Which DSLR for a newbie?
Discussion
Firstly, I'm sorry if this is a re-post. I've been toying for a while on taking up photography as a hobby even though up until now my photography skills have been as exotic as the odd drunkenly fuzzy photo on a Saturday night but I would like to give it a proper go. I've given myself a budget of £500 to get something half decent and then start playing around with it myself and perhaps go on the occasional course to get to grips with the basics. So, what would you recommend for a newbie? I've been looking at the Nikon D3200, is it any good? Would another manufacturer offer me more? I really don't know so I'm hoping that you guys might be able to help.
Many thanks in advance,
Rich
Many thanks in advance,
Rich
bigrich4 said:
Is there anything in particular I should look for though?
In terms of features, I'd say 'not really'. All cameras at that level will have more than you need, so it's really a question of ergonomics/handling. From what I read it seems Canons are a little smaller than Nikons - some people say they find Canons nice and small, others say the Nikon fits their hands better. I find Nikons instinctive; give me a Canon and I go 'Der'.Presumably you've 'warmed up' with a compact first?
I popped into Jessop's this morning to have a look/play with some camera's. I did find the Nikon a bit easier to hold than the Cannon offerings. However after explaining to the lady behind the counter that I have large ham-hands she threw me a bit of a curve ball and handed me a Sony Alpha 57 which I found a lot nicer to handle.... does this make me a bad person? I know that it's a bit more expensive than my original contenders too.... is it a case of trying to run before I can walk?... hmmm 
Edited by bigrich4 on Friday 19th October 12:22
Simpo Two said:
Hating them all saves time 
I do get what you said earlier about getting a cheaper camera and then more lenses for it. Something like the Nikon 3100 and an extra lens perhaps? I know it's the older model to the 3200 but do I really need 24mp?! I have no intention of blowing up a picture any bigger than A4 and I would imagine that even cropping and zooming in on photos at 14mp isn't going to have too much of a detrimental effect?bigrich4 said:
do I really need 24mp?! I have no intention of blowing up a picture any bigger than A4 and I would imagine that even cropping and zooming in on photos at 14mp isn't going to have too much of a detrimental effect?
No, you really don't. Hi-res sensors are useful for massive prints, or for significant cropping, but I'd rather have a longer lens than take a wider view and throw 3/4 of it away. They also show up poorer lenses and technique.It's important to note that everybody has different ways of doing things, has different combinations of kit, and after a while it can get a bit opinionated (guilty m'lud). The hard part for you is trying to predict what you want before you want it. Maybe the kit lens will be all you want and suit you fine. Maybe you'll want to take birds or racing cars and get a telephoto. Maybe you'll get the need for speed and buy a fast prime. Maybe you'll become an insect obsessive and buy a macro lens. Maybe you want to play with flash. Maybe you want to try long exposure stuff and buy a tripod. Maybe you'll go for portraits and buy studio lighting...
Thing is, you won't know until you get your paws on a camera and see what you like doing. However, IMHO a good combination for starters is body, kit lens (eg 18-55) and telephoto (eg 70-300). After a while you'll have a better idea of which way your hobby is going, and can buy bits to suit. And of course you can sell stuff too, so in a few years it's quite possible your kit will evolve into something different. If, in a few months time, you realise that actually the Pentax XYZ is better for you, then sell and upgrade.
EVF put an extra drain on the battery. Usually not a problem unless you have a very long day of shooting, or go on holiday and leave your charger behind.
I'm guessing that the main reason why people are against Sony is not that they are a bad camera, but that the system behind the camera (lenses etc.) is not as well developed as either Nikon or Canon. This isn't a problem for someone who only undertakes photography at a minor hobbyist level, but if you really get in to it, you may find yourself being limited by what's on offer from some of the lesser manufacturers.
I'm guessing that the main reason why people are against Sony is not that they are a bad camera, but that the system behind the camera (lenses etc.) is not as well developed as either Nikon or Canon. This isn't a problem for someone who only undertakes photography at a minor hobbyist level, but if you really get in to it, you may find yourself being limited by what's on offer from some of the lesser manufacturers.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff