Camera advice

Ray · 2013-03-29T16:18:35+00:00

Hello everyone Sorry, not guitar stuff but I got a keenness to get myself a SLR - a DSLR. I've got a SLR but it's still 35 mm from way back when I went to camera club. Then something got in the way. I dont believe I'll be going again - not that interested anymore. So, two things. I am looking at entry level stuff and two that caught my eye - Nikon D5200 and Canon 650D. Any thoughts? Then, if you were looking to acquire a camera, where would you scout around? I have been looking at SACamera which seems pretty well priced. Much appreciated Raymond

singemonkey

teleplayer wrote P.S Canon have a R900 50mm that will blow your mind, if you go Nikon you're going to pay a pretty penny for a fixed focal lens.

? Nah. This is not an issue. There's no good reason to buy a new 50 unless it's because you think Canon's price is so cheap you may as well save yourself the hassle of buying 2nd hand. Lenses are analogue gear. I know of photographers who use lenses from the turn of the 19th/20th C daily to produce better detail than the best DSLRs (because they're shooting on enormous film cameras). Lenses can go bad. And there are plenty of old ones that are totally outclassed by modern computer assisted lens designs (especially zoom lenses from before the mid-90s).

But basically you can pick up a great 50mm for Nikon from the late sixties to today for very reasonable money that will do a great job. And even recent ones, the 2nd hand prices between 2nd hand Canon and Nikon 50s are very similar and they'll be just as good as new ones. It's kind of like the drop you take on a guitar when you get it out of the shop. The person who buys new pays a hit and subsidises everyone who gets exactly the same product, just as good, 2nd hand.

I agree with Teleplayer though. I've never met an autofocus system that really did what I wanted - although that might be just the pictures I want to take.

Edit: Ray, that comfort thing is a real factor and you should definitely take it seriously. Lower end DSLRs are often quite pokey to hold (the top end ones are often unnecessarily monstrous, but that's another matter). This makes a real difference to how much you'll be prepared to use the camera.

AlanRatcliffe

deefstes wrote Oh, and one other thing I should have mentioned is this. I don't know how the 650D and D5200 measure up in low light but between their predecessors (the 600D and D5100) the Nikon outperformed the Canon quite handsomely at high ISO settings (I think ISO 3200 and higher). I suspect it might still be the case with these.

Nikon DSLRs always outperform Canon in low-light situations. They use a larger sensor (1.4 X the size, IIRC) which results in higher resolution (and larger file sizes). An important point if you're going to be shooting either at night or in pubs/clubs. The larger sensor is also why the difference in megapixels is not an issue.

ratrap wrote I've still got an old Pentax 35mm with a bunch of Pentax KL mount lenses.
I suppose I am being super optimistic wondering if the lenses will work on a Pentax DSLR? ?

Manual lenses won't magically become autofocus, but they will work. My two main lenses (both autofocus) predate digital and work well.

Ray

singemonkey wrote Edit: Ray, that comfort thing is a real factor and you should definitely take it seriously. Lower end DSLRs are often quite pokey to hold (the top end ones are often unnecessarily monstrous, but that's another matter). This makes a real difference to how much you'll be prepared to use the camera.

Yes, I think so. And maybe more so with me, I dunno. Certainly seems to be the case as far as neck width on a guitar is concerned. This 1 11/16 thing is just too cute for words.

singemonkey

As usual, the differences in low-light performance between brands are better seen in lab tests than in actual pictures. The difference is much greater between any brand's latest cameras, and the cameras from several years back.

Alan Ratcliffe wrote
ratrap wrote I've still got an old Pentax 35mm with a bunch of Pentax KL mount lenses.
I suppose I am being super optimistic wondering if the lenses will work on a Pentax DSLR? ?
Manual lenses won't magically become autofocus, but they will work. My two main lenses (both autofocus) predate digital and work well.

However, there are still perks. Autofocus indicators still work. I had the pleasure on a Kruger Park trip last year to use a Pentax 645 autofocus medium format camera for the first time. All my lenses for it are for my Pentax 67 - which is a superb but entirely basic (and huge), mostly mechanical camera - and entirely manual focus. But now, on the 645, all of those lenses gave focus confirmation with a large dot at the bottom of the finder. That combined with the humongous, bright viewfinder (you haven's looked through an SLR until you've looked through a modern medium format SLR. It's a revelation) meant that my focus was sharper frame to frame, than was usually the case with the 67.

I also do this with my Nikon F100. I've used nothing but manual focus lenses on it for the past two years, and the focus confirmation is very useful and means that focusing is not appreciably slower - for practical purposes - than autofocus. Especially as you become used to it.

