Off Topic-Sorta. (Camera suggestions)

"ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback" (armadaexpress)
07/09/2014 at 15:29 • Filed to: None

Im looking for a great camera for an amateur. I'd like to take great pictures of my family and at car meets. I'd like to keep it under 600-ish. Any suggestions?

Someone had suggested the Samsung NX300

Link-> !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

DISCUSSION (29)

MIATAAAA > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:31

I absolutely LOVE my Sony . I have an a55 (discontinued - the a58 is the successor) and it's amazing. I'm really glad I selected it. Have fun :)

trmoore09 > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:33

I have a Nikon D3100 that I really like. I'm also currently selling a D3000 with 18-55 and 55-200 lenses if you're interested. Asking $400.

HammerheadFistpunch > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:33

SO many great camera's in that price point. My recommendation is to get a super high end point and shoot like an Panasonic LX8, Sony RX100, or Olympus XZ-2 or XZ10. We have the XZ-10 and I've had an LX7 and even though I use a mirrorless interchangeable and have access to 5dIII's with L glass I end up doing most of my shooting on the Olympus. Its faster, easier to carry and takes phenominal pics for its price point. Just my 2 cents though, if you want the DSLR experience then my comment is worthless.

Anima > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:45

For that kind of money go for a entry level DSLR with 1 or 2 extra lenses. something like a Nikon D3200 (or canon equivalent) with the kit lens and then buy a 50mm f1.8 for around $120.

That 50mm lens is the best investment I've ever made.

trmoore09 > Anima
07/09/2014 at 15:50

I have a d3100, 18-55 and 55-300 and have been looking at the 50mm f/1.8G (currently have a craigslist ad up for one right now). So you would definitely recommend spending the money for the 50mm? They're asking $175.

AM3R > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:51

read my mind! I was just about to make a thread like this. I'm thinking of going with a DSLR but I don't know where to go from there.

ttyymmnn > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:53

Here's a short review on that camera from the excellent DP Review website. I have very little experience with this sector of cameras, so all I can say is that somebody handed me one, and I don't remember the brand, but it felt very cheap and plastic-y. But it probably took good pictures.

The only caveat I would offer is that if you ever want to get more involved in photography, you might be better off putting your money on a traditional DSLR, which would be more upgradable in the future. Don't forget about the used camera market. Sites like B&H Camera and KEH sell used bodies, lenses and kits at good prices. That's how I started. In fact, I've never bought a new camera body. I have bought my lenses new, though.

If you have no aspirations beyond those you stated, this would probably be just fine.

ttyymmnn > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 15:57

If you've got $600 to spend, I don't think you can possibly go wrong with this: Canon EOS Rebel T3i DSLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm IS II Lens Kit . This camera also shoots 1080p video. $549 from B&H, and you can probably find it for less.

Stephen the Canuck > trmoore09
07/09/2014 at 16:00

Do it. It's a focal length that will make you think and work for the shot. Plus the aperture works very well for low light. The Canon 50mm is quite sharp, and I would imagine the Nikon is the same.

Anima > trmoore09
07/09/2014 at 16:02

I have a d3100 too and I have the non G version. Biggest difference: No autofocus, but that's a good way to improve your skills. I've seen it on Amazon new for ~$130

Other lenses I own are the 18-55 kit lens and a Tamron 70-300mm

but yeah.. Great value for money and a razorsharp little light magnet.

Kinja'd!!!

trmoore09 > Stephen the Canuck
07/09/2014 at 16:15

Thanks for the info! If I can unload this D3000 I'm trying to sell, maybe I can get it.

trmoore09 > Anima
07/09/2014 at 16:16

Wow, those are good! Thanks for the tip!

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 16:22

As much as I love DSLR's, a better choice may be something like the Fuji X-E1 w/ lens ($699 on Amazon) or the Fuji X-M1 w/lens ($599 on Amazon) for interchangeable lens cameras, or a Sigma DP1/2/3 for fixed length or a Canon G1X for fixed zoom lens.

Personally, I love what Fuji has been doing lately. I'd go with the X-E1 or X-M1 and then if you decide to upgrade the body, you can bring the lens/lenses along with.

