Which Camera? Please read OP first

glic83 · 04-12-2016 1:22am

I've been keeping an eye on camera price busters.co.uk , cameras prices seem to be going up instead of down and the same for the 2nd hand market. Is this down to weaker ponund and they are trying to compensate for this?

glic83 · 14-12-2016 12:16am

Just said I'd update, managed to get a Nikon d5300 with 18-55 vr lens, unused for a decent price.

JohnBoy26 · 15-12-2016 6:44pm

glic83 wrote: »

Bacchus wrote: »

Oh yeah, good mirrorless systems are pricey... though if you could get a second hand X100S at a good price it'd be a nice option. This is why I think you are right to focus on Nikon and Canon. They have more affordable options that will give you the chance to learn a bit and see what like/dislike. Plus, they are systems with a lot of lens (new and second hand) so you'd easily be able to upgrade within that system should you choose to. On the flip side, should you decide you really want to go down the mirrorless route or just switch to another DSLR system, you'd be able to recoup most of that money because of the lens and flash which don't depreciate as much as the body.

TBH I'm very tempted by a Pentax KS-2 looks a great camera, weather sealed and has IBIS , seems to be much better than any entry level camera from eith Canon or Nikon. There isn't as many lenses available for Pentax but there should be enough for what I'd need. I'll keep researching away and seeing if anything comes up on offer for BF/CM.

I wouldn't buy a pentax tbh. On paper they are better than a similarly priced nikon or canon but in reality their cameras(or lenses for that matter)aren't near as well polished as those from nikon and canon imo.

koutoubia · 18-12-2016 10:46pm

My wife is looking for a camera similar to the Panasonic Lumix. Will need to buy it in a brick and mortar shop this week.
Is there anything similar out there or am I limited to the Lumix.
TIA

BreadnBuddha · 18-12-2016 11:00pm

Lumix are Panasonic Point & Shoot cameras.

There are hundreds of alternatives at a wide range of prices.

If she wants a specific model (ask her) and you're happy to pay for it, get that one.

If she's not hell bent on a particular camera, either give her a voucher from a brick and mortar shop or take her to one to pick something out herself.

Don't spend much on a camera that's not specifically what she wants. As soon as she finds some limitation in features or whatever, you'll be at fault for picking it/not getting what she decided she wanted herself.

noaddedsugar · 19-12-2016 5:29pm

I'm considering a camera for Christmas. I collect and sometimes sell plants, I also take a lot of photos of said plants(that makes me sound like a weirdo). Currently I just use my S6 or ipad, I have a Nikon bridge camera but it has no manual focus and drives me insane so is shoved in the back of a drawer somewhere.

Ideally it could deal with low light situations and be good for macro shots. My budget is about 350-400e. I was thinking about this one http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/3564471/c_1/1%7Ccategory_root%7CPhotography%7C14419436/c_2/3%7C19780865%7CDigital+cameras%7C14419441/c_3/4%7Ccat_14419441%7CCompact+system+digital+cameras%7C24966746.htm but it is out of stock everywhere. I have no idea whether or not it would be decent for my needs anyway. Any suggestions?

Silva360 · 20-12-2016 10:43am

When you say photos of plants, do you mean details of small flowers or full portraits of, say, something like a yucca.

If it's the former, I think you would be wise to buy a used camera body relatively cheaply and spend the money on a dedicated macro lens. Something like a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 would probably fall within budget.

For low light you would need to increase the ISO or open the aperture, or both. But due to the shallow depth of field with macro lens, you will most likely want a smaller aperture and low iso (for clean sharp images unless you are going for the arty effect). That's when a tripod/beanbag/solid surface and/or flash will come into play.

For larger plants, a standard lens will do just fine.

That's just my opinion, but as you know opinions vary quite significantly when it comes to this stuff. Why don't you post or link some ideas of what you would like to achieve and folk would be able to give you better/tailored advice.

OldGoat · 20-12-2016 11:07am

What do you intend to do with the images? Are they for printing or only for use on t'internet? If the latter then you might even be better off sticking with the tiny sensor on the pad and phone for macro shots and spend your limited budget on a tripod and some lighting.

noaddedsugar · 20-12-2016 11:30am

This is a link to my insta to give some idea of the photos/plants https://www.instagram.com/succulents.ireland/

OldGoat I'm not sure exactly what I will be doing with the photos yet

I just feel like I want to up my photo game. I have just considered lighting because I am really struggling with the darker days to take anything approaching a decent shot but I kind of want a new toy too!

Thanks silva for your reply, it has made me realise that I do need to study up on the mechanics of photography more. I think I am quite lazy when it comes to that and I suppose I thought maybe the fuji would be like an easy introduction? DLSRs seem a bit scary and complicated but maybe I should borrow a friends and play around with it for a bit and see where it leads. A tripod hadn't even occurred to me

CelticRambler · 20-12-2016 12:14pm

Before you spend a few hundred on a camera, look a some youtube videos (flower photography will get you what you need, but also lighting still life photography) and mess around with lights and reflectors for a while. Looking at the photos you've posted, working on your lighting will bring you instant results for next to no cost and help you make a better decision about what exactly you need buy to improve further.

If you consider yourself to be a real beginner and want someone to walk you through the basics, this is the guy for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpHIjQZmSwI (no mention of plants, but the principles are the same, and about a minute in, he'll also mention that the one thing you must have is a tripod.)

Silva360 · 20-12-2016 12:41pm

CelticRambler wrote: »

Before you spend a few hundred on a camera, look a some youtube videos (flower photography will get you what you need, but also lighting still life photography) and mess around with lights and reflectors for a while. Looking at the photos you've posted, working on your lighting will bring you instant results for next to no cost and help you make a better decision about what exactly you need buy to improve further.

I would certainly agree with that.

Your photos are fine, but if you want to go from fine to amazing it'll take a lot of learning and work!!

What I was hoping you would show us is what result you actually want to achieve, i.e., find a photo online that you think is amazing and would like to work towards and place a link. That way I think we would have a better idea as to how you might actually reach your goal equipment wise. The equipment is not the magic wand though....

It's also not all about the money. Someone posted a few days ago about getting a cheap used D60 camera (sub-€100 if i remember). You do not need the best. I think a lens would be far more important with this kind of work.

noaddedsugar · 20-12-2016 3:04pm

I'd love to do shots like these ones but I fear it may be a bit ambitious https://www.google.ie/webhp?hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1ju-a94LRAhWrK8AKHVk6AV0QPAgD#hl=en&q=succulent+macro+shots

Thanks for all the advice, I am going to have a youtube binge tonight and see if I can learn a thing or two. Then I will see what I can do about lighting, my house has tiny windows and is perpetually dark at this time of year, so even having the right light to practice would be fun.

JohnBoy26 · 21-12-2016 6:28pm

BreadnBuddha wrote: »

Lumix are Panasonic Point & Shoot cameras.

Actually that is not entirely true. The Lumix G series are far from point and shoot cameras. These are interchangeable lens micro 4/3 mirrorless cameras with near aps-c dslr like image quality and functions just in a much smaller package. Some G series models are also excellent at video recording.

BreadnBuddha · 21-12-2016 6:36pm

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Actually that is not entirely true. The Lumix G series are far from point and shoot cameras. These are interchangeable lens micro 4/3 mirrorless cameras with near aps-c dslr like image quality and functions just in a much smaller package. Some G series models are also excellent at video recording.

Yeah, but the general gist is that 'Lumix' is a range of compact cameras, not a specific model. Take the comment in context.

JohnBoy26 · 21-12-2016 7:48pm

BreadnBuddha wrote: »

Yeah, but the general gist is that 'Lumix' is a range of compact cameras, not a specific model. Take the comment in context.

I did take the comment into context. It's still misleading and inaccurate. Your post gives the impression that lumix reffers to just your average amature ordinary point and shoot camera when in fact there is far more to the lumix brand than just that. It also caters for enthusiasts and professionals with it's lumix g series offerings. This isn't a specific model. It's a whole range of cameras and lenses.

BreadnBuddha · 21-12-2016 7:54pm

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

I did take the comment into context. It's still misleading and inaccurate. Your post gives the impression that lumix reffers to just your average amature ordinary point and shoot camera when in fact there is far more to the lumix brand than just that. It also caters for enthusiasts and professionals with it's lumix g series offerings. This isn't a specific model. It's a whole range of cameras and lenses.

Okay, okay. Panasonic Lumix cameras are cameras. Of many types. From lowly point and shoots to 4k video capable micro 4/3.

Back in context, Lumix is a range, not a specific model. Point and shoot may have been an offensively misleading term for Panasonic owners, but in the context of the OP's question, that's completely irrelevant.

Now, I stand corrected and that's the end of that.

CelticRambler · 21-12-2016 9:32pm

Which is all the more reason to find out exactly what model she's got her eye on ...

Mister Jingles · 28-12-2016 2:30am

Will be heading to Vegas next year and want to pick up a proper camera of some sort beforehand. I intend on visting the grand canyon and other places alike and while there I would like to get a few good snaps in.

Was reading up a small bit on bridge cameras but still unsure if thats what I need. I dont really intend on using the camera for photographing birds or other small wildlife. Id be more interested in using it for aircraft, cars or boats etc and scenery such as the mountains and that.

My budget would be arould the 200 mark but could stretch another 100 if it was for something very decent.

Thanks

Shannon757 · 28-12-2016 2:49am

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Will be heading to Vegas next year and want to pick up a proper camera of some sort beforehand. I intend on visting the grand canyon and other places alike and while there I would like to get a few good snaps in.

Was reading up a small bit on bridge cameras but still unsure if thats what I need. I dont really intend on using the camera for photographing birds or other small wildlife. Id be more interested in using it for aircraft, cars or boats etc and scenery such as the mountains and that.

My budget would be arould the 200 mark but could stretch another 100 if it was for something very decent.

Thanks

I used a bridge camera for shooting aircraft before I moved up to a DSLR. A good quality bridge should be good enough for you. I had a Polaroid and a Nikon but I'm sure the more informed on here can help you pick one.

Enjoy the trip

cnocbui · 28-12-2016 10:43am

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Will be heading to Vegas next year and want to pick up a proper camera of some sort beforehand. I intend on visting the grand canyon and other places alike and while there I would like to get a few good snaps in.

Was reading up a small bit on bridge cameras but still unsure if thats what I need. I dont really intend on using the camera for photographing birds or other small wildlife. Id be more interested in using it for aircraft, cars or boats etc and scenery such as the mountains and that.

My budget would be arould the 200 mark but could stretch another 100 if it was for something very decent.

Thanks

Your budget is about a 1/3 of that required to get better quality than a good phone delivers.

bren2002 · 28-12-2016 10:55am

Moving aircraft? That will need significant investment. Is your intention to print or just view electronically? A 2nd hand dslr is a good option.

If you really don't want to spend much, stretch your budget and get this.
https://www.panasonicstore.ie/product/cameras-and-camcorders/dmc-tz70ebs-lumix-digital-camera/

Signpost · 28-12-2016 7:19pm

My old reliable POS has served its time and needs an upgrade. Tend to do a bit of travel and want to come into the world of DSLR but not too sure what to go for. I was thinking along the lines of a Canon 750D but when I went to buy it the guy in the shop basically said I may aswell use my iPhone if I wasn't going for something like a Nikon D7200, which he conveniently had on the counter ready to sell.
I'd be happy enough to go to around 1000 mark for something with a lens, will be shooting landscape and portrait shots but only for my own collection so doesn't need to be absolutely phenomenal lenses. Naturally a few hundred either side of budget for a great value for money isn't out of the question.
What kind of camera would ye recommend buying and where would you recommend buying it from?

Mike Litoris · 28-12-2016 8:47pm

Signpost wrote: »

My old reliable POS has served its time and needs an upgrade. Tend to do a bit of travel and want to come into the world of DSLR but not too sure what to go for. I was thinking along the lines of a Canon 750D but when I went to buy it the guy in the shop basically said I may aswell use my iPhone if I wasn't going for something like a Nikon D7200, which he conveniently had on the counter ready to sell.

Utter bullshít. Don't give them your business.

Most entry level DSLRs are really good and all will let you control the fundamentals. Have a read around DPreview.com for some reviews.

To give you an idea what you could get for €1000.

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-d3300-kit-with-18-55mm-vr-ii-and-55-200mm-vr-ii-lens-digital-slr-camera-black.html

and this for portraits

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-af-s-nikkor-85mm-f1.8g-lenses.html

€996 in total

If you don't need the reach of the 55-200mm lens you could get the same camera with just the kit lens, the portrait lens and the below 35mm 1.8 for roughly the same price.

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-35mm-f-1.8g-lenses.html

Bear in mind I shoot Nikon and the above is just an example of what you can get for your money. Also eglobal are about a third cheaper than highstreet and some online stores.

Mister Jingles · 28-12-2016 10:13pm

bren2002 wrote: »

Moving aircraft? That will need significant investment. Is your intention to print or just view electronically? A 2nd hand dslr is a good option.

If you really don't want to spend much, stretch your budget and get this.
https://www.panasonicstore.ie/product/cameras-and-camcorders/dmc-tz70ebs-lumix-digital-camera/

Moving aircraft ? Not really, more so as they land or before they take off type of thing.

Just view electronically. And even then it doesnt have to be anything special. I basically dont want to be using a phone camera on my trip to Vegas/Grand Canyon.....

Is there any opinions on the Canon Sx410/420 range ? Can i do a lot better then that for about 250 quid ?

JohnBoy26 · 28-12-2016 10:54pm

Mike Litoris wrote: »

Utter bullshít. Don't give them your business.

Most entry level DSLRs are really good and all will let you control the fundamentals. Have a read around DPreview.com for some reviews.

To give you an idea what you could get for €1000.

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-d3300-kit-with-18-55mm-vr-ii-and-55-200mm-vr-ii-lens-digital-slr-camera-black.html

and this for portraits

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-af-s-nikkor-85mm-f1.8g-lenses.html

€996 in total

If you don't need the reach of the 55-200mm lens you could get the same camera with just the kit lens, the portrait lens and the below 35mm 1.8 for roughly the same price.

https://www.eglobalcentral.eu/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-35mm-f-1.8g-lenses.html

Bear in mind I shoot Nikon and the above is just an example of what you can get for your money. Also eglobal are about a third cheaper than highstreet and some online stores.

I wouldn't say it is tbh(well apart from the iphone bit that is). If the op is going for a 750d then i would agree with going a few hundred extra and getting the far superior d7200.

It's one of the best aps-c cameras out there at the moment. The d3300 is grand but like all entry/mid level nikon aps-c dslrs it lacks a very important feature in not having any form of af fine tune.(the canon 750d doesn't have it either) This means You will have no adjustment if the lens isn't focusing properly on a subject.

The d7200 is also alot more rugged and has a better viewfinder.

It all depends on what the op wants though.

bren2002 · 28-12-2016 11:18pm

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Moving aircraft ? Not really, more so as they land or before they take off type of thing.

Just view electronically. And even then it doesnt have to be anything special. I basically dont want to be using a phone camera on my trip to Vegas/Grand Canyon.....

Is there any opinions on the Canon Sx410/420 range ? Can i do a lot better then that for about 250 quid ?

If you're thinking of taking photos at any semi interested level get a camera that takes raw photos. I'm not sure that Canon does. This is way more important than megapixels or focal lenght (zoom range) especially extremes like 1000mm 35mm eq.

BreadnBuddha · 28-12-2016 11:36pm

The D7200 is actually a great recommendation, for a whole host of reasons. If you're looking for a Canon model for direct comparison you'd need to be looking at the 70D.

A 'reasonable' comparison can be found here:

http://www.techradar.com/how-to/photography-video-capture/cameras/nikon-d7200-vs-canon-eos-70d-enthusiast-dslrs-go-head-to-head-1320876

Note, pricing has changed very much since 2015 when it was published.

cnocbui · 28-12-2016 11:43pm

bren2002 wrote: »

If you're thinking of taking photos at any semi interested level get a camera that takes raw photos. I'm not sure that Canon does. This is way more important than megapixels or focal lenght (zoom range) especially extremes like 1000mm 35mm eq.

That is a bit of an oversimplification. My phone has an excellent camera and it can take RAWs, so can my Olympus E-M1, but I mostly shoot low compression jpegs with it, but they would handily blow away RAW images taken with the phone in challenging light situations.

RAW is usually taken to mean the output from the sensor before the camera modifies it with noise reduction and so on but that usually isn't really the case.

Being able to edit and manipulate a RAW file to achieve a better end result than the JPEGs the camera can output requires a whole skill-set that many people probably couldn't be bothered with, so a camera having the ability to output RAW files means almost nothing unless the user wants to bother with dealing with such files.

It's a bit like the difference between having your own darkroom and enlarger and processing your own film (RAW) and just taking your film to the chemist and picking up the finished photos a few hours or days later (Jpeg).

CelticRambler · 29-12-2016 12:12am

Signpost wrote: »

My old reliable POS has served its time and needs an upgrade. Tend to do a bit of travel and want to come into the world of DSLR but not too sure what to go for.

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

If the op is going for a 750d then i would agree with going a few hundred extra and getting the far superior d7200.

The best advice I've heard (from a pro photographer) for those moving into DSLR but without any clear idea of what they want to do is buy a decent, cheap body and keep the "few hundred extra" for lenses. Why? Because the body will need to be replaced, sooner or later, either because it's knackered/dropped/stolen/obsolete/whatever OR because you finally decide what you really need and trade up. Lenses, though, should last forever, and the right lens can make a far bigger difference to a photo than a few extra megapixels.

Mister Jingles · 29-12-2016 12:31am

https://m.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/6530378/c_1/1%7Ccategory_root%7CPhotography%7C14419436/c_2/3%7C19780865%7CDigital+cameras%7C14419441/c_3/4%7Ccat_14419441%7CDigital+SLR+cameras%7C14419500.htm

I could probably up my budget for the above. Would it be a decent buy for basic stuff and messing about ?

Which Camera? **Please read OP first**

Comments

Which Camera? Please read OP first