Entry Level SLR

BarginHunter on 25/12/2014 - 16:33

I know there's another thread on here asking the same thing, but the one descended into an argument over whether SLR's are better or mirrorless.

I really don't want to get into that argument, I get that mirrorless are the newer tech, but I would rather get an SLR due to them being more prevalent thus making it easier to find second hand accessories.

I was thinking of just buying a second hand kit, but now Canon is offering a cashback on selected models I figure it's better to buy brand new.

Anyway, my primary use is for Landscape/Nature photos, and my budget is about $400 including lens.

Thanks.

Electrical & Electronics Camera DSLR

Comments

  • netsurfer on 25/12/2014 - 17:18

    Second hand… unless you can actually see the items first and try them out first, it is best to avoid second hand DSLR gear.

    $400 including lens, maybe a Canon 600D with the kit lens (not sure whether that will be under $400). The 18mm (which is about 29mm full frame) is okay for landscape. The kit lens isn't particularly sharp. Best to spend more money on a decent lens.

    • BarginHunter on 25/12/2014 - 19:35

      What lens would you recommend? Would it be better to just buy the body and the lens separate instead of buying the kit?

      • netsurfer on 26/12/2014 - 00:24
        +1

        Any decent wide angle lens would cost more than $400 alone. The kit lens is the only one that fits your budget. A few things to note:

        • The lens is important. The other day I only had a 50mm prime with me for the DSLR. I ended up using my point and shoot because the lens on the point and shoot has a better wide angle range than the 50mm prime.
        • The actual scene, light condition, and the weather actually have a bigger impact than the camera and lens. On a cloudy day, no matter how good your camera and the lens are, photos will still be inferior than photos taking in good weather and a so so camera.
        • With DSLR, you really need to shoot in manual mode to get the consistent exposure.
        • Proper DSLR photography requires substantial funds.

        Not to over spend initially when you get your first DSLR gear is a good idea.

        • p1 ama on 26/12/2014 - 11:40

          With DSLR, you really need to shoot in manual mode to get the consistent exposure.

          Manual mode gives you the best control, but to say that it's the only way to get consistent exposure isn't really true.

          Both Aperture-Priority and Shutter-Priority will give you consistent exposure if you understand how to use exposure compensation well and understand how matrix metering actually works.

          E.g. Let's say you're in a dark scene with a well-lit subject, in this case, you know to put down your exposure compensation because the matrix metering will attempt to bring up the scene, blowing out the highlights on your subject.

          These days, I don't ever use manual mode, unless I'm going for a specific unnatural effect, e.g. a long exposure or light painting…etc. For portraits, aperture-priority is the way to go. For action, sports and kids running around, shutter-priority is the way to go. For casual, walking around shooting random things, I even use program mode.

          If you like using manual mode, that's great - we all have preferences, but it's not the only way to get consistent exposure.

          Proper DSLR photography requires substantial funds.

          Completely agree. But with the slow depreciation of lenses, photography can require substantial capital, but be very cheap in the long run. Heck, I've bought lenses, taken thousands of shots with them and sold them for more than what I bought them for, you just need to know how to spot second-hand bargains (usually people trying to get rid of their stuff quickly) and jump on them quickly and be patient when selling (don't sell when too many other people are).

        • netsurfer on 26/12/2014 - 12:27

          @paulsterio: Thing with aperture priority and shutter priority is that you are still somewhat limited by the 30% grey exposure done by the camera. While it is possible to dial in exposure compensation to offset that (or to correct that), it is still not as flexible as manual mode. Don't get me wrong, most of the time, they are fine.

          Regarding making a profit on camera gear, you are obviously very good. However, ordinary people like me constantly making losses on lenses and camera gear. Only a small number of people like you are pros. For pros, obviously the proceeds from the photos easily cover the costs of the DSLR bodies and lenses.

          All I am trying to point out to the OP is that it is an expensive exercise if he is really into DSLR and that just because you have a DSLR does not mean your photos will be fantastic. It is also dangerous for people who are new to DSLR to buy second hand items.

        • p1 ama on 26/12/2014 - 13:03

          @netsurfer:

          Thing with aperture priority and shutter priority is that you are still somewhat limited by the 30% grey exposure done by the camera. While it is possible to dial in exposure compensation to offset that (or to correct that), it is still not as flexible as manual mode. Don't get me wrong, most of the time, they are fine.