When researching for myself, SnapSort.com is an amazing resource to start at, then use the internet to research your prospective choices, along with DxOMark.com, but note that with DxOMark, you have to go into the measurements to get any useful knowledge. Their base scores aren't always spot on (some say Nikon has paid them off).

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > AM3R
07/09/2014 at 16:34

Canon 1DX, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2L, 200mm f/2L IS, 300mm f/2.8L, 400mm f/2.8L

Haha... I wish...

In all seriousness, depends on how serious into photography you're planning on getting.

ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback > Anima
07/09/2014 at 16:37

These shots look awesome. Gives me something more to look into.

AM3R > iforgotmyburnerkeyonce
07/09/2014 at 16:42

Not super serious. I want something that can handle the occasional photo shoot of my car and the many family pictures it'll see.

Bottom line: I just want to have great pictures of my car/the cars I see at meets or C&C and good family pictures.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > AM3R
07/09/2014 at 16:58

I'd say the same as recommended in my comment to the OP: Fuji X-M1 or X-E1 with kit lens. I say this over an entry dslr because the Fuji kit lens is an 18-55 f/2.8-4 IS, where most entry DSLR's come with an 18-55 f/3.5-5.6. The Fuji is 2/3 stop faster at the wide end and 1 stop faster at the Tele end. One stop difference would mean a 1/60s shutter over a 1/30s shutter, given the same ISO. Plus the Fujis are more portable. Fujis are pretty good at low light as well, but that's my opinion. Typically on my Rebel T2i, I get excessive noise at anything over ISO 800-1600. There's been some advancement in entry dslrs since the T2i, but I think the Fuji gives pretty clean shots at ISO 6400 and definitely clear at ISO 3200. Not like the ISO 8000 my 6D can do clean, but it's a decent amount. Combine ISO performance with the faster lens and you've got a combo that makes people who just bought a T5i saying "how'd you get such good pictures? It's not bright enough in here!"

Anima > Stephen the Canuck
07/09/2014 at 17:25

I basically think in 50mm 24/7 nowadays :P

Anima > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 17:26

Thank you! Go for a DSLR.. you get way more for your money that way.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > Stephen the Canuck
07/09/2014 at 19:34

Except the canon one uses a stupid plastic mount, which is why I bit the bullet and picked up a used version 1 with a metal mount for $150. Since then, the prices have gone up to $175-$180. I'm imagining they're becoming harder to come across.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > Anima
07/09/2014 at 19:41

ThatThat's debatable... I used to be (and still am) a huge Canon fanboy. The cost of a decent DSLR with good lenses is more money than, say (I'm going to sound like a broken record here) a Fuji X-T1 with good lenses.

For instance... My 6D+85mm f/1.2L II is a value of roughly $3800-$4000.

Meanwhile, an X-T1 with a Fuji 56mm (85mm equiv) f/1.2R is about $2000-$2500.

DSLR is just a form factor. Yes, I prefer it, but I feel as though I'd have more "spur of the moment" shots if I had a smaller camera.

I wont debate that DSLR's are amazing for professional work. I don't think I could trust a mirrorless, even if the quality is the same.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > ttyymmnn
07/09/2014 at 19:55

Aghhhhhhh!!!!! Kinja I hate you right now. Third attempt. 2used bodies 1 new, 3new lenses 4 used. Dpreview is biased imho because dxo partnership. DigitalRev or even Ken Rockwell, as much as he loves particular brands, are good places, as well as some other sites like the-digital-picture or some crap like that.

I was much better the first and second attempts. Now I just want to post this and take a xanax.

Anima > iforgotmyburnerkeyonce
07/09/2014 at 20:00

What I'm saying is if you are going to spend 500-600 dollars on camerastuff (which for a lot of people is quite a lot of money) when starting, make it DLSR. Purely because if you want to further with it after you catch the bug, you have a much better starting ground. Mirrorless is great, but in my opinion far too expensive to justify. When you just want to capture what you see, everyone nowadays has a camera that obliterates what we had a few years back, on their phone. But if you want the freedom to play with aperture, shutterspeed and such, you might as well get a DSLR

Let's be honest, if you are going to bring your camera out, the trade off for it that it is that little bit bulkier does counter it being half the price, right? Electronic viewfinders have come a long way too, but it's still no optical.

Also: DLSR ar sturdy as f*ck. I throw mine in my backpack with all the other stuff without worrying about it. I don't think that (especially with a 50mm lens) bulkiness is an issue, therefore I really can't see the value in mirrorless asides from looks.

I'll take 911 RS for $5000 > iforgotmyburnerkeyonce
07/09/2014 at 20:17

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce is absolutely right. I'd recommend the Fuji's. They're excellent cameras with excellent glass when you want to invest in lenses in the future. They're also extremely portable compared to all the DSLRs recommended here. I ditched my DSLR for mirrorless and its opened up my world. I can carry my camera pretty much anywhere because it fits in my pocket or under my coat, even with a bulky lens.

I'll take 911 RS for $5000 > ArmadaExpress drives a turbo outback
07/09/2014 at 20:30

I'd really recommend mirrorless. I upgraded from a Canon T1i to a Sony a7 and it's a night and day difference. While the a7 is a significantly better camera than most new entry-level DSLRs (and costs more), most of it's advantages are common to all mirrorless cameras. The two biggest reasons are below.

It's a lot smaller. This is a huge benefit. I'm significantly more likely to carry my camera to social events and on family outings than when I had to carry my Canon. With the right lens it fits in the pocket of my jacket.

It's a lot more expandable. DSLRs by their nature have an internal mirror. This mirror means you have to have more space between the back of the lens and the sensor. The increased distance means it's hard to adapt lenses from one system to another. With a mirrorless camera, the distance is greatly reduced and you can use pretty much any lens from the past 100 years with a proper adapter. There are some really fantastic manual focus lenses for less than $50. Buying a new lens of similar quality could easily cost $300-400.

DSLRs are better for some things. Some really high speed activities (shooting RC planes, sports, auto racing) require faster AF than most mirrorless cameras can support, but if you're planning on shooting things like that you'll step up to a pro-level camera for more advanced autofocus (Canon's 1D line comes to mind).

All that said, at your price point, I'd recommend the Fuji XE-1 or XM-1. The Fuji sensor is fantastic and does a great job with colors. The kit lens that comes with either of those cameras is also fantastic. It lets more light onto the sensor (has a wider aperture), allowing for you to shoot in darker situations. The Fuji is also a lot better at high ISO situations than most entry level DSLRs, so when you're shooting in poor light, it'll turn out a lot better. Plus, when you want to expand your lens collection, the Fuji lenses are better than almost anything else at that price point.

ttyymmnn > iforgotmyburnerkeyonce
07/09/2014 at 21:01

I never got any sense of bias on DPR. Honestly, most of the technical jargon is over my head, so I read the intro and the conclusion and take what I can from that. But I'll check out the others.

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > I'll take 911 RS for $5000
07/10/2014 at 09:00

My plan was to snag an X-T1 (I love knobs on old school SLR's, that's why I use my AE-1 so much) and the 56mm f/1.2R for my next camera related purchase, but then I up and spent the money on an 80-200mm f/2.8L and 300mm f/4L IS because my current primes (35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.2L II) didn't cover the telephoto range and I've always had a secret desire to do some sort of wildlife photography.

One day Ill get that X-T1. Or maybe Canon will come out with a DSLR better than the Nikon Df, but same style. I just want knobs, dammit!

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > ttyymmnn
07/10/2014 at 09:09

I was an Electrical Engineering student for 3 years, so I actually love all the technical crap.

Seeing as DPR is a subjective review, they're less likely to come off as biased, but I don't trust them seeing as DxO is supposed to be purely objective, but their base scores are severely wrong in my opinion. Just compare the Tammy 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD with the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM. Tamron beats the canon on the base score but when you go into the measurements and interpret them for yourself, you'll find that the Canon is actually slightly better (look at the Chromatic Aberration field maps at all focal lengths. Less variance in the Canon). That and DxO doesn't take things like focusing speed into account for lenses. Or focus points/burst speed/AF Sensetivity, etc in their camera comparisons.

Personally, I take information from Snapsort, Lenshero, Fred Miranda Reviews, Digital Rev TV (great for real world tests), and other sources when comparing prospective purchases.

