Please help me decide if a DSLR is right for me

[PrincessInOz]

Wanderlust - I'll echo pea-n-me's comments (and I'll couch this by saying that this is what I've found out on my own journey. Naturally, someone else's journey may be different and different people learn things differently.)

You can learn about photography from reading books or going on-line to pick things up. And I've certainly done my share of googling and reading and asking others for how to technically set up a shot to get the 'look' that I wanted to work on.

But I've found that the best experience is going out in the field and just taking pictures and experimenting with the camera. The good thing is that with digital photography, you have the instantaneous feedback with a click of a button to review the shot you just took. It took me quite a few outings to actually start to make sense of what settings I was changing and the effect on the picture. I had to be quite disciplined in making sure that I logically tried out a variety of settings for each object; and then coming home to take a look at which picture I preferred and figuring out what settings I used to achieve it. It does take time and effort to do this; and it is something to factor into the decision as to whether your lifestyle allows you the time and effort.

As someone who does lurk into your blog from time to time, I would say that you already do a good job with your daytime pictures. As someone who also knows that you want to get into lowlight/dark photography, I would recommend that you consider what sort of budget you are prepared to spend in order to achieve lowlight shots you want and whether you'll spend the time and effort to skill yourself up.

You already got the tripod for long exposure shots.
And I'm sure you're aware that some lenses will allow to take handheld shots in the dark rides; with the appropriate camera settings. Some of those lenses can be pricey.


Good luck with the decision.

 

[havoc315]

I have just had a brief look at mirrorless cameras and they definitely look to be a great size. But the picture-quality compared to other types of cameras is confusing me.

Picture-wise, do you know how a basic model mirrorless (say the Sony NEX 3N) compares to the Sony RX100?

Putting aside the skill of the photographer (the number 1 true issue), image quality primarily comes down to sensor and lens.
The rx100 has a sensor which is amazing for a compact camera. But size does matter and it still doesn't match a dSLR sensor (which the Nex has).
That said, the rx100 lens could give you better picture quality than the Nex, unless you upgrade the Nex lens.

Mirrorless cameras can be a great compromise. Personally, I hate compromise which is why I own the rx100 and a dslt. Something truly compact. (Nex still not small enough for 24/7). And something truly full featured.

Personally also, I think a dSLR or rx100 are both superior for learning photography due to their layout of manual controls. When I've played with the Nex 3 in the store, I couldn't even find some of the most basic controls. It's more menu driven, made for a point and shooter.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

Thanks everyone! You have all been so helpful and have given me heaps to think about. Luckily I've been on holiday this week as it's given me heaps of time to research, research, research.

I think today I actually came full circle. As I began to understand DSLRs better from your comments and research, I thought perhaps I should give one a go. But weighing everything up, I think the RX100 is in all probability the best option for me right now for quite a few reasons.

1) I can't shake the worry that I like to travel lightly and I don't want a bulky camera. I already find my Panasonic FZ100 too bulky to carry around with me on a daily basis, yet there are often days where I find myself wishing I had my camera on me when I don't. I do have a small Waterproof TX10 that I carry around, but it doesn't quite have the capabilities I'm after to be my main camera.
2) I'm teaching myself how to use Lightroom 4 and am really quite enjoying it. I've also been putting fireworks You Tube Videos up on my TV at night, blackening the room, and then practicing with shutter speed. (It sounds silly, but it's really helping). Anyway, I think rushing into the word of DSLRs as well might be a bit much all at once. I know there's heaps to learn with the Sony also, but it doesn't overwhelm me in the same way.
3) I think the RX100 would probably complement my panasonic nicely, whereas a DSLR would probably need to replace it (due to the size of carrying around 2 bulky units). While I learn to use the Sony, I like that I can still have the Panasonic as a backup when I want a lot of zoom. Similarly, my DH can film with one, while I can take photos with the other.
4) The Sony is cheaper. I was starting to factor in all the necessary pieces I would need for my DSLR kit inc. the bag, and my WDW travel fund was beginning to shrink.
5) My biggest issue is with low-light, and the Sony looks as though it will help address this reasonably well.
6) Lastly, and I know this will sound lame to the purists amongst you, I like the fun modes/settings on the Sony. The HDR Paint Mode takes such cool-looking photos (at least IMO), and I like the setting where you can make everything B&W and leave one colour.

So, while that was all very long-winded, typing it has actually cemented in my mind that the Sony is the best decision for me right now. But thanks again everyone for your help. I've learnt heaps and can definitely see a DSLR (or mirrorless) in my future. It just won't be before I go to Disney.

 

[havoc315]

There is a tri-lens package with the Canon that includes the 18-55 and 55-250 as well as a 50mm F1.8 II. Once again that means nothing to me, but do I take from your comment that this is the sort of lense I would need for dark shots? Without this lense, would the RX100 take better night shots? This tri package is really at the extremes of my budget.

Sorry if you have infact already answered this question, I'm just trying to get my head around it.

By the way, I should have mentioned that Full HD video is also important to me. Not as important as the photos, but I like having it as a aspect of the camera.

They all have excellent HD video now. Though for dSLRs, only the Sony models, (and the newest Canons with specialty lenses) allow full autofocus during video.

Yes, the 50-1.8 is great for low light pics. With the caveat, that many people would complain it is too zoomed in for many Disney dark rides. Since you can't back up to get the shot, you may find it isn't wide enough in some situations. (It translates to 80mm, It's basically already a 3x view).

The rx100 basically starts as a 28mm/1.8 lens. (As you zoom in unforunateky though, the aperture gets smaller). So the rx100 gives you 1.8 with a 1x view.

If I was doing Disney dark rides with my dSLR, I'd use a 35mm 1.8. I use my 50-1.8 when my kids blow out birthday candles. (Yes, there are good reasons to own 5-15 different lenses).

 

[PrincessInOz]

Well done on a decision, Wanderlust. Are you going to buy local or on the internet?

 

[WanderlustNZ]

(Yes, there are good reasons to own 5-15 different lenses).

Lol. I think that's the problem. The more I investigate, the more I see things I'd want, and the more money I'd need to spend.

I think waiting until I have a bit more time and money to invest into this hobby is probably the wisest thing for me right now.
Thanks again for your help. You're a wealth of knowledge.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

Well done on a decision, Wanderlust. Are you going to buy local or on the internet?

Cheers PIO.
I'll probably buy from a place in Auckland where I got my last camera. They parallel import electronics so they are often about 20% cheaper than other places in NZ and more similar to US prices. It's all legal and they come with a warranty, but the downside is that they usually have an overseas plug (my last camera was UK) and I have to use the provided adaptor when I plug them in. Also, I have in the past been handed a photocopied set of the english manual since the original was something else (Japanese perhaps?)

The problem with ordering from overseas is that once I buy something over $500, I get stung with Goods and Services taxes as soon as it enters the country. This pretty much wipes out the savings.

 

[PrincessInOz]

Cheers PIO.
I'll probably buy from a place in Auckland where I got my last camera. They parallel import electronics so they are often about 20% cheaper than other places in NZ and more similar to US prices. It's all legal and they come with a warranty, but the downside is that they usually have an overseas plug (my last camera was UK) and I have to use the provided adaptor when I plug them in. Also, I have in the past been handed a photocopied set of the english manual since the original was something else (Japanese perhaps?)

The problem with ordering from overseas is that once I buy something over $500, I get stung with Goods and Services taxes as soon as it enters the country. This pretty much wipes out the savings.

That must be a NZ thing. I think it is a little higher in Oz.

Happy shopping.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

That must be a NZ thing. I think it is a little higher in Oz.

Happy shopping.

I just went into the What's my Duty .org.nz NZ Customs website to calculate the taxes I would need to pay.
Based on the price that the camera currently is at Amazon and an estimated $30 shipping, I would need to pay NZ$160 in taxes. Argghhhh! That is even worse than I expected.
With these taxes I can get it cheaper from even the most expensive camera stores in NZ and it'll come with a NZ warranty. Shessh, NZ customs are on a fine wicket.

 

[PrincessInOz]

I just went into the What's my Duty .org.nz NZ Customs website to calculate the taxes I would need to pay.
Based on the price that the camera currently is at Amazon and an estimated $30 shipping, I would need to pay NZ$160 in taxes. Argghhhh! That is even worse than I expected.
With these taxes I can get it cheaper from even the most expensive camera stores in NZ and it'll come with a NZ warranty. Shessh, NZ customs are on a fine wicket.

ouch!

 

[PrincessInOz]

Do you have Kogan in NZ?

http://www.kogan.com/au/buy/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-digital-camera/

 

[havoc315]

Thanks everyone! You have all been so helpful and have given me heaps to think about. Luckily I've been on holiday this week as it's given me heaps of time to research, research, research.

I think today I actually came full circle. As I began to understand DSLRs better from your comments and research, I thought perhaps I should give one a go. But weighing everything up, I think the RX100 is in all probability the best option for me right now for quite a few reasons.

1) I can't shake the worry that I like to travel lightly and I don't want a bulky camera. I already find my Panasonic FZ100 too bulky to carry around with me on a daily basis, yet there are often days where I find myself wishing I had my camera on me when I don't. I do have a small Waterproof TX10 that I carry around, but it doesn't quite have the capabilities I'm after to be my main camera.
2) I'm teaching myself how to use Lightroom 4 and am really quite enjoying it. I've also been putting fireworks You Tube Videos up on my TV at night, blackening the room, and then practicing with shutter speed. (It sounds silly, but it's really helping). Anyway, I think rushing into the word of DSLRs as well might be a bit much all at once. I know there's heaps to learn with the Sony also, but it doesn't overwhelm me in the same way.
3) I think the RX100 would probably complement my panasonic nicely, whereas a DSLR would probably need to replace it (due to the size of carrying around 2 bulky units). While I learn to use the Sony, I like that I can still have the Panasonic as a backup when I want a lot of zoom. Similarly, my DH can film with one, while I can take photos with the other.
4) The Sony is cheaper. I was starting to factor in all the necessary pieces I would need for my DSLR kit inc. the bag, and my WDW travel fund was beginning to shrink.
5) My biggest issue is with low-light, and the Sony looks as though it will help address this reasonably well.
6) Lastly, and I know this will sound lame to the purists amongst you, I like the fun modes/settings on the Sony. The HDR Paint Mode takes such cool-looking photos (at least IMO), and I like the setting where you can make everything B&W and leave one colour.

So, while that was all very long-winded, typing it has actually cemented in my mind that the Sony is the best decision for me right now. But thanks again everyone for your help. I've learnt heaps and can definitely see a DSLR (or mirrorless) in my future. It just won't be before I go to Disney.

Congratulations. I think you'll be very happy with your purchase. The one accessory I would recommend is a gorilla pod. Cheap in compact size. See my Disney fireworks pics in my Flickr for the great benefit of a gorilla pod combined with the rx100. And the whole set up can fit in a pocket.

Funny to hear you talk about the rx100 as cost effective. You're totally correct. But the initial reaction of many people is, "I'd never pay $650 for a compact!"
But nobody who uses the camera considers it overpriced. Most cameras start to get heavily discounted after just 3-6 months on the market, but most retailers still charge full price for the rx100, a year after release. It actually is a value, considering its capabilities.

 

[cjstarr]

I just went into the What's my Duty .org.nz NZ Customs website to calculate the taxes I would need to pay.
Based on the price that the camera currently is at Amazon and an estimated $30 shipping, I would need to pay NZ$160 in taxes. Argghhhh! That is even worse than I expected.
With these taxes I can get it cheaper from even the most expensive camera stores in NZ and it'll come with a NZ warranty. Shessh, NZ customs are on a fine wicket.

That does burn!!!

I'm sure you'll like the rx100. From what I've seen it will do a suPer job for you.

