DLSR buying advice?

"exizeo - still loving fourza" (exizeo) 04/05/2014 at 20:41 • Filed to: None

0

20

So I'm looking at getting a DSLR, sometime soon, for car-related things and non-car-things. Preferably easy to use for a beginner, but has some potential for better looking, semi-professional images, as well as being 400-600. I'll probably be using some of CS6, as well.

Just completely out of interest...how much does a professional, Stance|Works/etc camera setup cost? Are they still DSLR, or some insane wizardry?

twinturbobmw > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 20:45

0

A good DSLR for around $600 is the T3i, D3200 or A58. I currently use an A58 and I love it. Do remember you will have to eventually buy a new lens for better photos. Something professional would run around $5,000 to even $10,000, depending on the lens and body.

MPA > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 20:48

0

This is a good article:

http://prolost.com/blog/2013/12/1…

I ended up buying a body only Canon Rebel T5i. I picked up a Fast 50 lens for $99 off amazon based on that article, and a 55-250mm zoom lens off Ebay for $139 new since it was removed from a kit - Amazon and the local camera shop wanted $250+ for the lens

HammerheadFistpunch > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 20:49

0

there isn't a good answer to your second question only to say that a camera represents only a small part of a photographers toolkit and budget. if you want a good start on a path for photography figure 2 to 2.5 times a much for lenses you will spend on a camera body. a camera system is the way to go...but just remember "system" means more than a single camera body. there is a lot that goes into a camera system; lenses, bags, flashes and...most importantly...training

exizeo - still loving fourza > twinturbobmw 04/05/2014 at 20:58

1

Yeah, D3100/D3300 were two of the options I was considering. I will definitely be using new lens as time progresses...

I'm sorry if this is an utterly retarded question, but how exactly different is IRL photography to, say, Forza/GT photography?

ToyDeathbot > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 21:12

0

If you really want that mirror box, you can get the:

Canon T5i - it's pretty well rounded in every aspect and there's a great selection of lenses to choose from.

Canon Rebel SL1 - a really good small/compact DSLR which seems to be the best budget camera released by anyone yet.

Nikon D3300 - it has a better sensor than the camera, but you lose a bit on video if you need it.

Pentax K50 - very good lenses and sensors, but it's a bit less popular so 2nd hand lenses and costs here and there might add up...

Most of all, mirrorless cameras are starting to compete fairly well with entry-level (or even mid-level!) DSLRs. They're a whole lot less weight (the lenses and body are smaller), autofocus is faster and they're really flexible. Here's some which are really nice:

Sony Alpha 5000/6000 - Probably the boss of all APS-C sized mirrorless cameras.

Sony NEX-5T - A very good mirrorless, slightly old so you can dish out a bit more money on the lenses.

Olympus OM-D E-M10 - I have an E-M5 and this is pretty much the same camera, I am thoroughly happy with everything. Lens selection is massive and feature-wise matches or even beats some of the Canon cameras.

Olympus PEN E-PL5 - like the E-M10 but without the viewfinder, so it's a bit cheaper means more money on lenses!

Fuji X-M1/X-A1 - Very good lenses (no one really matches Fuji right now) and the sensor is superb. Fuji is like the underdog of the camera world right now, and it's cameras are beyond most reviewer's expectations and matching much expensive stuff.

The general rule is to dish out less money on the body and more on the lenses if you plan to be loyal to the camera system (ie, Canon EF lenses, Micro Four Thirds, Fuji X-mount etc)

If you want some online resources, DPreview is really helpful, and Steve Huff does a lot of useful reviewing

Merkin Muffley > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 21:12

0

How serious are you about wanting to learn to be a good photographer?

The Compromiser > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 21:26

1

I have a Pentax K 50. COUPLE of lenses. Easy, works Great! Excelent quality images and on board editing. Also Waterproof ish. WIfe woRks n a cAmera Store and they all recommended it for muLti Situational BeginneRs. Its aLso cheaPer Than A rebEl. You cun get it in muLtiplE colourS (Grips aNd body). If yoU wanT, it comes in gReen And pink grips (ewwww).

Mobile kinjA sUcks My ass.

AthomSfere > MPA 04/05/2014 at 21:29

1

I don't like a few things about that article... As in really don't like:

1) Throw away the kits lens? The kits lens really can be great especially for a beginner and can help you find your ideal spot / range. 18-55 or 18-105/115. A kit lens will probable never be your best lens, but it is indispensable for learning you and the camera if you are new to a DSLR.

2) Fast 50 - This may not be what you want on a DSLR. If you are shooting 35mm 50mm is perfect, but on a DX sensor the 35mm is probably a better choice because with crop it is appx 50mm.

3) Use Auto ISO... Not sure on this one as a rule. Sometimes you want it, but sometimes you want the grain or lack of.

4) Shoot RAW - I am in the minority here, but shooting RAW is probably the worst advice given the most often. I currently keep 2 16GB cards in, with RAW that space is near useless for more than a day out. 32GB of stuff that needs to be futzed with?

I shot 35mm, I am OK with slowing down and thinking about my shots, when I change lighting or subjects I check the screen to see my settings and their effect. Unless you plan/ want to spend a lot of time in photoshop RAW is a waste. Also, the article says "If you don't process and organize your photos they won't be good"... So I guess point proven, if you aren't taking good pictures you can "fix" them later. What this really means is you are probably never going to take great photos if you are relying on PP instead of the scene and your camera.

