What's the best entrylevel DSLR or mirrorless in 2016 in your opinion and why?
Also: suggest 2 lenses
1 to start with
2 to upgrade
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 520 Image Height 298 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2010:07:11 13:31:30 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 425 Image Height 208
>>2760315
Used X-Pro 1 + lens adapter + vintage fast nifty fifty (dime a dozen, you can get a nice one for $25 - $50 no problem) + vintage wide lens (28 or 35mm depending on where your favor lies
For DSLR: whatever Canikon camera meets your budget + the two kit lenses
>>2760322
is that worth it? I thought lens adapters were expensive or at least making it not worth it compared to the fuji 50mm
>>2760329
by that I mean the 35 since that's the 50 equiv
>>2760329
a lens adapter will costs you 20$ max.
>>2760329
>expensive
oh no my son
the Fuji lenses on the other hand are really quite expensive
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Tom Yarnold Image-Specific Properties:
>>2760333
holy fug I thought that rando company that sells £300 lens adapters was standard. Shiieet so what's the best budget 35mm lens I can get on this fuji?
>>2760333
i suggest buying k&f concept adapters. they're heavier but better quality controlled.
the fotga and other no brand are shit.
>>2760338
as in 35mm full frame equivalent or just 35mm? You have to remember the Fuji is a crop sensor camera. The crop is 1.6x, so a 35mm lens would actually look like a 55mm on the Fuji.
>>2760338
those are metajews with autofocus.
any first party lens would be good. just check out for conditions.
3rd parties are a mixed bag. if they used tokina, it should be find.
check out what's available for sale and check pentaxforums.
>>2760322
Analog control dials and no autofocus is hardly a good starting point for anyone besides autists
if you don't care about ovf or evf then I recommend a used Fuji X-E2 and either 27mm or 35mm (depending on needs: f/1.4 or f/2) depending an your budget.
>>2760341
fuji crop is 1.54 so it's a ~52mm which perfectly ok.
>>2760345
I fail to see how? You learn the basics of photography in a tactile manner, e.g stops make a lot more sense when they're actually clicks on a shutter speed dial or an aperture ring. Plus the X-Pro has focus peaking which makes manual focus easy mode. Learning how to manually control exposure does beginners far more good than full auto everything.
>>2760346
my mistake, was recalling off the top of my head.
>>2760341
yea I meant 35 -> 50mm
>>2760351
Really anything 'name brand' you can get your hands on. If you look on specific brand forums they usually have a lens review section, and you can find exactly what you want there. I like Leica M mount lenses but generally they're rather pricey. In general you'll need something with an aperture ring since the lens will have no electronic contact with the camera.
>>2760345
>>2760347 is right here. It saves the costs and time of developing film, but the learning experience the same as starting photography by shooting film.
Most people shooting manual with their DSLR are autist needle matchers who shoot manually for the sake of it.
>>2760356
a good manual 35mm costs the same, if not even more than any of the Fuji 35mm.
>>2760357
You reckon? The Fuji 35mm F1.4 is $600 USD, a decent 35mm manual lens would set you back less than a third of that, easily
>>2760358
You're just checked: The lenses sell on ebay for 380-420eur. So, depending on what manual 35mm you get it's cheaper.
>>2760362
*You're right, I just checked..
posting from mobile sucks
>>2760315
d700 and a decent nikon lens
you don't need more than 12 megapickles
D7100, the kit lens and a 35mm 1.8G DX
>>2760338
Speed boosters and autofocus adapters are expensive. Metal tubes to match flange distances are inexpensive.
>>2760358
>als and no autofocus is hardly a good sta
35mm f/2 is weather sealed, optically excellent, small, autofocus, and $400 USD.
Which other lenses provide anything in the same ballpark for less? Half sarcasm, half genuinely asking hoping to find some lens I am unaware of.
>>2760357
Maybe its just me, but most of the auto-semi auto modes on every camera I owned would spaz the fuck out when the lighting was something other than "sunny" and give me results that I didn't really like, and then I'd have to spend more time that I wanted to trying to fix things after the fact.
Eventually I started using manual most of the time, unless I feel like being lazy and I can be reasonably certain that the camera will do what I want it to do.
>>2760403
I'm not sure what cameras you've been using, so I can't say for sure, but it seems as though you just aren't using them correctly, with metering modes and EV comp.
