Suggestions for a Higher Quality Camera?

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

I guess I would call myself a above average amateur, but I took 3 high school photography classes using a B&W SLR. I think I want to try and get back in photography, but want to invest in a higher quality (but not extremely expensive camera). Suggestions?

 

[xlxo]

To clarify..... what's your budget? Are you looking at DSLR or mirrorless?

 

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

To clarify..... what's your budget? Are you looking at DSLR or mirrorless?

Probably a DSLR and maybe something in the $350-$500 range?

 

[xlxo]

If a DSLR.... have you thought about what type of lens or lenses will you be using?

• will you happy with an 18-55mm kit lens?
• do you like zoom? What zoom ranges would you be happy with? Will it push beyond your budget? Are you comfortable with lens swaps?
• do you need low light f/2.8 lenses? That will push your budget.
• What other accessories? Flash? Tripod? Again, that will push your budget.
• http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nikon-d...kkor-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6g-vr-lens-red/5580132.p

 

[dmaxphil]

Not knowing anything about what you plan to shoot, I'd say this.. With that budget it's going to be tough. If Nikon I'd go preowned with either d300, D90, D7000 + Kit zoom (18-140) + a 35mm 1.8. You could also go d3200-3300 I suppose, but I haven't really played with that those. Canon has similar options.

I just paid $100 for an old AF-D 28-105mm zoom macro and it's an awesome value. There are some real lens bargains to be had if you go with older versions.

 

[havoc315]

Probably a DSLR and maybe something in the $350-$500 range?

Do you understand the difference between dSLR and mirrorless?
Seems there are often misconceptions.
Nowadays--
-they are both interchangeable lens systems
-they use identical sensors and identical image quality
-dslrs have been around longer and therefore have more lens options. But mirrorless has full equivalent lenses. (So a mirrorless system may only have 3 similar 50/1.8 lenses where dSLR may have 7 different 50/1.8 lenses)
-mirrorless have better video and video af
-mirrorless have better live view
-newest mirrorless have more advanced AF features, and more accurate AF, and better lateral AF tracking.
-dslrs have better depth AF tracking (for sports)
-mirrorless are a bit smaller
-mirrorless may have faster burst rates, often much faster
-dslrs have faster startup time
-comparing equivalently priced cameras, mirrorless have much bigger, brighter, 100% viewfinders. Consumer dslrs usually have small dim 95% viewfinders.
-on average, dslrs will have much better battery life
- dslrs have optical viewfinder, mirrorless have EVF. Pros and cons of each, along with some subjective preference.

That's the bulk of the similarities and differences.
But in terms of a fast camera, with high quality interchangeable lenses, manual controls, image quality -- mirrorless and dSLR are the same.
The only difference is a mirror used for a viewfinder.

In your price range, I'd look at:
Sony a6000
Nikon d3400
Canon t5i

 

[xlxo]

-on average, dslrs will have much better battery life

If you take a lot of pictures.... this is a significant point. DSLRs use very little power to take a picture. Mirrorless require constant power to show something on those screens and view finders all the time--not much different than your smartphone. While the Mirrorless is smaller... you might find your camera bag full of expensive batteries.

 

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

Do you understand the difference between dSLR and mirrorless?
Seems there are often misconceptions.
Nowadays--
-they are both interchangeable lens systems
-they use identical sensors and identical image quality
-dslrs have been around longer and therefore have more lens options. But mirrorless has full equivalent lenses. (So a mirrorless system may only have 3 similar 50/1.8 lenses where dSLR may have 7 different 50/1.8 lenses)
-mirrorless have better video and video af
-mirrorless have better live view
-newest mirrorless have more advanced AF features, and more accurate AF, and better lateral AF tracking.
-dslrs have better depth AF tracking (for sports)
-mirrorless are a bit smaller
-mirrorless may have faster burst rates, often much faster
-dslrs have faster startup time
-comparing equivalently priced cameras, mirrorless have much bigger, brighter, 100% viewfinders. Consumer dslrs usually have small dim 95% viewfinders.
-on average, dslrs will have much better battery life
- dslrs have optical viewfinder, mirrorless have EVF. Pros and cons of each, along with some subjective preference.

That's the bulk of the similarities and differences.
But in terms of a fast camera, with high quality interchangeable lenses, manual controls, image quality -- mirrorless and dSLR are the same.
The only difference is a mirror used for a viewfinder.

In your price range, I'd look at:
Sony a6000
Nikon d3400
Canon t5i

Ok thank you for that, that definitely helps!

