To upgrade or not? That is the question

[dmc6469]

Right now I have a Canon T5 Rebel. I like it but sometimes I wish that I got a Nikkon D3200. Now a pro I am not and do good with the Canon but feel like that the photos might be better with that one. But I’d hate to go spend the $700 to get it and feel its just mediocre. I take shots on my own, do shots for media around town and I plan on ‘maybe’ eventually getting an extra lens but it’s not a priority. As much as I love photography, spending $1000 for an extra lens when this is just a hobby isn’t something that I care to do so I’m not looking into something high end and spend more on high end lenses. Opinions on both cameras?

 

[mom2rtk]

What is it you want the new camera to do that your current one is not?

 

[dmc6469]

I’ve heard that Nikkon has better clarity and colors. The Canon is good but when I look at some photos I just think ‘mine never come out like that no matter what settings I use.’ I take a lot of photos of my pets (my #1 subjects) and have begun blowing photos up and think I might need higher than 18mp for cropping and enlargements. Maybe I might need an additional lens but I’d hate to spend money on one when I am thinking about getting a different brand that probably won’t be able to use that same lens.

 

[Ariel484]

I’ve heard that Nikkon has better clarity and colors. The Canon is good but when I look at some photos I just think ‘mine never come out like that no matter what settings I use.’

Which photos are you comparing yours to? Do you edit your photos at all?

Might be a dumb questions but I'm wondering if you're coming your photos straight out of the camera vs. photos online that have been edited.

 

[mom2rtk]

It's entirely possible that the better clarity and colors is about the lens and not the camera.

What sort of "different settings" have you tried?

If you swap to another camera with a kit lens, your results might not end up any different.

 

[dmc6469]

Which photos are you comparing yours to? Do you edit your photos at all?

I don't edit my photos. I just go straight from the camera. The only thing I might do is turn them black and white and maybe lighten/darken them with the Canon sofware but that's it.

 

[dmc6469]

It's entirely possible that the better clarity and colors is about the lens and not the camera.

What sort of "different settings" have you tried?

I've done the Auto, M, P, adjusting the aperture. THe 2 lenses that I have came with the camera and they are 18mm to 55mm IS II lens and the EF 75-300mm

 

[Ariel484]

I don't edit my photos. I just go straight from the camera. The only thing I might do is turn them black and white and maybe lighten/darken them with the Canon sofware but that's it.

I'm not sure where you are looking at photos, but definitely keep in mind that editing/post-processing really does make a difference.

 

[dmc6469]

I'm not sure where you are looking at photos, but definitely keep in mind that editing/post-processing really does make a difference.

what would you recommend?

 

[Ariel484]

what would you recommend?

I like Adobe Lightroom. I definitely need how to use it better but I like it.

Look for some YouTube tutorials or other online help videos, that might give you a sense of the types of things people do in post-processing.

 

[mom2rtk]

How would you feel if you bought a new camera but didn't see the bump in results?

Both Canon and Nikon offer very good products. Changing brands probably won't do what you want it to.

The lenses you have are entry level. If I were you I'd invest in a better lens for the camera you have already. For your camera, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 would be the gold standard. If you don't want to spend that much, then consider the Sigma version. Or try renting one and trying that out.

Also, not sure of your skill level, so I hope I'm not overstepping, but try reading Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure. It's a great resource.

 

[Frantasmic]

Agree with other posters here. Ariel is correct in that you should learn to shoot in raw and post-process. Mom2rtk is correct that a jump in lens quality would also help. Doing both would give your photos a real upgrade. What type of photography are you doing? Is it mostly people or places? The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 is an excellent suggestion. If you are doing more landscape type photos, the following may work as well:
EF 24–105mm f/3.5–5.6 IS STM
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

If you are doing portraits, these would be a step up as well without breaking the bank:

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

 

[Ariel484]

@mom2rtk great recommendations with the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 and Understanding Exposure!! I have both and totally agree!

 

[traylorc]

I’ve heard that Nikkon has better clarity and colors. The Canon is good but when I look at some photos I just think ‘mine never come out like that no matter what settings I use.’ I take a lot of photos of my pets (my #1 subjects) and have begun blowing photos up and think I might need higher than 18mp for cropping and enlargements. Maybe I might need an additional lens but I’d hate to spend money on one when I am thinking about getting a different brand that probably won’t be able to use that same lens.

To be perfectly honest...you sound like me a few years ago. After purchasing a DSLR and taking a few pictures...and comparing them to others...my pictures never seemed to turn out as good as my fellow photographers.

I considered changing from Nikon to Canon...because personally I thought the Cannons did a much better job with colors. I elected to stay with Nikon...but decided that I needed to invest in top of the line camera bodies in order for my pictures to look better...to look "professional". So I spent a crazy amount of money purchasing professional grade camera bodies when they were first released (the D4 and the D800). Between the two bodies...I easily dropped $9,000+...additional money was spent on high end lenses. I was so excited to have purchased "professional" camera bodies and lenses I couldn't wait and go out and shoot. After spending an entire weekend shooting...I started reviewing my pictures. And you know what?? My pictures looked just as crappy as they did when I had nothing more than my $800 camera body and kit lens.

