Photographers - help!

[Chris Puttick]

I'd set a budget for camera/case/strap and lens (or 2), decide what the lens requirements are (e.g. a 50mm f1.4 for "street photos" and a low end zoom (70-200?) for wildlife etc. then head to Park Cameras site to see what they have in the budget. A used semi pro DSLR body a couple of generations old will be a great learning tool, capable of producing images of a quality that underline that megapixels isn't everything (or even a major factor, once you get up to say 20MP) compared to (a) decent lens (b) knowing the how and why of the settings to produce the image you want.

But budget is everything. The next zoom lens I want is £1k, and that's used.

 

[Chris152]

For learning photography with modern kit (as opposed to pinholes, film etc) it'll be essential that whatever camera you get, it can have full manual control. The key variables are shutter speed, aperture (f-stop) and iso ('film' speed (sensitivity)). With control of those, you can photograph anything from a fast moving car to a streetscape at night. The easier those controls are accessed, the better. I think an older, better quality camera with easy-access controls will be much easier to work than a new one with buttons and deep digital menus for the same money.

Don't get hung up on lens quality, reading endlessly about image quality and sensors etc, the course/ exam assessments will be about what's been done with the camera, not what the camera is capable of. Some of the very best photographs in history were made with the most basic equipment; ownership of advanced equipment will make little difference, imo.

 

[glenfield2]

Son is doing A level photography and needs a digital SLR. I know zero.

Any recommendations of a quality camera and basic lens (second hand fine if you get more bang for buck)

He could start by asking his teacher/tutor. My daughter teaches photography at a sixth form college and is always giving her students advice - and on a whole lot more than photography
I’ll ask her too for you.

 

[wiley198]

I would ask your daughter if she wants what is now 'old school' DSLR or the new mirrorless systems first.

I have two Canon prof bodies (1 series) and a bunch of L series lenses. State of the art...'in their time'...but their time is almost over.

Mirrorless is 'where it's at' now. Canon (I only use Canon...I bought into the system 30years ago and stuck with it) are investing all their efforts into this now. EOS DSLR will soon be a thing of the past.

Great for an old fart like me. The second hand market is beginning to bulge at the seams. But maybe not for someone young moving forward with 40+ years of photography ahead of them.

If I was buying now, I would buy Canon mirrorless (without a seconds thought). My friend Steven is a professional wedding photographer...mine was the very first wedding he ever did 19years ago...multi award winning, ranked in top 5 in the world in his field in certain categories and always in the U.K best wedding photographers list uses this system. Like me, he had DSLR kit. Switched it all out in 2019 and moving forward for the Canon mirrorless system.

Honestly, in my opinion, DSLR is going to get you a lot more for your money right now but mirrorless is the future.

You can check out Stevens work here...

https://stevenrooneyphotography.com...0UEVpdddT8NDV0dvGU_aem_kSOSqrGJQwuzbjQHmRGuWw

 

[spiritburner]

Have a look at the Fuji range of cameras while they dont have the "badge" of Canon, Nikon or Olympus they make incredibly good cameras that regularly come out on top of the leaderboards with a very good price.

This site here is probably the best online presence for reviews, I'm a VR360 photographer in my real life and part cinematographer. DP Review

 

[paulrbarnard]

What's the advantage of mirrorless vs DSLR?

Edit: sorry that was very lazy - think I have a vague understanding from this

https://www.techradar.com/cameras/mirrorless-vs-dslr-cameras

The article you link is trying very hard to be balanced to the extent it doesn’t give a clear answer. DSLR are the past, mirrorless are the future. A very important consideration to make is if this is going to be the start of a life long hobby or even job then start on the path that has a future. The BIG issue with photography is that lenses are not compatible between brands. They all have their own mount which locks you in to that brand. What you are actually choosing is the type of lens mount you are using rather than the camera brand. With mirrorless you can adapt lenses but that’s a different discussion. Take my own case as an example. I started out with Canon SLR in 1976 then switched to Minolta in 1985 which meant I switched not just the camera body but also my lenses. I only had three at the time but it was a very significant cost. I made the switch due to the arrival of auto focus technology. The Minolta mount was called A-Mount. Over the years from there to 2017 I went through multiple different camera bodies including DSLR but the common thread was they were all A-amount bodies to be able to use the A-Mount lenses I had acquired over the years. In 2017 I went mirrorless. I went to Sony as they were pretty much the only full frame option and they had adaptors to be able to use A-Mount lenses. I was still using the lenses purchased all the way back to 1985. I quickly found that mirrorless offered much more potential than DSLR and rapidly replaced my old A-Mount lenses with modern FE-Mount (Sony mirrorless mount) lenses. I currently have 9 lenses plus a couple of tele converters which cost significantly more than any camera body in the range. I have ‘upgraded’ my camera body three times since 2017 to get access to faster burst rates, better focusing or in one case better battery life. My point in all this is the part of the photography kit that sticks with you over the years is the lenses. It can be very expensive to switch brands once you get on the band wagon.