          Fair enough, but with flexibility comes the convenience trade-off. You get more flexibility in manual mode, but it takes more time to set it up…etc. But completely agree that manual is most flexible.

          Regarding making a profit on camera gear, you are obviously very good. However, ordinary people like me constantly making losses on lenses and camera gear. Only a small number of people like you are pros. For pros, obviously the proceeds from the photos easily cover the costs of the DSLR bodies and lenses.

          Photography isn't my profession, so I'm just like the rest of us, I love taking pictures and love gear.

          I used to make losses on lenses and camera gear as well. It's unavoidable to make losses on bodies, because they change so quickly. But like my tip for lenses is that you have to always stay liquid, always have enough cash so you can snap up lenses you want quickly at prices that are good and you also have to know what is fair market value for the lenses you're buying and selling.

          As an example, I bought a Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC (a great lens, btw) for $700 (which is a steal) and sold it for $750 after taking hundreds of snaps. All I had to do was be patient with getting the $750.

          I have made a few losses, most notably on lenses that I bought new, but even when I look at that objectively, comparing the number of shots to the loss I made, it's still so cheap. E.g. If you take 5,000 shots on a lens and lose $100, that's only a $0.02 cost per exposure. We paid more than that per exposure back in the film days!

  • p1 ama on 25/12/2014 - 20:05
    +1

    Anyway, my primary use is for Landscape/Nature photos, and my budget is about $400 including lens.

    The most limiting thing is your budget. At $400, you can't really get anything but the very cheapest of cameras from Nikon and Canon (i.e. the cheapest models).

    Canon 1200D - http://www.digidirect.com.au/slr_cameras/canon/canon_eos_120…
    Nikon D3200 - http://www.digidirect.com.au/slr_cameras/nikon/nikon_d3200_i…

    The Canon is a little cheaper, because they have a bigger cashback at the moment, but the Nikon has its merits as well. Nikon cameras (according to DxOMark, anyway) have superior sensors to Canon cameras and you might prefer the feel of the Nikon, which feels a little better in hand than the Canon 1200D. Even though I shoot Nikon, I've used Canon before, I've always thought Nikon feels better in hand, so definitely head to a camera store and check them out.

    • BarginHunter on 25/12/2014 - 20:15

      Would upping my budget by another $100 help? I want to get a camera, but I also don't want to spend too much in case I end up not using it as much etc.

      • p1 ama on 25/12/2014 - 21:03
        +1

        Not really, I would say both of those are great starting points. Save your $100 for a lens or something else.

        • BarginHunter on 30/12/2014 - 05:05

          I've doing a bit more research and from what I understand it seems like a few places right the d3200 as being better than the canon 1200D.
          What concerns me however, is this http://www.shootingonabudget.com/nikon-dslr-bodies-without-b…
          I'm not sure if it's as big a concern as the author makes it sound. I'm also not sure if I should be looking at other Canon's that are close to my price range, such as the Canon 600D which is $422 after cashback, and the 700d which is $511 after cashback.

        • p1 ama on 30/12/2014 - 11:06
          +1

          @BarginHunter:

          Don't worry about that - that's for compatibility with older AF-D lenses that were made a long time ago. Most of the lenses for Nikon are now AF-S, so it's a moot point only really important for photographers who have a whole lot of AF-D lenses and don't want to throw them away going digital. That's why the higher-end bodies have the screw motor inbuilt. So no, it's not an issue. I'm a Nikon shooter - all my lenses are AF-S - no problem.

          I've doing a bit more research and from what I understand it seems like a few places right the d3200 as being better than the canon 1200D.

          It is a better camera - you'll see this Nikon bodies are always generally cheaper than Canon bodies for similar prices, e.g. D810 vs. 5D3, D610 vs. 6D…etc. all the way down the chain.

          I'm also not sure if I should be looking at other Canon's that are close to my price range, such as the Canon 600D which is $422 after cashback, and the 700d which is $511 after cashback.

          Don't - never spend too much on gear. You're better off pocketing the change and putting that towards more lenses, a holiday or a couple of photography books.

          I'm almost certain that you'd be better off with a D3200 from Nikon and Tony Northrup's Stunning Digital Photography book (around $10 on Amazon) than you would be with a 600D and no book.

