Recommend a DSLR?

anastasiastarz on 04/09/2016 - 03:00

Hi Guys,

I'm after a new DSLR and was wondering if you could help me out, my Olympus e410 is on its way out and most phones have more megapixels these days.

Budget - Not sure, 1k? Would that include the lenses?

Shooting - Photos of food and events, often with low lighting. No landscape and videos.

Notes - I'm slightly challenged at lighting (warm/white) and holding still. My last camera was the Olympus e410, I found challenging to adjust the aperture, shutter speed and ISO. I know where they are, I just can't get the arrows to go in the direction I like. Ideally I'd like to take more picture perfect pictures and edit them less, and rarely print them. I often post pictures 800x600 online.

Do I need raw?

I don't need: wifi, gps.

Thanks!

Electrical & Electronics

Comments

  • BobD on 04/09/2016 - 07:42
    +1

    Do you even need a DSLR? IT sounds like you could do it with a point and shoot at the higher end. Maybe one of the Canons or a Panasonic. Do you want or need ultra zoom? Have a look at the Digital Camera Warehouse to see what's around. They also have over the counter in Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane so you may be able to get hands on. This is the Melbourne address http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/webcontent132.htm

    I'm not saying buy at DCW. I don't know if their prices are best but use them as a place to see what's around and if you like the prices then go for it.

  • Ocean on 04/09/2016 - 08:19
    +1

    Agree you might be better off with a point and shoot or a good phone camera. But if you want Dslr for low light its all about the lens eg Canon 700d from recent JB deal with 50mm f1.4 or 1.8 and 24mm f2.8. Its still going to be bulkier than your olympus to carry around so maybe borrow one first. And forget about raw.

  • poboy on 04/09/2016 - 08:31

    I got a point and shoot Cannon G12 a few years ago on the advice of a friend photographer. It's pretty good, but there's a huge difference between it and a DSLR.

  • BobD on 04/09/2016 - 08:35

    If he / she (probably she) wants raw then it is still possible with point and shoot. I saw at least one Pana and one Canon that featured raw capabilities. Problem with raw is you need to have processing capability. That can add significantly to the overall price.

    You mentioned holding still. Many of the current crop of cameras (all types) have anti-shake or whatever name their marketing department calls it. In fact, it is obligatory on an ultra zoom camera. At full zoom a little shake and the image is off screen.

    • toristo on 04/09/2016 - 14:53

      If you aren't sure if you need RAW, you probably don't need RAW.

      Think of it like film - if you'd develop the prints yourself, RAW. If you would take them to a 1hr mini lab to get prints made straight of the machine, JPEG.

      The extra processing required for RAW means you'll also need some software and willingness to commit time to making the required adjustment to each image. If you have Adobe Lightroom it's a relative breeze, but still more work than "finished" JPEGs that you could print and be pretty happy with out of the camera.

  • StewBalls on 04/09/2016 - 10:07
    +1

    most phones have more megapixels these days.

    This probably goes without saying, but it's not just about the megapixels, it's about the quality of the optics & image processing overall as well. Sure, some phones have good glass & IP, but that's only to say good for a phone, they won't hold a candle to a decent P&S, M4/3 or SLR. Best to focus (no pun intended) on other aspects of the camera IMHO.

    I picked up a Pentax K-r on here a couple of years back, I've been super happy with the feature set & image quality for the price…that said, it's not as easy to find accessories (but not too bad either) as for the more popular makes. TBH, in your shoes I'd be looking at one of the Canon/Nikon models just to make life easier for yourself in the future…read a lot of reviews on the different models though, as each make & model has its own benefits & drawbacks at any given price point.

    The other bit of advice, make sure you get yourself a decent prime lens (35 or 50mm)…doesn't have to be super pricey either…holy shit, I thought I was a terrible photographer until I got my 35mm recently…talk about chalk & cheese quality wise compared to my kit (zoom) lenses even at exactly the same focal length!

    I used to hear guys talking about the difference between fixed & zoom lenses, but all stingy me heard was blah-blah…but I'm happy to say I was wrong, I'm now a fixed lens convert!!! :)

    • smoo on 06/09/2016 - 13:54

      Agree. Any Nikon or Cannon DSLR should suit your needs. Just pass on the kit lens and get a 50mm f1.8. The lower aperture should allow you to get better low light photos and produce a bit of background blur.

  • Vampyr on 04/09/2016 - 10:09
    +2

    Raw is great, but requires editing that the OP doesn't want to do.

  • hashtagbargain on 04/09/2016 - 11:34
    +1

    I'd recommend the Sony RX100 series for you. Couple them with ebay discount codes and you could have a camera taking dslr quality pics in p&s convenience.

  • [Deactivated] on 04/09/2016 - 16:10

    Get a better phone?

  • Ryanek on 05/09/2016 - 08:20

    Olympus OM-D E-M10 MKII

  • robertbruce on 05/09/2016 - 14:12

    It sounds as tho' you are on to your next level…
    Give Pentax close consideration, they come with weatherproofing, good cleaning system and very good image stabilization…
    .
    Definitely get a prime lens for better results

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join