Soooo /p/ i'm going to buy my first DSLR, but i just don't know which one i should get. Don't want to make a mistake, since i don't want to spend my money on some Meme-Cameras.
Took all my pics with my smartphone and now i want to improve my photography. Heard the Canon d5500 is good for beginner, or the canon 5d mark I. The Nikon d3100 could be also a good beginner camera.
I just don't wan't to buy a shit tier camera, even i i could get a better one for the same money.
Will bump the Threads with some Tryhard pics from me
I'm thankful for every advice
Original pic
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Sony Camera Model D6503 Camera Software 23.5.A.0.575_6_f100000f Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:17 18:54:01 Exposure Time 1/10000 sec F-Number f/2.0 ISO Speed Rating 64 Exposure Bias -2 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.90 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3840 Image Height 2160 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Subject Distance Range Unknown
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Sony Camera Model E6653 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1688 Image Height 3000 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 2016:06:13 00:38:55 Focal Length 4.23 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1688 Image Height 3000 Unique Image ID 75912788e8617c190000000000000000
>>>/p/sticky/
>>>/p/gear/
You didn't even say what your budget is or what you want to shoot, so you could actually just get
>>>/out/
>>2875235
well i think i can spend anything up to 500-600
Have seen the sticky just now, even tought i am lurking on /p/ for quite some time
Well i am still thankfull
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Sony Camera Model E6653 Camera Software Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:07:03 16:03:43 Exposure Time 1/1250 sec F-Number f/2.0 ISO Speed Rating 40 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.23 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2160 Image Height 3840 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Landscape Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2875236
It's a picture of somebody's back with a tilted horizon
give up before you've spent any money on this
>>2875242
well i was on a boat and just took a photo ofmy gf, never claimed that i want to be a pro photographer.
I haven't even edited the photo yet.
hey op, im searching for a first camera too. nikon 3300 seems to be a pretty great starter, that's what I'm saving for.
>>2875362
I've started not so much time ago with d3300, and i'm really happy with it
>>2875245
Why did you make this thread then. Post more of your gf or leave
OP, you can get plastic consumer crop cameras 5-8 years old and great condition for 500-600 with lens, or you can get ~8-10 years old professional.
You won't benefit shit from pro bodies but you'll be happy to have one later on if you stick to the hobby.
Pro bodies usually have more immediate crucial control buttons and levers etc whereas consumer tier cameras have only a handful and the rest of the options must be set from menus or from the on-screen gui. Canon does a good job on their consumer line on this.
Pro bodies, especially full frame have bigger or much bigger viewfinders which you will love. Crop sensor bodies always have smaller finders, but Canon lowest price bodies have tiny, almost unusable finders. Go look thru one and compare.
Canon wins over Nikon in almost every aspect, but this is usually trivial. Just pick a year and look for the best bodies of that time frame, both Canon and Nikon will deliver stellar image quality for their classes.
All Nikon lenses utilise the same lens mount, so if you're in a tight budget you can buy an old Nikon body and still get stellar manual fous lenses for less than 100 bucks a piece if you're lucky. I bought a Nikon D200 with a manual focusing screen (microprism collar + split image) and two great Nikkor Ai primes for 450€.
With bodies of about 8-10 years of age performance in high-ISO and sensor megapixels are really bad. 12 Mp is okay. 18Mp is more than enough. Anything bigger than that is waste. You won't be printing 24'' by 36''. If you do, both Canon and Nikon have 50Mp and 36Mp lines, respectively, but these are pretty new and costly cameras.
If you get an old body, get fast glass. That iso 3200 is most likely unusable.
Canon has better user interface and usability. With Nikon you will be scrolling menus a bit, but they are well laid out for most things you need. Nikon needs more time setting up. But if you get a great deal on Nikon and some glass, never let "but Canon" be your excuse.
>>2875741
Also don't buy a pro body and think it will be worth more later to sell in exchange for new gear. This is how it goes with anything digital equipment in any trade ever:
>consumer shit is worth lots new, worth something used, worth nothing old
>pro shit is worth shit ton new, worth reasonable prices used, worth something old, worth nothing ancient
Generally you get a better price to performance ration on used pro bodies than used consumer bodies of same age, but it's never an investment.
I'd say goto a box store and actually hold a camera in your hand but places like best buy only carry nikon and canon and both of those feel like cheap plastic trash on the entry to mid tier levels. your price range. might as well hold a kid's fisher price toy in comparison.
>>2875236
She looks like a quadruple amputee in your pic (no arms, no legs) - just a head and torso. This is actually my fetish, post more of this girl, nudes if you have 'em.
Whatever you do, don't listen to those shitposter idiots recommending the 5D Mk 1 as a low-budget beginner camera. It's so hopelessly outclassed by even entry-level APS-C cameras. Plenty of other big-body DSLRs available if you need a doorstop and don't want to buy into the full-frame meme.
>>2875224
OP, I'm a professional photographer. I use a canon 5d mark iii. It's big and heavy and super expensive. The body is over two grand. Each lens cost thousands of dollars. You don't want a camera like this, it's no fun to shoot with and not something you would drag on vacation.
Get a Sony A6000 mirrorless instead. Smaller, lighter, and fun to use. Has an awesome viewfinder on the back and a great selection of lenses. It even has built-in WiFi. I mount mine on the end of a 16 foot painter's pole and use my cel to trigger it remotely.
>>2875741
I haven't actually tought to get good replys besides more shit or hatepost. So thanks to everyone who replied!
Like seriously, this was unexpected for me. I'll look now for a Sony Alpha 6k
A d3300
And a lumix k-30 or k-50
For now i am still for a sony alpha 6k
But seriously anons, i am happy about every single reply. Thanks for that.
You made my decision more clear.
Especially the anon who wrote so much to make clear what is more like a camera meme and what not.
Maybe the answers in this thread are even usefull for some other anons who are confused with the gear threads or the sticky.
Well thanks!
Not OP, but also looking to buy my first DSLR. Price range is between $200-$300. I've shot film all my life, and want to give digital a go without investing too much into it. Just wanna do street photography and long exposures at night. Any tips on what I should look for and avoid?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3100 Camera Software Ver.1.01 Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.5 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 37236 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 27 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2013:10:06 03:46:48 Exposure Time 1/20 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source White Fluorescent Flash Flash, Compulsory, Return Detected Focal Length 18.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4608 Image Height 3072 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown ISO Speed Used 800 Image Quality FINE White Balance WHITE FL Focus Mode AF-A Flash Setting NORMAL Auto Flash Mode Built-in,TTL Flash Compensation 0.0 EV ISO Speed Requested 800 Flash Bracket Compensation 0.0 EV AE Bracket Compensation 162111488.0 EV Lens Type Nikon G Series Lens Range 18.0 - 55.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6 Shooting/Bracketing Mode Single Frame/Off Noise Reduction OFF Camera Actuations 2118
>>2875224
Unrelated, but what did you use to edit that photo? The cloud looks cool as shit.
>>2875818
Keep telling yourself that, you clueless cropfag. 5Dc is still not outclassed by Canon APS-C bodies in:
>high ISO performance
In theory newer cameras go to higher ISOs, but 5D still beats them at ISO 1600
>low ISO noise
>sharpness
Those 12 megapixels of pixel level sharpness are just as good as best APS-C on the market, especially if both are used with affordable lenses
>dynamic range
Canon was shit in this aspect for many years, they basically stopped improving a decade ago, util 80D which is around 2 stops better
>colour depth
The most important advantages are its viewfinder size and FOV with full-frame lenses.
5Dc is a bad choice for sports and wildlife, but BY FAR the best low budget option for portraits.
Buying into a system is not such a good idea if you don't know what you need. Camera is just one part of it. In the end it all depends on your preferences. I like using small cameras. I use my mirrorless camera more then my DSLR. Sony Alpha is great, but the lenses are overpriced imo. You can adapt Canon EF glass, but AF becomes slower and small mirrorless system bulkier, which defeats its purpose.
For 500-600 you can get more then just a camera and 18-55 kit lens. If you want the biggest bang for your buck, you should buy an older camera body. Canon 50D in good condition and lower shutter count(with Magic Lantern, becomes capable video tool), used 18-135mm IS, Yongnuo 50mm, and a cheapest chinese TTL flash that is a copy of a copy like Triopo or something.
If speed and autofocus are not important to you, its possible to go even older and get a dirt cheap used Canon 20D. Huge resolution difference on paper is much less apparent in practice, especially when used with cheaper zoom lenses or wide apertures on affordable prime lenses. In other aspects Canon sensors barely improved in the past decade(until 80D), so this option is not as dumb as it sounds. With that you can squeeze in one more lens, for example a used Canon 10-18mm.
>>2877962
Not outclassed by Canon bodies, that I can't comment on. But the Nikon D7000 and later cameras kick the shit out of it. Hell, even the D3200 is superior. The D3300 even earned a higher ISO score than the 5d. They're barely inferior for low-light but beat it in every other aspect, plus have more modern AF, live view, better screens, and video.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D3300-versus-Nikon-D7000-versus-Canon-EOS-5D___928_680_176
But please, call me a "clueless cropfag" some more because I think it's a terrible idea for a beginner to buy a dinosaur. It's absolutely still a good camera but it's just not a sensible choice for a beginner. It's not even just outdated anymore, it's obsolete.
>>2878250
If you examine comparisons you posted a little closer(click on "measurments"), you will see that those cameras don't "kick the shit" out of 5Dc in any aspect except D7000 in dynamic range at lowest possible ISO. At ISO 400 there is only a stop difference and after that, they even out in dynamic range.
Only other big difference is the screen quality. 5D is pretty dated in that regard, but 5Dc kicks the shit out of D3200(thats the closest contender in the price range) in viewfinder size, physical controls, and bokeh.
It also has a bit more rugged construction, and few more important functions like bigger bracketing range. D3200 has more options, but they are mostly useless nooby things like filters.
>They're barely inferior for low-light
Yes, but with that pixel density i wonder how D3200/D3300 behave with widest apertures. This is useless for OP, but i have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.2, and back in the day, when i tried to use it on D80 i noticed it is a bit darker then it should be on widest setting.
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/F-stop-blues
>24 megapixels vs 12 megapixels
pic related
>I think it's a terrible idea for a beginner to buy a dinosaur.
If a beginner is interested in portrait photography its the best idea there is.
> It's not even just outdated anymore, it's obsolete.
LOL, its "absolutely still a good camera" but obsolete?
It does suck for sports for example, but it was not considered good for that even when it came out...
>>2875859
You're triggering me remotely, m8.
>>2875224
Pentax K-5 or K-5ii and Tamron 18-50 f2.8
I've got a k5 and the sigma 17-50 f2.8, it's not that much sharper for a LOT of money.
Pentax really shines in the used market, because they aren't well known the used prices are rock bottom. If you're buying new (which the Canon t5i might be an excellent option) Canon is more cost effective.
