Is this Camera+Lens Setup the most bang for the $ I can get?

[bagusbagus]

my last 2 cameras were d3200 and sony nex5, both with kit lenses, the d3200 was pretty gut in image quality with the kit lens,however the AF in liveview was just dead slow and unusable,I have heard in d3400 it's now decent. The nex5 AF however was very good ,however it lacked the image quality combined with the kit lens compared to the d3200.. I have now sold both of the cameras and got some $$$ to buy a new -better- system.

I kinda wanted the a6000 due to the form/ better autofocus ,however I did more research, what the startup kit+ Good Fast Prime lens would cost and it came out not what I expected..

Here is my maths:

D3400 +Kit 18-55 - £309
AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8 G - £126

Total: £435

lens+camera dxomark score: 28
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-NIKKO...

_____________

sony a6000 + Kit 16-50 -£389
SEL35F18 lens - £264

total: £653

lens+camera dxomark score: 23
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/Sony-E-35mm-F1...

So... Does that means that the sony system would cost me £220 more AND produce worse results? I'm really interested to get the Most Image quality I can buy for my budget of £500-£600 , the form factor really isn't that important although I wouldn't mind it..

Is the Nikon setup pretty much the best I can get or maybe there is something way better for the same budget or for even less?

[singlecoil]

There's a firm called Canon that make cameras too, you should at least look at some of their stuff, I understand they are quite popular.

I'm not familiar with the part of the camera market that you are looking at but starting from scratch as you are I would be inclined to go mirrorless, and Sony are writing the book on that.

[Narcisus]

Also a firm called Pentax ;-)

[DibblyDobbler]

What sort of thing do you want to shoot? This is probably key to answering the query

[DavidY]

singlecoil said:

but starting from scratch as you are I would be inclined to go mirrorless, and Sony are writing the book on that.

Sony might be writing the book on FF mirrorless, they have stiff competition in APS-C mirrorless from Fuji, and the M43 mirrorless crown is shared between Panasonic and Olympus.

Mirrorless is all well and good, but the AF on entry level mirrorless systems is not as fast as the AF on entry level DSLRs, so mirrorless is certainly an option but not one I would push if the type of photography the OP (at the OPs budget) wants to do involves moving targets.

A better question is to ask the OP what they want to photograph, and recommend suitable solutions on that basis bearing in mind their budget.

[Simpo Two]

bagusbagus said:

I'm really interested to get the Most Image quality I can buy for my budget of £500-£600 , the form factor really isn't that important although I wouldn't mind it

Would you consider s/h equipment? You'll get more bang for your $ and it would open up more options.

[bagusbagus]

Simpo Two said:

Would you consider s/h equipment? You'll get more bang for your $ and it would open up more options.

Used market in UK is just weird.. it's often the same price to just buy the same stuff New if we are talking about stuff that is still in production, older stuff..well..it's just old..there are only few models I would buy s/h which have dropped in value and still look good such as nex6 or nex5r but I understand that lenses for them are super expensive?

I have done my research, I want a good body + fast quality prime lens in the range of about 20-35mm , I do not care about zoom at all & I never shoot past 35mm , usually in the range of 18-35mm .. So a good quality 35mm would be just in time.

99% of my shooting is of STILL large size products, such as Bikes..I want to showcase the product, and leave the background somewhere else..
I do not care about shooting fast moving objects in crap light conditions, I make sure that the light is good.

I could give zero f if I'm buying an entry level dslr and I won't be able to call myself a ''pro'' , lol. It's just a tool for me which I wont be using all day everyday so I'm ok if I will have to spend an extra half a second to change some settings or it not being ''as rugged'' .

Here's a quick comparison between a D3400 and much more expensive nikons, I CAN'T TELL a difference in image quality between it and 3x more expensive one...There's a very very marginal difference in the crazy high 32000 iso's, that's about it.. I never go past 1k so what's the point..

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/...

so...The lens will make a much much much more of a difference, I want to find a decent combo of such lens and a Decent body.
If I had a budget of 2k I would buy the full frame Sony A7rii + Sony FE 28mm F2 ,maybe one day...
However my budget is like MAX 300-500 ,ideally 200-250 If I can combine something from used/new market

[Simpo Two]

Well, I congratulate you on knowing exactly what you want

As well as the lens, the main thing that will determine the quality of your results is the 'loose nut behind the viewfinder'. If I was shooting bikes I'd want longer than 35mm to avoid distortion of the shape, but YMMV. Note that the crop factor of your camera affects the angle of view you get per mm.

As for the lens, if you want fast and wide, it won't be cheap. How about a new body and decent used lens? Lenses don't become 'obsolete' so fast. If you choose Nikon I hear the 17-55mm f2.8 is about £350 s/h. Mine was about £1K new and I used it for almost all my weddings.

[bagusbagus]

Simpo Two said:

Well, I congratulate you on knowing exactly what you want

As well as the lens, the main thing that will determine the quality of your results is the 'loose nut behind the viewfinder'. If I was shooting bikes I'd want longer than 35mm to avoid distortion of the shape, but YMMV. Note that the crop factor of your camera affects the angle of view you get per mm.