IMHO...the best thing you can do is invest in your photography "education"....not switching brands...not spending more money on camera bodies or lenses. A new camera is not going to solve your issues with exposure or composition. A new camera is not going to automatically help you when you are shooting in harsh light, a new camera is not going to tell you when it is appropriate to use Rear sync flash, a new camera is not going to help you understand when to raise to place your camera in Auto ISO mode versus changing the ISO manually. Invest in yourself...as Mom2rtk suggested buy the book Understanding Exposure. Join various Photo forums and read through the threads that interest you. Go to You Tube there are a TON of photography based clips that provide helpful information for amateurs to professionals. There are tons of books out there that can teach you to become more proficient with your specific camera model. Learn how to process your shots with a program like Lightroom. No matter how good a photographer you are...you occasional need to know how to adjust items such as brightness, contrast, white balance, tone, shadows, sharpening, noise reduction in order to get make your photos pop. The goal is to improve your photography knowledge and learn to be a better photographer so you can more effectively use any camera.

Do not make the mistake I did by succumbing to GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) and believing that doing so will make you a better photographer. It won't...all it will do is drain your bank account and increase your credit card balances. Worse... you will still be unhappy with your pictures.

 

[coastalhh]

Shoot in raw and edit in lightroom. A just out of camera jpeg will not compare to with you see online.

 

[havoc315]

I've done the Auto, M, P, adjusting the aperture. THe 2 lenses that I have came with the camera and they are 18mm to 55mm IS II lens and the EF 75-300mm

Yes, but when shooting in M.... What aperture are you using? what shutter speed?

99% of the time, you will not notice any difference in images from the T5 vs the D3200. The Nikon has slightly higher resolution, but ultimately, that won't impact your images. A slight difference in cropping ability, and maybe you will notice if you print super large -- Like 20x30 inch prints. The bigger difference is that the Nikon has better dynamic range, but you will almost never notice that when shooting straight from camera jpegs. The better dynamic range is *sometimes* noticeable, when rescuing shadows and highlights in raw files that you post-process yourself.

Colors really come down to post-processing. Each camera brand uses slightly different "default" colors, but this is easily adjusted in post-processing, or can even be adjusted in the camera before you shoot.

Sharpness --- Really comes down to lenses. But most people can't even tell the difference in sharpness between a $5000 lens and a $100 lens -- The difference is in the eyes of experienced shooters, and when you pixel peep, and when you do extreme crops or blow up huge prints. A $100 kit lens is very capable of pretty sharp shots... If your shots are looking obviously soft or blurry, then its user error. And changing cameras won't fix user error.
You can't just put the camera on "M" setting. You need to understand how shutter speed interacts with camera shake and motion blur, to choose the appropriate shutter speed. Then you need to understand aperture and how it affects depth of field, to choose the appropriate depth of field for what you are trying to capture, while also understanding the impact on exposure. Then understanding how the interplay between aperture and shutter speed will affect your ISO, and find the right compromise that prevents your ISO from going too high. And that's how you get sharp shots with any camera and any lens.

 

[rhinodadz]

As others have said, shoot RAW and edit with Lightroom. You can get Lightroom and Photoshop for $9.99/month. Also, this is a good site for tips/techniques and general education: http://digital-photography-school.com/

 

[photo_chick]

I don't edit my photos. I just go straight from the camera. The only thing I might do is turn them black and white and maybe lighten/darken them with the Canon sofware but that's it.

And there is part of your problem. Most of those "amazing" photos out there have been edited to have the best contrast, clarity and color possible. Right now the jpegs coming out of your camera are the equivalent of a cheap one hour Walmart print. They're all processed the same and are not adjusted for individual lighting, color and situations to get the best image possible.

The grass is always greener with the other camera... until you learn what you're doing. Then you'll realize getting those great images is 90% photographer, 10% gear.

 

[dmc6469]

As per everyone's suggestion, I'm looking into editing software. Doing searching I've seen that photo boards are suggesting Lightroom or or Photomatix. Which do you all prefer on this board? I've downloaded Lightroom for my iPhone and edited a photo I took last weekend and wow, what a difference. See, this is what happens when you 'train' yourself. Thank you all for the suggestion. My photo popped so now I know I need an editing software but which one should I get?

 

[bob100]

As per everyone's suggestion, I'm looking into editing software. Doing searching I've seen that photo boards are suggesting Lightroom or or Photomatix. Which do you all prefer on this board? I've downloaded Lightroom for my iPhone and edited a photo I took last weekend and wow, what a difference. See, this is what happens when you 'train' yourself. Thank you all for the suggestion. My photo popped so now I know I need an editing software but which one should I get?

Lightroom is good. I use an earlier version of Photoshop, someday I may upgrade