Can someone just tell me which camera to buy?

[amomma23]

I think I've narrowed it down to 3. They are all in the price range I am comfortable with, but I feel like I am getting lost in the technical jargon that I don't yet understand.

I have no intentions of becoming a professional. I would just like to take nice shots of my kids playing soccer, at a dance recital, etc. and get some good travel pics. (I realize that lenses play into this as well.) Video capabilities are not a make or break for me. It's not something I would use often.

I don't want or need top of the line, but don't want to be wishing for more as I gain a bit of experience. I found a great book that I hope will help me to take less "amateur" looking photos, but I need some guidance as to what equipment to start out with.

Here's what I'm looking at. Thanks for any insight you can offer.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BW6LY2Y/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=AN1X63VFEFLKO

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JW1ZCII/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

http://www.qvc.com/webapp/wcs/store...gId=-1&catalogId=10151&UDC=TSV&MSG=TSV_BUNDLE

 

[havoc315]

All 3 of those cameras will really give you practically the same results. In terms of the Sl1, it's advantage is that it is smaller in the hand. The T5 is a cheapened version of the T3i/T4i/T5i -- lower resolution LCD, smaller viewfinder, etc.

 

[hakepb]

If I needed a zoom lens, now, and couldn't afford to add one to the SL1 (seems to be the best body of the group)....then I'd get the T3i from that group. The 55-200 is a good zoom lens. Many Canon fans are embarrassed that Canon still sells that poor 70-300.
(The T5 has a lower resolution LCD and no sensor cleaning function)

 

[amomma23]

Thank you both.

 

[Airship Ariadne]

If at all possible, I would go to a camera store and see how each one feels in your hand and how they function. All other things being equal, or at least reasonably close, the one that feels the best, and you find the easiest to change settings on, will be the smartest choice.

 

[havoc315]

Truthfully, since you're starting from scratch...
I'd wonder what made you decide on Canon.
Instead of 3 different Canons, all of which are really fundamentally similar, I'd be comparing the entry-level/mid-level of a few different brands.

Not that there is anything wrong With Canon -- Fantastic cameras, most popular for some good reasons. (Though partially just the most popular out of inertia).

If the small body of the SL1 appeals to you, you may also want to look at Sony E-mount cameras, and Panny/Oly m4:3 cameras.
Comparable to the t3i, take a look at the Nikon D3200 (higher resolution, possibly better image quality), the Sony A58 (EVF, better live view, in-body stabilization), the Pentax K500 (better image quality, better low light sensitivity, better optical viewfinder).

 

[amomma23]

Truthfully, since you're starting from scratch...
I'd wonder what made you decide on Canon.
Instead of 3 different Canons, all of which are really fundamentally similar, I'd be comparing the entry-level/mid-level of a few different brands.

Not that there is anything wrong With Canon -- Fantastic cameras, most popular for some good reasons. (Though partially just the most popular out of inertia).

If the small body of the SL1 appeals to you, you may also want to look at Sony E-mount cameras, and Panny/Oly m4:3 cameras.
Comparable to the t3i, take a look at the Nikon D3200 (higher resolution, possibly better image quality), the Sony A58 (EVF, better live view, in-body stabilization), the Pentax K500 (better image quality, better low light sensitivity, better optical viewfinder).

Just going on past experience. We have owned some very decent point and shoots over the years...Canon, Sony, Nikon. Canon has just given us the best luck as far as product quality and customer service.

I was under the impression that Canon/Nikon had a larger line of lenses to add on as I progress, which led me to look into those brands over Pentax/Sony. I'm hoping to have something I can grow into rather than out of, if that makes sense.

I have checked out the t3i and t5 in person, so I know what they're about. I have not seen an SL1 at any of our (limited) local stores, though.

I appreciate your knowledge. I am really looking forward to getting something and really learning how to use it. I don't want to get a completely decent camera and shoot with my kit lens and in auto mode forever.

 

[boBQuincy]

The T3i is getting old, 2 generations and over 3 years ago. The SL1 and T5 are both recent and appear similar "under the hood". The SL1 is smaller and about 2 ounces lighter, which I prefer although some photographers prefer larger heavier cameras. All of these have the main four exposure modes (Auto/Program; Aperture; Shutter; Manual) so there should be no problem of outgrowing them.

I agree with the assessment of the 70-300, not Canon's best by a long shot. Their 55-250 is much better.

While it is true that Canon and Nikon have the widest range of lenses a lot of these are ones most of us can't afford and don't really need. As an example, look at the lenses on the sidelines of the Olympics and World Cup. You would probably find whatever lenses you wanted in Sony's and Pentax's lineup, micro 4/3 (Panasonic and Olympus) also has a very wide range of lenses including some with high price tags. None of these are likely to present much of a limit to us as photographers.