 

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

If you take a lot of pictures.... this is a significant point. DSLRs use very little power to take a picture. Mirrorless require constant power to show something on those screens and view finders all the time--not much different than your smartphone. While the Mirrorless is smaller... you might find your camera bag full of expensive batteries.

Yeah I definitely don't want to lug around batteries all the time, seems like a hassle...

 

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

Not knowing anything about what you plan to shoot, I'd say this.. With that budget it's going to be tough. If Nikon I'd go preowned with either d300, D90, D7000 + Kit zoom (18-140) + a 35mm 1.8. You could also go d3200-3300 I suppose, but I haven't really played with that those. Canon has similar options.

I just paid $100 for an old AF-D 28-105mm zoom macro and it's an awesome value. There are some real lens bargains to be had if you go with older versions.

Going preowned is a good idea, thank you!

 

[havoc315]

If you take a lot of pictures.... this is a significant point. DSLRs use very little power to take a picture. Mirrorless require constant power to show something on those screens and view finders all the time--not much different than your smartphone. While the Mirrorless is smaller... you might find your camera bag full of expensive batteries.

Not sure of your bias against mirrorless, lol.. You seem to nitpick and exaggerate any difference you see. It is true that on average, battery life is better in a dSLR.
But that's just on average. It's partially because of the extra screen use, but it's also because most mirrorless have chosen smaller batteries, to help keep down the weight. There are some dSLRs that have about the same, or worse battery life than many mirrorless.

For example, the Sony A6000 is rated for 420 shots. Not great. But the Canon SL1 is rated for only 380 shots. So the mirrorless beats the dSLR by 40 shots.
For the Canon Rebel t6i -- 440 shots.

So in other words, mirrorless has the same battery life as consumer Canon dSLRs.
Nikon uses a larger battery in their consumer dSLRs, increasing the weight, but also giving slightly better battery life.
The Nikon D5500 can get 820 images, compared to the Sony A6000 420 images.

So to match the Nikon, you need 1 extra battery. Not a bag full of expensive batteries.
And that 1 extra battery: There are $10 to $20 third party batteries that will work. First party is $49, and weighs 2 ounces.

Now, poorer battery life on average is definitely something to consider as a con to mirrorless. But it is also a con against Canon as well. It's 1 thing to consider, on a long list. I actually always carry extra batteries -- I carry 1 extra battery for my dSLR, and 1 extra battery for my mirrorless. Unquestionably, I need to re-charge the mirrorless battery more often.
So the poorer battery life is indeed a negative, but a rather minor one. In fact, the related negative that is much bigger in my mind -- The 1 second start-up time.

What I'd suggest to the OP --- If you have a local store that actually has all the options -- (which is getting harder to find), go try all the dSLR and mirrorless that fit into your budget. See how they fit in your hand. See how they feel with using the viewfinder and the LCD. See if you like the control layout. And then pick the one you like the most. I wouldn't get hung up on which camera can give you 450 shots on a battery instead of 420 shots on the battery.. or if it has 13 EV of dynamic range vs 12 EV of dynamic range. In the end, all the cameras will get you nearly identical results. The only features you might want to consider a bit more carefully:
- Sensor size, but I assume all the cameras you will look at, with be APS-C.
- If you care about video, mirrorless is best, Canon is ok, Nikon is worst.
- If you like bracketing shooting, stay away from Nikon entry level cameras.
- If you want to shoot action on a budget, the A6000 with 11 frames per second is far superior to Canon/Nikon entry level options.

 

[havoc315]

Yeah I definitely don't want to lug around batteries all the time, seems like a hassle...

You don't need to lug around batteries. A camera like the A6000 has the same battery life as your average Canon consumer dSLR.

 

[xlxo]

As mentioned.... battery life depends on the photographer. If you turn the camera on, take a picture and then turn it back off. You will get great battery life. However, if you keep the mirrorless turned on for several minutes composing or waiting for that magic moment to take the picture and the next picture.... mirrorless battery life will not be the greatest. The bigger the screen, the brighter the screen.... the shorter the battery life.

I too have non-DSLR cameras.... I notice battery life is a factor on those cameras. Especially when travelling where I take many pictures.

http://www.sansmirror.com/articles/the-dreaded-battery-life-of.html

 

[havoc315]

As mentioned.... battery life depends on the photographer. If you turn the camera on, take a picture and then turn it back off. You will get great battery life. However, if you keep the mirrorless turned on for several minutes composing or waiting for that magic moment to take the picture and the next picture.... mirrorless battery life will not be the greatest. The bigger the screen, the brighter the screen.... the shorter the battery life.

