Discussion
Difficult to know where to start until you’ve had a go and decided if its the thing for you (thats when it starts to get expensive !)
For the money you intend to spend, it may be worth looking at a “bridge” camera – That’s the sort that looks like a Single lens reflex but without all the bells and whistles of interchangeable lenses etc. Alternatively a reasonable quality compact type.
Best bet would probably to pop into a local camera store, explain what you want to do and have a look at what they offer. I’ve found you can’t beat actually handling the equipment to see if you are comfortable with it.
Once the Camera’s bought go out and shoot anything and everything , the joy (or curse)of the digital world is that you can make as many mistakes as you like and all it costs is your time.
For the money you intend to spend, it may be worth looking at a “bridge” camera – That’s the sort that looks like a Single lens reflex but without all the bells and whistles of interchangeable lenses etc. Alternatively a reasonable quality compact type.
Best bet would probably to pop into a local camera store, explain what you want to do and have a look at what they offer. I’ve found you can’t beat actually handling the equipment to see if you are comfortable with it.
Once the Camera’s bought go out and shoot anything and everything , the joy (or curse)of the digital world is that you can make as many mistakes as you like and all it costs is your time.
covboy said:
For the money you intend to spend, it may be worth looking at a “bridge” camera – That’s the sort that looks like a Single lens reflex but without all the bells and whistles of interchangeable lenses etc. Alternatively a reasonable quality compact type.
+1, its how i started and they allow you to do a whole range of photography. Some of the latest ones have lenses that cover focal lengths from about 26mm to over 600! This massive zoom range gives great versatility and mean that you can shoot wildlife and sports (so long as the light is good, the one main drawback of bridge cameras is poor low light functionality).Most Bridge camera's will allow full manual control so you can learn the basics about exposure, by settings shutter speed, aperture,adjusting the ISO, as well as learning about how aperture affects depth of field, etc etc etc. I can personally vouch for the panasonic DMC FZ28, great camera and i assume its younger brother the FZ38 would be just as good. I happen to have just upraged to a full dSLR set up, buts its all due to the intrest in photography that grew with my bridge camera.
My favorite shot taken with it.
Edited by jimmy306 on Tuesday 16th March 20:36
jimmy306 said:
covboy said:
For the money you intend to spend, it may be worth looking at a “bridge” camera – That’s the sort that looks like a Single lens reflex but without all the bells and whistles of interchangeable lenses etc. Alternatively a reasonable quality compact type.
+1, its how i started and they allow you to do a whole range of photography. Some of the latest ones have lenses that cover focal lengths from about 26mm to over 600! This massive zoom range gives great versatility and mean that you can shoot wildlife and sports (so long as the light is good, the one main drawback of bridge cameras is poor low light functionality).Most Bridge camera's will allow full manual control so you can learn the basics about exposure, by settings shutter speed, aperture,adjusting the ISO, as well as learning about how aperture affects depth of field, etc etc etc. I can personally vouch for the panasonic DMC FZ28, great camera and i assume its younger brother the FZ38 would be just as good. I happen to have just upraged to a full dSLR set up, buts its all due to the intrest in photography that grew with my bridge camera.
My favorite shot taken with it.
Edited by jimmy306 on Tuesday 16th March 20:36
I'm still playing with mine, taking shots of anything and everything (and HD movies!) - it's fantastic piece of kit which gets very good reviews all over the place. I got the Lumix, spare battery, 16gb card for less then £300 - bargain
Hugely recommended!
Thanks for replies so far, been to local curry's today for a look and to hold some. I'm intrested in the idea of the "bridge" cameras but I'm in two minds as I could spend £250-£300 on a "bridge" camera but then in 6 months decide to go the whole hog and buy a full DSLR. Had a hold of the Canon EOS 1000D, Sony A230 and Nikon D3000 today and looking at Canon for £369, Sony £309 and Nikon £379 respectively. Are the Canon and Nikon worth the extra over the Sony? Are these worth the extra over a "bridge" camera? I'm aware that the extras such as memory cards and bags add up, which makes the "bridge" cameras better value but just thinking more long term, as I'd sooner save a bit longer and get something I'll be happier with for longer.
I think have a look for a used DLSR.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
jp1982 said:
Thanks for replies so far, been to local curry's today for a look and to hold some. I'm intrested in the idea of the "bridge" cameras but I'm in two minds as I could spend £250-£300 on a "bridge" camera but then in 6 months decide to go the whole hog and buy a full DSLR. Had a hold of the Canon EOS 1000D, Sony A230 and Nikon D3000 today and looking at Canon for £369, Sony £309 and Nikon £379 respectively. Are the Canon and Nikon worth the extra over the Sony? Are these worth the extra over a "bridge" camera? I'm aware that the extras such as memory cards and bags add up, which makes the "bridge" cameras better value but just thinking more long term, as I'd sooner save a bit longer and get something I'll be happier with for longer.