This isn't really helping Ray. It was just an excuse to waffle. ?

Ray

Talk. I'm listening.

deefstes

teleplayer wroteSo for me (shooting a hang of a lot of video professionally) the Canon is a no-brainer. If you're never going to use this function on your soon to be new toy, then I say look at price and go for that.

[thread hijack]Mind if I ask what software you use to edit your videos and how you deal with long videos being split into 12min chunks? Are you able to merge them seamlessly or do you observe a glitch where the files are concatenated? I don't have any pro video editing software and have had to resort to Windows Movie Maker (yuck) but I do pick up an ever so slight glitch where the files are joined.[/thread hijack]

teleplayer

deefstes wrote
teleplayer wroteSo for me (shooting a hang of a lot of video professionally) the Canon is a no-brainer. If you're never going to use this function on your soon to be new toy, then I say look at price and go for that.
[thread hijack]Mind if I ask what software you use to edit your videos and how you deal with long videos being split into 12min chunks? Are you able to merge them seamlessly or do you observe a glitch where the files are concatenated? I don't have any pro video editing software and have had to resort to Windows Movie Maker (yuck) but I do pick up an ever so slight glitch where the files are joined.[/thread hijack]

I'm using Premiere Pro, I was on Final Cut, but made the move when they switched to X. With regards to the 12min clip issue, I'm not shooting any crazy length shots on the DSLR, if you're editing, your shots are very rarely longer than 3-5 seconds, unless something very interesting is happening in the shot, or it's developing (rack focus, pan, tilt, zoom or a camera crane type shot) so that takes the 12min issue out. If you are wanting a shot of something for more than 12mins, you'll have to go to another type of camera that's designed to solely shoot video. I also don't record audio on the camera, the camera mic is unusable and you can't monitor what you're recording if you do use another mic. I use a Zoom H4n for the audio stuff and then choose my mic according to the situation from there. There's a great plugin for Premiere called Plural Eyes that lines up all your audio clips with the visuals, it's fantastic and saves a lot of tedious work.

Ray

This thread is becoming quite an education hey. BTW have any of you tried the READR from Pixelmags? From Pixel I was getting Acoustic Guitar and then when they told me about READR I jumped because for about 80 bux/month you get download of a whole bunch of magazines including a lot of photography ones.

Wizard

I went through the whole photography phase years ago and ended up with a very respectable semi-pro kit with drool worthy lenses.
Was in a nice big bag.
And was in the cupboard most of the time.

The best camera is the one you will actually use

I now have the same point and shoot as Manny. (Canon SX240)
And it's with me all the time.
And I use it all the time.

And yes there is a bit of chromatic aberation.
And it's got a huge lens. Equivalent of 25-500mm.
With internal stabilization.

I won't go back to an SLR with interchangeable lenses.
They are too big and I wont have it with me when the shot presents itself.

The following shots show it at its most vulnerable.
Hand-held at extreme focal length of 500m; with harsh light contrast.

And they're not perfect.
Imperfect sharpness & some purple / orange fringing.
But hell. They're not bad !!

Ray

You know, I've also got a little Nikon camera with a fixed lense and the equivalent to 300 zoom. And it's got a macro facility. And it takes some nice pics hey. But I was just in the Kruger Park last week and the guys with the SLR's just looked like they meant business. But I'm not going for the pro level kit. If possible I want to spend 10 G's or lower. And then I will explore the whole thing again. I must say that when I was going to camera club it was some great fun and I may just start going again. And then, if I find that the thing is stuck in my cupboard I can give it to someone who will use it.

At the moment I am thinking the Canon 350D is about the way I will go. Because the optics for Canon seem to be a whole lot cheaper than Nikon. And the Nikon d5200 doesnt come with too many standard kit offerings at purchase. The 39 AF points are very attractive but then again, what I have read is that makes it's value manifest when doing sport or action shoots. And I dont know how much of that I'll be doing. And as I said previously, the Nikon felt pretty uncomfortable in my hands.

Thanks again all.

JGP

Hi Ray

I am a novice in the guitar world but here I hope I can help. Question 1 is why do you want a DSLR at all as opposed to a point and shoot/bridge/mirrorless camera etc? Are you looking for quality, flexibility, portability, low light, flash etc? Most entry level DSLRs and lenses are mediocre at best and are just a stepping stone to the big expensive rigs. Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Sony (ex Minolta) all make great value product all the way to full pro gear and are mostly limited by the photographer more than the kit. Visit dpreview.com and dyxum.com for some expert input

Ray

Well thanks for that. Good stuff on those sites. Talking about Sony, a guy I work with reckons that's the way to go and he gives one reason being that the image stabilization is built into the camera body which makes the lenses plenty cheaper than Canon and Nikon. Something to think about. Why do I want a camera? I dont know really. I'll take some photographs I guess. And why do I want guitars? I want to play them. But I understand the whole thing of buying what you need and what does the job for you. OK, I want to spend the money is what it is I suppose.

