and please use their services
Beginner Decisions
- Thread starter Kas44
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,194
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Without it wanting to sound like a cop out ... you are best handling both bodies and whichever feels best in the hand is the one to get.
- Messages
- 686
- Name
- Iain
- Edit My Images
- No
Fully agree with Paul. Anyone can tell you that x is the brand and y is the model that you must have...but it doesn't matter how 'good' someone else says it is - if it's uncomfortable you won't get the best from it (and at worst you'll not use it at all).
- Messages
- 555
- Name
- Glyn
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Agree with the above..... Nothing beats picking the camera up and having a good play
- Messages
- 371
- Edit My Images
- No
Have you used a DSLR before? If not, maybe reconsider and stay with something you're comfortable with for a special holiday - don't know about anyone else, but my first photos on a DSLR were dreadful, far worse than anything I was taking with the compact I had at the time.
- Messages
- 23,638
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
As above what's most important is that you're comfortable with the camera so always best to try them out. If you have no preference after this then go for the Nikon as it is a significantly better camera (much better IQ, much better dynamic range, much better ISO handling, many more autofocus points, and better resolution)
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's possibly slightly shortsighted though. When you buy a DSLR you're buying into a system, and most people don't change systems very often once they've started to build a collection of lenses and accessories. So it's maybe worth looking at the differences between the systems rather than, or as well as, the differences between the current entry level cameras.
- Messages
- 2,872
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Very true,whatever body you buy you will eventually change it.once you have a collection of lenses however changing systems becomes very expensive.
Do your homework on what you want to shoot now and possibly in the future ( i know you need a crystal ball) but look at each sytems comparable lenses and flashes before you make decision
- Messages
- 23,638
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
You're right, but I was trying not to over complicate things for the OP. However for the consumer/enthusiast Nikon and Canon offer much of a muchness in terms of lens selection (yes there's some slight differences for more dedicated/specific lenses), flash comparability, accessories etc etc IMO. In terms of upgrading Canon is falling behind across the board at the moment in terms of sensor performance, and for cameras of a similar price bracket offer no real advantage in terms of autofocus etc etc. The area camera Canon does have the upper hand is the video of the 70d thanks to its dual pixel tech. But if I was currently buying into a system it would be Nikon for the reasons mentioned. Of course, if there happens to be a particular lens you want that canon has and Nikon doesn't then you would have to take this into consideration.
But of course we are fortunate we can be so picky, most modern DSLRs are superb and can offer great results. I just like to get the best I can for the money
Of course, people do prefer particular layouts and menu systems and is more important that folk are comfortable with the camera hence the first sentence in my first post.
Edit: There's other things to consider such as colours, some people prefer the warmer tones on Canon for example.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 253
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Definitely handle both first before making a purchase. It's like taking a car for a test drive really!!!
For a long time I had my heart set on a Nikon but ended up with a Canon after handling them both. The Nikon just didn't kind of 'feel right' in my hands whereas the Canon was just lurvley ;-)
For a long time I had my heart set on a Nikon but ended up with a Canon after handling them both. The Nikon just didn't kind of 'feel right' in my hands whereas the Canon was just lurvley ;-)
- Messages
- 23,638
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep, done the same myself. Went out to buy a Nikon d7100 and came back with a Sony A77 for the same reason. Then when upgrading to FF wanted a 5D3 but bought a D750 due to the ergonomics.
- Messages
- 423
- Name
- rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As above. Did the research when going for my first dslr and favoured the Canon 50D (I think it was). So nearly went that way but just before purchasing and simply out of curiosity I asked to try a Nikon. And that swung it for me. I went for a D90.
The one point I always stress above all others now when asked this question is to find out which brand feels best in your hands.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 143
- Edit My Images
- No
If you haven't even started down the DSLR route - i.e. you haven't invested in a system with lenses, accessories, etc - then now is the moment to take a step back followed by a deep breath.
You currently have a Panasonic bridge camera (presumably NOT the FZ1000?), which probably gives you quite decent results especially in good conditions. You probably think a DSLR compared with that is like chalk and cheese. Under certain circumstances, especially low light and versatility, then yes, but in quality of final result much of the time, no. Unless you pixel peep...
As you go up the sensor scale the gap narrows even more. To the extent that a significant number of photographers are settling for 'mirrorless' ILC systems. These use typically m4/3 sensors - although that means a sensor crop compared with full frame, be aware that many DSLRs don't even use FF, they use APS-C which is not that much bigger than m4/3. Quite a lot of people think 'mirrorless' is the future, and it's a mode that wasn't even thought of when DSLRs first evolved from 35mm SLRs.
Long story short, with a blank slate you should seriously think about buying into a mirrorless system, or at least considering it SERIOUSLY as an option. Your wallet and your shoulders and back could end up thanking you. Or think about something like the APS-C Fuji X-T1 which is an awesome camera. I know a very talented guy who's just got rid of his Nikon and Pentax and got one with a couple of good lenses, and he hasn't regretted his decision one little bit.
You currently have a Panasonic bridge camera (presumably NOT the FZ1000?), which probably gives you quite decent results especially in good conditions. You probably think a DSLR compared with that is like chalk and cheese. Under certain circumstances, especially low light and versatility, then yes, but in quality of final result much of the time, no. Unless you pixel peep...
As you go up the sensor scale the gap narrows even more. To the extent that a significant number of photographers are settling for 'mirrorless' ILC systems. These use typically m4/3 sensors - although that means a sensor crop compared with full frame, be aware that many DSLRs don't even use FF, they use APS-C which is not that much bigger than m4/3. Quite a lot of people think 'mirrorless' is the future, and it's a mode that wasn't even thought of when DSLRs first evolved from 35mm SLRs.
Long story short, with a blank slate you should seriously think about buying into a mirrorless system, or at least considering it SERIOUSLY as an option. Your wallet and your shoulders and back could end up thanking you. Or think about something like the APS-C Fuji X-T1 which is an awesome camera. I know a very talented guy who's just got rid of his Nikon and Pentax and got one with a couple of good lenses, and he hasn't regretted his decision one little bit.
- Messages
- 23,638
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep good advice, just as long as you realise the limitations of mirrorless. Unfortunately it's not 'there yet' to allow me to ditch my DSLR, but I do prefer the m4/3 for travel.
- Messages
- 143
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes, the size of the Olympus and Panasonic systems aren't nearly as large as (say) Nikon's and Canon's. However, two points:
1. what they DO have probably accounts for everything 95% of photographers want
2. they will accept lenses from a variety of sources, even old manual prime lenses from an SLR though the whole image circle will not be used
And mirrorless is probably still superior for video, and certainly so for silent mode.
- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Do you want to enjoy your holiday and the sights you see on it?
OR
Do you want to waste half your time, NOT seeing much, but the back of a camera, while you prod buttons looking for obscure menu settings trying to work out how to use it?
If you are sure you want to step up to a new camera system, then go for it. Pick the one that is easiest to handle and work. Then spend a month or three going out every evening round your own home, taking photo's of anything and everything that doesn't really matter if it comes out over or under exposed, out of focus or blurred to bluggery, until handling the camera and getting shots the way you want them becomes second nature and you don't even have to 'think' very much to do it, let alone prod buttons and hunt menu's worse, pull the user manual out your pocket and read up how to make it do what you want it to.
As to the choice of kit? I'm not surprised the chap in the shop recommended the 18-300.. that's a £500 lens! bet he was rubbing his hands with glee looking forward to his next commission cheque!
Yup, it covers the range of focal lengths I have in my bag, afforded by the £70 18-55 'kit' lens, and the £180 55-300.. for half the price... and of what I actually use with any regularity, the £180 18-140, would cover all my most used focal lengths even more cheaply.. in fact, the kit 18-55 on it's own almost does, even more cheaply!
Do you REALLY need that much 'zoom'? Ever! Let alone on holiday?
Back in 1980, my father was emigrating to Canada, and bought me an Olympus XA2 compact camera for my 10th Birthday, so I could get 'nice' photos of all I was likely to see when I went to visit him. Then, most cameras had a fixed, usually wide angle lens. Interchangeable lens 'system' cameras tended to be very expensive, and zooms were only really practical on SLR system cameras where you could see through the view-finder how the zoom changed the framing, and even then, they were often shunned, especially for 'travel' photography where you will mostly want a wide or normal angle lens for Landscapes, architecture and people shots... OK if you are going on Safari and don't want to get too close to the lions, something longer may be useful, but in that scenario, the extended reach of a long zoom probably still wont be enough and you'd be better ditching the compromises of a 'do it all lens' for a specialist one for that job.. or forget the camera all together.. enjoy the holiday, and buy a 10p post-card at the souvenir shop, taken by a pro with the specialist kit and the time to wait for the best light and setting and pose!
So, for the most part, that fixed wide angle lens compact has been my favourite 'travel' camera for thirty odd years, and STILL gets slipped into my pocket when I'm on the motorbike, and space is at a premium, and is to hand, wherever and whenever opportunity arises, and its total lack of any zoom is no real handicap! Its been my companion in travel all that while, not my reason for travel, and its small, simple, and lacking 'faff' and is more than second nature to use, I really don't have to 'think' to take a photo with it, its utter instinct. I see, 'something' and the camera is out of my pocket, in my hand, opened, cocked and at my eye, framed, shutter released, closed, and back in my pocket in less time than it took to type it! THAT is what you want in a 'travel' camera. Not mega-pixels and mega-zoom. Something utterly unobtrusive, that doesn't impinge on your holiday in any way, and lets you enjoy your holiday, not waste it, faffing with cameras!
Back to my first question; do you want to enjoy your site seeing, or do you want to spend your holiday prodding buttons looking at a 4" LCD screen most of the time?
Remember, better photographers take better photo's not better cameras. If you are already familiar and comfy with your bridge camera, then you will probably get more better shots of your holiday with that, than you will anything else, especially something new and unfamiliar that dumps you back at the bottom of the learning curve, AND you will get more out of your holiday, seeing what there is to see, not the back of a camera!
On the suggestion of mirror-less systems? I am sanguine. Notion one may be useful to you here is mostly down to them being more compact than a DSLR. But, if you are looking at mega-zooms to go with one? Well, rather defeats the point of an interchangeable lens system camera, doesn't it? Same could be said of a DSLR in fact. You might as well stick to a mega-zoom bridge IF you only want 'one' lens.
If then, you are prepared to sacrifice convenience and compact-ness for the 'versatility' of an interchangeable lens system camera, then 'currently' I believe that DSLR's are the better bet. If you want to explore photographic possibility, the incumbent 'systems' offered by Nikon & Cannon are well established and supported. There is an enormous range of lenses available for them, from the camera makers and the independent lens makers, covering a much wider range of specialist needs, that is far more available and affordable, with an awful lot more on offer second hand, making it even more so, IF you want to delve into it...And that is really the big question. And if you do? Well, I would NOT be looking at spending £500 on a jack-of-all-trades 18-300 super-zoom. I'd be looking at the 18-140, and saving £300 that could be better spent on 'specialist' lenses to justify and exploit having a camera I can change lenses on!
OR
Do you want to waste half your time, NOT seeing much, but the back of a camera, while you prod buttons looking for obscure menu settings trying to work out how to use it?
If you are sure you want to step up to a new camera system, then go for it. Pick the one that is easiest to handle and work. Then spend a month or three going out every evening round your own home, taking photo's of anything and everything that doesn't really matter if it comes out over or under exposed, out of focus or blurred to bluggery, until handling the camera and getting shots the way you want them becomes second nature and you don't even have to 'think' very much to do it, let alone prod buttons and hunt menu's worse, pull the user manual out your pocket and read up how to make it do what you want it to.
As to the choice of kit? I'm not surprised the chap in the shop recommended the 18-300.. that's a £500 lens! bet he was rubbing his hands with glee looking forward to his next commission cheque!
Yup, it covers the range of focal lengths I have in my bag, afforded by the £70 18-55 'kit' lens, and the £180 55-300.. for half the price... and of what I actually use with any regularity, the £180 18-140, would cover all my most used focal lengths even more cheaply.. in fact, the kit 18-55 on it's own almost does, even more cheaply!
Do you REALLY need that much 'zoom'? Ever! Let alone on holiday?
Back in 1980, my father was emigrating to Canada, and bought me an Olympus XA2 compact camera for my 10th Birthday, so I could get 'nice' photos of all I was likely to see when I went to visit him. Then, most cameras had a fixed, usually wide angle lens. Interchangeable lens 'system' cameras tended to be very expensive, and zooms were only really practical on SLR system cameras where you could see through the view-finder how the zoom changed the framing, and even then, they were often shunned, especially for 'travel' photography where you will mostly want a wide or normal angle lens for Landscapes, architecture and people shots... OK if you are going on Safari and don't want to get too close to the lions, something longer may be useful, but in that scenario, the extended reach of a long zoom probably still wont be enough and you'd be better ditching the compromises of a 'do it all lens' for a specialist one for that job.. or forget the camera all together.. enjoy the holiday, and buy a 10p post-card at the souvenir shop, taken by a pro with the specialist kit and the time to wait for the best light and setting and pose!
So, for the most part, that fixed wide angle lens compact has been my favourite 'travel' camera for thirty odd years, and STILL gets slipped into my pocket when I'm on the motorbike, and space is at a premium, and is to hand, wherever and whenever opportunity arises, and its total lack of any zoom is no real handicap! Its been my companion in travel all that while, not my reason for travel, and its small, simple, and lacking 'faff' and is more than second nature to use, I really don't have to 'think' to take a photo with it, its utter instinct. I see, 'something' and the camera is out of my pocket, in my hand, opened, cocked and at my eye, framed, shutter released, closed, and back in my pocket in less time than it took to type it! THAT is what you want in a 'travel' camera. Not mega-pixels and mega-zoom. Something utterly unobtrusive, that doesn't impinge on your holiday in any way, and lets you enjoy your holiday, not waste it, faffing with cameras!
Back to my first question; do you want to enjoy your site seeing, or do you want to spend your holiday prodding buttons looking at a 4" LCD screen most of the time?
Remember, better photographers take better photo's not better cameras. If you are already familiar and comfy with your bridge camera, then you will probably get more better shots of your holiday with that, than you will anything else, especially something new and unfamiliar that dumps you back at the bottom of the learning curve, AND you will get more out of your holiday, seeing what there is to see, not the back of a camera!
On the suggestion of mirror-less systems? I am sanguine. Notion one may be useful to you here is mostly down to them being more compact than a DSLR. But, if you are looking at mega-zooms to go with one? Well, rather defeats the point of an interchangeable lens system camera, doesn't it? Same could be said of a DSLR in fact. You might as well stick to a mega-zoom bridge IF you only want 'one' lens.
If then, you are prepared to sacrifice convenience and compact-ness for the 'versatility' of an interchangeable lens system camera, then 'currently' I believe that DSLR's are the better bet. If you want to explore photographic possibility, the incumbent 'systems' offered by Nikon & Cannon are well established and supported. There is an enormous range of lenses available for them, from the camera makers and the independent lens makers, covering a much wider range of specialist needs, that is far more available and affordable, with an awful lot more on offer second hand, making it even more so, IF you want to delve into it...And that is really the big question. And if you do? Well, I would NOT be looking at spending £500 on a jack-of-all-trades 18-300 super-zoom. I'd be looking at the 18-140, and saving £300 that could be better spent on 'specialist' lenses to justify and exploit having a camera I can change lenses on!
I don't understand why people say this kind of thing on here. What kind of advice is this? You can't make a decision based on 'what feels best in the hand', what happened to the things we used to compare like features, pricing, options?
It's a good job lots of people came on here with some useful information or everyone would be in curry's fondling the TV's to see which 'felt best in the hand'.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes you can.
Most DSLRs have way more functionality than most people need. And if you find that you're hitting a limitation on your DSLR - if you need better AF performance, say, or better low light capability, or a faster frame rate - then you can get that by upgrading within the same range. There's a healthy second hand market in DSLRs and upgrading is easy.
But the one thing you can't "fix" by upgrading is how well you get on with the controls and the menu layout. Those things are baked into the manufacturers' DNA and don't change from one model to another.
For example I handle Canon and Nikon DSLRs every day, and I find that:
- one of them has the control dials in exactly the right places, and one has them in places where my hands don't find it natural to use them;
- one has lenses that rotate in what seems to be the intuitive direction for focus and zoom, and one rotates in the opposite - "wrong" direction;
- one has a menu structure which I find completely intuitive and logical, and one doesn't.
Fortunately in each case it's the same one which feels "right", so that makes it very easy for me to decide which brand to use. But I know people who disagree on every point here, and are very comfortable using the "other" system.
I wouldn't want to buy into a system where, every time I zoomed the lens, it felt like I was zooming it the wrong way. I wouldn't want to buy into a system where I had to stretch and bend my fingers unnaturally to use the controls. So that's why handling them is more important than comparing the specs.
Last edited:
You're totally right but there's a difference between 'what feels best in hand' and 'which one is easiest to use'. Perhaps the person I quoted actually meant the latter but I've seen a lot of similar comments here which in the way they're written, suggest that you can make a decision simply by picking it up.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fair point. I assumed the quote meant the latter, and I think most people would, but it's worth clarifying.
(Although having said that, I could tell that I would struggle to get on with [a certain brand of DSLR] without even switching it on, because I don't like the positions of the control wheels. That's a case where 'what feels best in hand' and 'which one is easiest to use' amount to the same thing.)
- Messages
- 756
- Name
- Angelo
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you can have them along with some lenses for a few days, then the decision is in your hands. You'll clearly figure it out yourself which camera suits u better.
- Messages
- 367
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm as fussy as anything, and would always choose the better option when buying tech. After a lot of faffing around with brands and styles of camera, my honest opinion would be the 700D.
The only thing that would put me off is if my friends/family/colleagues mainly used Nikon, then I'd consider going that route to get the benefit of swapping lenses/kit/advice.
The only thing that would put me off is if my friends/family/colleagues mainly used Nikon, then I'd consider going that route to get the benefit of swapping lenses/kit/advice.
- Messages
- 143
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't understand your comment, is what I don't understand. The 'feel' of a camera in the hand - especially when comparing options that have quite similar specs not to mention prices - is ultimately the most important factor in coming to a decision. Isn't paying £50 more for a camera that you will enjoy using more, and get pictures on quicker because the controls fall just right to the fingers, better?
The TV analogy is worthless as a TV just sits in the corner of the lounge to be goggled at - you don't carry it around for creative uses.