Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: Incastone on November 18, 2014, 10:30:35 pm

Title: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 18, 2014, 10:30:35 pm
Hi everyone.

Photography has a little unexpectedly bloomed into a major interest for me over the last year and a half.
I've become more and more dedicated to it and am considering trying to pursue it professionally (I'm sure you've all heard that before!).

I've been using a bridge camera that's pretty ancient by today's standards - a Panasonic FZ38. Up until now it has been fine as I've been learning the basics first in terms of exposures, subject, composition and timing.
By timing I mean what I've seen written as 'f8 and being there', which is quite apt as the FZ38 only has an aperture range of 2.8 - 8 :)

I'm happy with what I've been able to achieve so far given the camera's limitations, but I'm tired of the camera getting in the way of a shot rather than me (which to be honest is a fairly happy state of affairs).
Its sensor size (approx. 6mm x 4mm) and general feature set are holding me back, and although funds are limited, I need something I can progress along the learning curve with at a proper rate.

I'll link to a couple of images at the end of this post so you can see where I am now, and maybe that might help with suggestions?

I was pretty dead set on a Canon 700D, as it's affordable, has a decent feature set to grow into, and having played with a friend's Canon and another friend's Nikon, I preferred the Canon control layout/menus/interface much more straight off the bat, felt more intuitive to me.
This isn't a deal breaker though for the Nikon side as I know that owning either will gain me familiarity.
I'm also quite keen on the Nikon D7100 on paper (the Nikon I tried was a D5300), and although I'm not buying into the 'what's best - Canon or Nikon' debate (yet), I want to make sure I'm not missing a trick if I go for the Canon.

It's important to me to get this choice right because I won't be able to afford to lose money on it, and I'm living in Spain but will be ordering from the UK and don't have opportunities or funds to rent cameras to try.

I like the 700D because it's compact - I like to have my camera with me as often as possible, so the lighter and easier to move around with the better, but I'm worried about the meagre number of focus points compared to the Nikon. Is this going to plague me in the future?

I've also read a lot of things about the sensors from these two brands, and as far as I can make out, people prefer the colour tones of the Canon but the overall resolution of the Nikon.
Do they both deal with higher ISO settings well? The FZ38 craps out at 400 which always compromises me so anything better than that is going to be a bonus to be honest!

I like to shoot a broad range of subjects, from animals to architecture to landscapes (the latter disappointingly at the moment with the FZ38) but I'm pretty sure that either of the models I've mentioned will do them justice.

I know this is probably the millionth 'which camera do I get' thread, but your input would be hugely valuable to me and very much appreciated.
As an aside, I didn't create this thread as a subversive way of displaying images for feedback - I know I'm in the wrong game if I need approval! But of course, if I'm deluding myself about being right in wanting to take this further (always possible), feel free to put me right.

Thanks in advance for any help.

(http://i.imgur.com/Lnc9Mjnl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/WR6LXrgl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/L0G3xcil.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/NaIHpXNl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/n9tB9Azl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7ISK5a2l.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/u76oNHxl.jpg)





Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: LesPalenik on November 18, 2014, 11:52:47 pm
No camera is perfect, and whatever is perfect for you, may not be ideal for someone else.

I would recommend buying a used Canon T2i or Nikon D5100 for a few hundred dollars and start that way. Both of these cameras are great value for money and take excellent pictures. I wouldn't worry about the number of focus points, that aspect is a way overrated, and it depends also on the type of shooting. Consider it a very inexpensive way to get into the dSLR game. As you shoot more, you'll find out which features are most important for you, and then you can buy some newer and more capable gear.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Tony Jay on November 19, 2014, 03:23:00 am
I think you need to take a further step back and think about an entire system.
The camera part of the equation is actually the cheapest by some way.
It is the lenses and other accessories where the expense really lies.

You need to decide what kind of photography you are doing and plan your lens requirements accordingly.
Part of the that planning process almost certainly will need to factor in future requirements as well as current needs.
Once you do that you may be surprised how certain systems exclude themselves and other possibilities come to the fore.

In generic terms DSLR covers a broad range of possibilities in technical terms do not exclude some of the newer mirrorless possibilities from say Sony are very attractive options for some genres.
As an example of what I am talking about: FE mount lenses for say the Sony A7r are somewhat limited but if you want to shoot portrait, wedding or landscape then a combination of available FE mount lenses and either Canon or Nikon lenses for some applications via Metabones adaptors is a definite option.
However, for an out and out wildlife or action sports shooter the Sony mirrorless offerings are currently a very poor fit.

Particularly if you do want to turn professional then do the hard yards and research your needs on a system level. Spend the time and effort on this and you will save tens of thousands of dollars in the future.

Tony Jay
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 19, 2014, 07:38:09 am
Thanks for the replies so far.

A few hundred dollars is what I will have to spend, the 700D is a Rebel T5i in the States, I can get this new with the standard 18-55 kit lens (the newer STM type) for the equivalent of USD 550 delivered which is a steal at European price rates.
I appreciate that an older model will still give me the improvements that I need the most (higher ISO shooting, interchangeable lenses, bigger sensor etc), but with that kind of deal available getting an older model doesn't make much sense, especially as I'm on a learning curve and I'm going to be hitting the shutter hard, so actuation-wise even a few thousand extra shots is going to make a difference, which is at least what I'll lose if I buy 2nd hand.
I haven't begun to specialise in anything yet subject-wise, but I have to admit that no matter how shoddy the camera I have, it always seems to love animals, I find it hard to take a bad animal portrait. I'm a fully paid up subscriber to the Robert Pirsig concept of 'Quality' that he outlines in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (bear with me!) - so the fact that the camera always empathises with my (normal, healthy) love of animals  ;D is not lost on me.

