Cameralopnik

"Dsscats" (dsscats) 05/18/2014 at 15:06 • Filed to: None

0

19

I'm looking for a cheap (<$300 used) DSLR and XSi's are getting dangerously cheap. I'm just looking for something basic to shoot cars at shows and b better than my potato. Anyone have experience with these?

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 15:27

0

I got a nikon d3100 14.2mp camera bundle off amazon for 600$. It came with a tripod, external flash, 2 lenses, filters, attachments, etc...

dogisbadob > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 15:29

0

I have the older XTi, and it's awesome. The XTi "only" has 10MP which is still way way more than needed unless you're making a poster. The file size of those 10MP photos usually ranges from 3-5MB per image. A 2GB card is usually good for about 450 photos at 10MP.

I think the newer camera you're looking at has 12MP which is even better. Image stabilization is also nice to have, which my lens lacks (the feature helps for long-exposure shutter speeds like you'd have in the dark).

My recommendation is to shoot in P, not the green rectangle mode, as the latter is always flash on, while P allows you to have the flash on or off.

If you upload pics like that to Facebook, only upload a few images at a time. That is, upload 5 images, then wait until they're done, then 5 more, etc. Otherwise, some of them might not show up in your album.

JGrabowMSt > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 15:30

0

this goes against conventional wisdom, but whats wrong with a point and shoot camera? Small, simple, and cheap. Best of all, youll get great results out of it without much effort.

I just dont see why so many people want a dslr these days. Yes I have one, but Im in a family of photographers, and I use mine for video work. For basic needs, i dont even take it with me. I have a Canon SD1100IS, and Ive had it for 7 years, and still love it. One of my friends has the exact one, and his 5 year old hasnt broken it yet...and he got his only shortly after I got mine.

ttyymmnn > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 15:53

0

Are you looking for a body only, or a kit with body and lens?

AthomSfere > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 15:58

0

Do you plan to eventually invest in a system? Or maybe add a lens but stay cheap?

If you are thinking about maybe getting into it later, then Nikon is my first choice, then Canon.

If you want to get in cheap, maybe tack on a second cheap lens later, then look at Sony. Built in in-body stabilization works with all Sony/ Konica lenses and the lenses are cheap compared to Nikon or Canon.

Dsscats > ttyymmnn 05/18/2014 at 16:43

0

Kit with a lens.

phenotyp > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 17:12

0

The XSi was my first DSLR (had film SLRs prior), and I thought it was great. I had the 50mm 1.8 (later Sigma 50m 1.4), 80-200mm or whatever that cheaper Canon tele was), and a Sigma 10-20mm. Very versatile, and great for outdoor shots, but its low-light performance isn't what newer sensors can manage, though the fast 50s mitigated that a bit. As a starting point for an SLR kit, I think it'd be quite a steal today. Though, as others have pointed out, if you're not thinking about expanding lenses and maybe later upgrading to ful-frame, it's hard to justify the bulk over a good P&S these days. The best camera is the one you have with you.

Orange Exige > JGrabowMSt 05/18/2014 at 17:55

1

If someone wants a used DSLR - very reasonable - I see no reason to dissuade them. Different photographers and aficionados have different feelings with regards to the rise of DSLRs and though I am but a lowly amateur and enthusiast, I fully support normal, everyday people buying DSLRs if they so please.

It makes me think that this person actually appreciates quality. They're not gonna bullshit you and say that their cellphone camera is just as good (though newer ones have gotten to be pretty good for most uses). Ok, perhaps they just want to "look cool" with a DSLR - and the truth is that they will (look better than using a phone or p&s - admit it!!) - but at the very least you'll have somebody with this proper camera who may eventually become curious as to its actual capabilities and maybe learn a thing or two about photography just by virtue of owning a better camera.

I mean, sure, as a professional, I bet that you and others probably get annoyed by people who think they are professional photographers just because they own a DSLR but hey, let that person have their fun while you (not you personally) do your job. DSLRs will never become so popular that everybody will have one - it'll always be just a small percentage of the population. If I were you, I'd instead take it all out on Instagram ;)

p.s. for the record, I use a compact mirrorless :)

ttyymmnn > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 18:08

0

OK. My experience is with used Canon 20D and 40D bodies with other lenses, all bought separately.