I can't remember if I did a post on how to read DxOMark measurements, but I might do that today sometime...

iforgotmyburnerkeyonce > Anima
07/10/2014 at 13:20

Ok, you seem to have a strong bias against mirrorless cameras. So, I'll put it into two sections:

Subjective Comparison (My [Logic Based] Opinion):

Mirrorless cameras are not necessarily worse than DSLRs. Certainly, I wouldn't bring one along with me on a professional shoot, but I would carry one daily. In fact, I like the X-T1 from Fuji, and Fuji has been rocking the industry lately with their emphasis on image quality over sales numbers and profit margins.

One of the cameras I suggested, the X-E1 with the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS kit lens, has metal top and bottom plates, which lends to its durability. The Fuji also comes equipped with an APS-C sized sensor, just as the D3300 and T3i (that's the two I could find in the $600 range). Except the D3300 and T3i come with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS/VC lenses. Hmm, that means the Fuji kit lens is 2/3 EV faster at 18mm and 1 EV faster at 55mm.

Not to mention the flange distance (distance between the film plane and the mount) on the Fuji/ all mirrorless cameras is very little, meaning there's less area for the optics to get all wonky between the rear element and the sensor. Giving up auto focus, you can use an adapter (without crappy corrective optics) to tap into all the Canon/Nikon lenses you want. Oh, and if you're in manual focus, there's focus peeking in the EVF, which has come a very long way. Even some of the X series bodies have an optical/digital viewfinder, such as the X-Pro 1, X100, and X100S. Granted, they're of the rangefinder type, and not the reflex type, but I don't think that's deterred Leica one bit, and oh yeah, Leica rangefinders (like all rangefinders) are technically mirrorless, as well.

By this point, I don't even want to comment on your statement: "But if you want the freedom to play with aperture, shutterspeed and such, you might as well get a DSLR"

In terms of the camera I've been talking about, the X-E1, Aperture control is on the lens, shutter speed is a dial on the top, ISO is adjustable via an electronic means, and exposure compensation for when using any of the exposure triad in auto mode is also a dial. It's just as useable for manual exposure as every DSLR. You'll find that Fuji's higher end bodies, such as the X-T1, actually have dials for everything, with auto modes, so you can choose exactly what you want to change and what you don't. No mode selection, just pick what you want to set yourself. A lot more intuitive than some DSLR attempts at retro styling (*cough* Nikon Df *cough*).

Also, unless you want to possibly damage the internals of your lens or camera, I wouldn't be tossing it anywhere. Not saying you have to gently place it on a padded surface, but a drop or shock could knock the sensor out of alignment, or even decenter a lens element, causing soft photos. But hey, it's your camera, not mine. I carry a DSLR with me almost everywhere (Today, I have a 6D and an EOS 650 35mm SLR) as well.

Now for the OBJECTIVE part:

DxOMark results for the following:

Canon T3i

Fuji X100 (they don't have any other Fuji X series cameras tested yet, but it's the same sensor as the X-E1/X-M1; Also, I don't know why they don't test it through it's entire ISO range, but it will go to 6400.)

Nikon D3300

Kinja'd!!!

Hmm... Same price point, better performance...

As far as the stock lenses (I'm just going to stick with the X-E1 choice, as the X-M1 apparently doesn't come with the nicer lens, but hey, it's only $100 more for the X-E1.)

Well, imagine that, they haven't tested the Fuji lens. Here's the jist of the Canon v. Nikon 18-55 matchup, though. Canon is sharper to the edge of the frame than Nikon. Nikon has less distortion and Chromatic Aberration than the Canon. Both are about equal at 55mm.

As I said before, the Fuji equivalent 18-55mm is f/2.8-4, so It's going to be faster, enabling a lower ISO or a faster shutter speed.

RANT. OVER.

Point being, DSLR's aren't the end-all be-all of cameras, especially in the entering market. There's a lot of upgradeable mirrorless cameras, and they're not just glorified point and shoots.

I'll stick with my DSLR for professional photography, but when it comes to personal photography, I don't NEED a DSLR, it's just all that I have. If I had a nice mirrorless body and lens, I'd be using that 99% of the time, and only breaking out the DSLR gear for when I have jobs to do.

Mirrorless cameras have come a long way since breaking into the mainstream market. Don't count them out as a viable alternative to the traditional idea of what a "good" camera is.