Beginner cameras

[LeeRatters]

The advantage of mirrorless for beginners is it's what they learn on. I drone for a living most my life and ran into a lot of people that could not drive a standard transmission, second nature to me.

Especially at my point in life I see no reason to go mirrorless. A mirrorless is an improvement in the tool I'm pretty sure but for an old guy learning to change hid way can be troublesome. Ya know I don't even know what they call the mirror cameras like I use!

Of all the people I know, only one person I can think of who can't drive manual gearbox ..... and that's my other half who is currently learning auto. Now driving with a dogleg box, that takes a bit of memory muscle.

Anyway, I don't think there is any indication that the OP is an old guy trying to change his ways. He shoots with his phone so mirrorless is the obvious progression.

 

[Phil V]

You're completely missing my point. My point was that just because a certain product, any certain product, is selling in larger quantities now than another product, much less a product that is no longer in production, in no way makes it more popular. And that IS a fact, if you're going by the Oxford dictionary, and generally accepted definition of 'popular'.

Shifts in market demands, or the reasons why a product is no longer in production, or why one product is selling in larger quantities than another need not come in to it.

I’m afraid what you’re doing here is defining your own criteria to justify your already held prejudices.

And no matter how loudly you stamp your feet, it doesn’t make your point any more valid.

Feel free to carry on stamping your feet, but I’ve had kids, and I’ve got grandkids, tantrums don’t wash with me.

 

[dan00001]

I’m afraid what you’re doing here is defining your own criteria to justify your already held prejudices.

And no matter how loudly you stamp your feet, it doesn’t make your point any more valid.

Feel free to carry on stamping your feet, but I’ve had kids, and I’ve got grandkids, tantrums don’t wash with me.

My reasonings are based on experience, and are rational. I've bought cameras brand new, none of them are worth anywhere near what I paid for them. I've also got a small collection of older digital and film cameras that are all worth more than what I paid for them, even my most recent purchase, a Nikon D700.

I also understand the definition of popular. No prejudice here.

I'm also not stamping my feet, nor am I being loud or having a tantrum. I'm presuming you think you know my current emotional state from my replies to you? Can you also tell me next weeks winning lottery numbers? (That's a joke, I'm not mad, honest.)

I'm a parent to a 3 year old. I have some experience with tantrums.

 

[Phil V]

If something is selling more than a similar thing it is de facto more popular.

We can debate whether popularity equates to superiority or whether it’s a function of other market factors (including the unavailability of alternatives).

But the sales figures in and of themselves are the only relevant data source re ‘popularity’. We can’t pretend to know what people ‘would’ choose if things were different.

More people buy the Sun than any other U.K. newspaper, yet in a large area of the country, virtually no one buys it.

More people visit the Daily Mail website than any other newspaper.

More people watch Strictly than the news.

None of this makes sense to me, but all of it is factually correct.

 

[Phil V]

My reasonings are based on experience, and are rational. I've bought cameras brand new, none of them are worth anywhere near what I paid for them. I've also got a small collection of older digital and film cameras that are all worth more than what I paid for them, even my most recent purchase, a Nikon D700.

And that’s relevant why?

 

[dan00001]

If something is selling more than a similar thing it is de facto more popular.

We can debate whether popularity equates to superiority or whether it’s a function of other market factors (including the unavailability of alternatives).

But the sales figures in and of themselves are the only relevant data source re ‘popularity’. We can’t pretend to know what people ‘would’ choose if things were different.

More people buy the Sun than any other U.K. newspaper, yet in a large area of the country, virtually no one buys it.

More people visit the Daily Mail website than any other newspaper.

More people watch Strictly than the news.

None of this makes sense to me, but all of it is factually correct.

I really don't want to get into arguments here, but please can you reference me where it states, as a fact, that something selling in larger quantities to something else deems it as more popular.
How many photographers, amateurs and professionals alike, do you think are shooting dslr vs mirrorless? I would bet money on it that there are more photographers out there shooting dslr. I would even bet money on it that if one could carry out a poll of all photographers of dslr vs mirrorless, that dslr would come out on top.