There's no magic involved, and there's no little man inside making decisions for you, it's just math, and math is completely predictable.
>>2760407
They were all beat up used shit tier things with decent lenses stuck on up until the D810 I got.
And nah, having a not-beat up camera now, I'm pretty sure everything else on the bodies I tossed in the garbage was set right. I'm a remote sensing guy by trade/training too, so I'm not entirely clueless on how cameras and a lot of these sensors operate either.
>>2760315
best dslr is the pentax k-3
best mirrorless is the a6000 with kit lens.
>>2760322
Where do you purchase the vintage fast glass? Where do you get an adapter to fit the lens
>>2761395
id say its more worth to go for the sigma 19 or 30mm instead of kit lens.
>>2761395
>best mirrorless
on paper maybe but the lens selection is god awful.
>>2762760
>on paper
That's /p/ for you.
>>2762761
/p/ is always right.
>>2760315
>entrylevel DSLR or mirrorless in 2016
sony a6000
>why
because it's relatively cheap and takes better pictures than all of the cameras in the same price range in most conditions
>lens to start with
def the kit lens
>lens to upgrade
depends on what you want really
I'd say the sony 28mm if you want a prime
or the sony designed zeiss 16-70 F4 if you want a zoom
for the price, you cant beat a $650 K-3
>>2760315
DSLR - Pentax K3
>fucking steal for $650. Superb image quality, a rugged body and IBIS.
Option: Nikon D7200, Pentax K50 or used K5 (II/s).
Mirrorless - Sony A6000
>beast of a camera. Looks kinda like babbys first camera but has a shitload to offer. Great IQ and Video options.
Option: New a6300 or used A7.
I am not going to list any lenses as there are too many good ones out there. It'd be a very hard choice to make.
>>2762984
I want to buy a6000 so much. Should I buy it now or wait until a6300 released? Now I am sporting father's old Canon EOS-1D Classic. Would I see an upgrade in photo quality? Especially low light?
>>2763003
Feel free to wait a little bit more as I am certain about another price drop once the a6300 hits shelves. I've had the a6000 myself (bought it when it was ~$650 new) and I totally loved the overall quality. You'll definitely see improvements in both image quality and low light situations as the a6000 offers great dynamic range. Be sure to get some adapters so you can use some delicious Canon EF glass on the a6k. There are a couple ones on the market that offer auto focus and aperture support so it's a whole new world in terms of adapting lenses from other manufacturers.
I'd definitely buy the a6k again. Great camera.
>>2760315
what's the best fuji mirrorles to start with? (never had a dslr or mirrorless but I shot film with a slr)
>>2764785
You can get a X Pro 1 with a lens or two for a pretty good price these days.
>>2760315
Generally you are better off saving a bit and gettin into higher and bodies and invest in better glass.
But as it was mentioned, the XPro1 sells at a phenomenal low price and the lenses for the fuji X System, except the XC Versions are godlike.
>>2766446
What lenses? How much are they each?
>>2766449
They have the XF Lenses wich primes are really leica tier. And they have the consumer grade XC lenses (which are just 2 or 3 i guess). All the primes are generally very fast (1.2 or 1.4).
Cost depends on how new the lens entered production and if it is weather sealed or not and also how fast it is. Just look it up at ebay, i can only speak for my german prices.
>>2764785
X-E2, X-T10, X-T1
The Fuji system is still coming of age, and the newer you go, the less growing pains you'll be dealing with. It really depends on what you're trying to do with it.
>>2766449
Also one thing to consider with the fuji system is that the lenses are focus by wire! That means you are not actually moving the lens elemtns when turning the focus ring, but the autofocus motor is controlled by that in MF mode.
Some people hate it, some like it. I took quite a bit to get used to that but it doesnt bother me now. Never the less you could use adapters to put on some vintage glass for manual focusing climax.
>>2766459
Leica? That seems a bit exaggerated.
>>2766464
I've been shooting on the X-T1 for about a year and a half now, shooting street, still life, portraits, and travel, and have never once used the manual focus rings for shooting. I played with them a couple of days ago to see what it was like (Hearing the video of the X-Pro2 would be improved made me wonder how the focus by wire system would work with video) and I can say that it really really depends on the lens. The 18-55 may as well not be focus by wire, it's so smooth, natural, quiet, and fast. The 35mm f/2 jitters like crazy, and can be heard. The 23mm also jitters, but it's more rapid-fire so the "steps" are a lot smaller and more smooth. Still not as smooth as the 18-55. The 50-140 is also very very smooth, and I've heard from others that the 16-50 is on par with the 18-55 in this area.
