DSLR Advice needed

"ImmoralMinority" (araimondo) 12/27/2016 at 14:29 • Filed to: None

0

12

I am looking at buying a DSLR camera. I was really into photography as a teen and logged a lot of darkroom time. I really liked taking pictures, but eventually lacked darkroom access so I drifted away.

I got AC/DC and Kiss Army stickers for Christmas.

I have gotten interested again since acquiring the Sunchaser and Vespa, and I am tired of the cell phone camera.

Back in the day, I had a Canon AE-1 Program that served me well. Any advice on a nice DSLR? I have no idea what to look for or how much to expect to spend.

bhtooefr > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 14:46

0

If you’re getting deep into it, spending money on the glass will last you longer than spending money on the body.

If you want to shoot using old glass, as I understand, Nikon is your better bet, as long as the body you choose has an AF motor in it - they still use a mount from 1959 on their cameras today. (Or, if you don’t care about autofocus...)

Other than that, it’s basically all personal preference as far as I’m aware. (That said, I was never really able to get into photography much - I wanted to, but didn’t.)

S65 > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 14:47

2

OOOOOOOO
I’ve got an AE-1 too

Dave the car guy , still here > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 14:53

0

Canon T6 kit is a good start. You generally get a short 17-55 EF-s zoom and a 75-300 EF zoom of average quality. Then you can get adapters to use old Canon FD, Pentax m42, Pentax K or Yashica/Contax manual lens for a fraction of elcctronic lens prices. That old glass has higher optical quality than much of the newer stuff and is takes very sharp pictures. There are even focus aids in most DSLR cameras for manual focus. I have that Canon T6 kit and have added adapters to 5 of my old 35mm lenses. Just make sure you read about using old lenses on new DSLR so you have some knowledge of the electronic adapters. At present the only other Canon DSLR new lens I want is a 50mm. The only downside with the manual lens usage is more time to focus and compose shots. When I know I won’t have time to play with the camera I use the zooms it came with.

TysMagic > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 14:54

0

Sounds like you’ve got the experience already, so maybe not the best route for you - for me as a novice wanting to test the waters I picked up a mid2000s model Nikon on craigslist for incredibly cheap with a couple lenses.

I did some research and found out Amazon buys/takes trade ins on camera equipment and if I ended up not digging the camera I could sell the whole package to Amazon and profit. So far, I’ve enjoyed the camera for the money I paid. However not enough enjoyment to have paid a new price for one.

HammerheadFistpunch > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 14:58

4

There are more questions here than answers. The biggest two in my mind to ask would be:

Do you plan on investing in lenses? if so, Canon or Nikon, choose this first.

If no, have you considered a mirrorless or advanced P&S? They are getting pretty incredible and the truth is that unless you are dedicated, you will shoot with the camera thats easier to carry and have around way more than the nicer one.

FTTOHG Has Moved to https://opposite-lock.com > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 15:03

1

My take, that will probably be different from most others: unless you are going full-frame, DSLR’s kind of suck. I got a Fuji X-System camera a few years ago to be a sort of occasional use compliment to my Nikon DSLR and have hardly touched the Nikon since. The Nikon is bulkier, fiddlier, and slowerand because it is a DSLR you’re stuck with a stupid old optical viewfinder compared to the Fuji’s absolutely brilliant OLED viewfinder with an eye sensor that flips between live view on the back LCD and viewfinder when you put the camera up to your face. The only thing the Nikon does better is that it focuses faster (because it has a mirror boucing light to a phase-detection autofocus system) and has a few more lenses available. The latest Fuji’s like the XT2 solve the slow focus problem by building phase-detection focus right into the sensor. (Most other mirrorless makers are doing this too now.) Fuji doesn’t have a ton of lenses, but the quality is fantastic. I can’t speak highly enough of the Fuji X-system.

Bman76 (hates WS6 hoods, is on his phone and has 4 burners now) > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 15:17

0

The Sony “Alpha” series are great compact cameras, all the guts of a DSLR without the mirror. Still has interchangeable lenses, but you have to use an adapter to use Nikon or Canon glass. I have an A6, the A7 is straight up black-magic (I swear, it can see in the dark) but very expensive, even used.

Kaputnik > S65 12/27/2016 at 15:35

1

Me 3!

Ilike_cougars > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 15:47

1

I would consider the Canon Rebel series, you should be able to pick one up for about 300-600 bucks depending on the spec. I would go for a t5 with the kit lens probably around $350 if you do some shopping around. The kit lens is pretty adequate for most day to day photography. You want to get the nifty fifty (50mm prime), its about 100 bucks and its really worth it.

Also take a look at my website, a good many of the images were shot with a Rebel t1i which is a few generations older than the one I’m suggesting

www.rayvenphotography.carbonmade.com

Nick Has an Exocet > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 17:42

0

My first DSLR was a Canon T2i. I upgraded to a T5i when that camera get stolen during an office break-in. 6 years after I first got my first T-series, I upgraded to a Canon 6D. It’s the first significant upgrade that I’ve done. To better explain that, the T series are all APS-C sensor cameras. It’s a smaller sensor than a full-frame (or typical 35mm in old school lingo). The new 6D is the digital equivalent of 35mm. With an APS-C, you have to do a little math when mounting a lens (multiply the focal length by 1.6) since the smaller sensor only sees a smaller amount of the glass on the lens (basically a crop).

If you’re just getting back into things, that’s not really a big deal. That said, you should have an idea of what you’re looking for.

If you want that old-school feel with manual controls and to take time framing and focusing, by all means, go for a Nikon or Canon DSLR and start buying vintage lenses on ebay. That type of photography is tons of fun but you’re going to be foregoing autofocus unless you buy a newer (or use the kit lens) which won’t have nearly as much feel to it.

Thomas Donohue > ImmoralMinority 12/27/2016 at 17:50

0

You can grab a two-lens Nikon D3400 kit for under $500 these days (I’m sure Canon has a similar Rebel). It’s amazing what you get in resolution and ISO performance these days. And it’s very light.

I’d hit the local camera store (or Best Buy) and see what feels right in your hand. I’d also look locally on Craigslist for an older model, i.e. D3100. That’s still more than enough camera for 90% of your needs, and you can spend the extra money on a good lens.

Mirrorless cameras are smaller/lighter, but nothing is fitting in your pocket, so there’s not that much of a leap up to a small DSLR since you’ll likely have it over your shoulder or in bag/backpack anyway. I have an older Sony Alpha that has an electronic viewfinder, but I still prefer the DSLR (I have both DX and full frame Nikons). Full frame gets heavy, mostly because of the lenses.

torque > ImmoralMinority 12/28/2016 at 02:56

0

This interests me as well & since it may help the OP...

What are the top differences between Cannon vs. Nikon? To make a car analogy is it basically like “Ford (Trucks) vs. Chevy/GMC (trucks)? Or are there legit differences in a “Tesla Model S vs. Any other petrol luxury car” kinda way?

Also what about Sony DSLRs? They don’t seem to get much (any) attention / respect