Big newbie questions . . camera recommendation?

D

danielhoworth

Messages
7
Name
Daniel
Edit My Images
Yes
As above guys. . My first post on here after being recommended by others on detailing world.

Basically I'm looking for a good starter kit that would allow me to progress too.

I've been looking at the following> http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=33558

What are peoples views on this?

As said at the moment I don't really know what I'm on about though I'm becoming more and more interested in photography, through detailing funny enough but basically I'm just looking to get started.

My budget would be around the £600 mark but any less is a bonus :thumbs:

Thanks in advance for any replies. Danny
 
I've had a read of the link above and the links on that page. I've learnt a few bits and bats like mega pixels aren't everything and that I definitely want the auto focus / stabelistation and would quite like the HD video feature. Still liking the look of the Nikon D3100
 
Nikon D3100 or D5000 is good place to start.

I started with D5000 and went on a local 8 week evening course in how to use it. That was very useful for a beginner :)
 
I have the nikon d3100 and as a newbie myself I love it. Would recommend it any day
 
Nickler said:
I have the nikon d3100 and as a newbie myself I love it. Would recommend it any day
Click to expand...


The 3100 is a good camera starting out especially if you want the video. If you don't need video a d90 will let you use non-afs lenses that don't have the autofocus motor built in to the lens. This means there are a lot of cheaper lenses you can pick up and use, like an f1.8 50mm and tons of cheap 2nd hand lenses.
 
If you have a camera shop near you then its well worth going in and trying a few different makes and models. Many users opt for a particular make based on how it feels in their hands.
 
Only a suggestion, but one I'm glad I was aware of 5 years ago when I started, before committing to Canon or Nikon is think long term. If you've been doing your research you already know that Nikon tends to have better low light capabilities while Canon is renowned for speed. This makes one better for portraits and the other better for sports in very general terms (either will do everything well). Why is this important now? An entry level camera will accept the highest quality lenses the manufacture has to offer. You might be tempted to buy expensive lenses for your entry level body as the glass is contributing more to the image than body (at least until you get in to specialized imagery). Once you start buying lenses you will find it very painful to switch brands. I have several times more invested in glass than camera which is true of most people I believe. For me it was no contest - I knew before I bought a Canon 400D I would be deeply rooted in motorsports photography. I bought a high quality L series lens soon after, now even though I changed bodies I still use the same lenses I had on for the 400D.

As mentioned above some manufacturers put stabilization in the body not in the lenses making lenses more attainable, Sony for example. But it seems to me semi pros and MANY pros only speak in two languages Nikon and Canon. Those who do not tend to be speaking in terms of 10s of thousands of GBPs for a camera with specific uses i.e.: Haselbald. Hope you found this helpful but if not feel free to ignore it.
 
DucDuc said:
Only a suggestion, but one I'm glad I was aware of 5 years ago when I started, before committing to Canon or Nikon is think long term. If you've been doing your research you already know that Nikon tends to have better low light capabilities while Canon is renowned for speed. This makes one better for portraits and the other better for sports in very general terms (either will do everything well). Why is this important now? An entry level camera will accept the highest quality lenses the manufacture has to offer. You might be tempted to buy expensive lenses for your entry level body as the glass is contributing more to the image than body (at least until you get in to specialized imagery). Once you start buying lenses you will find it very painful to switch brands. I have several times more invested in glass than camera which is true of most people I believe. For me it was no contest - I knew before I bought a Canon 400D I would be deeply rooted in motorsports photography. I bought a high quality L series lens soon after, now even though I changed bodies I still use the same lenses I had on for the 400D.

As mentioned above some manufacturers put stabilization in the body not in the lenses making lenses more attainable, Sony for example. But it seems to me semi pros and MANY pros only speak in two languages Nikon and Canon. Those who do not tend to be speaking in terms of 10s of thousands of GBPs for a camera with specific uses i.e.: Haselbald. Hope you found this helpful but if not feel free to ignore it.
Click to expand...


For sure you speak the truth. I have 10 times or more invested in lenses than camera bodies. Another thing to consider is what your friends use, that way you can share gear and you have a group of people who have knowledge about the specific system. Both nikon and cannon produce great cameras and lenses. My preference for nikon came about from using them in the film days. When I switched to digital I considered cannon but low light performance was important to me and nikon had the lead when I made the switch. They leapfrog each other all the time in different areas and right now I would like the video capability offered by cannon, but I have too much invested in glass and other items to make it worthwhile changing systems. I'm expecting the next crop from nikon to give me what I want but the situation in Japan will probably delay things a little.
 
As a newcomer to all this, it's been said before - get out there to a decent photography shop and ask questions, and handle and get a feel for the various camera's for sale in you price range. See the ones that you like then do a bit more research.

I decided on Nikon as I have a couple of friends that already use them so for me, there was the benefit of being able to borrow lenses from them. I couldn't be happier with my choice of camera - I really am made up with it, but I have noticed that there seems to a lot more Canon users out there than there are Nikon.

If you are starting from new, with no lens compatibility issues or worries, then try both brands and see which you prefer to use.
 
There are lots of people using Nikon for sports and portraiture so I don't think it is clear cut that you have to choose now what type of shooting you might be doing in 5 years time to decide which brand to go for. Both will do both types.

Go to a shop and pick them all up, including Sony and Pentax. They both have IS in body so you don't have to keep buying more expensive IS lenses and can use older lenses with the full benefit of IS. Canon & Nikon only have IS in the lenses. Nikon also use Sony sensors in a lot of their cameras so if you get an A580 from sony for £600 it is the same sensor as the Nikon D7000 which is a lot pricier.

For £600 you aren't going to get a bad dslr no matter which brand you buy. Get the one which has the best ergonomics for you and makes you want to go out and take lots of pictures.
 
lensflair said:
...

If you don't need video a d90 will let you use non-afs lenses that don't have the autofocus motor built in to the lens. ...
Click to expand...

Odd comment seeing as the D90 was the first Nikon DSLR to have video :shrug:
 
There is some great advice on this thread. A lot rings true of my own experience. A lot of people will say 'buy what feels right in your hand'. This is a fair point but Personally, most cameras feel ok to me, different, but fine.

With benefit of hindsight, I would say that as a beginner the best thing you can do is buy into a system that someone you know also uses. The only caveat to this, is that personally, I would still always suggest canon or Nikon as if you get serious, there are no boundaries with these two. There is also a very big marketplace for used lenses, which offers you choice and value.

I should add though, that for probably 90% of people, Sony, olympus etc ate not going to disappoint.

It's all a bit subjective, but with hindsight, I should have probably spent my money on the best used body that my budget would have allowed. That would have probably been a used Nikon d90 or d300. I didn't know how seriously I was going to take it though. I'm sure a lot of people have gone down this road.
 
Bristolian said:
Odd comment seeing as the D90 was the first Nikon DSLR to have video :shrug:
Click to expand...


The first gen of cameras that did video that nikon released just are not worth using for video imo. The video on newer models is so much better. I have a d300s same sensor and video as the d90 and it is ok for a quick family grab but not something i would use at all seriously.

But I'd you don't care about video the d90 has features that surpass the new entry level nikons.
 
Last edited:
A lot of info to take in, especially all the jargon which I'm trying to understand. I'll be taking a lot of photo's of detailing (cars) which will include close up, detailed shots of 50/50's on the cars paint etc. Pics will also involve a lot of night time and fast moving shots at a guess so good, sharp (not blurred) pictures in these conditions is a must.
One thing I mainly want to know is. . How do you get the background blured with the subject of the pic still clear?
And also how do you do a HDR image?
Bought a magazine today, digital photography I think it was that expalins some of photoshop so going to have a play with some pics I have from my compact see if I'm any good :)
 
lensflair said:
The first gen of cameras that did video that nikon released just are not worth using for video imo. The video on newer models is so much better. I have a d300s same sensor and video as the d90 and it is ok for a quick family grab but not something i would use at all seriously.

But I'd you don't care about video the d90 has features that surpass the new entry level nikons.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you meant "if you don't need good video"? Totally agree with you about the quality/useability of the D90's video though :thumbs: and your assessment against the newer entry level bodies :clap:
 
Bristolian said:
Ah, so you meant "if you don't need good video"? Totally agree with you about the quality/useability of the D90's video though :thumbs: and your assessment against the newer entry level bodies :clap:
Click to expand...


Yeah, I think the OP mentioned liking the idea of video and if that's important then the D90 wouldn't be my choice. But if being able to use some of the cheaper lens options available is important you would have to look at it more closely.
 
danielhoworth said:
A lot of info to take in, especially all the jargon which I'm trying to understand. I'll be taking a lot of photo's of detailing (cars) which will include close up, detailed shots of 50/50's on the cars paint etc. Pics will also involve a lot of night time and fast moving shots at a guess so good, sharp (not blurred) pictures in these conditions is a must.
One thing I mainly want to know is. . How do you get the background blured with the subject of the pic still clear?
And also how do you do a HDR image?
Bought a magazine today, digital photography I think it was that expalins some of photoshop so going to have a play with some pics I have from my compact see if I'm any good :)
Click to expand...

you need a wide aperture to do that :thumbs:
 
And wide apertures mean better lenses (which means more money), so you'll begin to see that the lenses, or 'glass', become the bigger investment or commmitment in a camera brand. As has been said already, go to a decent camera shop and try as many brands/models that you can.
 
Unless you mean pictures of moving subjects where the background is a streak but the subject is frozen? Motorsport type shots? This is done by using a slowish shutter speed eg 1/100s and then panning the camera to track the subject. A lot of technique is involved but you do not need any special equipment.
 
get a decent canon or nikon body and an additional lens or 2 with that budget.
50mm 1.8 for shallow dof and low light? - £75
zoom lens? - <£100

Also consider second hand options to get extra kit with the budget
 
Don't be blinkered into the Canikon fan club - you simply don't have to have one of their camera's to be a good photographer and many of the people with all the gear and no idea simply buy into the labels.

Try a few cameras including Sony, Pentax and Oly's. I use Sony's as I was previously a minolta user and you can (because of the inbody stabilisation) still use all of the older minolta glass out there some of which is as good as (if not better) then modern lenses.

Try looking at the second hand market as well - most cameras will come with a 18-55 kit zoom - look at getting a 55-200 or similar to complement then. Moving on you could then pick up a prime lens or two - each maker has a 50mm f1.8 (or thereabouts) I would recommend that as a starter.

Good hunting and the best bit of advice is that no matter which system you go for - take a shed load of pics....it's the best way to learn and get better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top