I too have non-DSLR cameras.... I notice battery life is a factor on those cameras. Especially when travelling where I take many pictures.

http://www.sansmirror.com/articles/the-dreaded-battery-life-of.html

With respect, you clearly haven't shot with any modern mirrorless system.

I shoot with both a Nikon d750, and Sony a6300.
I shoot professionally a bit, and for my own leisure a lot.
As this is a Disney board... I'll say that for a theme park vacation or Disney cruise vacation, I take 300 to 600 pictures per day.
There have been days I've carried just the d750. There are days, even entire vacations, I've carried just the mirrorless a6300.
Last year, I did just the a6300 for 4 days at Universal. Took about 1200 shots. I never once had to change batteries, but I did have one backup just in case (not exactly a bag full of batteries.. and never even needed it).
That's not to say there is no difference -- I can shoot the entire day with the d750 and still have more than half the battery left. The a6300 is close to dead by the end of the day and absolutely needs a re-charge.

Point is -- on average, battery life is a bit weaker on mirrorless. Really depends on the camera comparison. As shown, some Canon dslrs are even worse than mirrorless.

But on average, it's a slight negative for mirrorless. You shouldn't exaggerate it to scare people away from mirrorless. Just as mirrorless fan boys shouldn't exaggerate the benefits of mirrorless. (For example, the mirror movement of a dSLR can degrade image quality... it's a very minor effect. But I've seen mirrorless fan boys claim they can never shoot dSLR because of the image degradation due to mirror slap).

When people come here for advice, we should share any knowledge we have, as objectively as possible. Not lie and exaggerate... not nitpick 1 mirrorless with terrible battery life and compare it to one dSLR that may have fantastic battery life.
Here is the truth... mirrorless cameras will get 300-600 images on a battery. Dslrs will get 400-1500, depending on the camera and usage.
If you compare a small mirrorless to a massive $6,000 dSLR... there will be a tremendous difference. If you compare a mirrorless to a consumer aps-c dSLR, the differences will tend to be much less.

 

[mousehockey37]

Are you a Canon or Nikon person? Me? I'm a Canon guy.

My 2 cents here are this:

You have a low budget. That's fine, I do too (but I'm constantly looking for refurb deals and such). That said, look at the type of photos you're going to want to take. If you're doing this just for fun and recreation, then a Canon T5, T6 or SL1 will run you up to about $500 (numbers from Cameta camera.. I also use BH and Adorama for things as well). Also, think about if you want crop or full frame.

Lenses are lenses and the better glass you want, the bigger the price tag that'll come with it.

If you're going to go above and beyond and make this a profitable hobby, then you'll want to try and bump your budget and get better equipment.

 

[KVH]

Based on the budget alone (and considering the other posts here), I would still suggest this. Yes, you will need an extra battery AND you'll need 2-3 SD cards too (32GB are a good in-between value right now) and a bag. The 5i is powerful enough you won't outgrow it for quite a while. But, unless you're careful, there's LOTS of things to spend extra money on with photography.

 

[dmaxphil]

The whole battery thing is a non issue. Seriously, a non issue. You need to find out if you prefer an EVF or OVF. If you don't know what that is, look it up. If you prefer an OVF, I stand by my recommendation above. If EVF is the choice, I'd recommend Olympus/Panasonic, Fuji, then Sony in that order. If your budget miraculously grows I might change my ranking but for budget minded consumers, you'll have far more options with the m4/3 system than with Fuji/Sony.

So to recap, start with the EVF/OVF decision. It will all sort itself out from there.

 

[Tigerlulu]

Definitely buy used/refurb.

Nikon d5xxx series is great for a mid level camera.

Either the d5000 or d7000 series. The 7000 will be very hard with that budget. You could probably pull it off with the d5300, used.

Start with a 50mm. Cheap, good learning lens.

 

[bob100]

I'm also a Canon guy, you could get an entry level Canon DSLR around your price range (T5i, T6i, etc.) and look at used and refurbished. But it also depends on your photo subjects, do you intend to shoot night time sports or birds? the cost of the better lens could exceed the camera.
Also I wouldn't worry about batttery life with a mirrorless or DSLR

 

[ParksPixar&Pizza]

Thank you so much everyone. Much of the finer details went RIGHT over my head, but now I know what to look for and can focus my research. Greatly appreciated!!!