Either way, it's not really something to even mention unless manual focus is something you actively want, going in. The AF is very very accurate on all of the Fuji bodies (and all mirrorless cameras in general, I believe) and very fast and reliable on the newer ones.
>>2766466
Is there a guide to Fuji lenses?
>>2766473
I'm sure there are, if you google it. What are you looking for in particular?
>>2766475
Ehh, just comparing lens selection to mft lense selection. Considering if it's worth the switch or not. Most of the mft lenses are cheap, great,and ultra portable. Lots of pancake lenses or otherwise small lenses that make the system ultra portable and light. While weather sealed lenses aren't a priority of mine, Fuji does seem to have lots of weather sealed lenses, though they are expensive.
>>2760384
Metajew's speed boosters are expensive, off brand ones are 1 third the price if not even less, usually the only differences are the housing and the coating on the actual elements, as well as no AF
>>2766465
When i put my 35mm Summicron f2 against my fujinon xf35 f1.4 after f 8 i cannot tell them apart qualitywise when i both use them on my XT-1.
They are just really good, thats it.
>>2766479
Most of the Fuji lenses are NOT weather sealed. The newer ones are, but the older ones are not. The lenses labeled WR have weather sealing.
Fuji has both small and large lenses. The fast "pro" ones are generally larger, but you'll have that with a larger sensor.
I came from a 5Dmk2, and I feel that the X-T1 is a hell of a lot smaller, but I still wouldn't call it "small". Though for me, small is a cell phone. Anything with a lens sticking out of the front is still on a shoulder strap or in a bag for me.
For me, the X-T1 with kit lens or 35mm on the front feels pretty much the same size as my old SLRs felt. My X370, or ME Super. Just general "body feel" of having it around. Not sure if that helps. The X-E series is smaller and thinner.
In all honestly, you should just go somewhere and pick one up if you're able to. That's really the only way you'll know.
>>2766487
>after f/8
wut
>>2766466
I was interested in the 35mm f2 because i heared it had very quiet af compared to the 35mm f1.4 i personally own right now. But does it really jitter that hard? I cannot believe this new lens can be as audible as mine.
>>2766491
Fujinon isnt as sharp from 1.2 up to approx 5.6.
The Leica is sharp even at the fast apetures. But at f 8 and FURTHER i cannot spot any difference. Notice thats just my experience and i was not testing it with a very scientific metho if you have it that way.
>>2766493
I had both lenses at the same time (I replaced the f/1.4 with the f/2)
The f/2 is a LOT quieter than the f/1.4. The only reason I made the comment about hearing it in video is because the mic would be attached to the body and would pick it up a little. "It can be heard" is not anywhere near "It's really obnoxious and distracting" like the f/1.4. What you've heard is true it's a dramatic improvement in that arena.
It really only seems loud in comparison against the 18-55 which is completely silent as it focus.
And I just picked it up again to try it out to get a better impression for you. There's very soft music on in the room I'm in (you can hear footsteps on carpet over the music) and if the focusing happens on the beat to the music, you can't hear it.
But with on-board audio, it would be picked up I believe.
At this point, I see no reason to buy a crop DSLR body, except as a tele body for sports shooters.
For a truly entry-level camera, I'd probably go with an A6000/6300. It seems to be the best balance of usability, size, price, and performance, and has a decent lens selection and aftermarket.
For DSLRs, I think I'd go with the D610 or maybe D750. You get a great FF sensor with a good amount of pixels, decent build quality and sealing, a great VF, built-in control of Nikon's excellent TTL flash system, and the ability to use decades worth of manual lenses.
When I retired from pro sports shooting, I sold off my D3S and D300S and bought a D610. I mostly shoot relatively static subjects now, and the D610 is much less of a pain to lug around, plus it provides better IQ in good light and means I don't have to use a speedlight as a commander when shooting with external strobes, which was a real pain with the D3. (I do PR/Media for a company that makes race cars and parts for race cars, so most of my shooting is stuff going on around the shop, cool cars that we're working on, and basic product photography.)
>>2766499
As i dont shoot video i dont care. I used to have the 18-55 and really liked the quiet and fast focus, but iam just more of a prime shooter. And i noticed that the 35mm 1.4 is a bit to loud for stealthy street shots.
But if you say it vastly improves on that ill propably not only get the XPro2 but trade the faster lens for the slower but quiter and better focusing one.
>>2766503
That is exactly as I have done (Includng the XPro2 preorder) and I'm pleased with the 35 f/2 so far. I was confident and happy enough to have sold the f/1.4 a couple of weeks ago. The focus is faster, there's no push-pull on focus to lock, it's quiet, it doesn't feel as hollow, etc. It's a good upgrade that I would happily do again. Losing the f/1.4 makes me a little itchy but it hasn't been an issue yet, and with the 23 f/1.4 I still have my low-light covered, and with the 50-140, I still have portraits covered.
everyone says either the pentax k-3 or the a6000, what if you had to choose between the two of them?
a6000 is cheaper so you can blow more on lenses, however it's lacking glass. and i'm getting mixed reviews about the k-3, some people say it's great others say it's okay but to get it's competitors instead.
i know the main differences between the two but i'm just curious what you guys would go with.
>>2767924
After being with the X-T1 for a while, I can't go back to an OVF, so I'd say the a6000, though I don't care for the ergonomics or lenses. I also don't like the lenses on Pentax, so there's that.
>>2767924
Find like a best buy and hold them.
I'm almost positive that will make up your mind for you.
As for me personally, I'm outdoorsy as hell, so the rugged design of the pentax seals the deal for me. I can work around things like sensor performance, but I can't baby a camera in the field.
>>2768022
If you want good video, The Panasonic GH(2/3/4) will be pretty good, but micro 4/3rds.
If you don't need video, the X-E2, or X-T10 could be very good.
The a6000 may have all that you need, so don't just take my dislike for it as a condemnation, it just didn't have the lenses I want, in the sizes I wanted, and I very much preferred the feel and usage of the Fuji as well, but not because the Sony was bad, merely because it was very... clynical. Which lots of people enjoy.
I have the a6000. Fan-fucking-tastic camera. The 50mm f/1.8 really made it the perfect street/everyday camera and I use it with a battery grip for studio work.
I just got a used a7 today and I'm even more blown away at how much cropping there was between full frame and APS-C. Even more happy that they both use the same E-mount and battery.
Picture related; moments after my purchase.
>>2768059
You walk around every day with a 75mm prime equivalent? Strange.
>>2768062
I've never used a full frame 50mm before the a7, so I didn't have any reference of how much cropping there was. It worked for me in the sense that it made me more aware of positional composition in street shooting instead of spamming the shutter at everything.
>>2768065
>made me more aware of positional composition in street shooting instead of spamming the shutter at everything
What? What does one have to do with the other? Other than you had a lot more trouble getting things in the frame, and had to slow down and say "hold on let me back up" more often?
>>2768068
It wasn't like that at all. I never had a full frame camera to compare crop factors, so whatever I saw through my camera was what that lens was to me. So 50mm on my camera was what I referenced 50mm as, even though its a 75mm crop equivalent.
I never had any framing difficulties since after using it for a day or two, you get used to how much distance you need between you and your elements. Moving to full frame with the same reference of distance to a crop sensor meant everything I use now will be a lot wider.
>>2768062
I also have an a6000; what would you recommend as a walk-around lens if not the 50mm/f1.8?
>>2768094
Something in the range of 20 to 35mm. Things in the 50mm lens are usually used for wide portraiture. People like to be wider for walk-around stuff generally because they can't get close enough to their subjects for intimacy and involvement. Even 50mm on full frame, many people find too tight for walk-around stuff.
Reminder that if you jump into mirrorless you will not be able to do sports or wildlife photography.
>>2768352
You are completely wrong:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIakt30iBGY
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jackez2010/ <- Note it's not all MILC, but also many SLT. Still, plenty of MILC shots to prove you simply wrong.
>>2768094
If you are liking the 50mm and never struggle with how tight it is, don't get another lens. I shoot mainly portraits when I carry my APS-C+50mm and I can just move back for almost any shot. Plus showing more background doesn't help my composition much in most cases.
>>2768352
gr8b8
Fuji XE-2 with the 18mm F2 and if you have the money the 35mm F1.4 or 2.0 depending on budget. Xpro 1 is not getting anymore updates and the XE has 4.0 so lots more features.