 

[havoc315]

A word about Micro 4:3. They are not "dSLR like" or "compact camera like". In fact, Olympus PEN cameras have the same sensors of their 4:3 Olympus dSLR cousins - the mirror is just taken out, allowing a smaller overall package. .

Technically true but a bit misleading to a layperson. There is no 1 universal size sensor for all dSLRs, or for all compact cameras. And size does matter --- A larger sensor has many advantages for image quality, as it can gather more light.
When most people are looking at dSLRs... looking at the Canons/Nikons/Sony/Pentax that they see regular consumers using, *most* of those cameras use the APS-C size format. The Olympus dSLR uses a 4:3rd format, which is a bit smaller (but still larger than most compacts.)

When talking about "dSLR like" or "compact camera like" -- personally I'm referring to functionality. The layout of the body, how it will actually feel to use.

Sensors sizes, can be briefly summarized from biggest to smallest like this:

-Full frame. (There are even larger sensors, but for regular consumers, this is the largest, and is equivalent to 35mm film size). Full frame cameras are very expensive, with entry level cameras starting around $2000.
Typically, full frame sensors are in flagship dSLRs, but technically you can stick a fullframe sensor in a compact body. The Sony RX1 ($2800) is a compact camera with a full frame sensor.


-APS-C format -- The most common format. Used by Sony/Nikon/Canon/Pentax (Canon's version is slightly smaller, but very close).
Mostly found in your common dSLRs (often called "crop bodies"), but also in some mirrorless models (Such as the NEX), and some compact cameras.

-Micro 4/3rd -- Smaller than APS-C, larger than most compact cameras. Found in a few dSLRs, and in a large ranging mirrorless format.

-1" --- The one inch sensor is smaller than Micro 4/3rds, but much larger than most compact cameras. The size is used by the mirrorless Nikon "1" series, and by the Sony RX100.

- "compact camera sensors" -- A bit of a range, from about 1/2.3" to 1/1.7". The smallest sensors have 1 advantage -- it's cheap and easy to include a lens with "mega zoom" since they only need to reflect upon a tiny sensor. *Most* compact cameras rely on this range. Many "bridge" cameras, that have a dSLR-like appearance, actually use these small sensors.

- Cell phone sensors. While some newer camera phones use larger sensors, for the most part, the sensors are even slightly smaller than you find in compact cameras.

So when using terms like dSLR or mirrorless or compact, different cameras may still have different image sensor sizes. And the differences can be significant.
There are rather large bridge cameras that looks like dSLRs that use the really tiny sensors. There is the "compact" RX1 which uses a fullframe sensor.

Here is a slightly incomplete chart so you can actually visualize the difference in sizes:


Sensor size comparison KB, APS-C, mFT, Nikon CX, compact by Peter Lueck, on Flickr

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Technically true but a bit misleading to a layperson. There is no 1 universal size sensor for all dSLRs, or for all compact cameras. And size does matter --- A larger sensor has many advantages for image quality, as it can gather more light.
When most people are looking at dSLRs... looking at the Canons/Nikons/Sony/Pentax that they see regular consumers using, *most* of those cameras use the APS-C size format. The Olympus dSLR uses a 4:3rd format, which is a bit smaller (but still larger than most compacts.)

When talking about "dSLR like" or "compact camera like" -- personally I'm referring to functionality. The layout of the body, how it will actually feel to use.

Sensors sizes, can be briefly summarized from biggest to smallest like this:

-Full frame. (There are even larger sensors, but for regular consumers, this is the largest, and is equivalent to 35mm film size). Full frame cameras are very expensive, with entry level cameras starting around $2000.
Typically, full frame sensors are in flagship dSLRs, but technically you can stick a fullframe sensor in a compact body. The Sony RX1 ($2800) is a compact camera with a full frame sensor.


-APS-C format -- The most common format. Used by Sony/Nikon/Canon/Pentax (Canon's version is slightly smaller, but very close).
Mostly found in your common dSLRs (often called "crop bodies"), but also in some mirrorless models (Such as the NEX), and some compact cameras.

