Posted: 4/29/2016 5:27:33 PM EDT
|
I know we all carry a camera in our phones but lately I have been lamenting the fact that most of the pictures I have of important stuff are iffy cell phone pics.
My wife has printed up some of the better pics she has of the grand kids and they are all just OK. So I am considering a better camera. I don't want to go full camera nerd, but something that takes pretty good point and shoot pics but all has some good camera nerd options for getting better pictures. Go ahead and tell me about some of the lower cost "Wow, I can't believe it does all that for that price" full nerd cameras too if you want. |
|
Answer some questions to yourself first: do you want changeable lenses or not? Do you want mirrorless or not? Are you going to do sports pics where a fast shutter speed would be nice, if not necessary?
Define your budget as well. Hit Nikon, Cannon & Fuji web sites for options in that price range. Also, Nikon offers refurbished cameras at a nice discount (I'm sure others do as well but I'm a Nikon guy). Used cameras can be a nice option as you can get a better used camera than a same-priced new one. Obviously this is a bit more risky & I would only do this via a well known camera store & NOT e-bay or something. Buy a couple of digital camera magazines from a newsstand & read them ALL. Also read the ads, they're quite informative as well. Cameras are every bit as addictive as firearms, IMO. I started out with a nominal Nikon DX-format camera & now have close to $20K invested in a camera & lenses. But it DOES take damn fine pics! 
A good web site to hit is B&H Photography. I've bought from them many times & they're first class, the Brownells of cameras, if you will. Another one is Adorama & Abe's of Maine. Don't be afraid to visit a local camera store (NOT Wally World!) & tell them you want a camera but don't know jack. That's pretty much what I did when I got my first DX Nikon. Nothing wrong with admitting you need to learn something, IMO. Also visit arfcom's photography forum & surf around. I've learned a lot doing just that. Good luck! My .o2 |
|
Photography (and, especially, camera collecting) are other hobbies of mine, besides guns.
A few years ago, I would have told you to go to a local camera store and try out a few cameras within your price range. Now, however, there are very few local camera stores left. The Internet has killed them. I agree with the recommendation of B&H Photo for mail order. You can't beat their prices, and their service is first-rate. However, you don't get the hands-on experience before buying. Every major maker has a selection of simple point-and-shoot cameras that would meet your needs, and be a lot better than a cell phone for taking pictures. If your budget is around $2,000, I would suggest a full-frame DSLR that can also take video (something like a Nikon D610). But that's what's known as a pro-am, or serious amateur, camera, and would be well beyond your needs. The manual is a book that would take a month to study and learn. Consider learning the basics of photography using an old-fashioned film camera. Some are still made. |
|
Get a T4i or T5i. They are fairly reasonably priced, give you multiple lens options if you want them. They will give you good pictures and shoot good video.
If you want to use the viewfinder, great. However, they have a 3" screen that can be used as a viewfinder as well as it having a touchscreen interface that uses the same technology as the iPhone. I use them with my filmmaking students and they are rugged and will create remarkable footage for a smaller frame DSLR. They are much better than a point and shoot camera or camcorder due to the sensor size. If you and your wife like that, then you can think about a full sensor camera. B & H is a great source of info and an awesome business to deal with. I have given them over $50,000 of business and don't regret one purchase. |
|
Cameras are every bit as addictive as firearms, IMO. I started out with a nominal Nikon DX-format camera & now have close to $20K invested in a camera & lenses. But it DOES take damn fine pics! My first serious camera was a Zeiss Contaflex, back in 1963. I used to argue with my high school buddy about the merits of that, versus his Nikon F. He was right, and I was wrong. After a few years of struggling with the Contaflex, I "graduated" to the Nikon Nikkormat, and then the Nikon FM. When photography went digital, high-end film cameras could be bought very reasonably. I became a collector. I now have every model of Contaflex ever made, every model of Nikkormat, every model of the Nikon FM series, and every model of the Nikon F2 series -- plus all the arcane accessories, such as radio remote controls, motor drives, intervalometers, etc. It's definitely an addiction. The cameras that I actually use now are the Nikon D40 for travel (because of its small size), and the D610 for everything else. One of the advantages of the Nikon system is the backwards-compatibility of new cameras with older lenses. I can use many of my film lenses with the digital cameras. |
|
Canon SX series point and shoot does pretty good for me. Fairly compact, but well featured and not terribly hard to get into the more manual functions. But, consider buying a used consumer grade DSLR (the smaller body Nikon or Canons) and see how you like it. You can pick something up with a kit lens for probably $150. If you find after 6 months that it's not getting used, you can pretty much get your money back. A decent lens upgrade would run you $100 (50mm f/1.8). If the flash gets used a lot, then get a speed light. You can bounce the beam with those which gives a much more pro look than the straight on nuclear blast that will make any camera look like crap. That's what you get with any onboard or popup flash. Nasty shadows. |
|
Quoted:
