Beginner Starting out with Cameras .. (Canon)

N

Notepad12

Messages
24
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey all,

New member here and new to photography (sort of)

I've been having a look on the Canon website and I've came across a couple different options so far that fit my budget. (Around £1,700)

I'm looking to do some general pictures of family, holiday pictures, garden views, some wildlife, some sports etc.

What would you recommend?

The first one being the R10:

Canon EOS R10 Mirrorless Camera + RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens

With the Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM Lens

Or option 2

Canon EOS R7 Mirrorless Camera + RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM Lens

If you have any other kits or recommendations I'd be glad to hear them also
 
No doubt many will come along here with recommendations, uppermost of these will be another manufacturer. Personally I'm a Nikon user but many others will say Sony or...

So, why Canon, any particular reason?
 
ShinySideUp said:
No doubt many will come along here with recommendations, uppermost of these will be another manufacturer. Personally I'm a Nikon user but many others will say Sony or...

So, why Canon, any particular reason?
Click to expand...
Always been impressed by Canon with my dad's older camera.

My perceived perception of Canon is that they are a market leader with cameras and lenses having been around for a long time.

I could well be wrong, though.
 
I’d also recommend trying out the other brands in person too.

Back when I first started out; it was (mainly) the likes of Canon and Nikon to choose from.

First thing I was told when trying them out (and something I’ll always say to anyone now) is to choose the brand which feels best in your hand. Ergonomics / button placement etc.

I chose Canon.

You honestly won’t go wrong with any of the main brands. They’re all excellent cameras for your stated needs.
 
Last edited:
Why Canon, and why new? (you said you looked at the Canon website and found something that suits you budget)

As has been mentioned, there are other good choices (I changed from Canon to Panasonic), and used would get you more for your money, ie a Canon 5diii with a 28-135 and a Sigma 150-600 would come in about £500 under your budget, and give better pictures.

Won't have all the latest features, and just as an example of alternatives.
 
At the moment the issue or perhaps non issue with Canon is the lack of third party lens options. Canon’s RF lenses are aimed at professionals with high prices with a few lenses down the budget end. If you aren’t bothered by budget or not interested in having more than a couple of lenses then it’s a non issue. Sony on the other hand has lots of choice at different price levels from different third party lens manufacturers. From your list of photography interests most cameras will suffice including older cheaper DSLRs. Just remember that it’s easy to get caught up in the gear acquisition syndrome and you end buying loads of camera equipment that you think will make you a better photographer.
 
Mintchocs said:
At the moment the issue or perhaps non issue with Canon is the lack of third party lens options. Canon’s RF lenses are aimed at professionals with high prices with a few lenses down the budget end. If you aren’t bothered by budget or not interested in having more than a couple of lenses then it’s a non issue. Sony on the other hand has lots of choice at different price levels from different third party lens manufacturers. From your list of photography interests most cameras will suffice including older cheaper DSLRs. Just remember that it’s easy to get caught up in the gear acquisition syndrome and you end buying loads of camera equipment that you think will make you a better photographer.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply

'Gear acquisition syndrome' is something I'm trying to avoid hence coming on a couple forums trying to gauge what's best for me and what route to look down.

Budget like I say is 1,700 from what I've researched and looked into the 100-400 would be good for the wildlife and sports pictures I plan on taking and the 18-45 would sort the rest out at a smaller range.

I was interested in the R7 because of the weather proofing and the IBIS but that's outside of my budget. (If we include both lenses)

I felt the R10 was then more suited and it seems like a solid camera, unless I'm wrong

I looked into DSLR's but isn't that technology coming to an end and brands are going towards mirrorless?
 
Last edited:
Sangoma said:
Why Canon, and why new? (you said you looked at the Canon website and found something that suits you budget)

As has been mentioned, there are other good choices (I changed from Canon to Panasonic), and used would get you more for your money, ie a Canon 5diii with a 28-135 and a Sigma 150-600 would come in about £500 under your budget, and give better pictures.

Won't have all the latest features, and just as an example of alternatives.
Click to expand...
I suppose I've always related Canon's as the main brand for cameras (I appreciate this might be a narrow view point but I'm not too knowledgeable when it comes to camera brands)

What's better about the Canon 5diii that will give better pictures compared to an R10?
 
Notepad12 said:
What's better about the Canon 5diii that will give better pictures compared to an R10?
Click to expand...

If just starting now I'd definitely go mirrorless rather than DSLR.

As above re lens choice, Canon may be a bit limited and expensive. Maybe take a look at Sony who are arguably the company pushing the technology forward and have the largest range of lenses and if there's nothing to suit you you can always go back to looking at Canon.

Good luck choosing.
 
Notepad12 said:
from what I've researched and looked into the 100-400 would be good for the wildlife and sports pictures
Click to expand...

Not aware of your research but I commented on this in another thread recently... Copy pasting here:

"Canon RF doesn't have any affordable lenses I would consider usable in UK weather. I barely get by with a 200-600mm at f6.3 at long end and even then its a massive stretch.
The f7.1, f8, f9 and f11 aperture tele-lens might be super in Australia or Africa or shooting polar bears in August in the arctic but it just doesn't cut it even with latest greatest FF sensors in the UK.
IMO, these lenses are clearly made for a different country or population than those that shoot wildlife in the UK (half which are small/tiny birds sat in tree/bushes with overcast sky!)."

On an APS-C body your problem is going to be even worst.

Notepad12 said:
I looked into DSLR's but isn't that technology coming to an end and brands are going towards mirrorless?
Click to expand...

Basically it's ended now for all intents and purposes.
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply

'Gear acquisition syndrome' is something I'm trying to avoid hence coming on a couple forums trying to gauge what's best for me and what route to look down.

Budget like I say is 1,700 from what I've researched and looked into the 100-400 would be good for the wildlife and sports pictures I plan on taking and the 18-45 would sort the rest out at a smaller range.

I was interested in the R7 because of the weather proofing and the IBIS but that's outside of my budget. (If we include both lenses)

I felt the R10 was then more suited and it seems like a solid camera, unless I'm wrong

I looked into DSLR's but isn't that technology coming to an end and brands are going towards mirrorless?
Click to expand...
The main reason I suggested DSLRs is that many people new to photography spend a lot of money buying gear and a year later it just sits in a draw. The advantage of (new model not so much older) mirrorless cameras is the autofocus which can very effectively track moving subjects and much better accuracy with fast glass (lenses with wide open apertures of f1.2, f1.4 etc). The main question is do you want a camera to record moments which are better than your phone or do you intend to invest a lot of money into this hobby over time?
 
nandbytes said:
Not aware of your research but I commented on this in another thread recently... Copy pasting here:

"Canon RF doesn't have any affordable lenses I would consider usable in UK weather. I barely get by with a 200-600mm at f6.3 at long end and even then its a massive stretch.
The f7.1, f8, f9 and f11 aperture tele-lens might be super in Australia or Africa or shooting polar bears in August in the arctic but it just doesn't cut it even with latest greatest FF sensors in the UK.
IMO, these lenses are clearly made for a different country or population than those that shoot wildlife in the UK (half which are small/tiny birds sat in tree/bushes with overcast sky!)."

On an APS-C body your problem is going to be even worst.



Basically it's ended now for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply,

What would be your suggestion then?
 
I can't offer any suggestions as its an individual choice. I changed from Canon to Fuji because of weight.
The only thing I would say is whatever you get you are usually buying a system, lenses, flash etc and changing can be expensive if you have a lot of gear.
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply,

What would be your suggestion then?
Click to expand...
Try to handle lots of cameras (friends, London Camera Exchange etc.)

You may not like or suit the Canon's handling.

Rest assured that nowadays it's very hard to buy anything other than a good camera.


Don't discount the smaller sensor options either.

Micro four thirds' lenses are surprisingly good and much lighter and cheaper than the "bigger" brands.
 
I have shot Canon since the 70s and I confess to knowing very little about other brands, and very little about mirrorless (I like my dslrs) RF lenses may be expensive and short of chioce however from what I have read the EF lenses can be used with aconverter. With the advent of mirrorless and the rush towards it there is plenty of good used EF glass on the market. You can always change later if you feel the need.
 
Canon do free 48 hour test drives, which I would recommend to get a feel for the cameras.

I tend to lean towards it is better to prioritise lenses, rather than the body, which in your case would be the R10, but I'm not too sure about either of those lenses, so cannot comment. Other than that if you want to shoot wildlife, 100-400mm is going to be more useful than 150mm.
 
Go to a shop and handle various cameras to see what seems most natural to you.

What sports do you like to shoot.