I'm aware of all the options re system types, but am very limited by budget, and can't afford a mirrorless at current prices.
Also, as I've been restricted to live view all this time (the EVF on the FZ38 is pants and I never bother with it), I want an optical viewfinder as I much prefer the feeling of being 'in the scene' that you get from composing/framing shots this way. Maybe the novelty will wear off in the future but for now, it's what I want.

Lens-wise I will want primes in the future of course, but again right now there just isn't the money for it - with youth unemployment hitting 55% in this region of Spain and overall unemployment over 30%, I feel lucky to have anything at all to spend. Eventually I will get nicer portrait, macro and tele lenses but at the level I'm at now, the bundled 18-55 won't hold me back.

I can feel I'm just looking for validation for the choice I've all ready made in my mind (700d/T5i), which quite rightly I'm not going to get. It will do the job for now. I can afford it and it'll allow me to go out and shoot in confidence, and at this stage I need to shoot, shoot and shoot some more.

Thanks for the input.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: mcbroomf on November 19, 2014, 10:14:00 am
The Nikon sensor is noticeably better than the Canon at every measure
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-700D-versus-Nikon-D7100___870_865
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 19, 2014, 11:07:37 am
Ah. This is the kind of in-depth side-by-side I haven't seen.
I can take great pictures with the Canon, I know this, but I'd be lying if I said that those kinds of sensor differences didn't matter to me, especially the dynamic range and ISO performance.

I've also noticed that the 7100 has twice the shutter speed of the 700D at 1/8000, although even 1/4000 is 4 times better than I currently have.
Now you've got me looking closer at the Nikon, from another site I've just noticed it has twice the shot count of the 700D on a single battery, over 900 in theory as opposed to 450.
I didn't think of checking this because the advantage I have had with my FZ38 is that I've never run out of battery even when shooting all day, it just doesn't use that much power.

The shot count alone trumps the articulated screen/built-in wifi etc of the Canon.

If I consider the 7100, I would buy body only, new, which would be 50% more than the Canon with lens.
It's now worth holding off a little to get more money together, I think.

Could you recommend a good place to look for 2nd hand DX lenses, i.e. is there a known good classifieds site where professional users sell their old/unwanted gear?
Pros tend to look after their stuff properly and I'd feel more comfortable buying from the photog equivalent of SoundOnSound than ebay for example.

Is this forum worth looking at in that sense for someone that's based in Europe?

Thanks very much for the heads-up.
 

Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Ken Bennett on November 19, 2014, 11:32:55 am
The thing about DxO and all of the other measured test numbers is that they look very authoritative on paper. Of course after reading that you want to get a Nikon, since it must be soooooo much better. Numbers don't lie, right? That's why every professional photographer in the world switched to Nikon as soon as those test numbers were released. (<----this is sarcasm :) )

There is much more to a camera than the results of testing by one company (http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/do-you-believe-in-dxomark.html). The reality is that any current DSLR, and most every model in the last few years, is significantly better than most photographers. You could go into a camera store and throw a dart at the display models, and get very good results from whichever random camera it struck.

How the camera feels in your hand, and how well you adapt to the controls, is actually very significant, and I would argue more so than just raw sensor test numbers. I've been shooting Canon for more than 30 years, and while I can shoot with a Nikon, they have never felt comfortable in my hands. I also shoot with Fujifilm cameras, as they feel right while shooting. All of them provide excellent results -- certainly for me the camera is not the limiting factor :)

If you decide to pursue photography in any serious way, especially if you want to make a living at it, any consumer camera and lens that you buy now will need to be replaced anyway. You're not getting married to your camera system at this stage of your development as a photographer.

Good luck, and happy shooting.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: mcbroomf on November 19, 2014, 11:36:52 am
As Les said above you could opt for a Nikon 5100 (or any of the 5000 bodies) that could save some money, especially if you buy used
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5300-versus-Nikon-D5200-versus-Nikon-D5100___919_850_698

In addition to DXO you can check dpreview for in depth reviews and descriptions, and sample photos.

I do buy used lenses, but with caution; requesting image samples, good return policy etc
Lula buy and sell, and also;
fredmiranda
KEH
getdpi
and of course ebay (not always possible to get a sample of a photo taken with the lens)
If you decide to look for an older model (Nikon 5100 or the Canon) then you may find used deals at your local camera shop, and be able to negotiate a whole package so that you can get a lens immediately.

Lastly k bennet has good points about current/recent camera quality and ease of use (for you).  I also shot Canon for many years and still have trouble with my D800, although I just blame the Canon for that  ;D
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: geezerhood on November 19, 2014, 12:28:06 pm
Considering that you will be spending quite a bit on lenses, why not get a used Nikon D800e? There are some pretty decently priced used bodies out there that I have seen since the D810 and Pentax 645z came out. Under $1600 sometimes.

Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 19, 2014, 02:23:30 pm
The thing about DxO and all of the other measured test numbers is that they look very authoritative on paper. Of course after reading that you want to get a Nikon, since it must be soooooo much better. Numbers don't lie, right? That's why every professional photographer in the world switched to Nikon as soon as those test numbers were released. (<----this is sarcasm :) )


No, but Nikon has eroded a 17% market gap with Canon in DSLRs to under 7% in one year!  And Sony got some of Canon's buyers too.  Just saying...
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 19, 2014, 02:47:22 pm
I know this is probably the millionth 'which camera do I get' thread, but your input would be hugely valuable to me and very much appreciated.
As an aside, I didn't create this thread as a subversive way of displaying images for feedback - I know I'm in the wrong game if I need approval! But of course, if I'm deluding myself about being right in wanting to take this further (always possible), feel free to put me right.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Bottom Line: The quality of the images you make is more determinent on your skill, technique and creative vision than which camera you choose.  It is just a tool that helps you achieve your goals.  But, remember, you are buying into a whole system for an extended period of time, unless you can justify replacing current purchases in the future.

First, figure out what features you need and try to come up with some measure of what is most important.  This is hard to do sometimes, especially since you don't have any history to go on.

I am a Nikon shooter and prefer their layouts and operation to Canon.  Almost every friend I shoot around have Canon and when they ask for help it is a chore trying to figure out the Canon terminology.  But if you prefer the Canon way, then mark that down as a plus for the Canon side.

You mentioned the 700D and D7100.  The D7100 is $250 more than the 700D.  That said, it is a much better camera overall and compares closer to the 7DmkII.  I actually use that camera having previously shot a D300s.

I personally think Canon screws up the reds while Nikons screw up the greens/yellows.  However, overall, the image quality from the sensor in the D7100 beats the 700D and the 7DmkII at all ISOs.  They get closer at high ISO, but under 800, the D7100 is the clear winner.

DxOMark Side by Side 700D versus D7100 (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-700D-versus-Nikon-D7100___870_865) 

Also think about the rest of the lenses and accessories you might buy.  Most of the pissing and moaning about brands is because we long time users of one brand or another (amateurs) tend to be stuck in that brand due to legacy purchases.  Once you accumulate $5,000 or $10,000 worth of stuff, it is somewhat unappetizing thinking of changing.

I switched from Canon to Nikon when Canon moved from the FD to the EOS mount.  It wasn't that I was totally pissed at Canon for obsoleting my investment though I was disappointed.  It just happened to be a moment of opportunity to reevaluate since I no longer had legacy baggage.  I chose Nikon for their glass.  I preferred the rendition of Nikon lenses to Canon at the time.  Nikon also had better flash system which was important to me at the time, less so now.  I also ended up using N90s Film bodies for an extended period of time.  They were awesome.

Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: ErikKaffehr on November 19, 2014, 03:08:47 pm
Hi,

My advice would be that if you are shooting at low ISO-s and under challenging light conditions a camera with Sony sensor may be your best choice. If you shoot at higher ISO the advantage of the Sony sensor will be lost.

Overall, I guess that Canon may be better made, but at low ISO the Nikon has the better sensor.

Best regards
Erik

Ps. Shooting Sony and Hasselblad P45+, no pony in this race…


Hi everyone.

Photography has a little unexpectedly bloomed into a major interest for me over the last year and a half.
I've become more and more dedicated to it and am considering trying to pursue it professionally (I'm sure you've all heard that before!).

I've been using a bridge camera that's pretty ancient by today's standards - a Panasonic FZ38. Up until now it has been fine as I've been learning the basics first in terms of exposures, subject, composition and timing.
By timing I mean what I've seen written as 'f8 and being there', which is quite apt as the FZ38 only has an aperture range of 2.8 - 8 :)

I'm happy with what I've been able to achieve so far given the camera's limitations, but I'm tired of the camera getting in the way of a shot rather than me (which to be honest is a fairly happy state of affairs).
Its sensor size (approx. 6mm x 4mm) and general feature set are holding me back, and although funds are limited, I need something I can progress along the learning curve with at a proper rate.

I'll link to a couple of images at the end of this post so you can see where I am now, and maybe that might help with suggestions?

I was pretty dead set on a Canon 700D, as it's affordable, has a decent feature set to grow into, and having played with a friend's Canon and another friend's Nikon, I preferred the Canon control layout/menus/interface much more straight off the bat, felt more intuitive to me.
This isn't a deal breaker though for the Nikon side as I know that owning either will gain me familiarity.
I'm also quite keen on the Nikon D7100 on paper (the Nikon I tried was a D5300), and although I'm not buying into the 'what's best - Canon or Nikon' debate (yet), I want to make sure I'm not missing a trick if I go for the Canon.

It's important to me to get this choice right because I won't be able to afford to lose money on it, and I'm living in Spain but will be ordering from the UK and don't have opportunities or funds to rent cameras to try.

I like the 700D because it's compact - I like to have my camera with me as often as possible, so the lighter and easier to move around with the better, but I'm worried about the meagre number of focus points compared to the Nikon. Is this going to plague me in the future?

I've also read a lot of things about the sensors from these two brands, and as far as I can make out, people prefer the colour tones of the Canon but the overall resolution of the Nikon.
Do they both deal with higher ISO settings well? The FZ38 craps out at 400 which always compromises me so anything better than that is going to be a bonus to be honest!

I like to shoot a broad range of subjects, from animals to architecture to landscapes (the latter disappointingly at the moment with the FZ38) but I'm pretty sure that either of the models I've mentioned will do them justice.

I know this is probably the millionth 'which camera do I get' thread, but your input would be hugely valuable to me and very much appreciated.
As an aside, I didn't create this thread as a subversive way of displaying images for feedback - I know I'm in the wrong game if I need approval! But of course, if I'm deluding myself about being right in wanting to take this further (always possible), feel free to put me right.