          Anybody can pick up a great camera, because all you need for that is $$$, that's easy. What's more important is actually taking pictures that matter and pictures that mean something to you. Just think about it - just like a good oven doesn't make you a better chef, a better camera doesn't make you a better photographer.

        • BarginHunter on 30/12/2014 - 17:35

          @paulsterio: Thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate your help and feedback.

        • BarginHunter on 01/01/2015 - 16:25

          @paulsterio: I went to Office Works today and I picked up the D3200 Single Kit Lens, they have it listed for $548 but I got them to price beat Harvey Norman who have it for $468. So after cashback I'm looking at less than $400.

          Thanks again for all your help. I really appreciate it.

  • RePete on 31/12/2014 - 13:23
    +1

    Go Pentax. For the entry level price you will get glass equal to mid range Cannon / Nikon and a better camera. Don't be afraid to buy an older model DSLR either if you are just going to be using it casually. My 12.1mp Pentax K-x is still perfect after years and love it.

    Most of all, do your research before you buy.

    • p1 ama on 31/12/2014 - 14:24

      Pentax is a great option, but I feel that buying into the Pentax system is a bit like committing yourself to using Linux. Both Linux and Pentax are great, but there's always the disadvantages of going with something that isn't 'mainstream'.

      Firstly, there aren't many Pentax shooters. So if you join a camera club or if you have friends who are photographers, you can't borrow and try new lenses if you're on the Pentax system. I do this a lot, I have friends who own lenses I'm looking to buy, so I borrow them to play with them and test them out…etc.

      Secondly, the second hand market just isn't as good. I am on Gumtree a lot and something I see is that Canon and Nikon lenses, even Sony, tend to sell very quickly. Pentax just doesn't sell that well because there isn't really a demand for it.

      So I feel that if you're going to go DSLR, then you should really stay with Canon and Nikon. If you're considering mirrorless, then both Sony and Fujifilm are great options. Even though they're not as big as Canon and Nikon, they have a growing userbase. Sony has done great things with their A7, heaps of people jumping on. Same with Fuji - their XT1 is amazing and if I could afford it, I'd be jumping on the XT1 as well.

      Pentax just isn't driving in customers at the moment. You don't want to be left with a dead system. Canon and Nikon, especially Nikon, support their systems so, so well. If you're buying into one of the big guys, you know that they're not just going to roll over and quit the business one day.

      A similar thing was going to happen to Minolta, but thankfully Sony saved them. If you want an example of a great camera system which failed because it got abandoned, look at the Contax system.

  • bonezAU on 31/12/2014 - 14:27

    I have a Canon 1100D that I'm pretty happy with. I wanted something that takes better quality pictures than a compact. Every time I say what I'm about to say, I get criticised by some photography buff, but I leave it on auto mode most of the time and I'm very happy with the pictures it takes.

    • p1 ama on 31/12/2014 - 14:44
      +1

      Nothing wrong with leaving it in Auto mode, it's your pictures that matter. If you're happy with your pictures, who cares what mode you shoot on.

      That said, even if you don't want to try the other modes, give the P mode a try, it's exactly the same thing as AUTO, but it allows you to adjust a couple of things you can't in AUTO such as your exposure compensation.

    • UncommonName on 01/01/2015 - 13:43

      Canon has an app for begginers in DSLR photography, its focused on 1200D. I'm going through the app, its a nice thing to start with. I'm pretty sure you too can put that app to some good use as 1200D is only an upgrade over 1100D.

      Link - http://www.canon.co.uk/apps/eos-1200d-companion/

  • Kazielle on 02/01/2015 - 18:30

    Deals for entry-level DSLRs pop up fairly often around here, if you're willing to wait a month and up your budget to $500 I think you'd get yourself a pretty fine camera for under that amount. A few weeks ago I snapped up a Nikon D5200 for $488 and while I haven't seen a deal that good in a while, the D3300 crops up semi-often for under $460, and that's a damn good camera. As for the D3200 - that's on sale at Harvey Norman right now for under $400 and also a great camera if you're just looking for an entry-level hobby type thing. Well worth the price of entry.

    You're going to have to stick with the kit lens with your budget, though. Which should be fine, for now :)

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join