The Canon 1000d is very bottom end stuff, and uses old canon tech (digic III processor instead of digic IV etc) and you would probably be looking to upgrade just as soon as you would be with a bridge camera. it would be worth getting the 450d or equivalent nikon. I'm not sure about the others, but i suspect the that if you get into photography seriously you would be looking to upgrade.The main advantage of a bridge camera is the flexibility the massive zoom range gives you. The "kit" lens that a SLR comes with will probably be something like an 18-55 (the canon one is) which are okay for general photography of portraiture. But say, for example, you wanted to photograph motorsport, or wildlife you would be looking at needing a 300-400mm lens (at the long end) which at the cheapest are around £400, and about £600 for a 400mm. Which is a massive outlay.
Without spending money on lenses, a dSLR wont necessarily get you better photo's then a good compact or bridge camera (with the exception that they WILL work much better in low light due the far larger sensors they posses.
Perhaps the best option would be to spend a little more, and get some second hand gear, maybe a canon 400d and a couple of lenses.
RobDickinson said:
I think have a look for a used DLSR.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
Yep. Not only will you learn more about photography, but you'll be able to grow the system, add bits ans sell bits, as your needs and wants develop. Loads of stuff on eBay (and there's PH Classifieds of course!)350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
RobDickinson said:
I think have a look for a used DLSR.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
I may sell my 350d soon if i can afford the upgrade to a 40d body. (Thanks for giving me the idea everyone in the other thread. 350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
). I will sell it with the 18-55mm kit lens and a sigma 75-300mm lens. They are not the best lenses optically but cover a wide range and helped me learn the settings of the camera and the reach i need for what i like to photo. I got a 70-200mm F4L for photos on the hill climb and the quality is great. The only reason i want to upgrade is the burst rate for RAW's as i was missing good photos towards the end of last season filling up the buffer, only get about 5-6 shots before delayed shooting a 40d should be good for 2-3x that. i quite like its small size and weight.
As said add a "nifty fifty" (i'm keeping mine
)to learn about aperture and get some nice shots and portraits.Once you have learned about the settings etc and whether photography is for you then you can upgrade the glass and if you need an extra feature the body as required.
I would say that generally you would get better pictures from an older camera and nice lens (especially some of the L glass) than an expensive body and a cheap lens.
No point spending huge money on something you decide you don't enjoy or buying an expensive lens you dont use.
Good luck finding something
.BlueMR2 said:
Thanks for giving me the idea everyone in the other thread.
You'll thank me in the long run.
To the OP, seriously, go second-hand - you'll get a far better camera much quicker that route than if you go out and spend similar money on a bottom of the range current model. As this is a car forum, you wouldn't not buy a second-hand Porsche just because you could buy a brand new VW for the same price would you?
RobDickinson said:
I think have a look for a used DLSR.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
^ What he says.350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
A 'cheap' bundled kit lens will get you going, then add a nifty fifty and a cheap long lens and your done.
Personally, it's not about the camera body at the end of the day. You can still take a crap shot with an expensive camera as easily as a cheap one.
I replaced my broken 400D for a s/h 400D off Ebay for instance for £234 2 months ago. (And bought more glass with the rest of my budget). Glass is far more important than body. The s/h body I bought had 3,000 actuations which I didn't think was bad. Body was so clean that MrsT was adamant it was stolen!
Nothing wrong with the 1000D. Don't get too side tracked with Digic processors and all that stuff. They only really come into play when you start pushing iso and noise levels. Don't worry too much about AF speed either. The vast majority of photographers stop to take a picture, compose the picture, double check exposure and stuff, and then take the picture. So AF speed are quite immaterial and overstated.
Where you need AF speed is when you have specific jobs, but by then you are specializing somewhat, and probably are needing a better body for a variety of reasons.
Sony vs Canon vs Nikon. All the same really just different bodies at the end of the day. They all achieve the same thing. However, there is more history with Canon and Nikon, and its easier to swap a lens with a mate if you go C or N, because they'll more than likely have the same. I think the whole choice of C v N comes down to what your friends own to be honest and it certainly had a bearing in the last 4-5 bodies bought in my circle of family and friends.
As for lens - stick with the 18-55 kit lens to start with. Choose your next lens on your needs. What do you enjoy taking pictures of? What limitations are you finding with the lens? And so forth. Buying lenses is an expensive business at the end of the day.
When I moved up from the kit lenses I went for fast over anything else, hence a 24-70 f2.8 a few years ago and an 11-16 f2.8 more recently. But there are so many permutations....
Simpo Two said:
RobDickinson said:
I think have a look for a used DLSR.