I know we all carry a camera in our phones but lately I have been lamenting the fact that most of the pictures I have of important stuff are iffy cell phone pics. My wife has printed up some of the better pics she has of the grand kids and they are all just OK. So I am considering a better camera. I don't want to go full camera nerd, but something that takes pretty good point and shoot pics but all has some good camera nerd options for getting better pictures. Go ahead and tell me about some of the lower cost "Wow, I can't believe it does all that for that price" full nerd cameras too if you want. I have been doing SLRs (prosumer cameras) for more than 30 years. They are all like that these days. If you want compact to carry in your pocket, get a mirrorless. If you want really great pictures to impress your friends, go DSLR. For brands, the top two are Nikon and Canon, take your pick. For camera models, any camera they make within your budget will be great, pretty much guaranteed. I usually tell people to start with a Nikon D3300. It is their low-end DSLR, but still an amazing camera, and can be had for under $500 new. Or you can look for the D3200, the previous model (with no real significant differences for a new shooter) and find it for even less. If you went with the equivalent model from Canon, you would be happy, too. |
|
Quoted:
Consider learning the basics of photography using an old-fashioned film camera. Some are still made. Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 |
|
Quoted:
Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. Quoted:
Get a T4i or T5i. Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. From what I have been reading in reviews lately, Nikon seems to have an edge overall right now. That could change next month, of course, and the differences are subtle enough that a new shooter would never notice. |
| If you're getting a more capable camera, this book is indispensable: Understanding Exposure. |
|
There are lots of them out there, goto http://www.dpreview.com/products/cameras for good info. I'm a Nikon fan - I have four of them. For an inexpensive point and shoot I like the Nikon Coolpix camera (look at some of Zacks baby bird pics). |
I have a DSLR, but I shoot with this, mostly.
I'm pretty happy with it. If you decide later to get into more advanced techniques, this one allows you to control shutter, aperture, ISO and focus manually, but put it in Program mode and it's just a point and shoot snapshot camera that Grandma could use. http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lf1_review/ Some of the pictures I've taken with it: 
|
|
Canon frequently has phenomenal deals on refurbs....come with a full warranty. The ones I've gotten were new. They have SLRs and point/shoot. I've gotten both.....a $100+ point/shoot for $30...
$300 for a t5 with two basic lenses: http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/rebel-t5-ef-s-18-55mm-is-ii-ef-75-300mm-f-4-56-iii-kit-refurbished |
|
Quoted:
Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 Quoted:
Quoted:
Consider learning the basics of photography using an old-fashioned film camera. Some are still made. Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 I agree. I still have good Nikon 35mm film cameras. I haven't used them at all since I got digital. They are harder to work with and manage. They are harder to learn from simply because you have to wait a week to figure out what you actually did. Film takes different pictures depending on the kind of film and isn't relevant to what you will need to do with digital. Also, digital is far more flexible in terms of things like ISO settings. You can't Photoshop your pictures until they are converted to digital. And most of all, it costs a shitload of money to do anything with film. I haven't done it in years, but the last time I did, it was a minimum of 25-50 cents per picture, which would mean a simple photo trip like I do with digital would cost $100 to $200, or more. That's an expensive hobby, just in the cost of film and developing. I have done film. No more. |
|
Quoted:
I agree. I still have good Nikon 35mm film cameras. I haven't used them at all since I got digital. They are harder to work with and manage. They are harder to learn from simply because you have to wait a week to figure out what you actually did. Film takes different pictures depending on the kind of film and isn't relevant to what you will need to do with digital. Also, digital is far more flexible in terms of things like ISO settings. You can't Photoshop your pictures until they are converted to digital. And most of all, it costs a shitload of money to do anything with film. I haven't done it in years, but the last time I did, it was a minimum of 25-50 cents per picture, which would mean a simple photo trip like I do with digital would cost $100 to $200, or more. That's an expensive hobby, just in the cost of film and developing. I have done film. No more. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Consider learning the basics of photography using an old-fashioned film camera. Some are still made. Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 I agree. I still have good Nikon 35mm film cameras. I haven't used them at all since I got digital. They are harder to work with and manage. They are harder to learn from simply because you have to wait a week to figure out what you actually did. Film takes different pictures depending on the kind of film and isn't relevant to what you will need to do with digital. Also, digital is far more flexible in terms of things like ISO settings. You can't Photoshop your pictures until they are converted to digital. And most of all, it costs a shitload of money to do anything with film. I haven't done it in years, but the last time I did, it was a minimum of 25-50 cents per picture, which would mean a simple photo trip like I do with digital would cost $100 to $200, or more. That's an expensive hobby, just in the cost of film and developing. I have done film. No more. Me too. But I still look at my closet full of film equipment and get all  .
