Hey Oppo!

"Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow" (chriskf) 10/27/2015 at 14:04 • Filed to: None

0

56

School me on cameras.

Let’s say I wanted to get into this whole taking pictures thing, mainly of cars but also other stuff, and planned to set a budget with a maximum of $500-600. What should I get?

P.S. I know there are plenty of articles out there about this, but I wanted to gain insight from my fellow Oppos, since you all seem to use your cameras in the ways I’d intend to use one.

P.P.S. I don’t intend to go hardcore into photography. Just want the ability to take some cool pics of race cars, and nature, and shit.

Thanks!

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:13

5

Hasselblad medium format or GTFO.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 10/27/2015 at 14:15

0

Had no idea what that was. Googled it. I’ll see myself out.

Lol

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:16

0

I’m quite happy with my Nikon D5100. Body+basic (18-55mm in my case) lens for around $600 (open box body, used lens), but the reality is glass is expensive and you will go over that budget unless you:

a) Take your time and find a really good used deal.

b) Settle for an older camera (mine is a last generation model).

c) You can make do with a basic lens.

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:17

0

It all depends on one question: how much are you likely to spend on lenses?

If you aren’t going to go past one or two lenses my vote would be something like an olympus or sony mirrorless, if you plan to really invest down the road into photography get a cheap canon with kit lens and buy lenses as you go before upgrading the body.

CaptDale - is secretly British > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 10/27/2015 at 14:24

1

You mean the H4D 200MS? 200 million pixel image, or if you prefer 200 megapixels.... I need new pants and $45k...

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > HammerheadFistpunch 10/27/2015 at 14:24

0

Car parts are going to take priority over lenses, for the foreseeable future at least. So really I just need something decent, and that I could potentially upgrade later. Sounds like your latter option is more along the lines of what I was thinking. I’ve been considering the D3300 after reading a few other articles.

dogisbadob > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:24

1

It doesn’t matter. Just get something cheap you can afford just to play around with and go from there.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/27/2015 at 14:25

0

I certainly wouldn’t mind going with an older model, I’m not good enough for it to matter.

I also wouldn’t mind buying used, but I honestly wouldn’t be sure of what (if any) little issues or anything to look for in used products.

I also don’t mind starting with a basic lens either, see point at the top. haha

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:26

0

Its a matter of pros and cons, the mirrorless stuff is really great and the prices drop off a cliff with the 2nd generations (they are evolving fast) which means you get good deals...but...the larger more traditional cameras are a good bet too. Just bear this phrase in mind:

To take cool pictures, find something cool and have your camera.

If you can’t be bothered to lug a DSLR around (its kinda a pain for casual photography) then you wont up up with any better pictures than your cell phone can provide.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > HammerheadFistpunch 10/27/2015 at 14:29

0

Meh, I don’t mind lugging around a DSLR. I’m generally driving everywhere anyway, so throwing another bag in the back seat of the FR-S isn’t a big deal to me.

I’m honestly not familiar with the mirrorless stuff at all.

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:30

1

I’m not trying to sway you, I’m just throwing that nugget out there. I know of many people who buy DSLR’s and never have them with them and end up selling them because of it.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > HammerheadFistpunch 10/27/2015 at 14:31

0

For sure. I can understand the point you were trying to make. I imagine I’d have it on me most of the time.

I already use my phone a ton, but would prefer to start taking some better quality pics.

Luke's Dad Sold His 2000TL To Get a Sienna > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:32

0

Choose your brand loyalty early on if you plan on staying with photography for a long time. Don’t have to sell all your lenses to switch between Nikon and Canon. I’m a Canon person but I checked prices for my friend two days ago and in the long run, Nikon lenses are cheaper than Canon lenses. The 50mm f/1.2 for example is $1300 for Canon, $700 for Nikon. Don’t know how Nikon works but for Canon, some lenses works on cameras with 1.6 crop that doesn’t work on full frame Canons, so get as few of those lenses as possible and start building up a lens collection full of primes since they work on both crop and full frame. For $600 you can get a 70D which is a crop body, but what might be better is to get a used full frame, like a 5D Classic might be around $500 now and then you can get a 50mm 1.4 which is a great lens.

EDIT: Also look at high end Sonys and Sony mirror less. And their RX series, I've read so much praise on the RX100 series I'm almost sure they can easily outshoot most DSLRs and it's a point and shoot.

Mattbob > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:32

0

You need a Sony Mavica. End of discussion. It is the medium format camera of the digital age. You want to have bigger storage medium than the other camera people. This is crucial.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:32

0

See if you have any open-box/used stores around you. I’m lucky enough to work right around the corner from the Henry’s Outlet store, the place they send all their demos and trade-ins. They check them out themselves for issues and offer a warranty. There’s probably a store in your area that does something similar.

Tbh I'd set aside an extra $150 or so for a second lens, anyway. I picked mine up with the 18-55 like I said. Within a week I went back and picked up a 55-200 as well. I'd miss a ton of shots if I didn't have it.

SteveLehto > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:34

1

Someone else said it and it is true: LENSES.

There is a big divide in the DSLR community that goes back to film: Nikon vs Canon. (Think Mopar vs Ford). I am a Nikon guy but the point is that once you pick, you will probably stay that way. You will acquire camera bodies and lenses and when you upgrade, you will probably keep using your favorite lenses on later bodies.

There are some amazing cameras out there that you can get fairly cheaply. Get a decent one and learn how to use it. You can experiment a lot more with digital than you could with film and digital is very forgiving. Even the cheapo (free) software programs like Picasa can correct 99% of the things you can do wrong with a photo (at least to get you an okay looking pic).

As for me, I have a Nikon D80 (which does not shoot video) but I’d suggest you get something that shoots both (stills and video). And then invest in a decent zoom and a good wide-angle. That will allow you to shoot almost everything you’d ever need.

My advanced tip: If you can, buy Vibration Reduction lenses. The VR tech is amazing and allows you to handhold stuff that would have been shaky in the old days.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > CaptDale - is secretly British 10/27/2015 at 14:35

0

FILM OR DIE!

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:35

1

To be perfectly honest, I take most of my pictures with a large sensor point and shoot with raw capabilities. I have a few mirrorless I use too and access to a 60D I almost never use. The new large sensor compacts are brilliant, but not “upgradable” so I can’t send you there if you want interchangeable lenses. I think a Nikon or Canon is a great choice, they will product great images for the money.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/27/2015 at 14:35

1

Cool! I’ll see if I can find any stores like that.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > HammerheadFistpunch 10/27/2015 at 14:35

0

This was my issue... I went to the Henry’s outlet by me several times looking for a DSLR and came out upgrading my point and shoot instead before I finally bit the bullet.

Now I wish I'd done it sooner.

HammerheadFistpunch > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/27/2015 at 14:36

1

I mostly shoot on my advanced P&S. Its 80% of the quality I can carry 100% of the time.

m2m, apex detective > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:36

0

If you don’t plan on entering “big” DSLR territory, take a look at Sony’S Alpha 6000. Or go to a store and try one.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > SteveLehto 10/27/2015 at 14:37

0

Thanks for the input Steve! From what you said, and everyone has been saying, it sounds like I should probably be looking at used bodies and lenses for my budget. Are there any good resources out there to find used camera gear apart from CL?

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Luke's Dad Sold His 2000TL To Get a Sienna 10/27/2015 at 14:38

0

I couldn’t figure out the way the Canons I tried worked. My Nikon way easy.

One thing, however... the Nikon lenses go on backwards. Gets me EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. I change lenses. Have they NEVER heard of lefty-loosy?

SteveLehto > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:40

0

Not sure how I’d feel about buying used. Unless you really know what you are doing. But Ebay and Craigslist would have used stuff if you wanted to go that route.

Luke's Dad Sold His 2000TL To Get a Sienna > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/27/2015 at 14:40

1

I’ve never gotten my hands on a Nikon DSLR before and now I'll have to just to see that opposite way of removing lenses.

ttyymmnn > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:42

1

Many replies, and certainly many along these lines, but I can tell you my experience. I started with a Canon 20D that I bought used for about $200. Then I got a new Tamron 17-50mm for about $400. Later, I added a longer range Tamron 18-270 since I like to shoot air shows, and still later added a 70-200 and a couple more used bodies (one was a 50D I swapped with my brother for a flash). So, I think your most eonomical route would be to get a good used body from B&H Photo or KEH, and get a new lens. As for the lens, it all depends on what you want to shoot. If you think you’ll be doing mostly up close stuff, a good mid-range zoom would be perfect. If you think you’ll be shooting long distances, a good super zoom would give you the flexibility of both up close and long range, but the sacrifice for that is speed, and you will need to do most of your work outdoors in good light. But beware: photography is like doing drugs, and you’ll find yourself always wanting more. And if you scrimp too much at the beginning, you’ll find yourself coming up against the limitations of your gear, particularly slower lenses. And if you solve your range problems with two lenses, you’ll really wish you had a second body. Switching lenses in the field is a PIA. Good luck!