As for the lens, if you want fast and wide, it won't be cheap. How about a new body and decent used lens? Lenses don't become 'obsolete' so fast. If you choose Nikon I hear the 17-55mm f2.8 is about £350 s/h. Mine was about £1K new and I used it for almost all my weddings.

I don't mind the seriously older stuff at all..since the used stuff has already depreciated so I can use it for some time and re-sell if ever need for same/more thus not loosing anything.

however.. I inputed that lens + d3400 in DXo and in spit out a score of 18
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-Zoom-...

Seems like much better than the Kit lens for sure... but... the 35mm 1.8 got the score of 28 .. That's QUITE a lot of difference,although I have no idea what its like in real life
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-NIKKO...

[noell35]

What dxo mark does a Fuji xt10 with the 23mm f2 get?

[Gad-Westy]

If slick AF using live view is the priority, I think Nikon are bottom of the pile, still. And that is coming from a big fan of Nikon gear. Others have been doing this better for years and Nikon still haven't caught up. Canon's dual pixel AF is probably top of the tree for this but Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji etc all do it extremely well. Worth picking something up with a touchscreen if this is how you shoot.

[thebraketester]

Canon 5dii and a 50mm 1.8 lens. Perfect starter kit.

[Simpo Two]

bagusbagus said:

however.. I inputed that lens + d3400 in DXo and in spit out a score of 18
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-Zoom-...

Seems like much better than the Kit lens for sure... but... the 35mm 1.8 got the score of 28 .. That's QUITE a lot of difference,although I have no idea what its like in real life
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-NIKKO...

Don't get your head stuck too much in reviews and graphs; they are little to do with photography. I charged over £1K for weddings and nobody ever said 'Hmm, those photos look like they was taken with a lens that only scored 18'.

The 35mm prime should score higher then the zoom because it's a prime. The graph may look nicer but you lose the zooom facility, which I find indispensible.

The real arbiter of quality is the Mark One Eyeball. That's what everyone sees photos with

[GroundEffect]

bagusbagus said:

my last 2 cameras were d3200 and sony nex5, both with kit lenses, the d3200 was pretty gut in image quality with the kit lens,however the AF in liveview was just dead slow and unusable,I have heard in d3400 it's now decent. The nex5 AF however was very good ,however it lacked the image quality combined with the kit lens compared to the d3200.. I have now sold both of the cameras and got some $$$ to buy a new -better- system.

I kinda wanted the a6000 due to the form/ better autofocus ,however I did more research, what the startup kit+ Good Fast Prime lens would cost and it came out not what I expected..

Here is my maths:

D3400 +Kit 18-55 - £309
AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8 G - £126

Total: £435

lens+camera dxomark score: 28
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-NIKKO...

_____________

sony a6000 + Kit 16-50 -£389
SEL35F18 lens - £264

total: £653

lens+camera dxomark score: 23
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/Sony-E-35mm-F1...

So... Does that means that the sony system would cost me £220 more AND produce worse results? I'm really interested to get the Most Image quality I can buy for my budget of £500-£600 , the form factor really isn't that important although I wouldn't mind it..

Is the Nikon setup pretty much the best I can get or maybe there is something way better for the same budget or for even less?

Image quality and autofocus aren't the same thing. The D3200/D3400 will take as good a photo in good light with a still subject as any other camera but it depends on a lot of factors:

- How good is the light going to be in the majority of photos you'll take? (If it's dark you will need an AF system that can handle many EV stops and still focus well & you want a sensor that is good at higher ISOs)
- How dynamic will your subject be? (If they're going to be fast, you'll want an advanced autofocus system so you need to look at the more advanced bodies - a D3200/D3400 or some of the lower end Mirrorless cameras have poor and simple contrast based AF)
- Will you use Liveview/video often? (Canon are #1 for this with their Dual Pixel AF system and they do it on even modest cameras - even my D7500 Nikon isn't the best at it)

Based on what you've said so far I'd be looking at a mid-range Canon that sports Dual Pixel AF. Something like a Canon 80D or a cheaper 70D used. Or if the Liveview AF performance isn't THAT important, go for something like a Nikon D5500 which is a brilliant camera. A very good all-rounder.

I had a D3200 for a good number of years and what I found to be the main limiting factors:

- Autofocus system couldn't keep up with fast targets in Viewfinder or Liveview mode
- 4 Frames Per Second very frustrating for wildlife/motorsports
- Higher ISO (>800) performance poor

I went for a D7500 as an upgrade and it fixes all of the above but had to spend £1200 on the body...but remember a huge amount of the performance is in the lens too. That 35mm F/1.8 is a great lens (I have one) but I find the 35mm focal length a bit frustrating, it's not long enough for portrait (the 50mm F/1.8 is better on APS-C) and not wide enough for general purpose. I bought as an everyday lens the Sigma 17-50 F/2.8 OSM and it's a lovely lens - got it for £195 used too! I would recommend that if you need a general "do it all" lens.