And that’s relevant why?

Granted, it's not relevant to the definition of popular, but I feel it's relevant to this post, and it's relevant to me putting my case forward in defence of being called prejudiced.

 

[Adam-G]

Mirrorless is currently outselling DSLR's at a rate of roughly 4:1 in the strictly traditional camera market so if you define that metric as popularity then that's only a trend that will continue as manufacturers move away from the older technology.

If you want to move the goalposts and talk about defining popularity as cameras in peoples' hands then 85% of all photos are taken on any one of the 7 billion smartphones worldwide and every single one of those is mirrorless.

It might be pertinent to point out to a beginner, that the vast majority of those wanting to move into using an interchangeable lens camera for their photography will have taken most of their photos over the last decade on their mobile phone.

In my opinion, the ease of transition to a mirrorless camera is far more natural to most than trying to learn on a technology that only one major camera manufacturer is continuing to make (Pentax) who have such a nominal share of the market that it isn't listed in the top 5 but merely lumped in with all non top 5 brands in a combined 5.7%.

That doesn't mean that buying mirrorless is right for the OP however, it's just a clear indicator of where the market is and where it will continue to move to.

I learned on a Nikon 3200 kindly loaned to me by a friend who took up photography and didn't take to it and it taught me all the core principles I needed before buying a camera of my own.

Reasons to consider a DSLR have been stated above and I agree with all of them.

You'll get more bang for your buck, a huge choice of reasonably priced lenses and a massive second hand market to dip into.

If you don't desire the latest and greatest or have any need for the advances in mirrorless cameras, you'll do perfectly fine with an older DSLR. I know I did.

 

[Phil V]

I really don't want to get into arguments here, but please can you reference me where it states, as a fact, that something selling in larger quantities to something else deems it as more popular.
How many photographers, amateurs and professionals alike, do you think are shooting dslr vs mirrorless? I would bet money on it that there are more photographers out there shooting dslr. I would even bet money on it that if one could carry out a poll of all photographers of dslr vs mirrorless, that dslr would come out on top.


Granted, it's not relevant to the definition of popular, but I feel it's relevant to this post, and it's relevant to me putting my case forward in defence of being called prejudiced.

See ‘popular music charts’ which is probably everyone here’s earliest and most common usage of the word ‘popular’.

However it’s semantics. You’re wrong and I won’t change your mind.

However, your wider point (if you hadn’t decided you were prepared to die on the hill of semantics) is absolutely correct.

I always advise that a ‘first’ camera should be seen as precisely that first. And therefore by far the wisest choice of first camera right now would be a mid range used dslr from Nikon or Canon. Great value for money and with a simple upgrade path.

 

[Ed Sutton]

You often don't have to pixel peep to tell a mirrorless picture from a DSLR one. For example a picture with the subjects face away from an area DSLR's have their focus points is maybe a give away. Just a small example of an advantage of being able to focus accurately and consistently anywhere in the frame with face/eye detect.

Ok, if you never take people picture then that wonderful ability doesn't matter

Oh, and three or four hundred on the second hand market could well get you some decent mirrorless kit.

That's fine if you always want people in focus, but bloody annoying when they're not the main subject of your photo. I've missed more pics because of face/eye detect than I've got. Hate it!

 

[Phil V]

That's fine if you always want people in focus, but bloody annoying when they're not the main subject of your photo. I've missed more pics because of face/eye detect than I've got. Hate it!

Then you need to learn how to set your camera for how you wish to use it

I have the R6 set to eye detect on one back button and single point focus on the other.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Then you need to learn how to set your camera for how you wish to use it

I have the R6 set to eye detect on one back button and single point focus on the other.

I have. It's switched off.

It might go on a custom setting but I need it so infrequently it's all but redundant. I find auto exposure point more useful.

For what and how I shoot.

As for the OP's dilemma, we really need to know what they like to take photos of and how seriously they think they might get into photography. If it's just casual snappery then pretty much any camera ILC or compact made in the last ten years will do for a long time to come. If they want to go further then a mirrorless ILC makes more sense. IMO.

 

[woof woof]

My camera doesn't have face/eye detect but even if it did, I wouldn't use it, I use single point focus, almost all the time. Perhaps it comes from my past when I used manual focus lenses and single point focus was all I had i.e. what my eye saw, I focussed on, QED.

What interchangeable lens mirrorless can you buy (of the same quality as a decent DSLR) for four hundred quid, camera and lens?

I too used single point focus for years (although these days I'm mostly manual focus, another example of the advantages of mirrorless) but there's no denying that focusing and recomposing or cropping to compensate for large areas of the sensor not being covered by focus points both have their drawbacks. With focus and recompose you risk moving the point of focus and with cropping you're throwing away image size. Both may be acceptable if your final image is small enough to not show that the subjects eye or indeed face isn't sharp or to be affected by cropping. I suppose we all need to chose.

Without really trying a Panasonic GX80 (RF style MFT camera) can be had for comfortably under £300 and a 25mm f1.8 can be had for around £100. I have this combo and I'd rate it as both more flexible (full sensor coverage for focus, eye detect, much higher ISO's available, WYSIWYG etc) and with better IQ (higher DR comes in handy) than the Canon 5D I had which was my best DSLR. But that's just MHO.

 

[woof woof]

That's fine if you always want people in focus, but bloody annoying when they're not the main subject of your photo. I've missed more pics because of face/eye detect than I've got. Hate it!

I really don't understand this comment unless it's a joke. I hope it is a joke and I think it is going by your later comment but just for the sake of anyone who knows even less than me I'll answer the point anyway

Mirrorless cameras are not stuck in any people / face or eye detect mode. It's something that you have to select. If you want to you can use a mirrorless camera with a single central focus point which doesn't know or care what it's pointed at.

 

[Adam-G]

Then you need to learn how to set your camera for how you wish to use it

I have the R6 set to eye detect on one back button and single point focus on the other.

That's a super clever set up. I'm going to steal that!

 

[woof woof]

I normally use aperture or manual modes but I have my eye/face detect as a custom setting together with a wide aperture and wide area focus. There may be quicker ways of doing it but turning the mode dial gets me from aperture or manual with me tweaking as I see fit to a known set of settings including eye/face detect I can start from and back again.

The main things are the compositional freedom and the accuracy and consistency.

 

[Ed Sutton]

I really don't understand this comment unless it's a joke. I hope it is a joke and I think it is going by your later comment but just for the sake of anyone who knows even less than me I'll answer the point anyway

Mirrorless cameras are not stuck in any people / face or eye detect mode. It's something that you have to select. If you want to you can use a mirrorless camera with a single central focus point which doesn't know or care what it's pointed at.

No it's not a joke.

 

[woof woof]

No it's not a joke.

Then it needed to be answered. Sensibly, to point out the drawbacks of throwing away data when cropping and risking the point of focus moving when focusing and recomposing.

Getting back to manual focus, I find mirrorless has real advantages here as I can manually focus very accurately using the magnified view option. This is perhaps the most accurate way to focus and you can literally pick your point of focus along the length of an eyelash at f1.1, if that's the aperture you want and if that's where you want your point of focus to be.

The limitation here is time as you have to have time to do it.

I've posted many many manual focus shots on this forum and although they may not win any prizes they are in focus.

 

[Phil V]

That's a super clever set up. I'm going to steal that!

I can’t take credit.
Before I got the r6 someone had posted a setup video in the R series thread here. And it was a great shortcut for when I had the r6 on test drive. And subsequently how I set mine up.

The only ‘hack’ I have that is mine is that I have C1 set to 400 iso, 1/125, f5.6 and exposure simulation off, which I have as a start point for using flash.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Then it needed to be answered. Sensibly, to point out the drawbacks of throwing away data when cropping and risking the point of focus moving when focusing and recomposing.

I never mentioned cropping, and I don't uses wide apertures so if I do recompose there's not much chance of the subject going out of focus at f8.

I was just making the point that face/eye detect isn't always a good thing. Which You and Phil have agreed with!


But none of this has helped the OP much so I'm outta here.

 

[Phil V]

I never mentioned cropping, and I don't uses wide apertures so if I do recompose there's not much chance of the subject going out of focus at f8

Well that might be ‘practically’ correct, but it’s technically incorrect.
Focus is a plane, DoF doesn’t make it more than that

(unhelpful for the op and everyone else)

 

[Ed Sutton]

Well that might be ‘practically’ correct, but it’s technically incorrect.
Focus is a plane, DoF doesn’t make it more than that

(unhelpful for the op and everyone else)

 

[woof woof]

I never mentioned cropping, and I don't uses wide apertures so if I do recompose there's not much chance of the subject going out of focus at f8.

I was just making the point that face/eye detect isn't always a good thing. Which You and Phil have agreed with!


But none of this has helped the OP much so I'm outta here.

The way you shoot is the way you shoot but even you must accept that to some people the way you use your kit imposes real limitations on the way they'd want to use similar kit, at f1.1 or f8 or any other aperture.

To be clear, face and eye detect are real improvements which help many people to achieve results which would be difficult or even impossible with even the last generation of DSLR's and crucially you don't have to use them.

To be clear again. I'm replying not to rub your nose in mirrorless but for the sake of clarity for those who don't know the possible advantages mirrorless brings, even for manual focus.

 

[Nod]

See ‘popular music charts’

This analogy falls down a bit at this moment in time, with the #1 single being around 50 years old, featuring 2 dead members of the band and the #1 album being from a group in their late 70s!

 

[Phil V]

This analogy falls down a bit at this moment in time, with the #1 single being around 50 years old, featuring 2 dead members of the band and the #1 album being from a group in their late 70s!

It’s the best selling single in the country.

There’s nothing complicated.

The number of posthumous hit records is neither a recent phenomenon or a rarity.

 

[ShinySideUp]

Then it needed to be answered. Sensibly, to point out the drawbacks of throwing away data when cropping and risking the point of focus moving when focusing and recomposing.

Getting back to manual focus, I find mirrorless has real advantages here as I can manually focus very accurately using the magnified view option. This is perhaps the most accurate way to focus and you can literally pick your point of focus along the length of an eyelash at f1.1, if that's the aperture you want and if that's where you want your point of focus to be.

The limitation here is time as you have to have time to do it.

I've posted many many manual focus shots on this forum and although they may not win any prizes they are in focus.

I can do that on my D850 in live view, not that I bother as it would be far too much trouble and anyway, the only time I use live view is when I physically can't get to the viewfinder.

 

[adrianday]

Hi guys I don't know much about photography or cameras but I enjoy taking photos and I'm looking for a camera that's easy to use to start off with. I usually use my phone as it's got quite a good camera but I'm looking to get rid of it and get something simple as Im spending most of my day staring at a screen. Any suggestions or advice you have would be really appreciated

The best advice I can offer is, buy a cheap used 'entry level' DSLR with a kit zoom lens. Something like a Nikon D3300/D3400/D3500 series with a 18-55mm zoom (other makes are available). Spend some time learning the basics. Then perhaps, buy a 35mm,f/1.8 or alternatively, a longer zoom. Whatever rocks your boat.

Lots of people are ditching DSLR's for mirrorless. There are plenty of bargains to be found if you look around. It's easy to believe you need to spend a fortune. Trust me, you don't.

 

[ShinySideUp]

I think we must have put the OP off.

 

[luthy]

I think we must have put the OP off.

OMG Im not surprised Ive just read the entire thread and Im baffeled, and Ive been indulging in photograph since approx 1975 and hope Ive learnt a thing or two.
The OP says he is currently using a phone.
My advice would be to go for something with a fixed lens of around a 10x zoom, with the ability to set to full auto and can be used in AF SP and manual. That way he can concentrat on taking photos and experiment with more creative methods as he feels fit (sorry Im assumeing the OP is male) They used to be called bridge cameras no idea what the clasification is now.
Having had a quick look they can be purchased fairly cheaply the OP gives no indication of budget but I would suggest keeping out lay low until they are sure which direction they want to go.

