Camera Noob - need help
 

I love to take pictures. I have always been a point-and-shoot kind of guy and now I have shifted almost exclusively to my iPhone unless I am traveling. I don't really edit my pictures and I don't really need to win any awards.

What I would like to have is a high performance camera that will deliver high quality pictures, have multiple options on lenses and is fairly durable. I will want to take pictures of everything from Museums to soccer games to double backroll mobes (not that I can do one).

I really do not where to start. I haven't really set a budget at this point so I am pretty open. Any general direction you guys can give me?

Seven years laters and I didn't even know that was there. Thanks.

Point and shoot cams are so nice now a days so don't think you need a big bulky cam with switch out lenses to take amazing photos. IMO taking pictures has to fit into your life style. Example if a camera is small and easy to pack away you're re likely to bring it along camping or on a hike or on a bike ride and THATs where you get some of the best shots. So the #1 thing for me is having the ability to bring it along.

So I saw Samsung has a new Web Based camera. It's a 14 to 16 Mega Pixel camera with built in Wi-Fi So it's a point and shoot camera with 22 times optical zoom that has a Smart Phone built into it. It's got a 7 inch touch screen on the back side of it. It looks super cool and easy to use.

Here is a link to the cam Sony also makes a Wi-Fi cam as well
http://m.samsung.com/us/photography/...cid=ppc-#specs

holy cow, that's expensive for a point and shoot! But I guess you could play angry birds on it too?

Another low(er) budget option would be something like a "superzoom". I have the (now outdated) panasonic FZ35. The FZ60 is about $350 online (http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-...keywords=FZ200)

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...L._AA1500_.jpg

I took these pics and vid from the bullards thread with the FZ35:

http://i824.photobucket.com/albums/z...y/b1b4a691.jpg

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...03281868_o.jpg

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rH2Au2NK8xM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Shawndoggy has a good point, BUT.........nothing, and I mean nothing can match an SLR. With that said, absolutely NOTHING can do the job better than a 28-300 mm lens. Having an all-in-one lens is the only way to go IMO. 28mm allows you all your close ups, and 300mm allows you to bring a wake boarder in up super close. As an armature photographer, subject matter is everything.

I have a nikon SLR with a 28-250 lens. My new choice would be the D700 and a 28 to 300 lens. Had it 4 years, it goes with me everywhere and the pictures I capture with friends and family are stunning. To be 70 feet away and take a picture that seems you are only 10 feet away is priceless. People do not like having a camera in their face, you'll never be able to capture really good natural pictures this way. When your 70 feet away (or more) people feel much more relaxed and comfortable and the pictures are far more realistic.

Yes, as Shawndoggy mentioned its big and bulky but it out performs a LUMINX 10 to 1. So here's the give and take scenario.

In the end, it's not about pixels what so ever. This lingo is only second or third to importance these days. It's about the lens and expect to pay upwards of $600 to $900 for a really really good lens.

Another aspect of a good lens is it's ability to take great photo's in low light conditions.

Nikon AFS 28-300/3.5-5.6 http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/04/26...03-5-5-6-vr-g/

Lol don't get me wrong, I'm shopping for a consumer dslr now. D3200 vs t4i is my current conundrum.

If you're looking to get into a DSLR do yourself a favor, grab a older body for a few hundred dollars(Craigslist is a good spot)and spend the rest of your budget on glass. Bodies are essentially throw away items, but good glass will follow you from body to body. Most new photogs look for the best body they can afford and spend 'whatever is left over' on glass....they're doing it wrong.

unless you are looking to shoot video too... the newer bodies are much better on that front.

I'm a camera Noob to I started this thread a month or two ago.

http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=795847

I ended up getting a Cannon T3 with a lens for 349.00 off of dealnews.com. Its a starter DSLR but my wife loves it and for that kind of money I couldn't go wrong.
You should check out dealnews.com, They have new speacials every day on all kinds of stuff.

Great info guys - thank you. Starter DSLR seems like the right way to go. I do take some videos from time to time but it isn't my focus. When you say bodies are essentially throw aways - what kind of bodies would make the most sense? Any brands or models that have particularly good feedback/reviews/durability etc? I have no idea what I would look for if I was assessing a used body. Any advice?

I like the sound of this 28-250 lens - sounds like it is right up my alley.

PBP, I'm really leaning towards getting one of these: http://www.costco.com/Nikon-D3200-DS...&storeId=10301

That costco deal is the best one I can find by about $50.

Why wouldn't I get that costco deal? It looks amazing!

It depends on how serious you become. Both of those kit lenses are pretty slow and both receive 'okay' reviews.You'll struggle in low light with them.

What is your budget?

I'm gonna sell my entry level DSLR set up.

Canon Rebel XTI
Stock 18-55 lens w/ cover
Camera Bag
Chargers (house/car)
Memory cards
lens filters, etc
tripod
Low snap count - rarely used.

$200. PM me if you want info/pics.

I clearly have no idea what I am doing. lol. I am open on the budget - I don't want to buy something entry level and then a year from now have to upgrade. I would like to have this set up for a while.

Best buy is running a deal on the T3i on Friday....you should be able to lock something down for cheap if you look around. T3i, D5100, T4i....all great choices. I am not sold on the D3200 just yet, but haven't researched it much either.

a few things I like more about the d3200 bundle over the best buy t3i deal:

d3200 comes with the wifi adapter which lets you use your smartphone as a remote and also automatically transfer files from camera to phone. Also d3200 shoots just a little faster (4 fps vs 3.7). Also for video, the d3200 will continuously autofocus, where the t3i requires you to pull focus manually. That's probably not a huge deal for shooting video from the boat because your focal point is at a fixed length on a rope.

Also the same t3i kit from amazon is probably cheaper in the end considering free shipping and no sales tax: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Processo...i+18-55+55-250

Seems like I've read that for video the kit lens you want with canon is the 18-135 (as in this kit)

glass looks about the same between the costco d3200 kit and the best buy t3i kit?

What does 'open on the budget' mean? Give me a ceiling to work under.

Then stay away from kits. They're usually mediocre glass(at best) which is the heart of your image quality. If you decide to become semi-serious you will quickly exhaust the capability of kits lenses,
I would spend a few weeks researching Fred Miranda website, these types of questions are asked day after day. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/

If I were in your shoes I'd grab an older 40D
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 (or 4.0 is)
and a nifty 50.

The 50mm can be had new for about 120.00.
The other two I would pick up used for around 800-900.00 a piece
and a low shutter count/clean 40D goes for around 350.00

I'm a big fan of used glass and frequently buy/sell. Because of that I shoot Canon.. Their bodies aren't better than Nikon(both make great products), but the availability of second hand equipment is far better than Nikon.

If your camera is something you'll remember to pull out only on holidays and special occasions than by all means, grab a kit from Costco.
If you're truly interested in photog, don't walk.. run from kits.

Barry -- I'm not the OP, but in the market and relatively ignorant. I want to spend under $1K, want to be able to shoot HD video @60p with autofocus. Zoom needs to be sufficient to shoot wakeboarders from the boat.

currently on 1saleaday.com:

679.99 - Canon EOS Rebel T4i 18MP Digital Camera w/ 1080p HD Video with Autofocus & 18-55mm IS Autofocus Lens!

with that said, i'd listen to barry.

I was expecting to spend $1500-2000 - in that area but to be honest I wasn't sure what that would get me. Due to my lack of education I am worried about buying used products. I have no idea what to look for or look out for. I will check out Fred's website for sure.

I expect to use my camera on a weekly/biweekly basis.

I really appreciate everyone's input - this is super helpful.

Shoddy,
I'm sorry, but I can't help with the multipurpose cameras(DSLR/Video). I'm a bit old in my ways, but I tend to think that video should be left to video cams and stills to SLR. Admittedly, I have zero experience with video on an SLR.

Joe is an expert in video(Have you seen that guy's work?!), I would consult him.

how do you guys feel about the sony alpha offerings (a57 or a65)? Seems like there's lots of good relatively inexpensive minolta autofocus glass from the 80s and 90s still out there in peoples closets?

I'm noticing that the a57 and 65 will shoot at 10fps ... significantly faster than anything else in the under $1K pricepoint. I'm also liking the autopanorama and auto-hdr features.

Looking at this kit specifically:

http://www.adorama.com/ISOSLTA57MA.html

Barry's post is spot on, but I wouldnt consider a 40D to be fast...LOL. Again,as he pointed out, all things you've listed as the OP are relative. IF you want fast fast, 7D. Also, I've got MANY friends utilizing the video on these DSLR's. They are amazing for certain types of work and give flexibility of lenses and such for video that even vid camera's wont.

For 2K, I would buy a refurbed 7D kit from canon (Body and 18-135) and add on a used 70-200 2.8. Thats just me.

Shawn, I'll admit I know nothing about that camera, but you must consider how difficult it will be to upgrade lenses or find any of them used. Canon stuff is EVERYWHERE brother. Craigslist galore. Not saying its the only way to go, just something to consider. Look and see how many lenses are available for that camera NEW compared to Canon or Nikon's line up, then scour for used.

Oh we'll that's the thing... Lots of a mount Minolta glass is out there too.

Man, if you've never had one, whatever you get is going to blow your mind. Just be weary that if you use it, it turns into an addiction quickly! DO IT! LOL Well, and then report back what you get and give us some shots!

like a boat, right? Always a better newer shiny object that you NEED!

Nothing shiny and new here! I'm still shooting with an old Canon 1D MKIIn that's 3 or 4 generations old.

Barry
I just got my wife a canon T3 and it came with standard 18-55mm lens. Whats the next lens I should buy her for Christmas, I'm guessing something like a 75-300 lens. I have no idea and maybe the question has to many answers. Just looking to be pointed in the right direction.

Two questions- Budget and what does she like to shoot?

Barry read my mind. So many choices these days...macro, prime (50 1.8 would be a good shot at it), and then a telephoto zoom like you've mentioned. If you can figure out where she feels she wants to shoot, or potentially what she wants to shoot MORE of, but can't with her kit....you'll know where to go.

Budget I would say is limited since I've already bought her enough stuff but I would like to keep it under 300 if I can. She'll be taking alot of wakeboarding, party pictures with kids and friends, and probably some beach pictures. She's only had the camera 2 weeks so it kinda of hard to say right now.

Jon
I might save my money and run with the kit lens until you have enough to move into better glass. It would give you more time to figure out what she likes to shoot so you can make a wise decision.
It might seem like grabbing a 300.00 zoom is a good idea right now, but trust me.. it's not. Cheap lenses are cheap. :)
Save for a used 70-200 2.8.. You can get a first gen for between 800-1000.00. Used(good) glass holds its value, so if you ever want to sell it you'll end up getting back what you put into it(sometimes more)

If that money is burning a hole in your pocket you may want to grab a 50mm 1.8.. New they're around 130.00 and while cheap, they are a MUST HAVE.

Do most lens fit all DSLR camreas or do I need to get just canon lens. The reason it ask is my boss has a bunch of nice lens he dosen't use any more. He just desn't know what kind.

Yes for theist part they are camera specific.

Just a quick update from the OP. I ended up going with the Canon EOS 60D and the Canon EFS 17-55. After learning as much as I can about the 1 billion options on this camera - all I can say is that it is freaking amazing. Particularly in low light settings. This camera is going to be a blast. I have been running around creeping out my neighbors taking pictures of everything. I am so excited to finally have a real camera. Thanks for all the input everyone.

I bought the a57 with the 18-135 and the 55-300, but its wrapped up under the tree. Will post some pics after Xmas.

Loving the A57. My nikon lovin' pops bought me a f1.8 50mm to go along with my kit for xmas. Since it's cold and dark I haven't been outside much and the 50 was awesome for family pics at xmas.

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...53069075_o.jpg

I have my eye on this:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens

Just saw the canon 60d on sale the other day at Costco for now $200 off. That's better than the $50 off it's been for several months.

Having fun with this sucka!
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/01/02/udezumyt.jpg

Shawn... nice bokeh on those shots. I got my first DSLR about five years ago... a used Nikon D200. I quickly learned to love prime lenses. The 50mm f1.4 was my first. Since then I've added a 35mm f1.8 and my new favorite, an 85mm f1.8. Nothing beats them on sharpness, low light ability, and butter smooth backgrounds.

I upgraded to a D7000 two years ago mainly because I wanted better high ISO performance, which it delivers like magic. Between the wide open apertures of the primes and the high ISO performance of the D7000, I almost never need a flash.

Earlier there was a recommendation for a 28-300mm lens. I once owned a 18-200mm, back when it was the mac daddy all-in-one. IMHO, these super lenses give up way too much sharpness and aperture in order to achieve the flexibility they provide. For some that is a fair trade off. But for me it violated the purpose of getting a DSLR in the first place. IDK... maybe I gave up on mine too soon (only kept it for a few weeks). I still have a basic zoom (18-105mm kit lens), and it is what I use on the boat . But I look for any and all opportunities to mount the primes. Almost all my "keeper" shots have come from those three lenses.

Here's a shot I took with the 50mm f1.4 several years ago... to this day one of my favs. It's shots like these that make you forget all about what the equipment costs. One shot alone can easily make it worth the investment (kind of like boats in that way). Note: this was not a posed shot, just a moment I happened to capture up at Sundance.

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p24/IXFE/tyler2.jpg