The Canon R series will accept any EF and EF-S lens with the RF-EF lens adaptor and you can buy some very good high quality lenses that will last for years and will work as well or even better than they did on the original bodies. I can't comment on other manufacturers as I'm a Canon shooter.
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply,

What would be your suggestion then?
Click to expand...

If you are looking at APS-C I'd suggest either Fuji or Sony.

If you are looking for a small long range option, the one I liked most was Sony 70-350mm. The APS-C bodies for it are not as nice as canon or Fuji options but that lens is super nice. On canon the closest option is the 100-400mm you mentioned which as I commented on above I'm not a fan of.
On Fuji the closest option is the 70-300mm. It is a bit old so not as fast focusing and of course doesn't have as much reach.

Canon and Nikon are still relatively new to mirrorless, and they have been focussing on FF. So APS-C lenses are limited and lack of 3rd party support means you have even less options.
 
Mintchocs said:
The main reason I suggested DSLRs is that many people new to photography spend a lot of money buying gear and a year later it just sits in a draw. The advantage of (new model not so much older) mirrorless cameras is the autofocus which can very effectively track moving subjects and much better accuracy with fast glass (lenses with wide open apertures of f1.2, f1.4 etc). The main question is do you want a camera to record moments which are better than your phone or do you intend to invest a lot of money into this hobby over time?
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply.

I'm just looking for something that will be able to take good quality pictures, some at small range some at range hence the 100-400 lens suggestion.

Once I've spent the budget I won't be ploughing huge amounts of money into it over time.
 
I'm a bit puzzled by the Canon 18-45 4.5? The previous non R lens were 18-55 3.5. This gives less range and a smaller aperture. Not exactly a forward step. I think I'd be going body only and using older lens as Andrew says in post 17.
 
As others have said try other brands, see what feels right for you in terms of where the buttons are, how the menu's come across to you, the size and weight of the camera with particular lenses, possibly the ones you want, and then make your decision. I use Canon for the above reasons. I did try others but couldn't get on with them. If it comes down to the R7 and the R10 and you're still undecided take a memory card along with you, take it home and check out the images in your home, see which you prefer.
 
andrewc said:
Go to a shop and handle various cameras to see what seems most natural to you.

What sports do you like to shoot.

The Canon R series will accept any EF and EF-S lens with the RF-EF lens adaptor and you can buy some very good high quality lenses that will last for years and will work as well or even better than they did on the original bodies. I can't comment on other manufacturers as I'm a Canon shooter.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply.

Are there any particular EF and EF-S lenses you'd recommend for what I'd use them for?
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply.

I'm just looking for something that will be able to take good quality pictures, some at small range some at range hence the 100-400 lens suggestion.

Once I've spent the budget I won't be ploughing huge amounts of money into it over time.
Click to expand...

If you go mirrorless, you will start on the path of spending far more than you anticipated as manufacturers come out with ever more lenses to fill in the tiny gaps in focal length and aperture. I'm not saying don't go mirrorless, but you are probably opening your wallet to a world of hurt, whereas there will barely be any more releases of lenses for DSLRs, so what you see is all there is, or is ever going to be. As mirrorless becomes more popular among the GAS-afflicted, so DSLR lenses will drop in price and if you can't find an existing DSLR lens that suits you now, you certainly won't find it in mirrorless either. Mirrorless or DSLR, in any event, if it is your first 'proper' and you're not entirely sure where you are going with photography, buy used as, just like cars, the value drops off a cliff the moment you take it out of the showroom.
 
Personally I think it’s a bit foolish to spend £1700 without handling them first, especially if you’re not experienced with cameras. You don’t want to spend it and find out there’s something you don’t like. Go to a shop and handle them, even if you don’t buy from the shop.
I’d recommend Sony, but I’ve only used Sony and Fuji. The a6000 series of cameras are available second hand and the mount is old enough now to have cheaper lenses. Along with some 3rd party like sigma.
They’re small and light enough for family and travel photos with a 16-50 style lens and also capable for sport and wildlife.
My advice is to buy a second hand Sony a6000 series camera that comes with the kit 16-50mm lens. The lens isn’t amazing in terms of maximum aperture but if you buy second hand and find you don’t like it you can sell it on without losing a significant amount of money if any at all
 