Thanks in advance for any help.

(http://i.imgur.com/Lnc9Mjnl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/WR6LXrgl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/L0G3xcil.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/NaIHpXNl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/n9tB9Azl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7ISK5a2l.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/u76oNHxl.jpg)






Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 19, 2014, 03:09:46 pm
If you buy by the 22nd of November, you can get the D5200 for $496!  The D7100 is $946!  Both Nikons are 24MP and have similar sensors.  Features and sealing are different.

DxOMark Side By Side 700D verus D5200 Versus D7100 (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-700D-versus-Nikon-D7100-versus-Nikon-D5200___870_865_850)
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 19, 2014, 04:43:47 pm
Thanks very much for all the comments.

I just deleted a couple of sentences moaning about how people in the States and Canada always get electronics so much cheaper than in Europe, but looks like the gap has closed - both the 700D and the 7100 are cheaper to buy new here than in the US! That's a turn up for the books. Suits me.

@geezerhood - the D800e is just too rich for my taste at the moment unfortunately. The cheapest 2nd hand I can find in the UK/Europe is double the cost of a new 7100. As well as the body I will need at least one lens, a decent tripod, a filter or two, remote shutter release, fast SD cards etc, so I can't stretch.

@dwswager - can't buy until Jan, so any special pricing is out, and I don't want to come in with a model any lower than the ones I mentioned from either line.
Saying that, I completely agree with this:

Quote from: dwswager
Bottom Line: The quality of the images you make is more determinent on your skill, technique and creative vision than which camera you choose.  It is just a tool that helps you achieve your goals.

There is a caveat here though which is that if your goal is to achieve professional quality prints at decent sizes rather than just have something that looks ok on Facebook or a forum, then the hardware takes on a whole new significance. This is not GAS (and I'm very familiar with that from the audio world  ;D) - in the last year and a half I've been using a 2nd-hand bridge camera from 2009 that falls short in just about every department, and before that I've only ever had point and shoots.

So yes, any DSLR is going to be a big step up. But I want to buy once, buy right, within my means anyway, without having to wait months saving up for a higher end model. I want to be out shooting, not sitting indoors saving :)

Quote from: dwswager
First, figure out what features you need and try to come up with some measure of what is most important.  This is hard to do sometimes, especially since you don't have any history to go on.

Yes, I need to be careful here. I've all ready caught myself worrying about not having an articulated touch screen if I go for the 7100.. Is this really so important in the grand scheme of things? No, it isn't. Better battery life is way more important to me for example.

Quote from: dwswager
I am a Nikon shooter and prefer their layouts and operation to Canon.  Almost every friend I shoot around have Canon and when they ask for help it is a chore trying to figure out the Canon terminology.  But if you prefer the Canon way, then mark that down as a plus for the Canon side.

What K Bennett wrote about this same thing has been causing me a dilemma. The only DSLRs I have actually taken any pictures with (for just a few mins) are the Nikon D5300 and the Canon 5Dmk II.

The 5D felt more familiar, and more 'enjoyable'(?), but I'm wondering how much of that experience was expectation bias, as I knew of the calibre of the 5D in advance, plus it felt like a 'real' camera compared to the 5300.  
What wasn't imaginary was the control layout feeling much more intuitive and quicker to operate, maybe because it was more similar in layout to the Panasonic I have.

Because I have no real experience of either platform, I reckon that it doesn't matter if I go Canon or Nikon. Once I've put enough hours in on either, it should become second nature.

@K Bennett - I am wary of going by numbers on spec sheets alone, you're right to warn people about that, but all the subsequent reviews I've read place the 700D behind the 7100, in major areas.
 
Quote from: dwswager
Also think about the rest of the lenses and accessories you might buy.  Most of the pissing and moaning about brands is because we long time users of one brand or another (amateurs) tend to be stuck in that brand due to legacy purchases.  Once you accumulate $5,000 or $10,000 worth of stuff, it is somewhat unappetizing thinking of changing.

I might have got this mixed up, but this actually sounds like another plus for starting with Nikon.
If I start with Canon, and then decide to move to Nikon, then any Canon lenses I buy will be useless with a Nikon body, but if I start with Nikon and move to Canon, I can use the Nikon lenses on a Canon body with an adapter. Is this correct?

I've swung from Canon to Nikon in just a few posts  ;D
I guess I'm fortunate being a newb in that I'm not completely predisposed to one or the other and haven't invested anything yet.
So there are some benefits to being a beginner :)

Thanks so much for all your insights and comments, you're making this a lot easier for me.

I'm really excited about getting this camera, so I'm sorry for writing so much, but I don't have many enthusiast friends where I am. I only know two professional photographers, both in different countries so I can't really bang on about it here without boring people to death  ::)
Southern Spain has to be one of the best places for a budding photographer to be, there is so much incredible imagery here and I can't wait to shoot more of it.
Here's a couple more images of two different festivals in Spain, they sure know how to put on a spectacle!

Semana Santa (Easter week) in Sevilla this year
(http://i.imgur.com/6P9wcCGl.jpg)

Morros y Cristianos festival in Xixona last year
(http://i.imgur.com/ARTzqlyl.jpg)
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: mcbroomf on November 19, 2014, 05:17:34 pm
There are 2 types of adapters to allow use of Nikon on Canon. 
One is for non G and non E lenses.  It's a straight adapter, aperture control is adjusted on the lens.  No AF, no stabilization if the lens has one.
There is a 2nd (more expensive) that is for G lenses (will work OK on non G as well).  Aperture control is managed by a lever on the adapter as the lens control will not shut down the aperture.  The lever does not have markings on it.  No AF or IS.
E lenses need electronic aperture control and there isn't one that can manage that.
Title: Re:
Post by: Torbjörn Tapani on November 19, 2014, 08:11:52 pm
You said DSLR but if you are thinking about crop cameras I would go smaller. Olympus OM-D EM5 is due for replacement. Get a used one cheap (in jan) and a few lenses. Great in body stabilisation. Better sensor than the bigger brother E-M1. Weather sealed. Great looking and more stealthy than a DSLR.

Why? DX is getting no love from Nikon they will push you to FX if they can. And then the system is a chore to bring along.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 20, 2014, 05:58:20 pm
Thanks for the details about lens compatibility MIke, I'll bear those things in mind.

Torbjörn, the 4/3 camera you mentioned can all ready be had for around 300 GBP without lens, which is a good deal.
It's funny how relative things can be - if I had been using a dslr all this time, I would probably be happy to consider a more 'stealthy' camera :)
But after only ever having had a camera in my hand that I've sometimes had to remind myself is there, I'm actually looking forward to having something more hefty!
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on November 21, 2014, 09:11:18 am
I have been using Canon EOS for more than 20 years, so I do understand about familiarity:)

The truth is, these days, any camera, DSLR or mirrorless, FF, APS-C, or 4/3 sensor size, will be able to give you high quality results. Camera technology has reached a pretty high level. So you should choose a system based on your requirements.

From what you say, any mid-level DSLR, new or used, will be able to accompany your growth as a photographer in the mid-term, say for 5 years. For example, have you looked into a used Canon 60D? Pretty good camera. Have you looked into Pentax at all? They make great cameras, quite a lot of them are weatherproof, for example, look into a used K5/K5MKII; Pentax also make great lenses.

As expected, a few people have mentioned the advantage of Sony sensors married to the Nikon cameras, and supported that with DXO ratings. Fine, I will not argue that. Just bear in mind that camera and sensor technology is just one step in the whole processing image workflow, and you need to perfect all of the steps. Of course it helps to start with good data to work with, hence the advantage of Sony sensors.

But, IMO, today, as a landscape and travel photographer, I feel my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 L lens are extremely good. This new lens is really good, and so far I have not been limited by the sensor on my 6D. How many shots do you really take where you need to open up the shadows 3 or 4 stops? Just to put things in perspective.

Things do keep changing, so maybe in 5 years time, I will be using a Sony FF mirrorless, who knows. But they do need to come out with more lenses...
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: kitalight on November 21, 2014, 09:46:45 am
There are 2 types of adapters to allow use of Nikon on Canon.  
One is for non G and non E lenses.  It's a straight adapter, aperture control is adjusted on the lens.  No AF, no stabilization if the lens has one.
There is a 2nd (more expensive) that is for G lenses (will work OK on non G as well).  Aperture control is managed by a lever on the adapter as the lens control will not shut down the aperture.  The lever does not have markings on it.  No AF or IS.
E lenses need electronic aperture control and there isn't one that can manage that.

You said DSLR but if you are thinking about crop cameras I would go smaller. Olympus OM-D EM5 is due for replacement. Get a used one cheap (in jan) and a few lenses. Great in body stabilisation. Better sensor than the bigger brother E-M1. Weather sealed. Great looking and more stealthy than a DSLR.

Why? DX is getting no love from Nikon they will push you to FX if they can. And then the system is a chore to bring along.

Good points...and yes, no AF but MF is nice...easy with Nikkors...

I used Nikkors on Canon bodies for 8 years with great results...the only (minor) issue is focusing and metering @ the shooting aperture...but the Nikkors are great @ 1-2 stops down from wide open so it doesn't get too dark through the VF....  

...still, after 8 years, Nikon FX got me this month as I got the 610....I already have a bag full of Nikkor primes so it wasn't much of a leap...learning the system will be a bit of learning though....

The advantage of using Nikkors on a Nikon FX body is that it's easier to focus and on the FX sensor there are more options available re: depth of field/focus..."less is more" if that's clear.  
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 21, 2014, 11:13:39 am
But, IMO, today, as a landscape and travel photographer, I feel my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 L lens are extremely good. This new lens is really good, and so far I have not been limited by the sensor on my 6D. How many shots do you really take where you need to open up the shadows 3 or 4 stops? Just to put things in perspective.

Things do keep changing, so maybe in 5 years time, I will be using a Sony FF mirrorless, who knows. But they do need to come out with more lenses...

I have been a Nikon shooter since the Canon FD to EOS mount switch.  While I'd like to say I never looked back, there was a time after Nikon squandered their lead from the D1 that Canon (switching 1st to CMOS sensors), just kicked Nikon's butt.  Now the roles have reversed and Nikon has the sensor quality lead thanks in large part to the Sony Sensor.    Who knows what will happen down the road.

For the guy trying to decide.  I will say that I started in DX since I am an Amateur and could not afford justify the cost of the early FX Nikon cameras.  I shot the D300s for 5 years and currently shoot the D7100.  But the goal was always to get back to full frame understanding that my preferred output is print and the nature of the technology was that at the same pixel density a larger sensor would give better performance.  With the goal in mind, I purchased only 1 DX lens over the 7 years I've been shooting that format.  I had some legacy lenses from film days and have purchased several FX lenses that I used on the DX bodies.  I have a D810 now and am prepared with the appropriate lenses to support it because I planned it that way!

My advice is to decide where you want to go and map a long term course to get there.  It will determine how many MPs you want, sensor size, camera size/weight, features, etc.  But most importantly, it will determine what accessories you need.  Stuff that lasts a lifetime!  $280 seemed like a lot for my Arca Swiss B1 ballhead, but 20 or so years later, I'm still using it.  I paid $850 for a used AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D (3rd iteration, tripod mount).  When I bought the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G, I sold that 80-200mm to a friend for $750 after having used it for 17 years!  There are times to go 'cheap' and times to go 'quality' and figuring out which is which is sometimes difficult.   My daughter's homecoming dress helped me pick a tripod.  How did that work?  My wife spent $150 on dress that might get worn twice.  Figured $1000 for a Really Right Stuff TCV-34L tripod that I would use 50 times a year for the rest of my life was a good deal!
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: armand on November 21, 2014, 01:46:58 pm
I like the dress vs tripod analogy. Might come handy down the road  ;D
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: rpsphoto on November 21, 2014, 01:51:52 pm
You can also rent bodies and lenses to test drive before purchase. I think it's worth a few $$$ and a little time to find the best fit.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: ErikKaffehr on November 21, 2014, 03:25:26 pm
Hi Paulo,

Good points!

I can mention that I was shooting with Hans Kruse in the Dolomites West workshop. Hans was shooting both Nikon D800 and Canon 5DIII and pretty much said that the Nikon had a clear edge in image quality, but I still felt that he preferred the Canon. Maybe Hans felt usability was better on Canon.

I guess both cameras were good enough! The other participants shot Pentax K3, Canon 5DIII, Sony A7r, Fuji XT (or what it is called), we all got great images. All those cameras are certainly good enough!

Best regards
Erik

I have been using Canon EOS for more than 20 years, so I do understand about familiarity:)

The truth is, these days, any camera, DSLR or mirrorless, FF, APS-C, or 4/3 sensor size, will be able to give you high quality results. Camera technology has reached a pretty high level. So you should choose a system based on your requirements.

From what you say, any mid-level DSLR, new or used, will be able to accompany your growth as a photographer in the mid-term, say for 5 years. For example, have you looked into a used Canon 60D? Pretty good camera. Have you looked into Pentax at all? They make great cameras, quite a lot of them are weatherproof, for example, look into a used K5/K5MKII; Pentax also make great lenses.

As expected, a few people have mentioned the advantage of Sony sensors married to the Nikon cameras, and supported that with DXO ratings. Fine, I will not argue that. Just bear in mind that camera and sensor technology is just one step in the whole processing image workflow, and you need to perfect all of the steps. Of course it helps to start with good data to work with, hence the advantage of Sony sensors.

But, IMO, today, as a landscape and travel photographer, I feel my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 L lens are extremely good. This new lens is really good, and so far I have not been limited by the sensor on my 6D. How many shots do you really take where you need to open up the shadows 3 or 4 stops? Just to put things in perspective.

Things do keep changing, so maybe in 5 years time, I will be using a Sony FF mirrorless, who knows. But they do need to come out with more lenses...
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 21, 2014, 06:06:37 pm
There's lots of good advice here.
Down the road I'm sure I will be using a mirrorless, at least as a 2nd/alternative camera. After seeing the shots of the Guinness Storehouse I was really interested in the Sony, and love the concept but too expensive for me to consider starting with, more's the pity.
 
I'm not so stupid though as to think that spending more money (if I had it) would get me that kind of photo. I understand of course that cameras don't take great photos, people do. I have experience with audio production so am fully aware of just how important certain things are in the grand scheme - no point having a fancy body with a crap lens, and no point having any of it if you don't have technical ability, and no point having technical ability if you can't identify a great image before releasing the shutter.

4/3rds is also something that really appeals, but print-wise I'd rather have the larger sensor and pixel count of the 7100. Maybe thinking about printing is getting ahead of myself, but might as well hedge my bets, so to speak! I reckon I would outgrow something like a 60D within a year, and I can't afford to outgrow anything that quickly.
I promise I will not scrimp on things like tripod and lenses. I've always spent as much as I possibly could on project critical items in the past. I've thought nothing of dropping over a grand on a pair of studio monitor speakers for example, when 300 quid 'would do', because I know where the pressure points are.

I will buy primes for my first lenses, and now after consideration of comments here, will probably get the FX type.

It's interesting to hear people talk about deciding what kind of work I'll be doing. I thought I would do it all  ;D
If I had to theoretically describe my 'photographer personality', it would have to be travel, because I left England 15 years ago and have been living/working/traveling abroad ever since.
I WISH this passion had been kindled earlier, because I have what I think are some unique images but shot on 5-8Mp compacts, using more luck than knowledge in terms of exposure and in some cases, focus :/ With subsequent cropping they're unusable for anything other than web, and even then not great quality, which is a crying shame, because I love some of these images. Better late than never I suppose :)
Here's a couple more. Sorry about being an exhibitionist but these have only ever been posted on FB and I have a pathological need to share :)
 
I don't have any preference for landscape, portraits, nature, or animals, I love capturing them all equally. I've gathered I need about 3 lenses - a 50mm, something between 80 and 100, and I'd like a macro lens too for serious close up stuff. I do have a thing for black and white though, but who doesn't?

(http://i.imgur.com/Ad5ORhul.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7IKAJRrl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/yrRQojel.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Yd6RBeLl.jpg)





Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 23, 2014, 12:03:00 pm
I want to just add this.

I have been shooting a D7100 for a little over a year having previously shot the D300.  I have always had this unhappiness with the D7100 which I must admit is irrational.  I was a D400 waiter and Nikon wrapped the D7100 in the 'enthusiast' body style instead of the 'pro' body style.  But when you actually take stock of the D7100 with it's 24MPs, no OLPF, 51 point AF (15 Cross Type sensors), and all the other features, it is a truly remarkable camera at it's price point ($1200 list, $949 w/ current discount).  And the fact that there is not a Canon body, Full Frame or APS-C) that beats the sensor system performance except at high ISO, it tells you how irrational my unhappiness has been. 

Nikon did choose to limit this camera, however.  While 6fps is fine, the buffer is too small and since it uses dual SD cards the actual data writing slows it some more (I use Sandisk 95mb/s Extreme Pro SD while in my D810 I use Lexar 1066X (160mb/s) CF).  SD just can't match CF for write speeds.  I shoot sports with it and while, I can work around, this without much issue, having this in the 'pro' body with the additional buffer and CF that would go along with it would make this a killer all around camera!

The more I exercise the D810, the more I come to appreciate just how special the D7100 actually is.  Hope the wife lets me keep it!
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 23, 2014, 12:19:12 pm
Hi dw, thanks again for chipping in so much, especially as you use a 7100 yourself.

Could you explain the sd card thing to me please? I just assumed that it had 2 slots so that when one card is full the camera just starts writing to the other one?
Now I've read what you just wrote, it sounds like it uses one card as a buffer in burst mode, is that right?
With the specs of the 7100, it would be irrational for me to choose an inferior body just because I didn't like the layout so much. I can get used to a layout, I wouldn't like having to get used to 30% less shots per charge or whatnot, so if I go with a mirror, it will be the 7100.

I don't and won't ever shoot sports, wildlife will be the fastest action thing I shoot (which still needs fast speeds but I imagine sports needs sustained fast burst modes and more than 6fps). 6fps will do me fine. I've never shot burst so 6 is luxury :)

I can get the 7100 for the equivalent of about $800 new with 3 years accidental damage insurance here - no brainer really.

If someone could convince me that a 16Mp 4/3 camera would be a better bet than 24 CMOS bearing in mind I will want to print large without stitiching loads, then I'm still tempted to investigate that route more.
I would prefer modern mirrorless to 4/3 but can't afford it.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: mcbroomf on November 23, 2014, 02:48:16 pm
No further comments on the body, but a question/suggestion about your lens choice.

If you want both a 80-100 and a macro as well as a normal lens then I suggest you look for something like a 90/macro and leave some extra money for a wide angle, perhaps in the 28-35mm range.  There are plenty of 90/macro lenses that will go to 2:1 and 1:1 with a 2:1 adapter or tubes if you need to go large.  Even if you don't shoot in the WA range much at the moment (you can make table using your exif data of all your best shots to see which FL are most used) then I suggest you invest in one and start trying to use it to expand your vision.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 23, 2014, 03:02:32 pm
Hi dw, thanks again for chipping in so much, especially as you use a 7100 yourself.

Could you explain the sd card thing to me please? I just assumed that it had 2 slots so that when one card is full the camera just starts writing to the other one?
Now I've read what you just wrote, it sounds like it uses one card as a buffer in burst mode, is that right?

The D7100 has 2 card slots; both SDHC.  You can set it up in a variety of ways.  I have it write to the 1st slot and use the 2nd slot for overflow if I fill the 1st card and for videos if I take any.  You can have it write to both cards simultaneously so you have the same photos on 2 cards.  I would think a wedding guy might use that.

The SDHC cards are not buffer.  Buffer is the internal memory in the camera.  When you shoot in fast bursts, the camera writes the photo to the buffer and then when the buffer fills it starts writing out to the SD card and as it clears the buffer more images can be taken.  Since the SD Cards are slower than internal memory, once you fill the buffer you will notice the camera slowing down significantly.  So buy the fastest cards if you need continuous shooting.

Since we are on this topic, the number of images the buffer can hold is listed in manual.  Hence, you can take less RAW than JPGs.  This is what most shooters complain about.  The buffer isn't big enough if shooting RAW, but for JPG is usually fine.  Also, some options like JPG compression technique (Optimal Quality vs Size), Lens Correction, Noise Removal, etc. can impact the continous shooting at 6fps.  The options are really based on consuming processor cycles.  The way I shoot, I can typically get 9-12 Large JPGs in a burst if I want, but rarely end up shooting bursts over 5 frames.

With the specs of the 7100, it would be irrational for me to choose an inferior body just because I didn't like the layout so much. I can get used to a layout, I wouldn't like having to get used to 30% less shots per charge or whatnot, so if I go with a mirror, it will be the 7100.

My unhappiness really was based on prior experience with the pro style button interface.  I hate changing cameras precisely because once I learn how to make it jump through hoops, I don't want to have to relearn it.  Some items just aren't shown in the viewfinder on the Enthusiast layout.  ISO yes, but don't believe the shooting mode or White Balance is.  On the pro cameras you push a button and spin the dial and you see it in the viewfinder. In and of itself, the interface of the D7100 is fine, and the U1 and U2 settings are even better than the Shooting Banks on the pro cameras.

I don't and won't ever shoot sports, wildlife will be the fastest action thing I shoot (which still needs fast speeds but I imagine sports needs sustained fast burst modes and more than 6fps). 6fps will do me fine. I've never shot burst so 6 is luxury :)

I can get the 7100 for the equivalent of about $800 new with 3 years accidental damage insurance here - no brainer really.

If someone could convince me that a 16Mp 4/3 camera would be a better bet than 24 CMOS bearing in mind I will want to print large without stitiching loads, then I'm still tempted to investigate that route more.
I would prefer modern mirrorless to 4/3 but can't afford it.

At $800 new, it is a no brainer.  It is a seriously good camera for that amount of coin!  With good technique and the lack of OLPF, you can get really sharp images at the pixel level.  It is relatively small and light as well, but still comfortable.  I actually like big and heavy, but I usually have it on a tripod or monopod for long stints and not in my hands.  Guess a wedding guy or others that hand hold constantly heavy my get bogus.

BTW, if my wife makes me sell mine since I have the D810, I will have a Really Right Stuff L-Plate for sale.
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 23, 2014, 03:08:25 pm
No further comments on the body, but a question/suggestion about your lens choice.

If you want both a 80-100 and a macro as well as a normal lens then I suggest you look for something like a 90/macro and leave some extra money for a wide angle, perhaps in the 28-35mm range.  There are plenty of 90/macro lenses that will go to 2:1 and 1:1 with a 2:1 adapter or tubes if you need to go large.  Even if you don't shoot in the WA range much at the moment (you can make table using your exif data of all your best shots to see which FL are most used) then I suggest you invest in one and start trying to use it to expand your vision.

I would suggest something different.  Not sure a flat field macro would be all that spectacular in everyday use.   I don't do true 1:1 macro, but only close up.  I use either extension tubes (Kenko 3 tube set) or Nikon 5T and 6T diopters both usually on the 70-200mm f/2.8.  BTW, the 80-200mm f/2.8 is a wonderful lens.  It doesn't focus quite as fast as the AF-S models, nor track quite as well, but it is still dear to my heart.  I used it for 17 years and only sold it so I could put the TC-14e on 70-200mm f/2.8.  I waited 5 years for Nikon to upgrade the 80-400mm to lose the slow focus and 6 months after I bought the 70-200mm they did! Doh!
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: Incastone on November 23, 2014, 08:48:42 pm
Even if you don't shoot in the WA range much at the moment (you can make table using your exif data of all your best shots to see which FL are most used) then I suggest you invest in one and start trying to use it to expand your vision.

That is a spectacularly good idea about the table, thanks for suggesting that!
The bridge camera I've been learning with has the FF equivalent of a 27-486 range. I never use it at full zoom because the image quality is awful when I do. I try and leave it as wide as possible and just get closer to the subject, so yes a wide angle lens is a must actually as I'm used to having that 27mm framing option (and wider would be even better).
I'm pretty sure I rarely go beyond about 100 in general but I'm definitely going to go through images now and check.

When I wrote about the fl I wanted I was working on the premise that primes are always going to be better than zooms, and if you do have a zoom, that a smaller range is always preferable. Maybe the real world difference isn't something I need to worry about just yet, or is it?

I should probably just say what I want rather than try to guess.
I want a nice portrait lens for animals and street photography, a good macro lens that will give me 1:1 or 2:1 without having to bolt loads of stuff onto it (unless there's a good reason why that's better, but it sounds like a load of faff!), and something that will give me enough reach for landscape (max 200mm I'm sure would be enough unless I start working for the CIA, right? Or wrong?!).

Lenses are becoming less confusing but there's still so much I don't have a grip on.
I won't be buying all these at once, and as suggested in an earlier reply, I will probably get FX lenses so that I can move them to a FF body in the future.
The portrait lens is probably the most important for now as I've all ready spent a lot of time in the city and environs I'm moving to (Granada) and I know that I don't need much magnification to get the shots I want, it's all right there.

If you guys think I would be ok with a 16-35 FX lens (which would be a 24-55 approx on the 7100 no?) that would cover my WA and portrait needs to start with, then I can save and get a nice macro and finally a tele.
Would something like a 24-55 equivalent really compromise me over a 50mm prime? Or should I really consider getting both?

Thanks in advance for your help (again)!
Title: Re: Hello. About to buy first DSLR, have a couple of Q's..
Post by: dwswager on November 23, 2014, 10:09:26 pm
That is a spectacularly good idea about the table, thanks for suggesting that!
The bridge camera I've been learning with has the FF equivalent of a 27-486 range. I never use it at full zoom because the image quality is awful when I do. I try and leave it as wide as possible and just get closer to the subject, so yes a wide angle lens is a must actually as I'm used to having that 27mm framing option (and wider would be even better).
I'm pretty sure I rarely go beyond about 100 in general but I'm definitely going to go through images now and check.

There is one potential booger in the ointment trying this.  With zoom lenses it is commonplace to get lazy and just use zoom when really you should move closer or farther away and change focal length.  Most people zoom to get everything in the frame or to make the subject larger without thought to the perspective. A classic example is using a wide angle with a boulder or something in the foreground and mountains in the background.  Doing this, it is possible to diminish the mountains and make them look inconsequential.  A table of focal lengths gives you just numbers, but doesn't tell you if you picked the correct one!

A good exercise is to shoot the same shot, with the same framing from different distances and different focal lengths and then compare them.  There are times when you do want to accentuate the foreground and others when you don't.  The key is to know what you want and how to execute it properly.