350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
Yep. Not only will you learn more about photography, but you'll be able to grow the system, add bits ans sell bits, as your needs and wants develop. Loads of stuff on eBay (and there's PH Classifieds of course!)350D, 20D or equivelant age nikon (D50, D70), still take a better pic than a bridge, and work faster , and you get full DSLR controls & speed + interchangable lenses.
It's tempting to get sucked into the "old=bad" fallacy, but the horrible truth is that my photo-taking ability is easily outstripped by the capability of my 5-year-old D70. You can see the results of my experimentation on my flickr page at www.flickr.com/photos/RobK76. Any problem photos on there are my fault, not the camera's!
[quote=jimmy306The Canon 1000d is very bottom end stuff, and uses old canon tech (digic III processor instead of digic IV etc) and you would probably be looking to upgrade just as soon as you would be with a bridge camera. it would be worth getting the 450d or equivalent nikon. I'm not sure about the others, but i suspect the that if you get into photography seriously you would be looking to upgrade.
[/quote]
This is rubbish (sorry jimmy) I bought my 1000d a year ago and spent an age thinking i'd bought the wrong camera due to comments like this. Then i realised it did everything i needed and more, there is no way i would have gained anything from buying the 450 instead, apart from a broken budget. I've now got the nifty fifty and the tamron 70-300 cheapo and have recently done my first paid job with it, with another booked in and a regular 'gig' with a buliding firm who want pics for their offices. I know i'll upgrade at some point but i'll probably wait until my skill warrents the outlay, the camera doesn't make the 'tog. The 'tog makes the camera.
I highly recomend the 1000d for a beginer, just buy the accesories you want and upgrade if your interest/skill takes off.
[/quote]
This is rubbish (sorry jimmy) I bought my 1000d a year ago and spent an age thinking i'd bought the wrong camera due to comments like this. Then i realised it did everything i needed and more, there is no way i would have gained anything from buying the 450 instead, apart from a broken budget. I've now got the nifty fifty and the tamron 70-300 cheapo and have recently done my first paid job with it, with another booked in and a regular 'gig' with a buliding firm who want pics for their offices. I know i'll upgrade at some point but i'll probably wait until my skill warrents the outlay, the camera doesn't make the 'tog. The 'tog makes the camera.
I highly recomend the 1000d for a beginer, just buy the accesories you want and upgrade if your interest/skill takes off.
AndyKH said:
jimmy306 said:
The Canon 1000d is very bottom end stuff, and uses old canon tech (digic III processor instead of digic IV etc) and you would probably be looking to upgrade just as soon as you would be with a bridge camera. it would be worth getting the 450d or equivalent nikon. I'm not sure about the others, but i suspect the that if you get into photography seriously you would be looking to upgrade.
This is rubbish (sorry jimmy) I bought my 1000d a year ago and spent an age thinking i'd bought the wrong camera due to comments like this. Then i realised it did everything i needed and more, there is no way i would have gained anything from buying the 450 instead, apart from a broken budget. I've now got the nifty fifty and the tamron 70-300 cheapo and have recently done my first paid job with it, with another booked in and a regular 'gig' with a buliding firm who want pics for their offices. I know i'll upgrade at some point but i'll probably wait until my skill warrents the outlay, the camera doesn't make the 'tog. The 'tog makes the camera. I highly recomend the 1000d for a beginner, just buy the accesories you want and upgrade if your interest/skill takes off.
Okay perhaps rubbish is too strong a word, and its true that a good photographer will get results from just about any kit. I hadnt realised the 450d was digic III as well. I guess it depends what you want to use the camera for. I suspect a 1000d would be more then adequate for most purposes, but for wildlife and sports etc you would miss larger buffers, quicker frame rate, better high ISO performance etc of say a second hand 40d, which you can get for £400- £450.
My intention was not to rubbish anyones kit, and i apologise if an offense was caused, just my 2 pense worth. And in context (comparing to a bridge camera) i was trying to emphasize the convinince and VFM of a bridge camera compared to a SLR for which multiple lenses would be needed to cover the same focal lengths.
My intention was not to rubbish anyones kit, and i apologise if an offense was caused, just my 2 pense worth. And in context (comparing to a bridge camera) i was trying to emphasize the convinince and VFM of a bridge camera compared to a SLR for which multiple lenses would be needed to cover the same focal lengths.
I started with a Sony DSC-R1, which is a "bridge" camera but has a lens adapter and a number of available lenses - which means you end up with something which approaches SLR capability but with the ease of a fixed lens snapper. I've got some startlingly good pics from it with zero talent. I use it with a wide angle and a telephoto lens and added a circular polarizer and wouldn't want much more - its given me the taste and I'm about to splurge out big-time on a 7D and lots of lenses and start to get serious (and partly because of a niche interest in the 1080p HD recording) - if I didn't have the time or funds to do SLR properly I'd be very happy with the R1...I'll be putting the whole kit on ebay soon and for the amount they'll pay someone will get a kit will give very pro looking shots.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff