Which Camera? **Please read OP first**

JIdontknow

As someone who is considering getting into some amateur photography, and I know this is a very vague question but what dslr camera would you recommend (I will be buying second hand). I have used a Canon 6D before and liked it, so just wondering if I should stick with what I know or consider maybe a Nikon? I think the 6D is released about 9 years now. I see different D range of Nikon from D610 -D810. My budget would be maximum about 600-800 for suitable camera but would consider more if it included a lens etc. What I’m looking to photograph is mainly landscapes (and nature). As I said I know this is like asking “what car to buy” but if anyone has any pointers that would be great. The next question is lens but maybe that’s for another day!

5uspect

The 6D is a full frame camera so you don’t have the same experience with a crop body. You’re better off investing in good lenses as bodies come and go.

A secondhand 7D is probably a good all rounder. It’s an APS-C crop but has a lot of the pro benefits of a full frame.

Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way. An EF 70-300 is a good bet. You could also add a 50 mm f/1.8 in time.

JIdontknow

5uspect wrote: »

The 6D is a full frame camera so you don’t have the same experience with a crop body. You’re better off investing in good lenses as bodies come and go.

A secondhand 7D is probably a good all rounder. It’s an APS-C crop but has a lot of the pro benefits of a full frame.

Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way. An EF 70-300 is a good bet. You could also add a 50 mm f/1.8 in time.

Fair play, thanks for the information. I guess the only reason I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this! My budget would stretch (from looking at them second hand they are well within budget and I’m willing to spend a bit more) so I could afford a more expensive / newer / better version of the 7D, but again I’m open to all suggestions as it’s all very new to me. Also thanks for the feedback on the lens, that’s good information to know.

cnocbui

JIdontknow wrote: »

Fair play, thanks for the information. I guess the only reason I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this! My budget would stretch (from looking at them second hand they are well within budget and I’m willing to spend a bit more) so I could afford a more expensive / newer / better version of the 7D, but again I’m open to all suggestions as it’s all very new to me. Also thanks for the feedback on the lens, that’s good information to know.

An Olympus E-M1 does timelapse and is a good bit smaller than a Full frame camera like a 6D. They seem to be obtainable used for around £220 on ebay uk. With on Olympus weather sealed lens fitted, you can leave one outside shooting a time lapse and it won't matter if it gets drenched.

CelticRambler

5uspect wrote: »

Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way.

Agreed, with one caveat: wide angles are great for urban landscapes, where the space that the sky would usually be is full of "stuff" worth capturing!

JIdontknow wrote: »

I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this!

Setting up for a good quality timelapse requires a lot more than an intervalometer - a nice heavy tripod and ND and/or polarising filters to begin with. An independent intervalometer is a relatively insignificant addition to the gear you'll be bringing, so I wouldn't let that be a determining factor.

I have a cheap one (think I paid about 20€ for it) that does everything an intervalometer should and also serves as a off-camera shutter release - very handy for those times when using the camera's countdown timer just isn't right for the situation.

JIdontknow

Fair play thanks for all the replies. Will need to do a lot more research, but food for thought!

tbayers

First time posting on this side of the site. So I have a Nikon d3100 with AF-S Nikkor 18-55 and 55-300mm lenses. Have it over 10 years now. Definitely outgrown it.

Obviously looking to upgrade. I have a bought a good drone in this time so getting very interested in shooting some movie footage too..

I was looking at Sony RX10 iv but slightly worried the sensor on this camera won't be a huge upgrade on current setup? But budget, zoom capability and the need for no investment in glass is appealing.

Budget is €2000 or less. But I am struggling to find a camera that does good stills and more than decent video. Would be willing to go 2nd hand.

BTW sports photography and landscape (surfing mainly) is main subject, hence the willingness to have good video. Not picky on FF, mirror less or cros sensors.

cnocbui

Panasonic GH5 does more than decent video. Almost nothing can touch it. Takes good stills also.

Bluefoam

cnocbui wrote: »

Panasonic GH5 does more than decent video. Almost nothing can touch it. Takes good stills also.

Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.

tbayers

Bluefoam wrote: »

Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.

This is probably my biggest function I want. Obviously my current set up is ancient but you can't use auto focus in live view, just jumps all over the place.

Bluefoam

tbayers wrote: »

This is probably my biggest function I want. Obviously my current set up is ancient but you can't use auto focus in live view, just jumps all over the place.

The Canon R Series or some of the newer Sony's would be the best for this type of use.

CelticRambler

tbayers wrote: »

a camera that does good stills and more than decent video ...
BTW sports photography and landscape (surfing mainly) is main subject, hence the willingness to have good video. Not picky on FF, mirror less or cros sensors.

Bluefoam wrote: »

The Canon R Series or some of the newer Sony's would be the best for this type of use.

Having (briefly) looked into the R series last week, it sounds like it definitely does not meet tbayers' requirement for "more than decent" video.

A one-line summary (from dpreview) that summarises everything I've read (no exceptions, none, not a one! :eek: )

EOS R's video capabilities lag behind the competition considerably.

(and I've been a proud EOS owner for almost 30 years)

tbayers

CelticRambler wrote: »

Having (briefly) looked into the R series last week, it sounds like it definitely does not meet tbayers' requirement for "more than decent" video.

A one-line summary (from dpreview) that summarises everything I've read (no exceptions, none, not a one! :eek: )

(and I've been a proud EOS owner for almost 30 years)

Yup just looked them briefly and wouldn't be confident with the video. Very close to pulling plug on the Sony A6600. Within my budget and a like new one on mpb. However, buying from sites in Ireland the 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 that coens with it would suffice until I invest in a bigger lens.

Gregor Samsa

There's Sony A7iii with a broken LCD for sale here (with kit lens, and maybe a 50mm too) for €700:

https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/sony-a7iii/22835880

A screen is only $25. https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-LCD-Display-Screen-for-SONY-A7III-ILCE-7M3-Digital-Camera-Repair-Part-A7M3-/263775107522

Replacement isn't difficult: https://www.raiphoto.com/replace-lcd-screen-sony-a7a7ra7s/

Obviously if the camera was dropped there could be other damage, so you'd have to be very careful and check out the seller carefully, but if everything else was OK with it, it would be a dirt cheap way of getting an excellent full frame mirrorless with great AF if you were any way handy.

cnocbui

Bluefoam wrote: »

Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.

If you are videoing birds in flight, you might want to pick a Sony FF, but ithe GH5 focuses adequately for a large number of people who buy and use them professionally because of the unmatched video quality. Lot's of them don't even use auto focus and use manual lenses - imagine that.

An E-M1 III or X focuses very well and has the best video image stabilisation you can get, so it all depends on what your video needs are. If your video subject involves low light - limiting your ability to stop down - and subjects moving towards the camera at a significat rate, then maybe the GH5 isn't your best pick, but other than that, if you would like to point out a mixed stills video cam used more by pros, name it. There is an entire accessory industry based on making stuff for the GH5, like gimbals, cages, lights, off camera recorders.





These sorts of professional video setups exist because Panasonic have the best video quality you can get in a consumer level stills camera. This has been the case since the GH2.

Panasonic GH2 video better than Red, Arri says Coppola

https://www.zacuto.com/great-camera-shootout-2010

Zacuto ran a blind test involving movie industry professionals where skilled film makers used everything from the latest iPhone to movie industry pro staples, with the resulting footage judged blind by hollywood industry pros like Coppola, and the GH2 footage was very highly rated and the top pic by many.

The Panasonic GH line has only gotten better since then and has never slipped from being No1.

But, if fast tracking AF is a high priority, then there are better performers, but if you don't have that c-af requirement, then the GH5 will deliver better video quality than almost all other options.

Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise.

tbayers

"Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise."


That's a nice summary. Leaning towards Sony and maybe even the FF A7 III. At heart of it all its photos where I want to excel at, video is a bonus. As I said earlier post the Sony Rx10 iv is very tempting but the sensor limitations will frustrate if I to grow quickly in my view

Thanks all for tips

cnocbui

tbayers wrote: »

"Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise."


That's a nice summary. Leaning towards Sony and maybe even the FF A7 III. At heart of it all its photos where I want to excel at, video is a bonus. As I said earlier post the Sony Rx10 iv is very tempting but the sensor limitations will frustrate if I to grow quickly in my view

Thanks all for tips

You might find this of some interest:

It's about using the currently cheap as chips E-M1 II to shoot sufing video and stills, but the results aren't too shabby.

My personal number one priority for video and stills photography is in body hand held stabilisation.

tbayers

Jeez this is getting tough. Looking at Nikon Z-50 now too. I can upgrade in years to come to Z6/Z7 if need be then and keep the lenses. Won't hit wallet as much either. When I started on this process a few days ago I wasn't aware of the choice that's out there

Rmulvany

I'm looking at the Olympus E-M1 as my next camera.
On HDEW I've seen a decent bundle offer on the Mk. II including 12-40 lense which is tempting.
They also have the newer Mk.III (body only) which is about £500 dearer.

Would anyone be able to point out a decent comparison between the Mk.II and Mk.III?
From quick comparisons I've seen the Mk.III has a newer processor, and offers 80MP high-res mode (vs. 40 MP in the Mk.II).

If the differences aren't overwhelming then I'd be tempted towards the Mk.II bundle, but if anyone can help with the comparison that'd be great.
Thanks

cnocbui

Rmulvany wrote: »

I'm looking at the Olympus E-M1 as my next camera.
On HDEW I've seen a decent bundle offer on the Mk. II including 12-40 lense which is tempting.
They also have the newer Mk.III (body only) which is about £500 dearer.

Would anyone be able to point out a decent comparison between the Mk.II and Mk.III?
From quick comparisons I've seen the Mk.III has a newer processor, and offers 80MP high-res mode (vs. 40 MP in the Mk.II).

If the differences aren't overwhelming then I'd be tempted towards the Mk.II bundle, but if anyone can help with the comparison that'd be great.
Thanks

Side by side comparison, but a bit funky and not enough detail: https://cameradecision.com/compare/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II-vs-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-III

The III has hand held hi res - which I personally would consider a big deal. It also has the stary sky autofocus, which again would be worthwhile, and according to a user who has both cameras, the eye detect AF in the III is better than the II. You also get 20% more shots on a battery charge with the III, than the II.

The III also has 1.5 stops better in body IS than the II.

You can see the detailed specs of the two here: https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/index.html#anc01

I use an original E-M1. I'd get the III just for the HHHR.

feelpablo

Hi,


Im in desperate need of help and steering towards the right camera!!


Spend: 1200 euro max


need: great stills, 4k video.

would be great: ibis and weather sealed



im not stuck to any brand or system.


Thanks in advance

cnocbui

feelpablo wrote: »

Hi,


Im in desperate need of help and steering towards the right camera!!

Spend: 1200 euro max

need: great stills, 4k video.

would be great: ibis and weather sealed

im not stuck to any brand or system.

Thanks in advance

You could look at an Olympus E-M1 II or a Panasonic G9.

davesweets

Hi All,

Had a good read through the forum but your help would be appreciated.

Looking for a decent Camera (DSLR or Mirrorless) with a good zoom range specifically sports/rugby shots. Have used a family members Canon 100d (18-55mm lens) but would like something with more zoom range.

Budget around €900. If anyone could recommend a lens/body combo that would be much appreciated. Is it best to stick to DSLR or is there a mirrorless in budget with a decent zoom range for sports?
Thanks

Bluefoam

Unless you have legacy gear, stay clear of DSLR.

Sony are stopping production of their gear and Canon have cancelled their DSLR lenses and cameras are due to follow soon.

Irishphotodesk

Bluefoam wrote: »

Unless you have legacy gear, stay clear of DSLR.

Sony are stopping production of their gear and Canon have cancelled their DSLR lenses and cameras are due to follow soon.

Slight bit of overreaction - yes canon have indicated they will stop production of EF lenses and will possibly stop production of EF camera bodies (but they make multiple millions of each every year, so there will be plenty floating around for years to come, if my memory is correct they stopped production of manual focus lenses (70s/80s)and film cameras in the 90s ..... Yet they are all still available for purchase on the secondhand marketplace, some in new condition.

Bluefoam

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Slight bit of overreaction - yes canon have indicated they will stop production of EF lenses and will possibly stop production of EF camera bodies (but they make multiple millions of each every year, so there will be plenty floating around for years to come, if my memory is correct they stopped production of manual focus lenses (70s/80s)and film cameras in the 90s ..... Yet they are all still available for purchase on the secondhand marketplace, some in new condition.

If you were starting with a brand new kit, would you chose to start with an out dated setup, that's out of production and with no future development...

Or would you chose a current system with availability, an upgrade path and modern use in mind?

davesweets

Bluefoam wrote: »

If you were starting with a brand new kit, would you chose to start with an out dated setup, that's out of production and with no future development...

Or would you chose a current system with availability, an upgrade path and modern use in mind?

Thanks both. So in terms of starting from scratch and going with a mirrorless and needing a decent zoom lens. Where should I look in terms of makes and models for less than a grand?

Bluefoam

davesweets wrote: »

Thanks both. So in terms of starting from scratch and going with a mirrorless and needing a decent zoom lens. Where should I look in terms of makes and models for less than a grand?

You mentioned sports photography earlier... From that perspective I can't advise... You'll probably be looking for a faster shutter... Not sure what the recommendations might be.

I'm a fan of the Canon EOS M system. The new M6ii or M50Ii might be good, but not sure of budget. Some here might recommend full frame cameras...

CelticRambler

Bluefoam wrote: »

If you were starting with a brand new kit, would you chose to start with an out dated setup, that's out of production and with no future development...

Or would you chose a current system with availability, an upgrade path and modern use in mind?

Me, based on the experience of choosing both paths in various domains, I'd opt for the supposedly "outdated" system. Not only does it generally offer much better value for money, but there's also considerably more information available about the features, quirks and limitations of the system than one that is still relatively new. Similarly, an "upgrade path" can turn out to be a dead end if either the technology or your interest swerves off in another direction.

Regarding the OP's question: for sports photography, you should be aiming for/comparing cameras with the highest rate of shots per second, and lenses with the widest aperture at long focal lengths. The fact that you're asking the question suggests that you're not already pushing yourself and your equipment to the max in this field, as the "right" answer will usually present itself through an examination of the shots that you found unsatisfactory. I would be wary of spending nearly a grand on something in the hope that it'll work out OK if you don't have a list of improvements you want to make.

Hopefully this is the right thread for this, but with phone cameras being so good thease days especially on the recent Google Pixel phones and of course the Apple iPhone is it still worth it for someone who just wants to take nice photos to invest in a dedicated camera?

Ideally I'm looking for something compact and easy to travel with my main interest is in landscapes, wildlife and birds (the feather kind 😄)

I have no idea what I should spend although ideally it will be a max of €900 with a lens and maybe even a transport case.

Cherry Blossom

Hi, I took up photography a year ago and started out with a basic DSLR the Canon EOS 2000D. I’m now thinking about upgrading. I was thinking the EOS 90D or some equivalent of mirrorless camera. I’m looking for a general purpose camera that I can use for landscapes and family occasions alike. I don’t know anything about mirrorless cameras at all. I’d like to stick with Canon. Can anyone help me out? Budget is around 2000 - 2500 and should include a lens or two for that price. What mirrorless cameras do people recommend that fit the bill?

harr

https://berminghamcameras.ie/canon-eos-rp.html

Any of the canon mirrorless in The R series are a good bet .. R , RP or R6 .

New R7 and R10 being released in the next few months so maybe wait till to see what price they will be.

With an adopter all your current Lens will work on the R camera and work well in my experience.

There is talk of canon discontinuing the M mount so maybe that might be one to avoid.

For your budget you Would pick up an RP or an R with a Lens or a R6 with no Lens but as I mentioned you can use any current canon Lens you have.

fixXxer

Trying to source a Fujifilm X-S10 to replace a faulty X-T20 but they seem to be as rare as hens teeth at the moment. Has anyone seen stock online or can recommend an online store to keep an eye on? I have been through the usual Irish shops so am casting the net further afield at this stage.

Tauriel

Hi all, I am hoping that someone could recommend me a good camera. No real budget in mind.

I currently have a Nikon Coolpix P900 but I have issues with her focusing (when zooming into an object no matter how slow I zoom in, 95% of the time she can't focus) and shutting down if I try to take a picture of let's say the ceiling inside a cathedral. I recently returned from a holidays and the pictures I took on my phone look better than the ones on the Nikon.

My main usage for the camera is travelling so looking for a excellent camera that works well for snapping architecture, inside cathedrals, landscapes and in particular museums.

Thanks in advance!

Lime Tree Farm

My first camera was a Nikon D5100 with DX kit lens 18-55mm f4.5 - I still use it. The model has been discontinued but can be bought used for around €160, lens maybe €50 www.mpb.com I paid approx €700 in 2012 and use it with f2.8 lenses now.

grind gremlin

Can anyone recommend a camera in and around the €350 mark (or less), that would be good for taking photos mainly of my kids and the occasional landscape / nature.

I’m not very tech savvy and don’t anticipate I will be doing any editing of photographs taken.

I have been using my iPhone up to this point but printed images aren’t of great quality at all

Thanks in advance.

retoos

I was looking forward to the camera at a lower price! I have high hopes that the Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro and the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra will be excellent photography phones that are reasonably priced in some parts of the world.

CID question

Hi could someone direct to a relevant existing thread, or offer advice.

Need to get a videocamera to record club hurling matches for simple general analysis. No software required; recorded on memory card and viewed on a laptop from there.Budget around €600. Will need to get a tripod and gimbal(?) also on top of this.

Thanks!

Robert Nairac

Hello,

I would like to buy a video camera/camcorder. I am a complete beginner.

I don't mind buying an old model. I would probably not want to pay more than 250-300 quid in total. Do you have recommendations for good used models to consider?

Ya-Boy-Ya

Hi

Ive been lookin for places to let go my camera dont know if this is the correct way in doin so. Have a sony rx100m5 (Sony RX100v) compact camera and havnt got the time to sell

If interested let me know

MojoMaker

Only way to find out is to stick up a price.

Notch000

looking for advise. Back in the day I had a Nikon D40 which I loved then upgraded to a Nikon D5100 and upgrades to a Sony A6500 which I never liked. Thinking of going back to a Nikon D5600 or maybe cheaper D3500 (i believe they have the seam senor) i like the size & weight and the click shutter DSLR ness.

Reason to stick with Nikon is i like the brand and UI and lens seem to have got really affordable since DSLRS are on the way out now.

I did not enjoy the Sony mirrorless. (ergonomic we crap and meus set up woefully bad, not a fan of the digital view finder either). took good picture but nothing amazing either.

Now my question is will the D5600 perform any way better then then several models older D5100

(my D5100 was never 100% i think i gave it a few good too many knocks and focusing was never perfect or maybe metering was off slightly)

Or what left field would people recommend for about a 5-600euro budget ??????? second hand OK too

ablelocks

any recommendations for a point and shoot for teenager - budget max €120 (if there is one in that bracket.)