|
|
Quoted: Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 Quoted: Quoted: Consider learning the basics of photography using an old-fashioned film camera. Some are still made. Allow me to politely but strongly disagree. With digital one can immediately see if one needs to re-take a pic, i.e. someone with their eyes closed for example. With film, you never have that opportunity until it's too late. Not to mention being able to download a thousand digital pics w/o having to pay for them ala` film processing (even using a proof sheet). While I am as nostalgic over older technology as the next guy, film cameras for novices aren't the way to go, IMO. My .o2 If you're serious about getting waaay ahead on the learning curve, spend $100 on a used consumer-end Nikon DSLR body (smallest body they make--D40 or newer), and another $100 on an old manual lens. Read the Understanding Exposure and google "Sunny 16". The camera won't meter with the manual lens, but between those two references, you'll be proficient in how to drive the camera in manual mode in a matter of days and making deliberate choices in ISO, shutter, and aperture. |
|
Quoted:
Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. Quoted:
Get a T4i or T5i. Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. Guess what side of the fence I'm on? Honestly, you couldn't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon. I'd even suggest a mirrorless from Sony or Panasonic, but they are probably too expensive for the OP. |
|
Quoted: Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. Quoted: Get a T4i or T5i. Well, there are Canon people, and then there are Nikon people. Two different worlds. It's like arguing whether chili should contain beans, or no beans. I'm a Nikon guy only because that's what I grew up with. Canon also makes wonderful cameras. If I were starting from scratch I would feel comfortable in purchasing either one. |
|
Quoted:
I know we all carry a camera in our phones but lately I have been lamenting the fact that most of the pictures I have of important stuff are iffy cell phone pics. My wife has printed up some of the better pics she has of the grand kids and they are all just OK. So I am considering a better camera. I don't want to go full camera nerd, but something that takes pretty good point and shoot pics but all has some good camera nerd options for getting better pictures. Go ahead and tell me about some of the lower cost "Wow, I can't believe it does all that for that price" full nerd cameras too if you want. http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/premium-compact-cameras/dl24-85-f%252f1.8-2.8.html https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/point-and-shoot/advanced-cameras/powershot-g7-x-mark-ii |
|
Find out how much money you want to spend and then look here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM |
|
Things look pretty well in hand, I can't really top the recommendations made here.
I can suggest coming to visit over in the photography forum for information and more interaction with the real camera nerds. 
|
|
Quoted:
$7500 point-n-shoot or go home!  Eh, my point and shoot is a relatively cheap one. The sensor on it isn't that great, it doesn't offer manual controls, doesn't even shoot raw. But I like it. Mainly because of the 100ft waterproof rating without a housing...but it also manages to take fairly decent pictures. Pictures from the AW130 that I use (and the prior AW120 that has the same sensor) are featured heavily in this thread with pics from my most recent explorations of a local swamp. Check it out. |
|
I'm a Nikon guy only because that's what I grew up with.
Canon also makes wonderful cameras. If I were starting from scratch I would feel comfortable in purchasing either one. Well, that's just the thing -- photographers going into digital from a film background already have an investment in lenses. That tends to lock them into a particular brand. I know that Nikon has made a big deal about backwards compatibility. A newbie can go with any brand, but he should realize that it limits him to the lens selection of that brand, for the future. Nikon has a excellent reputation regarding their optics. BTW, most DSLR's come with "kit lenses" that are zooms. These are versatile, but they are slow (maximum aperture of f4, if you're lucky), and they are bulky. I prefer a faster, prime lens. My standard is the 50mm f1.4, for a full-frame camera. I use a pancake 45mm f2.8 on my D40, which is a DX-format (crop sensor) camera. That makes for a very compact package. |
