1211]

Wow this thread definitely picked up a lot more steam in the ATOT forum than I've seen similar threads in the camera forum get!

I'm going to side with the guys saying to grab something off of craigslist to start out. It's really difficult for you to buy a full kit right now that would suit your needs because you really can't know what type of shooter you are until you get to shooting.

Also, as others have said, you don't know if you're going to get into the hobby or not. It is a long and difficult path to learning how to use your camera properly (how to use the autofocus system, how to use the autometering system, how to use more manual controls (shutter speed, aperture, ISO), and on and on).... not to mention dedicating yourself to actually carrying the thing around and using it. More often than not, people don't make it past "so I bought a DSLR... now what?" So consider the few hundred bucks on a used camera your litmus test to see whether you should consider spending hundreds , if not thousands, more on the hobby down the line.

 

[TuxDave]

I'd start with a cheapo DSLR like a Canon T3. I've seen it for $300-ish on sale.

My Canon T3 is my gateway into photography. Quality is good and I managed to avoid the upgrade bug for maybe 3 years now. It's definitely great to get into learning the camera settings and then eventually into the "what do I enjoy taking pictures of". I think the upgrade bug is still probably a couple more years out because I'm limited more by creativity/inspiration than gear.

All in all, I'm still happily taking pictures with my cheapo DSLR with the stock lens. It's still the "go to" camera for family events.

 

[NoTine42]

well it was more of just a general opinion that there were not in the top end of the market

nothing on specific model and the comparisions to other cameras in the price range

she did not say they were bad

Pentax is not in the Full Frame (35mm) market right now

But they did just introduce an almost affordable (to semi pro photographers) medium format camera (a higher end market that Canon and Nikon don't exist in)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/04/15/hands-on-with-the-pentax-645z

Of course no beginner starts with medium format..

 

[Imp]

One more thing to consider: even if you do get into photography, you may get sick of humping around a DSLR and lenses.

A Canon 5D Mark III is $3300 USD on Amazon for just the body. A Canon T3 is $450 with a kit lens. If you do love it and get a 5D, the cost of a T3 would just be a drop in the bucket -- same holds if you get either one used.

 

[Rinaun]

One more thing to consider: even if you do get into photography, you may get sick of humping around a DSLR and lenses.

A Canon 5D Mark III is $3300 USD on Amazon for just the body. A Canon T3 is $450 with a kit lens. If you do love it and get a 5D, the cost of a T3 would just be a drop in the bucket -- same holds if you get either one used.

I spoke with someone today and they told me to avoid the T3 and opt for a T3I because of something to do with cleaning the sensor more frequently. I'm definitely looking at a T3/T3I as it's in my budget range for purchasing now.

 

[Gintaras]

Why?
Because Pentax embarrasses entry level Canon and Nikon cameras with beautiful pentaprism viewfinders, weather sealing (like the pro D4/1Dx) Sony sensors (like Nikon) and built in image stabilization

Pentax is not the popular choice, they are kinda the Subaru of cameras...many valid reasons to get a Pentax, different doesn't mean bad.

Camera for a photographer - amateur-hobbyist or pro - it's just a tool, similar to a hammer to a construction worker. It depends how you'll use that tool. Some do hit nails perfectly, some do it more or less good, some can hit their own fingers - with a popular brand of a hammer...

Do anyone question themselves, what did photographers - hobby or pro 20-30 years ago, when there were no internet/forums?
Same should be done today, because money - won't buy you nothing - TALENT, SKILLS, ETC...
And no cameras in the market with "Instant Masterpiece" button yet - no Canon neither Nikon....

 

[Smoove910]

Sigh, looks like I'm saving up for a week and gonna get a Pentax or another good 400$+ DSLR.

If you are gonna spend that amount and aren't afraid of something that has been gently used, I would HIGHLY recommend buying a body off the Pentax forums.

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/24-photographic-equipment-sale/

Bodies I would consider:
K5
K7
K20

These are all K-mount, which means you can use essentially ANY Pentax lens from the past 30 years. Go to yard sales? See a Pentax lens, most likely you can pay $10 and use the lens on your modern DSLR. The benefit of the K5/K7 bodies is they are magnesium (not plastic!) and they are fully weather-sealed. To note, the K5 is the best out of the bodies I listed.

If you wanna see what a K5 can do, you can visit my site. Granted, I like the HDR/rich color look, so take it as you will.

http://kf-photography.artistwebsites.com/

Have any Pentax related questions, feel free to ask.

 

[IAteYourMother]

You may consider also MFT format. They're smaller/more portable and the lens ecosystem is pretty good as it's supposed by both Panasonic and Olympus. You can still get really nice pictures and the lenses are much cheaper than if you went into full frame, especially as you're a student on a budget. I recently started into photography, and I decided to go MFT because I'm also a student and wanted a lens system that wouldn't completely bankrupt me.

 

[jaedaliu]

You may consider also MFT format. They're smaller/more portable and the lens ecosystem is pretty good as it's supposed by both Panasonic and Olympus. You can still get really nice pictures and the lenses are much cheaper than if you went into full frame, especially as you're a student on a budget. I recently started into photography, and I decided to go MFT because I'm also a student and wanted a lens system that wouldn't completely bankrupt me.

I also went MFT, but more for the size than cost. When comparing micro 4/3 and cropped sensor, bodies are more expensive on micro 4/3, and lenses are cheaper on cropped sensor DSLRs.

If you want to do it "right," many say full frame is the way to go. You can always step up and go medium format, too. But the cost of that is probably too high if you aren't a true professional shooting magazine covers and the like.

I carried a borrowed Nikon D5200 on vacation for a week, then ended up getting a Panasonic GX7 instead. I liked the smaller body. Yes, both needed a neck strap, but the D5200 always weighed me down, while the GX7 could be ignored (and stuck in my coat pocket in the winter) I have a thread about that in here with everyone chiming in on their thoughts, too.

 

[iGas]

I also went MFT, but more for the size than cost. When comparing micro 4/3 and cropped sensor, bodies are more expensive on micro 4/3, and lenses are cheaper on cropped sensor DSLRs.

If you want to do it "right," many say full frame is the way to go. You can always step up and go medium format, too. But the cost of that is probably too high if you aren't a true professional shooting magazine covers and the like.

I carried a borrowed Nikon D5200 on vacation for a week, then ended up getting a Panasonic GX7 instead. I liked the smaller body. Yes, both needed a neck strap, but the D5200 always weighed me down, while the GX7 could be ignored (and stuck in my coat pocket in the winter) I have a thread about that in here with everyone chiming in on their thoughts, too.

If size and weight is a concern then a used Canon S90, S95, or the alike can be had for less than $150. Other wise a Micro Four Third is just about as big as a small DSLR such as the Canon Rebel SL1/100D, and there aren't much different in weight.

Canon EOS 100D vs. Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Side by side
Weight (inc. batteries)
100D 407 g (0.90 lb / 14.36 oz), GX7 402 g (0.89 lb / 14.18 oz)
Dimensions
100D 117 x 91 x 69 mm (4.61 x 3.58 x 2.72&#8243, GX7 123 x 71 x 55 mm (4.83 x 2.78 x 2.15&#8243

Canon 50mm, 40mm, 22mm vs. Panasonic 20mm, 20mm, 16mm Side by side

The Canon lenses weight roughly the same as the Panasonic counter part or up to 1.5 ounce heavier. However, the Panasonic lenses are 2X the price of the Canon. IMHO, unless you are going into space, the different in weight and size is so negligible that it doesn't warrant the cost and lack of accessories.

 

[IAteYourMother]

If size and weight is a concern then a used Canon S90, S95, or the alike can be had for less than $150. Other wise a Micro Four Third is just about as big as a small DSLR such as the Canon Rebel SL1/100D, and there aren't much different in weight.

Canon EOS 100D vs. Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Side by side
Weight (inc. batteries)
100D 407 g (0.90 lb / 14.36 oz), GX7 402 g (0.89 lb / 14.18 oz)
Dimensions
100D 117 x 91 x 69 mm (4.61 x 3.58 x 2.72&#8243, GX7 123 x 71 x 55 mm (4.83 x 2.78 x 2.15&#8243

Canon 50mm, 40mm, 22mm vs. Panasonic 20mm, 20mm, 16mm Side by side

The Canon lenses weight roughly the same as the Panasonic counter part or up to 1.5 ounce heavier. However, the Panasonic lenses are 2X the price of the Canon. IMHO, unless you are going into space, the different in weight and size is so negligible that it doesn't warrant the cost and lack of accessories.

I don't have enough experience to speak to any differences in quality between the lenses you showed, but to me the obvious difference is actually how small the MFT lenses are. If you need to carry around a couple primes, it's super easy and pocketable. Carrying around a bag with big lenses didn't appeal to me.

The MFT cameras are also so well built with alot of metal that I kind of like as well.

 

[iGas]

I don't have enough experience to speak to any differences in quality between the lenses you showed, but to me the obvious difference is actually how small the MFT lenses are. If you need to carry around a couple primes, it's super easy and pocketable. Carrying around a bag with big lenses didn't appeal to me.

The MFT cameras are also so well built with alot of metal that I kind of like as well.