JGP

Happy to hear the sites were useful. I did not make myself clear before, I am asking why you want a DSLR as opposed to other camera options not why you want a camera. Some of the top end fixed lens zooms today are capable of incredible results without the size, cost and complexity of a DSLR. Canon G1X, Sony RX100, Panasonic FZ200 and others are only limited by sensor size and lens and flash flexibility. Mirrorless format cameras such as the Sony Nex and Olympus four thirds are much more compact than DSLRs but still offer interchangeable lenses and a large sensor except in the case of the Nikon 1 mount which has a smaller sensor. Sensor size is important as it gives higher quality and greater control of depth of field. We are talking physical size here not Megapixels. If you want to do serious wildlife or sports photography, fashion shoots or artistic work you will want a DSLR. In this case I would NOT suggest an entry level model from any of the manufacturers as they are way to compromised as are the bundled lenses. Sony SLT 57 or 65, Nikon D5200 or Canon EOS60D is where you start to get the real deal, these camera bodies are capable of working with entry level all the way up to upper end 20-30 grand (or more) lenses. If these are more than you want to spend i would suggest buy used, if you decide to spend the bucks in the future the used lenses will still be with you. If you want a really good general purpose camera for family pics, holiday memories and the like a DSLR is like a Marshall doublestack as your bedroom practice amp, expensive and way over the top, rather look at the mirrorless or top end fixed lens options. These are never wasted as if you move up to bigger things they will still have a place.

As with a guitar do not buy without picking it up, trying different options, asking questions etc. The sales staff at the big discount stores have no idea of what they are talking about. You might pay 5-10% more at a specialist but you will probably end up with the right option.

Ray

Thanks for you input JGP. Very helpful. Yes, I've been reading about these CSC cameras and how they rate up to the DSLR's. And there is a lot to be said for them. I will definitley go and take a look. A colleague of mine is of the firm opinion that Sony is the way to go becasue of the image stabilization story. But he is a Minolta fan thru and thru. But I read a lot of love for Sony and also Pentax in UK magazines but I dont hear much of it here is SA. Some guy at a dealership reckons the after sales is pretty poor here for cameras - specifically DSLR's. I'm pretty keen on the A65 which looks like it packs quite a punch.

The thing is, I dont want to spend good $ on a camera to find out in the future that I actually want more than I've got. That is why I am looking at SLR mainly.

Attila

I've found that its always good to have a mik-'n-drik (samsung or cannon) on hand for everyday photography, Most camera phones are crap and DSLR look impressive but are fairly specialist equipment, as JGP has indicated

One could argue the old 80/20 rule saying that you will in all likelihood use the "big gun" 20% of the time. However, in reality its closer to 5% of the time for specialist shooting, ala Long distance game shooting/viewing (both types) , Macro and Arty shooting with depth of field experimentation.

I own a Sony A350, a great camera WITH the right lens + feature is that you can use most Minolta SLR lense and external Flash units with the Sony which are freely available due to their now obsolescence.

just a word of warning; Most these camera packs on offer at eg. R9999.00 = Camera body + two lenses - be warned these lenses are mostly bottom of the range stuff.

peace

Sean

Attila Barath wrote One could argue the old 80/20 rule saying that you will in all likelihood use the "big gun" 20% of the time. However, in reality its closer to 5% of the time for specialist shooting, ala Long distance game shooting/viewing (both types) , Macro and Arty shooting with depth of field experimentation.

Wizard

Generalist vs. Specialist.

After buying all sorts of general zoom lenses and not figuring out what to get next, I was forced to ask what I was actually intending to do with photography.
I also realized I was using all of my zoom lenses at one or other extreme of the zoom range; indicating I'd be better off with better quality fixed focal length lenses.

I decided I wanted family snapshots & mountable nature photographs.
This helped me finalise on:
- 28mm f2.8
- 85mm f1.8 portrait lens
- 180mm f2.8 IFED

I found myself without a "standard" 50mm lens and never missed it.

Then if you do want to shoot small wildlife at long distances in low light, you can buy a 600mm F2.8 lens.
And sell the house to finance it.
?

Attila

Wizard wrote Then if you do want to shoot small wildlife at long distances in low light,

Or a scoped .270

« Previous Page