AthomSfere > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/05/2014 at 21:34

0

How to buy a DSLR:

Pick a store you like, Best Buy for example. Go there. Pick up each camera in your price range and shoot it there. Play with the settings a bit.

See which one you like the way it holds or how the settings are accessed. Buy it there. Feel free to look online for a good deal, and then try to get it price matched. But buy it there. If no one does, we aren't going to have big box stores to try before we buy for long.

Buy a lens too, the kits is probably fine for learning your own style for now. Later you will want a prime or ten.

As for me, I prefer my Nikons. I like the colors it sees and the controls better. But there is not really a wrong choice.

ToyDeathbot > AthomSfere 04/05/2014 at 21:50

2

I agree with most of your points, however, with RAW, it's rather debatable. The use of RAW can work in both ways. I've taken quite a lot of night shots and usually there's a mixture of lighting (fluorescent, incandescent, halogen all at the same time) and I find it annoying just to change the custom white balance every 3 or 4 shots. Instead, all I just do now is set it on Auto and post-production it later. It saves a lot of time and fuss. RAW is also helpful occasionally, when you want a bit more highlights or shadows. Obviously, there's a line where it all turns a bit extreme where it turns into a dreadful mess. I used to shoot 35mm (I still do now sometimes) and always though that post-production ruins everything. However, RAW is now part of the whole digital photography experience and it's what makes it distinct from film (just like how people used to play in the darkroom), whether you like it or not.

AthomSfere > ToyDeathbot 04/05/2014 at 22:05

1

I don't think RAW should never be used, I just like the "Shoot RAW only" mentality so many people use, and it certainly shouldn't be defacto advice for every newcomer. It should be used to fix a problem, a specific problem.

If you need to find a way around lighting at night, RAW probably is the best all around approach for example.

Want higher contrast, maybe RAW. Or my solution has been take bracketed shots and use HDR instead.

In all, I wish people would let them experiment and find their niche and if they need RAW they will use it to fit their niche. But using it as the magic cure is BS.

And, I do sometimes miss the darkroom.

MPA > AthomSfere 04/06/2014 at 01:18

0

The only things I took from the article really was buying body only, getting the fast 50. I have my camera set to capture raw & JPG, and being new to it all, Lightroom has definitely helped me tweak my images to make them look a little better while I get more experienced - it's a lot to remember with all the different settings.

I don't follow his other advice - using the lowest F the lens will handle, auto ISO, etc.

AthomSfere > MPA 04/06/2014 at 12:36

0

I would add then: Are you shooting a DX sensor? You might pick up a 35mm too to get the 50mm equivalent on DX.

And lowest F stop is dangerous advice! You said you don't use it, but on many lenses with a low F stop the lowest setting can often get pretty ugly.

What other lenses did you get, btw?

MPA > AthomSfere 04/06/2014 at 13:20

0

Nah it's not a DX - it's APS-C I believe. The other lens I have is a 55-250mm zoom

AthomSfere > MPA 04/06/2014 at 13:28

0

Haha, yes you're right. Same thing, but Nikon calls theirs DX and a lot of other brand shooters still use Nikon's terms DX for APS-C and FX for a full frame camera, because who doesn't like a 2 letter abbreviation?

For any crop sensor though, DX, APS-C, NX etc. just take the focal length and multiply by 1.6 to get the effective focal length in 35mm. A 50mm for example is like shooting 80mm on full frame / 35mm. Great for reach, but any prime wider than 17mm is stupid expensive.

exizeo - still loving fourza > Merkin Muffley 04/06/2014 at 15:22

0

Pretty serious. I won't be having it as a main occupation, but I am serious about wanting to be good at it.

Merkin Muffley > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/06/2014 at 15:50

0

In that case, the best plan is to take 150 bucks, buy an old fully manual 35mm film camera and a 50mm non-zoom lens (pentax k1000 is perfect for this), and learn the fundamental basics. While doing this, start saving up money for a nice digital rig, which can cost over a grand, even buying gently used, which I recommend. If you jump in and buy a 4-600 dollar dslr kit right now, you will do yourself a disservice in the long run, because the automatic settings and zoom lenses make it far too tempting to 'cheat.' Once you have a solid grasp of the relationship between aperture, shutter speed, and ISO, you understand good composition, and you become smarter than your light meter, you will have hopefully/probably saved up enough loot for a nice setup. The nice thing is that the 1-150 dollar film camera will still be worth 1-150 bucks when you are done with it, but the 4-600 dollar dslr will only be worth 1-200. Yes, it will take time, and it will take more effort, but I promise that the end results will be worth it. I've been doing photography for over 20 years now, it worked for me, and I have seen it work for many others.

exizeo - still loving fourza > Merkin Muffley 04/06/2014 at 17:06

0

Alright, I'll be sure to keep that in mind.

I do fully plan on getting Adobe CS6, though, especially Lightroom, for postprocessing. Would this be unadvised, especially when starting?

Merkin Muffley > exizeo - still loving fourza 04/06/2014 at 19:35

0

you can always scan negatives.

exizeo - still loving fourza > Merkin Muffley 04/06/2014 at 20:08

0

Hm?