The lenses are pretty much the same dimensions between the DSLR vs. Micro 4/3 if you look at the lenses comparison link that I provided above.

 

[IAteYourMother]

The lenses are pretty much the same dimensions between the DSLR vs. Micro 4/3 if you look at the lenses comparison link that I provided above.

Hmm... I was just going off my impressions when I switched from a Canon XS to the OM-D. A lot of the MFT lenses are actually around 57mm in diameter, including the 12-50mm and 14-42mm kit lenses, the 45mm 1.8 and the 25mm 1.8. I don't really have enough experience to make comparisons between lenses, since there's a lot more to it then just focal length and aperture. The difference in diameter does seem insignificant numerically (little over a cm), but it makes a big difference in person.

 

[Rinaun]

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/ele/4420574229.html

Good? Bad? Thoughts?

 

[AViking]

I got into photography by buying the cheapest entry level camera. I wish I didn't do that. If you're just a mom who wants to take pictures of her cats then I think that's appropriate. However if you're actually considering photography as a hobby then a step up is more than appropriate.

That 450D is 6 years old and is only going to be useful taking photos in good daylight. It will inevitably drive you insane. You'll be shooting at max ISO 800 or probably ISO 400. Can you learn on it? Sure. It's at least got bracketing and live view but I really think that with the technology today you'll go nuts with a camera that can't shoot at least at ISO 1600 without looking awful.

With all that said I think $200 to get a DSLR that you can learn on is pretty good.

 

[Rinaun]

I got into photography by buying the cheapest entry level camera. I wish I didn't do that. If you're just a mom who wants to take pictures of her cats then I think that's appropriate. However if you're actually considering photography as a hobby then a step up is more than appropriate.

That 450D is 6 years old and is only going to be useful taking photos in good daylight. It will inevitably drive you insane. You'll be shooting at max ISO 800 or probably ISO 400. Can you learn on it? Sure. It's at least got bracketing and live view but I really think that with the technology today you'll go nuts with a camera that can't shoot at least at ISO 1600 without looking awful.

With all that said I think $200 to get a DSLR that you can learn on is pretty good.

Yeah all the stuff you brought up make 100% sense. I might just wait and see how this month goes and come back here to ask what to buy once I have a set pool of money. Overall this thread has helped me immensely so far...... I was so close to buying an older camera and probably would have had buyers remorse a month or so later.

I'm a fast learner so I wouldn't doubt myself to get angry a month later learning what I can't do with this camera.

 

[CuriousMike]

If you're on a budget, for $200 you'll get some *amazing photos out of that thing.
You'll get your first taste of a shallow DOF and say, "Hell yes!"

*amazing compared to cell phone / P&S photos

 

[Kippa]

I would strongly suggest getting an entry level dslr camera with a kit lens. The great thing about basic kit zoom lens is they can go a big wide in the angle so you can fit a lot in the shot, or zoom in to focus on something in the distance. They're great for starting off with.

It will take you quite a while to master the basics of the camera with regards to the three main variables being shutter speed, aperture and iso. Playing around with those 3 things take a bit of getting used to.

For a reference to what those 3 things are about here is a link to help you out:
http://fav.me/d6nevxk

If you do get a dslr with a kit lens. I would suggest NOT getting any other kit before you master the basics of exposure.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Everyone ends up with the Nifty 50 to see what can be done with depth of field on the cheap. Then it is never again used.

I love my DSRL but man, my cell phone takes pretty damned good photos. People think cell phones arn't that great but simply compare them to 15 year old tech and it is better than what most had back then.

 

[alkemyst]

Why would you ask clients about what DSLR to buy? Are they Photogs?

 

[Paladin3]

If you are new to photography and want to go DSLR, you could do a lot worse than a cheap body and kit wide lens. Limit yourself to about $300 or it's money wasted, since you have no idea what to buy or why.

Shallow DoF is overrated. It's not the Holy Grail of photography. Some images need it, others don't, but making a great photo is about more than bokeh.

Canon and Nikon have the lion's share of the DSLR market for a reason.

Megapixels are overrated. 10 is enough for most shooters, at least until you learn why you need more and can put it to good use.

Fast lenses and cameras that shoot at high ISOs are luxuries and not necessary for learning photography. Don't go buying expensive lenses based on the opinions of others when you don't even know enough to have your own opinions.

Once you get a basic camera/lens, seriously consider buying a flash next and learning how to use it. Photography is all about light and most photographers don't have the slightest idea how to use this simple tool that actually creates it.

Don't spend too much on a tripod. Nobody cares what it's made out of so long as it supports the camera. The same goes for bags, straps, filters and other gadgets until you learn enough to know what you do and don't need.

Wear comfortable shoes and have fun.