 

[amomma23]

The T3i is getting old, 2 generations and over 3 years ago. The SL1 and T5 are both recent and appear similar "under the hood". The SL1 is smaller and about 2 ounces lighter, which I prefer although some photographers prefer larger heavier cameras. All of these have the main four exposure modes (Auto/Program; Aperture; Shutter; Manual) so there should be no problem of outgrowing them.

I agree with the assessment of the 70-300, not Canon's best by a long shot. Their 55-250 is much better.

While it is true that Canon and Nikon have the widest range of lenses a lot of these are ones most of us can't afford and don't really need. As an example, look at the lenses on the sidelines of the Olympics and World Cup. You would probably find whatever lenses you wanted in Sony's and Pentax's lineup, micro 4/3 (Panasonic and Olympus) also has a very wide range of lenses including some with high price tags. None of these are likely to present much of a limit to us as photographers.

Thanks for your help. My hesitation with the t3i is what you said, it's old. It seemed to have more to offer than the newer t5. The t5i seemed like a decent upgrade, but I haven't been entirely convinced the price difference was worth it over the 3i. That led me to look at the SL1 which I am heavily leaning toward at this point. I am trying to find somewhere nearby to actually put my hands on it. I will definitely give another look at the other brands mentioned, as well. Thanks!

 

[boBQuincy]

Fwiw, I used Canon dSLRs for about 10 years and liked them. What made me switch brands was the small size and weight of micro 4/3. Canon's SL1 was not available then. If that model were out when I was looking for a smaller SLR I might have stayed with Canon (although the lenses are larger than micro 4/3 too).

 

[hakepb]

I'm not a Canon expert, but the T5i and T5 seem to be very different cameras.

The T5i is a very, very nice entry level DSLr. The T5 just looks to be Canons latest attempt at building the cheapest possible camera, and other than slightly longer battery life, the T5 seems inferior to the T3i on paper.

 

[havoc315]

Just going on past experience. We have owned some very decent point and shoots over the years...Canon, Sony, Nikon. Canon has just given us the best luck as far as product quality and customer service.

I was under the impression that Canon/Nikon had a larger line of lenses to add on as I progress, which led me to look into those brands over Pentax/Sony. I'm hoping to have something I can grow into rather than out of, if that makes sense.

I have checked out the t3i and t5 in person, so I know what they're about. I have not seen an SL1 at any of our (limited) local stores, though.

I appreciate your knowledge. I am really looking forward to getting something and really learning how to use it. I don't want to get a completely decent camera and shoot with my kit lens and in auto mode forever.

In terms of lens selections for 100% of amateurs and 99% of professionals, Sony and Pentax have all the lenses anybody would ever need. (For example, Sony has a, a 50/1.8, a regular 50/1.4, a premium 50/1.4, and a 50/2.8.. But where Sony has 4 different 50mm primes (plus several third party 50 primes), Nikon has 7 different 50mm lenses, as well as a couple others in the 40-60 range.
99% of even professional photographers, would have no trouble finding the lenses they need for Sony and Pentax. (There are some holes in the Sony lens lineup, but nothing that seriously impacts most APS-C shooters).

(Personally, growth is 1 of the reasons I chose Sony, as there is a huge library of affordable used lenses of exceptional quality that has allowed me to grow on a budget).

I'm not trying to steer you away from Canon. They are great cameras. And any of the major brands will produce very similar quality photographs. I'm merely saying you can consider the pros and cons of each brand. There is no reason to be brand loyal, just because you've had good luck with their point and shoots previously.

The t3i, t5, sl1 -- are all going to be very very similar.
If you look at other brands, you will really have some major pros and cons to compare. (But even then, the fundamentals will be pretty similar).

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I promised myself I wasn't going to get involved in this thread, first because you indicated you were looking at Canon, I'm a Pentax shooter, and second this is probably one of the most asked and difficult questions to answer! There is a lot of expertise on this site who can answer questions about cameras and camera systems. However, we are all slightly prejudiced toward our own system, otherwise we would have changed. If I have a general and Sony/Minolta specific question, Havoc is a great resource. There are Canon, Nikon, Olympus experts and I know a little about Pentax. We chose our system for a multitude of reasons. I switched from Minolta to Pentax back around 1980 when I got a great deal on a Pentax Lx SLR. I was able to sell my XG-7 and purchase the higher end Lx and make a profit. When it came time to convert to digital, I was invested in Pentax glass, so rather than purchase new glass, I stuck with Pentax. Pentax has the largest selection of legacy lens because they chose to make all their cameras backward compatible with almost every K-mount lens ever made. Now, is my system the best for what I shoot? No, why because I shoot motorsports and many, many times I'm the only one shooting with something other than a Canon or Nikon. However, Pentax cameras are excellent cameras with a sturdy build, internal stabilization (making lenses slightly cheaper and lighter), and at the price point the best weather resistant bodies on the market. Do I use Pentax glass today for motorsports? No, I use Sigma and Tamron. Pentax glass does not come in the focal lengths that I want to use for what I shoot. For what I shoot, this combination works for me. I have a Nikon shooting friend who just recently purchased a $9,500 400mm f2.8 lens for her FF camera. I cannot afford that so what do I use, a Sigma 100-300mm f4 that I purchased several years ago for $1,200. My Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 was $800 when the Canon and Nikon mounts were $1,300 (much more expensive today). The point I'm trying to make is you really have to look at what you are trying to accomplish, research the different systems (and you are buying into a system), and find a system that is going to closely match what you are trying to do and your budget. Each manufacturer has a business model they adhere to. Canon, who has the largest market share, caters to the larger consumer market and has a pro model line of cameras and lenses. Pentax is a niche camera system with rugged, small camera bodies with a growing number of WR lenses and they recently introduced a WR flash for the prosumer market preferring to stay with the APS-C format. There is rumor since the company was purchased by Ricoh they are considering a FF camera, however that is just rumor at this point. Pentax fits my budget and between Pentax, Sigma and Tamron lenses, I have everything I need to do my job.