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > SteveLehto 10/27/2015 at 14:43

0

Yeah, I definitely don’t really know what I’m doing. haha

A buddy of mine who hosts fairly popular automotive podcast now just said he’s got a D300 body he’d sell me. So I’d still need a lens or two.

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:44

1

I agree with Steve’s advice below, be careful with use photographic equipment. Lenses can be easily abused and bodies have a defined lifetime in their shutter cycles.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > ttyymmnn 10/27/2015 at 14:47

0

Another very helpful response!

Although perhaps you can help me a bit. What would be considered close range vs. long range with photography? Most of the pics I’d be looking to take would be at race tracks, autox, etc. I’d consider it close range, although not like feet away from the cars obviously.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > HammerheadFistpunch 10/27/2015 at 14:47

0

Which one is that? P&S's are far from created equal. DSLR's *seem* closer.

I’ve had a Fuji J12 (awesome. built like a brick outhouse too.) that took really good stuff. Sadly the lens got scratched. Got an XP10 after that since my first Fuji had served so well. What they did there was shove the largest amount of shit possible into the smallest package. Went out and got myself a Canon ELPH100HS (Got a great deal. $260 value new, $100 open box on sale, less $40 tradin). Still got it. Have no plans to retire it.

For comparitive purposes, considering I used them all for roughly equal amounts of time:

Used ~14GB on the J12.

Never filled an 8GB on the XP10. 4, maybe.

~12 so far on the elf.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Luke's Dad Sold His 2000TL To Get a Sienna 10/27/2015 at 14:48

0

It is by far my biggest complaint.

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:50

0

Don’t listen to ANYONE who tells you “Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Sony is the bestest and all the otherz are teh suxzors!1!!111!” camera Fanboys are worse than teenage gamers.

If you want something small and easily portable, Sony and Panasonic and Olympus all offer great mirrorless options in your price range that each have different strengths and weaknesses. I love the what both Fuji ans Samsung have done with their respective mirrorless systems, but they are both expensive and have limited lens options, that said; the Fuji X-M1 is a hell of a tool for cheap, as long as you don’t want to run in auto mode all the time or do sports photography with autofocus... see, compromises... ... I would avoid both Canon and Nikon’s mirrorless systems, as both are leaders in the “traditional slr” field and their only incentive to innovate in the mirrorless market is to cover all the bases. That said, the Nikon stuff is REALLY small and pretty cheap, so it’s attractive in that way...

If you want something thats more like a “Traditional SLR” Nikon is probably the leader in cheap SLRs. The higher level Canon stuff is pretty good, but the cheap stuff is cheap junk BUT it has fast autofocus and tends to be excellent for sport photography. The SLR-Like Sony A3000 is an interesting half-way machine...

If you want the best picture taking tool you can fit in a normal pants pocket get a Sony DSC-RX100 mark whatever.

Sony and Nikon have both got really good “idiot proof” auto modes that will make you look like a superstar when all you did was point the camera and push a button... but Some sony cameras tend to have annoying JPEG compression issues straight from the camera and may require using RAW to get the best results... so.. yeah...

Step one: decide what your real priorities are... do you want to “LEARN how to take good pictures”, or do you just want to “take good pictures”, and are those pictures going to be posted on facebook, or printed, and will they be of close-action sports, landscapes, wildlife, etc. and finally, how much are you willing to spend down the line to accomplish those other goals that you aren’t going for now, if you want to go for them later....

HammerheadFistpunch > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/27/2015 at 14:53

1

I have an olypmus zyx or something like that, they have all have the stupidest names. Its a 1/1.7 sensor with a F1.7-2.8 zoom and the ability to shoot raw. In good light (and no taking into account depth of field) its a colorful and pleasing as anything below a 7d, without all the goofy over saturation you get with sony. To be honest, If I had $600 I would be looking seriously at one of these

http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/digitalc…

Its pretty much all the camera I “need”. 28-300 f/2.8 constant with image stabilization, and an ND filter? yeah, I’m good. Their 1/1.7 inch sensors and their software really go nicely together.

gin-san - shitpost specialist > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 14:54

1

SLRs are fine, and if you’re not taking it too seriously a basic starter kit with the kit lens should be more than enough. Nikon tends to package their 18-55mm lens and I have the older, non-VR model but it capable of taking excellent photos.

If you want something versatile but smaller, the mirrorless ones might be a good option, but I have a Fujifilm X10 that I use most often since I lent my SLR to my brother and it came back with missing pieces and a dirty sensor (never again will I lend camera equipment to anyone). The Nikon D40 I have, prior to its sensor being dirtied, was perfectly capable of taking excellent photos.

I would certainly not hesitate to look used (even just one generation old) because SLR bodies plummet in price beyond the current generation.

Nikon, Canon, Pentax - they can all take great photos, it's how the camera feels in your hand and how you feel about the button/knob placements, menus, etc. Play with the cameras for a bit and see which one feels most intuitive to you.

CaptDale - is secretly British > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 10/27/2015 at 14:57

1

Well you are my kind of person!! As awesome as 200 mp is, I would much rather go out with my field camera and take pictures and develop the film and then make my own prints.

Agrajag > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 15:09

1

I have the Nikon D3300 and have been incredibly pleased with it. Get this lens to go with it.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Agrajag 10/27/2015 at 15:12

0

Why that lens in particular?

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 10/27/2015 at 15:27

0

For now, it will be mainly learning how to take good pictures. Most likely posted to Facebook and Oppo, with the potential of some prints if I like the photos enough. I plan to shoot mostly racing (track and autox), but also some still shots of cars, nature, and general scenery while I’m out and about. Doesn’t need to be anything professional level for the time being though.

As for how much I’d be willing to spend down the road, I suppose it depends on how much I fall in love with taking pictures. I could see myself spending a fair bit on a good telephoto lens, if I got more serious about taking pictures of race cars. But I expect that my addiction to actually driving the cars will always take precedence over taking pictures of them.

Agrajag > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 15:31

0

A fixed focal length lens(prime lens) with a wide aperture(f1.8) allows you to take great photos in low light conditions without having to crank up the ISO to the point of graininess. Also works well for astro-photography. When I got mine a few months back I got the 55-200mm lens and the 35mm shortly after. I don’t think I’ve used the kit lens(18-55mm) since.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Agrajag 10/27/2015 at 15:38

1

So you think going with something like a D3300 and then a 55-200mm lens and that 35mm would be my best bet?

I’ve also got a buddy with a used D300 body he’d sell me. Perhaps go with that and then pick up the two lenses?

RWS Motorsport > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 15:38

1

If you arent fussed about new, second hand Canon and a nice second hand lens or 2 will do you proud.

Something like a 50/60/70d will be a great camera, and anything above the absolute entry level lenses are pretty decent too. Especially if your just starting out, the best thing to improve your pictures is to improve your technique, composition etc.

P.S. I’ve suggested Canon because thats what I use, but in reality between Canon and Nikon theres nothing in it. They both have huge support for lenses and accessories, and are by far and away the most prevalent DSLRs.

ttyymmnn > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 15:44

1

If you intend to take pictures of cars on a track from your viewing position in the stands or trackside, I would consider that long range. I do a lot of aviation and sports photography, and almost all of that, especially planes in the air, is done with my 70-200mm lens. If you intend to take pictures of cars at a car show, your car in the driveway, family members, pretty much anything you could walk up to, I would consider that close range. And that’s where a so-called super zoom would be really handy if you can only afford one lens. Super zooms, also called “travel lenses,” give you both up close and long range shooting in a single lens. But, as I said before, they are relatively slow (slow meaning that the lens lets in little light, fast meaning that it lets in lots of light). My 18-270mm is f/3.5-6.3, which means that at its fullest reach it is only capable of f/6.3, which is fairly slow (the higher the f number = the smaller the aperture = the less light that enters the lens). My 70-200mm is f/2.8 throughout its zoom range, so I can use it both outdoors and indoors and in lower light, and I can get some super fast shutter speeds. But since I shoot most brightly lit air shows at f/7.0 or higher (smaller apertures make sharper pictures, just think of what happens when you squint), the slower speed is not a problem. But if you’re shooting in the evening or on a very cloudy day, you might come up against problems. You’ll have to either slow your shutter considerably, which could lead to blurry shots, or turn your ISO way up, which leads to grainier photos. It’s all one big balancing act that is heavily influenced by the speed of the lens. When I go to an air show or soccer game, I take two cameras: one with the 70-200mm for stuff in the air or on the field, and one with the 17-50mm (which is also f/2.8 throughout) for the static displays and detail shots and close ups of the players. Faster lenses (lower f numbers) also give you those great blurry backgrounds, called bokeh .

My general advice, and that of other professionals (which I am not), is to save your money on the body and spend your money on the lens. You can get a perfectly good used body for ~$200-300, and then you can spend about $400 on a good new lens. That would fit right in your budget. And you can also find good used lenses. I have zero experience with mirrorless cameras, but I get the sense that if you ever want to become more serious about photography you are going to want a traditional SLR, as it gives you the greatest flexibility. I shoot Canon, but there’s no technical reason I can think of to say that either Canon or Nikon is better. They both take great pictures. It’s all what you’re used to, like Mac vs. Windows.

One thing I can say is that ergonomics are very important. I have become used to the way Canon arranges its bodies, and I think it’s very intuitive. I have held some of their less expensive offerings, like the Rebel, and found that it feels cramped in my hand, with buttons poorly laid out. I have not spent much time holding Nikons. But the point is, if you’re going to be carrying this thing around all day, you want something that is comfortable. So go to a camera shop and hold the cameras. See how they feel in your hand. The Canon 20D and upward uses a magnesium body that is a tad heavy but it really feels solid in the hand and grips well. I don’t get cramped using it for a whole day. The Canon layout also allows for very quick changes of settings on the fly, and the controls are laid out so that you can make adjustments without taking the camera from your eye. I would imagine that Nikon has a similar layout, but I don’t know.

I hope this helps. It’s a lot longer than I intended! But I’m happy to answer any more questions if I can. And, just like cars or anything else, you’ll get lots of opinions and counter opinions. Some people swear by Canon, others swear by Nikon, and everybody has a setup that works for them. So my final advice would be to find an arrangement that offers the most flexibility for now, and later, when you discover exactly what kind of pictures you want to take, you can start looking for gear that is specific to your needs. Later, when you hopefully have more money!

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Agrajag 10/27/2015 at 15:48

1

Gotchya. Appreciate the input!

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 15:51

0

OK, nex refining question: Transportability or flexability, which rates higher?

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > RWS Motorsport 10/27/2015 at 15:52

0

Thanks! I’m definitely not opposed to buying second hand, just wary because I’m not sure of what to look for in terms of potential issues. I’ve got a buddy who is selling a Nikon D300 body, and I definitely trust him not to sell me something that’s in poor condition. Back when they were new (2007/8) they went for around $1,700-1,800. Now it looks like the used ones are selling for around $300-400.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 10/27/2015 at 16:02

0

That’s honestly a tough one for me. I’d probably say flexibility ranks higher for me, because I’m fairly resigned to the idea that I’d be toting a backpack with me around anyway. And I’d prefer a camera that I can do multiple types of shots with (race cars and also nature shots), and possibly some video too.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Agrajag 10/27/2015 at 16:20

1

Just found this deal, and strongly leaning towards it. https://www.keh.com/367720/nikon-d…

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 16:21

0

KEH.com and Adorama.com. both have reputable and diverse used departments. Also, gmcamera.com is an ex-employer of mine, they aren’t as big but they have competitive pricing and you can trust them.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 10/27/2015 at 16:39

0

Thanks for the input!

Looking at this deal right now https://www.keh.com/367720/nikon-d…

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 18:15

0

yup, that’s a pretty nice setup for the $$$.

Agrajag > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/27/2015 at 21:21

0

That’s a great deal! Just play around with the camera and if you like it expand from there. A lot of my friends(naysayers) who have dslr’s were saying I’d use it for a few weeks and then never touch it again like they did. I’ve been actively shooting since and even have since ventured into film photography.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > CaptDale - is secretly British 10/28/2015 at 07:08

0

I just love the grain and contrast. Contrast looks better on film, I think. I also really like pushing everything several stops.

CaptDale - is secretly British > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 10/28/2015 at 10:41

1

Ha ha, Yeah. If you like grain, you should try exposing color film, but developing it in B&W chemicals. It comes out really cool. Takes some finesse and patience to get the film processed correctly and the prints take forever due to the thickness of the film, but it is a lot of fun.

Nick > JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t 10/28/2015 at 14:44

0

don’t forget about B&H photo/video! they have a great used section.

Stephen the Canuck > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 10/29/2015 at 23:44

0

I’ve seen in a couple of comments that you’ve got a buddy who is willing to sell you a Nikon D300, which would be an excellent camera from what I’ve heard/read. If you can get that for a decent price it would be great. Get the fastest memory cards you can.

For lenses on a budget, you could start with these two. Used ones would be less money too.

35mm f1.8G $250 / refurb $175 and 55-200mm f4-5.6G VR $247 .

A Tamron or Simga 17-50 f2.8 would also be a good starting lens.

You’ll want a camera bag and probably a tripod too. Get at least one spare battery.