 

[lesttaylor]

Hi guys I don't know much about photography or cameras but I enjoy taking photos and I'm looking for a camera that's easy to use to start off with. I usually use my phone as it's got quite a good camera but I'm looking to get rid of it and get something simple as Im spending most of my day staring at a screen. Any suggestions or advice you have would be really appreciated

Try the Sony 6000 or later models. The 6000 takes some good photos and can be picked up used for around £100. Higher models are better especially the 6700

 

[Faldrax]

...

Feel free to carry on stamping your feet, but I’ve had kids, and I’ve got grandkids, tantrums don’t wash with me.

Not got any grandkids yet, but I know what you mean.

 

[Faldrax]

If something is selling more than a similar thing it is de facto more popular.

We can debate whether popularity equates to superiority or whether it’s a function of other market factors (including the unavailability of alternatives).

But the sales figures in and of themselves are the only relevant data source re ‘popularity’. We can’t pretend to know what people ‘would’ choose if things were different.

More people buy the Sun than any other U.K. newspaper, yet in a large area of the country, virtually no one buys it.

More people visit the Daily Mail website than any other newspaper.

More people watch Strictly than the news.

None of this makes sense to me, but all of it is factually correct.

Can you use 'factually correct' when taking about the Sun and Daily Mail?

 

[Faldrax]

I can do that on my D850 in live view, not that I bother as it would be far too much trouble and anyway, the only time I use live view is when I physically can't get to the viewfinder.

But on mirrorless it's easy, and happens via the viewfinder.

I've just skipped through the thread, so someone may have mentioned it without my noticing, but the big advantage for a beginner with mirrorless that you are by default operating in live view. You see an approximation of the final image - you change the settings and immediately see how this changes the image.
Just like the switch from film to digital made learning easier by dramatically shortening the time from taking the shot to seeing the image, so the switch to mirrorless does so by taking out the delay entirely.

 

[Adam-G]

But on mirrorless it's easy, and happens via the viewfinder.

I've just skipped through the thread, so someone may have mentioned it without my noticing, but the big advantage for a beginner with mirrorless that you are by default operating in live view. You see an approximation of the final image - you change the settings and immediately see how this changes the image.
Just like the switch from film to digital made learning easier by dramatically shortening the time from taking the shot to seeing the image, so the switch to mirrorless does so by taking out the delay entirely.

I skimmed over this in an earlier post, definitely offers a more familiar experience to people used to shooting on mobile phones. They are way more familiar with 'what you see is what you get' that mirrorless can provide through the viewfinder compared to a traditional optical viewfinder.

 

[swanseamale47]

I think we must have put the OP off.

I wonder why???

 

[ShinySideUp]

I wonder why???

It's a forum so people talk about things, that's what a forum is. He has made only two posts and hasn't been seen since very early yesterday so perhaps in answering his question by giving alternatives, he has decided to stick to his phone. Might have been nice to tell us though

 

[Don Fischer]

My son has my old D5000 that I gave his daughter years ago. He's never taken the first photo with it, he uses his phone. His daughter was the same, never used it one time, used her phone instead. I suspect the reason is it easier to carry around a phone and send photo's right away with the phone. Oh well their choice. Funny thing, my son brought a Canon Pro 100 printer here he was going to try to make some photo's with and has never even tried it. Seem he doesn't know how to get the photo's out of the phone. Tells me to use it. shoot I have a 9000 MKII and an iP 100 set up and running! No room for another big printer right now even if I wanted to use it!

 

[ntz]

incredible discussion ... let me throw my 5 cents in ...

if OP really starts with photography then it is almost insignificant what camera he/she will take ... Personally myself - I am not a proponent of to suggest some old and outdated gear because he/she starts with photography ... just go and buy reasonably priced camera that you can afford, not the cheap one and also not some incredibly expensive one .. endnote .. and then start exploring photography ... If you will fall in love with photography you will not like your first camera anyway ..

to MILCs Vs DSLRs - I am stuck with DSLRs .. looking through OVF just gives me vibes and excitement ... different vibes than looking through EVF .. I cannot describe how I feel it .. it's like if shooting with DSLRs is shooting with heart, warm, vivid, arcane ... and shooting with EVF is just shooting with brain - it's cold, cruel, emotionless .. particular camera device as whole just gives me absolutely different immersion, DSLR gives me gut feelings, MILC not .. I absolutely agree that what works for me might absolutely not work for somebody else ...

Suggesting a specific camera from my side is impossible .. everything is wrong and everything is right ... Because my personal passion with DSLRs I would probably recommend to go with decent second hand DSLR - but I don't know what you want to shoot and also chance that you will not like your first camera is really, really high especially if it will be DSLR these days .. If you can afford it go with Nikon D7500 ... it's fantastic camera and there are tons of lenses for it, huge second hand market and they are getting cheaper and cheaper .. After year or two with it you will have a better insight on what the proper camera for you is ... if you wanna go (fx) milc I would recommend Nikon Z5 ( because all the most nice and handsome photographers use Nikon of course) ..

 

[wiltw]

Mirrorless is currently outselling DSLR's at a rate of roughly 4:1 in the strictly traditional camera market so if you define that metric as popularity then that's only a trend that will continue as manufacturers move away from the older technology.

The issue is that 'popularity' is relative. In the case of mirrorless, certainly it is currently selling more units each year than new dSLRs. On the face of that fact, mirrorless seems to be more 'popular'.
But we can also look at the same facts with different colored glassees...mirrorless sales have NEVER TAKEN OFF since 2012...it holds a relatively static number of annual sales, at about 4-5 million annual units over the past decade...that is not 'taking off', it is merely not losing as much business volume as dSLRs have lost in recent years...because the market for dSLRs is saturated, while mirrorless adopters have not yet reached saturation!
Why is there not evidence of significant unit volume growth from year to year, for mirrorless?! I don't know. Yet it does not seem to be 'popular' in the face of near zero unit volume growth.
Compaed to peak years of about 16 Million dSLR sold in one year, 4 Million annual volume of mirrorless does not seem generally as 'popular'

 

[Erty]

Almost any DSLR from about 2010 onwards can take great pictures. Even something even older like a 2008 D90 is pretty capable if you just want to take pictures. The camera sensors have not really improved much since 2010. What you are paying for on newer cameras is better video, zillions of megapixels (which most people don't really need) and things which de-skill taking better pictures. (Nothing wrong with that, particularly if you are a beginner! I like the de-skilling things because they make my life easier.)

It would be really useful to know what your budget is and what you want it for.

 

[Phil V]

But we can also look at the same facts with different colored glassees...mirrorless sales have NEVER TAKEN OFF since 2012...it holds a relatively static number of annual sales, at about 4-5 million annual units over the past decade...that is not 'taking off', it is merely not losing as much business volume as dSLRs have lost in recent years...because the market for dSLRs is saturated, while mirrorless adopters have not yet reached saturation!

Or another way of looking at the same facts would be through an economists eye.
Whilst the worldwide economy has shrunk in recent years, and sales of all consumer goods has shrunk significantly, mirrorless camera sales have remained static. Which means that in relative terms, not only have they decimated DSLR sales, but have performed very well compared to other consumer goods.

BTW, describing DSLR’s as a ‘saturated market’ in a discussion where we’re making a comparison with a rival product is disingenuous.

I genuinely don’t understand why you’re struggling to understand where this market is right now.

SUV’s, flat screen TV’s, tablets / phones to replace computers, mirrorless cameras, they’re all simply the market direction. It’s not even complicated, it’s what’s happened since the birth of the Industrial Revolution and picked up speed with the rise of consumerism.

Just like digital took over from film, phones replaced consumer digital cameras, mirrorless cameras are replacing DSLR’s.

Whether you accept it, whether it’s a good thing, or the right thing is irrelevant, it’s just factually what’s happening.