JGrabowMSt > Orange Exige 05/18/2014 at 18:15

1

Seeing the state of cameras today, i think a point and shoot is perfectly reasonable. The manual modes on many are very good, and would be a massive step over a cell phone camera.

i suggest it for price, not to take it out on anyone. I think its a reasonable suggestion for someone to keep the cost down.

im sure you could agree that without exif data, a properly exposed and well framed picture would be hard to identify whether it was a dslr or point and shoot or mirrorless. A point and shoot has size and speed at its advantage, and anyone can use it, and i dont worry about dropping it, or people bumping the lens or anything.

Orange Exige > JGrabowMSt 05/18/2014 at 18:26

1

Those are all good points for sure.

I haven't used any point and shoots that are even fairly recent, so I'm not too aware of what manual controls they have. And of course, like you said, it's not like you can't take a good photo in program mode, whether with a DSLR, P&S, or even a cameraphone.

Keeping cost down is definitely a huge factor for most people, myself included (hence why I got a mirrorless). I'm a very thrifty person and I was willing to splurge $200 for my "toy" - but then again, I don't even have a reasonably decent phone camera so it's slightly less of a toy (see the recent potato thread someone started) - and I don't think $300 for a used DSLR is unreasonable for a normal, middle-class person to splurge if they really want it. Me personally, I'm waiting for the Sony NEX-7 to become ancient technology so I can pick that up cheap and replace my Olympus E-PM1... ;)

Howdy Harrell > Dsscats 05/18/2014 at 19:03

0

I just got a Cannon Rebel t3i for graduation. Havent used it yet but from what ive seen it looks to be pretty kick ass. Best buy has some pretty sweet deals on them too.

Stephen the Canuck > Howdy Harrell 05/19/2014 at 23:35

1

I love my T3i. I've had it since October and taken almost 9000 pictures with it. It works really well, does everything I ask of it, and I got it on a sweet deal from Futureshop.

Louros > Dsscats 05/20/2014 at 08:23

0

You can do much better than an XSi for $300. I bought a used T1i body for about $220 over 6 months ago; I'm sure prices have dropped even more since then.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > JGrabowMSt 05/20/2014 at 09:24

1

Sensor size.

JGrabowMSt > iforgotmyburnerkeyonce 05/20/2014 at 10:29

0

Do you need to compensate for something?

Una Bear Dog > Dsscats 05/20/2014 at 10:55

0

uy a used T4i. The auto focus is much, much better!

The newer 18-55 STM kit lens is also better than the older lenses. Plus touch screen, auto focus in video, etc.

As a former 1DsII/ 1DX owner, I am very happy with the T4i. It is a great camera, and the first Rebel that I could really use.

FWIW, the 18-135 STM lens is even better than the 18-55, and much more useful. But that might be a bit of a stretch for you to start with a $300 budget.

Good luck!

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > JGrabowMSt 05/22/2014 at 09:41

0

No, larger sensors with the same number of megapixels typically have larger pixels. If you think of them as buckets collecting the rain of light, a larger bucket will collect more rain. Thus, when shooting High ISO, when the signal is amplified after capturing the light, is less left to the processor for interpretation, typically resulting in less noise. Thus, why my APS-C 18MP T2i can only shoot low noise up to between 800 and 1600 ISO, but my full frame, 20MP 6D can shoot low noise (in my experience) somewhere between 6400 and 8000 ISO. If you're looking at a larger sensor than most compact cameras, say, APS-C, you'll spend much more money on it than if you were to grab an APS-C DSLR. If you're just shooting in bright light, then yes, a compact camera may be the answer, but just as there's no replacement for displacement

enosone > Dsscats 05/27/2014 at 11:31

0

I know you're looking to spend somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 for a used camera but would you be able to swing another couple of hundred more for a new mirror-less camera?

I've been shooting with mirror-less cameras nearly exclusively for 3 years now - starting with an Olympus E-PL1. Since that time I've seen just how quickly mirror-less have progressed in terms of image quality and even lens systems. You can find plenty of great cameras with similar kit lenses at the $400-$500 range - all brand new.

There are some compromises you'd have to make an entry-level mirror-less camera, namely the loss of viewfinder for most MILC camera bodies but you'll get decent sized sensors (larger than a point-and-shoot) and mostly established lens systems.

FWIW, I'm currently shooting with a Samsung NX30 and NX Mini; you can find some of my shots on my Flickr page .