Nebular89 said:
Personally I think it’s a bit foolish to spend £1700 without handling them first, especially if you’re not experienced with cameras. You don’t want to spend it and find out there’s something you don’t like. Go to a shop and handle them, even if you don’t buy from the shop.
I’d recommend Sony, but I’ve only used Sony and Fuji. The a6000 series of cameras are available second hand and the mount is old enough now to have cheaper lenses. Along with some 3rd party like sigma.
They’re small and light enough for family and travel photos with a 16-50 style lens and also capable for sport and wildlife.
My advice is to buy a second hand Sony a6000 series camera that comes with the kit 16-50mm lens. The lens isn’t amazing in terms of maximum aperture but if you buy second hand and find you don’t like it you can sell it on without losing a significant amount of money if any at all
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply.

The Sony A6400 seems like a quality camera at a great price in comparison to the R10.

What's your view on this kit, specifically the lens it comes with?

https://www.parkcameras.com/shop/sony-a6400-with-e-18-135mm-f35-56-oss-lens-kit-black_7016503m
 
100% hold as many as you can - I know Sony/Canon/Nikon/Olympus/... make good cameras but what feels right in my hand might not in yours.

Case in point - I have a Nikon DSLR for use at work - I get the requires results but I don't enjoy using it. It's very much a tool to me.

I have a range of Canon cameras at home & even allowing for their primary use being "not work" they feel right in my hand.

My colleague (dyed in the wool Nikon) loves the work camera...

Bottom line - if you don't enjoy using it, then it is far more likely to fester in a drawer.
 
Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM Lens?
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply.

The Sony A6400 seems like a quality camera at a great price in comparison to the R10.

What's your view on this kit, specifically the lens it comes with?

https://www.parkcameras.com/shop/sony-a6400-with-e-18-135mm-f35-56-oss-lens-kit-black_7016503m
Click to expand...
I’ve not used the a6400 or that lens. But that’s good for the money. If you want to spend more you have a lot left over for another lens. The downside to that lens is that it’s not a fixed aperture however it would do everything you wanted. I can’t comment on how fast it focuses.

I would 100% hold it first though. The a6000 series I think is smaller than the canon which might not suit you.

Do you know how much time you’ll spend doing each type of photography? If you’re going to take more family photos id invest more into the fast prime. If you’ll do more wildlife then invest in that more
 
Notepad12 said:
Thank you for your reply.

Are there any particular EF and EF-S lenses you'd recommend for what I'd use them for?
Click to expand...
Well - the best Canon made EF lenses are generally (but not exclusively) from the L range - and you'll find that good glass has traditionally held its value well. Probably the best bang-for-buck would probably be the Canon 70-200 f/4 L which was available in both normal and image stabilised versions. I would expect that would work very well on a new Canon mirrorless body.

As well as Canon, 3rd party lenses from Sigma, Tamron etc., should all work nicely as well.
 
I know the 5diii has been recommended but how about the 5div second hand? I can bag a like new one for £1,000.

Only 1312 shutter count. Brand new from Canon is £2829.

Seems like a good deal?
 
why DSLR? any particular lens on DSLR you are after?

for similar price you can get Canon Eos R, R6, Nikon Z6, Z7, Sony A7iii, A7RIII

the only DSLR I think I'd consider at this stage is perhaps the Nikon D850 - base ISO64 for high dynamic range, very nice AF tracking system, 45mp sensor, light PF lenses
A mirrorless body that can do all that just as well costs a whole lot more than used D850.
 
nandbytes said:
why DSLR? any particular lens on DSLR you are after?

for similar price you can get Canon Eos R, R6, Nikon Z6, Z7, Sony A7iii, A7RIII

the only DSLR I think I'd consider at this stage is perhaps the Nikon D850 - base ISO64 for high dynamic range, very nice AF tracking system, 45mp sensor, light PF lenses
A mirrorless body that can do all that just as well costs a whole lot more than used D850.
Click to expand...
I really like the look of the

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II USM' as my long range lens and the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens as my general purpose lens.
 
andrewc said:
Those, new, will cost £ 4k, and you still need a camera body.
Click to expand...
Second hand, the camera (5diii) around £500, the (5div) around £1,000.

The 100-400 pre owned is £850-950.

The 24-105 pre owned is £400-500.

If I went for the 5diii plus the lenses all in I'd be at £2k or the 5div I'd be in at £2.5k.

The lenses I could carry forward onto a EOS R full frame camera in the future once second hand prices come down

What do you think?
 
Notepad12 said:
Second hand, the camera (5diii) around £500, the (5div) around £1,000.

The 100-400 pre owned is £850-950.

The 24-105 pre owned is £400-500.

If I went for the 5diii plus the lenses all in I'd be at £2k or the 5div I'd be in at £2.5k.

The lenses I could carry forward onto a EOS R full frame camera in the future once second hand prices come down

What do you think?
Click to expand...
I just bought a very good 24-105 from a dealer for £204, with their 6 month warranty.
They also have the 100-400 starting from £650.

If you want to crop your images, it may be worth getting the 5Div over the 5Diii, but otherwise I think the 5diii gives nicer images, others on here have said similar recently.

I bought my 5Diii couple of months ago for less than £410 including postage, and less than 40k shutter count.


For £450 you could buy a Panasonic Lumix G9, plus a 100-400 Power OIS lens for around £700, plus a 14-140 Mkii Power OIS lens for around £300, which will give you 28mm-800mm 35mm eq with just two lenses, with dual stabilisation, a camera which is rated as having excellent ergonomics, has probably more features than you would use, but is also very easy to use.
They give amazingly sharp images, superb build quality, and an added bonus is that the lenses work on all the previous models, so if you wanted a second cheap body, you could get a G3 for well under £50.

There are some times when the full frame is more suitable and gives better results (night shots for example) but for me they are few and far between, and most of the time the Panasonic comes out well on top.

I can't comment on the other suggestions like Nikon, Sony, or Fuji. I have used them, but never owned one so I couldn't give any valid thoughts.

However, it does seem you have already decided on Canon and really just looking for approval of a Canon solution :)
 
If you want to crop your images, it may be worth getting the 5Div over the 5Diii, but otherwise I think the 5diii gives nicer images, others on here have said similar recently.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that they give nicer images?

Im just surprised if they upgraded the camera to the mark iv and the image quality was worse.

I don't really want to crop my images too much, more just taking hugh quality ones.

I feel like the Mark 3 is a good starter point.

And may I ask which dealer you used for your pre owned? There are many
 
Notepad12 said:
What makes you say that they give nicer images?

Im just surprised if they upgraded the camera to the mark iv and the image quality was worse.

I don't really want to crop my images too much, more just taking hugh quality ones.

I feel like the Mark 3 is a good starter point.

And may I ask which dealer you used for your pre owned? There are many
Click to expand...
The 5Diii has less noise than the 5Div, which shows up in indoor and low light shots, and the 5Diii gives better colour in very low light.
However, the 5Div has more pixels, and allows you to get more detail in cropped images.
The 5Div also has many other "improvements", such as a touchscreen, better video, better processor, better dynamic range and others.

How a image looks is quite subjective, and there will be many different opinions on the same thing :)


Edit
I got the lens from MPB, and that is where I got the prices I mentioned
The requirements for high quality images for all the things you want to take pictures of are different.
If I want good pictures of something far away or moving, I would use the G9, if I wanted night time shots or indoor without flash I would use the 5Diii (not quite a simple as that, but to show the idea) and each one would be better in the chosen use.
 
Last edited:
Notepad12 said:
And may I ask which dealer you used for your pre owned? There are many
Click to expand...
There are quite a few dealers offering pre owned I can only speak of the one I have used. That is Park Cameras Ive bought four items off them In the last 12 months and have found all items to be as described and good value. I guess you take your pick and take ylur chance most give some form nf guarantee.
 
Hi @Notepad12 and welcome to TP.

You've already moved your goalposts significantly since your opening post, and I'm pleased that you've already realised you'll get a lot more bang for your buck in the S/H market.

In your shoes; I'd keep my powder dry for a while and head to the Photography show in Birmingham in a week or so. There you'll be able to see the different brands (and formats), have a play and compare the look and feel of the leading brands, don't fall for the marketing hype though.

Take cash for your lunch and leave your cards at home though - it's too easy to get tempted by shiny things.

Of the stuff you've looked at, the 5dIII is an absolute bargain atm, but that should also show you that DSLR's are the past and mirrorless is the future (that camera was £3k new). However, I don't see anything in your intended use that makes me think you should be thinking of FF. APSC and even M43 cameras are perfectly capable of capturing great images, and lighter on the shoulders and bank balance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top