-Micro 4/3rd -- Smaller than APS-C, larger than most compact cameras. Found in a few dSLRs, and in a large ranging mirrorless format.

-1" --- The one inch sensor is smaller than Micro 4/3rds, but much larger than most compact cameras. The size is used by the mirrorless Nikon "1" series, and by the Sony RX100.

- "compact camera sensors" -- A bit of a range, from about 1/2.3" to 1/1.7". The smallest sensors have 1 advantage -- it's cheap and easy to include a lens with "mega zoom" since they only need to reflect upon a tiny sensor. *Most* compact cameras rely on this range. Many "bridge" cameras, that have a dSLR-like appearance, actually use these small sensors.

- Cell phone sensors. While some newer camera phones use larger sensors, for the most part, the sensors are even slightly smaller than you find in compact cameras.

So when using terms like dSLR or mirrorless or compact, different cameras may still have different image sensor sizes. And the differences can be significant.
There are rather large bridge cameras that looks like dSLRs that use the really tiny sensors. There is the "compact" RX1 which uses a fullframe sensor.

Tell me something I don't know. I've posted this information and graph for people myself.

I use both 4:3 and micro 4:3 cameras and have for many years.

You often refer to Micro 4:3 as "dSLR like", and myself and other 4:3 users have pointed out to you that dSLRs come in the 4:3 standard as well, the "SLR" part referring to the mirror mechanism. These types of dSLRS - and their mirrorless counterparts - use the 4:3 sensor format (isn't that what I said ??) and not APS-C. Do not mistake my uncaring attitude about specs as unknowing. I have explained 4:3 terminology to you in the past when you've referred to micro 4:3 as having "micro 4:3 sensors", which, as I've explained above, is incorrect.

The "compact camera" description I don't agree with at all, as mirrorless are anything but. They are still quite large, come with a lot of equipment and lenses, and pretty much require a bag to carry around. (Although I have stuck my PEN in my purse many times.)

I still say, havoc, that you should try one sometime. You might be surprised.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

Do you have Kogan in NZ?

http://www.kogan.com/au/buy/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-digital-camera/

No, disappointingly. That is a really good price. Unfortunately still over the stupid tax threshold though.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

OP, congratulations on your purchase.

 

[photo_chick]

Lots of interesting and some misleading technical information in this thread.


OP... know that 90% of getting those great shots is the photographer. You can get them with any camera with the exception of extreme situations like low light Disney rides. Those take a fast aperture and solid ISO performance, which the RX100 has at wider focal lengths. Learn about the basics of photography and in time you'll be able to get those kinds of shots too.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

Congratulations. I think you'll be very happy with your purchase. The one accessory I would recommend is a gorilla pod. Cheap in compact size. See my Disney fireworks pics in my Flickr for the great benefit of a gorilla pod combined with the rx100. And the whole set up can fit in a pocket.

Funny to hear you talk about the rx100 as cost effective. You're totally correct. But the initial reaction of many people is, "I'd never pay $650 for a compact!"
But nobody who uses the camera considers it overpriced. Most cameras start to get heavily discounted after just 3-6 months on the market, but most retailers still charge full price for the rx100, a year after release. It actually is a value, considering its capabilities.

Thanks Havoc. I think I'll be happy too. I did notice that the RX100 hasn't gone down much in price since it was released and agree that that's saying something.
Interestingly, not many main stream electronic places in NZ sell it. Without understanding it's value, I think most people see the price and balk.

I'm going through my iPad App and can't see your signature at present, but will definitely check your Flickr out. Will also check out Gorilla Pods. I have actually ordered a MeFoto Roadtrip from Amazon and are waiting for it to arrive. I thought if I'm serious about improving with night shots, I'll need a tripod. But it'll probably just be something I carry around in the evenings when I'm at Disney. With all my practicing lately, I've discovered that even my Panasonic can take okay (as opposed to awful) fireworks shots when I keep it perfectly still.

 

[WanderlustNZ]

That does burn!!!

I'm sure you'll like the rx100. From what I've seen it will do a suPer job for you.

Thanks cjstarr