If I was to recommend to a new consumer the Pentax line, I would tell them to go to KEH and purchase a refurbished like new K50 and find a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 lens. That is a great starter kit to build on.

 

[amomma23]

Thank you for the great info Gianna's PaPa.

Havoc... you have led me to look at this Sony model. http://www.adorama.com/ISOSLTA65K1H.html
Any thoughts? The price is right, and it wins most comparisons with the SL1.

Unfortunately I live in the "PA Wilds", so my local camera shop is Walmart. It makes comparing things "in hand" or with a real life expert a little tricky.

 

[HPS3]

Does it have to be a DSLR? What about mirrorless?

Over time I've really come to like mirrorless offerings such as the Olympus M4/3, Sony Nex and Fuji X lineup. Size makes a huge difference when you carry it all day. The focus speed is just as fast as a DSLR in single shot mode and is getting better at continuous focus like on the Sony A6000 and Fuji XT1.

I wouldn't dismiss the Sony A6000 for an all around camera.

 

[Animagic!]

I own both Sony and Pentax cameras and have used Nikon dSLRs as well. They're all good, especially if you are starting fresh. Of course there's nothing with Canons either.

However like Havok, I would suggest looking into Sonys. I haven't used the a65 but it is supposed to be a solid performer. They are high on features and usually less expensive than similar Canon or Nikon cameras.

Of the three I like the SL1 the most. It's a very small, light body.

 

[Groucho]

I was under the impression that Canon/Nikon had a larger line of lenses to add on as I progress, which led me to look into those brands over Pentax/Sony. I'm hoping to have something I can grow into rather than out of, if that makes sense.

Fact is, nobody has a more complete range of APS-sensor lenses than Pentax. Unless you are 100% positive that you are going to full frame in the future (less and less compelling as sensors advance), you'll see that most of the high-end C/N lenses are built for FF sensors, so bigger/heavier/more expensive, and you won't find as many "sweet spot" lenses. Heck, it took Canon years to release a fisheye that'd work properly on an APS sensor DSLR, and it's $1,500!!!

If you look closely, you'll see that the C/N lines are meant to funnel you upwards towards the extremely high-cost gear. That's an advantage of systems that concentrate on a single sensor - like Pentax, Sony (for the most part), Fuji, and the Micro 4/3rds cameras.

Besides, you're never really locked into a system - if you buy good lenses, they'll hold their value so you're not going to be out a ton of money if you sell them, and if you're buying cheap lenses, buy 'em used anyway and they'll probably be worth exactly what you paid for them. The bodies will all depreciate terribly.

 

[SkaGoat]

If you look closely, you'll see that the C/N lines are meant to funnel you upwards towards the extremely high-cost gear. That's an advantage of systems that concentrate on a single sensor - like Pentax, Sony (for the most part), Fuji, and the Micro 4/3rds cameras.

But it's also a disadvantage as there is no full frame option with Pentax, meaning if you decided you want to get really serious about your hobby, and buy a full frame camera, there's no room to grow in the Pentax line. I also wouldn't call the Canon 6D or Nikon D610 at $1700 extremely high-cost to go full frame.

Each brand has +/-, but I don't think you'd go wrong with Canon or Nikon.

Pentax has limited lens selection, and relies on IBIS, many lenses rely on the in-body focus motor, and their AF isn't up the mid range Canon, or Nikon standards, but are well built, reliable, and weather resistant. Just to pick on Pentax.

 

[hakepb]

To go completely off the OP's post:


But, what does Canon/Nikon have to compete with this? (Not that much more than a 1D or D4...)
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5406066786/ricoh-announces-medium-format-pentax-645z

 

[SkaGoat]

To go completely off the OP's post:


But, what does Canon/Nikon have to compete with this? (Not that much more than a 1D or D4...)
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5406066786/ricoh-announces-medium-format-pentax-645z

they don't make a medium format camera... it doesn't really matter what your 35mm format camera is when they are completely different lenses.