My advice would be if this is possibly a passing phase just grab a second hand enthusiast level DSLR with a kit zoom lens. Nikon or Cannon are both solid choices for that with lots of options.
On the other hand if this is likely to be a long term passion then do not go for DSLR get straight into mirrorless. As it stands today So y offer many more body options and massively more lens choices because they had a multi year head start. Both Nikon and Cannon have very good options now but much more restricted lens line ups. I listed the order previously as 1 Sony, 2 Canon, 3 Nikon and highly recommended making choices in that order. If you can’t find something that suits you in 1 look in 2. Only look in 3 if you really can’t find something to suit you in the first two.

As a specific recommendation look at the Sony A7 range. Third generation bodies and later are exceptional but even the first generation A7 is winning photography competitions.

 

[glenfield2]

He could start by asking his teacher/tutor. My daughter teaches photography at a sixth form college and is always giving her students advice - and on a whole lot more than photography
I’ll ask her too for you.

This is my daughter’s reply:
Depends how much you want to spend. A Canon750d is all singing all dancing really nice camera that will last, but it’s not so cheap.
Otherwise one of these second hand. Or a 4000d or 2000d or 1300d but those are getting a bit old now, but it would be pretty cheap probably second hand so could be a sensible buy for a camera that will be chucked in a school bag and locker! Or one to buy and if the student falls in love with photography they upgrade in a year or so.
Nikon is the second choice, but you can buy more accessories with canon mount that are generic. Eg fit a canon but made by a random brand and sold
on Amazon! Like lens etc.
Shame the school he is going to don’t have cameras the students can borrow, it’s seems a bit divisive that you have to buy a camera to do it! All we ask students to get is an sd card. They could borrow a camera every weekend for two years if they wanted.

 

[Jacob]

Yes to Canon. Mines an old 450d but still works perfectly. Very cheap second hand and lenses compatible over a range of other models earlier and later. Means you can update parts of the kit, the camera body itself, or the lenses, as and when you want to. Keep it simple - though even the older ones are pretty sophisticated but you can do everything simply using the basic settings.
My first camera was a Pentax S1a which was superb and is still in use by my daughter 60 years on! She's into retro cameras and celluloid film, amongst other photography things.

 

[Doris]

For learning photography with modern kit (as opposed to pinholes, film etc) it'll be essential that whatever camera you get, it can have full manual control. The key variables are shutter speed, aperture (f-stop) and iso ('film' speed (sensitivity)). With control of those, you can photograph anything from a fast moving car to a streetscape at night. The easier those controls are accessed, the better. I think an older, better quality camera with easy-access controls will be much easier to work than a new one with buttons and deep digital menus for the same money.

Don't get hung up on lens quality, reading endlessly about image quality and sensors etc, the course/ exam assessments will be about what's been done with the camera, not what the camera is capable of. Some of the very best photographs in history were made with the most basic equipment; ownership of advanced equipment will make little difference, imo.

I second this. I use to sell camera kits to Photography students years ago and it was essential then that all manual functions are used in order to demonstrate understanding of shutter speeds, aperture etc. Back then they had to use 35mm film cameras though, not digital.

I recently bought a Nikon D40x, nice cheap but well built camera that's a few years old but all the functions are there. The kit lens (18-125mm) should be enough for what he needs to do with it.

 

[Chris152]

I second this. I use to sell camera kits to Photography students years ago and it was essential then that all manual functions are used in order to demonstrate understanding of shutter speeds, aperture etc. Back then they had to use 35mm film cameras though, not digital.

I recently bought a Nikon D40x, nice cheap but well built camera that's a few years old but all the functions are there. The kit lens (18-125mm) should be enough for what he needs to do with it.

Alongside my main gig, I taught undergrad photo students within fine art - there's no doubt they learned best from the most basic (but capable) kit.

 

[GuitardoctorW7]

Son is doing A level photography and needs a digital SLR. I know zero.

Any recommendations of a quality camera and basic lens (second hand fine if you get more bang for buck)

Do his lecturers not have any recommendations?

 

[paulrbarnard]

Sorry to keep banging the mirrorless drum but this graph shows the situation.

The problem you will get just asking a random group of people is that unless they have been making buying decisions in the last three to five years they are basing their recommendations on history not the future. The photography equipment landscape has dramatically changed. No one is making new DSLR any more.
Only go DSLR if this is likely to be a one of two year fad. If you expect to be sticking with camera based photography for the next ten or fifteen years go MILC.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

This thread bears comparison with a rookie woodworker asking what tools to buy. Unless the OP has very deep pockets, money may be a significant consideration.

Whilst we may appreciate the benefits of well fettled quality, if advising a woodworking novice we may suggest buying reasonable second hand, or fairly basic Axminster/Record kit etc. The cost would be much lower with the ability to upgrade selectively if required at a later date.

I am a photographic philistine - I stopped carrying an SLR 15 or more years ago when phone cameras were capable of reasonable holiday snaps. Technology has moved on - phone cameras are now excellent - for most traditional kit costing many £'000s is completely unnecessary.

I do appreciate that for creativity, manual controls, performance in poor lighting conditions etc mean a smartphone will be outclassed by professional kit. But my suggestion would be to go for that which allows skills to be learned, rather than costly technically optimal solutions.

A little like a hardpoint tenon saw from B&Q costing £10 will cut the same piece of wood with similar results as the £100+ brass backed example from Thomas Flinn. The latter is of course rather nicer to look at, may have a more comfortable handle, but probably needs to be sharpened.

 

[Rhossydd]

Son is doing A level photography and needs a digital SLR. I know zero.

Any recommendations of a quality camera and basic lens (second hand fine if you get more bang for buck)

From this I assume he's chosen photography as an option, rather than it having been a passion for years.
As such he'll only need a basic camera as it may well end up unused on a shelf in three years time after he's finished his course.
My daughter did A level photography, got an A*, and never used her DSLR again, just her iPhone.

Photo enthusiasts can be absolute gear heads and upgrade kit with almost no use on a regular basis, so there are some fabulous secondhand cameras for bargain basement prices if you avoid the nonsense of buying new. Depreciation can be huge.
Any of the older Canon/Nikon/Sony DSLRs from the last ten years will be fine. Generally if a camera looks OK, rather than totally beaten up, it will be fine and give good service.
There still are a few decent camera shops in central London selling s/h kit. I'd suggest you drop by, preferably when they're not busy at the weekend or lunchtime and have time to help, and ask what they recommend for your budget and have in stock. You should be able to pick up something very decent for less than £500 with a guarantee.

 

[Sideways]

There is one thing to chip in that none of us have mentioned (edit: at least when I started writing this ...
A camera is a handheld tool just like a plane, a chisel, a saw or a screwdriver.
For your very first camera, you don't really know what you like, but after you've had a camera in your hands for a few dozen hours you begin to get an idea. At that point, the easiest thing may be to go to a photography show where you can mooch around the stands and just pick up and handle the main models from the main brands.
When my own camera was first launched, it took a few months before I was able to see and feel one in the flesh. Before that it was just "that looks neat and the specs are "wow!, but ouch, so pricey". Once I'd handled it, I knew it fit me and I had something to save towards.
Cars tend to be the same. Sit in it, drive it, and you know it's the one for you.

Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji - they have their own style and ergonomics. They also have niches where they have advantages over each other. For instance, Fuji had some great success with small, quality cameras well suited to candid urban photographs. Sony as Paul says are making very high technology cameras.
It is not necessarily a bad thing to realise that a particular brand and even an advanced camera is the thing you aspire to, then to buy an older more affordable model from that brand as a learning tool. As others have said, committing to a lens mount is the single biggest deal because they aren't interchangeable. The best investment is in glass. A lens can last 10 years before a newer version is released and easily 20 years in use. Cameras are superceded on about a 3 year cycle because the tech in them evolves faster and pro may swap every 3 years or every 2nd update depending if the changes give them better images and lead to more work / sales.

So, take a look at when the next camera shows or open days are around your way and consider going. Go with a clear agenda - not to buy but to get a feel for the brands and an idea of where to aspire, and use this to shop for an older used model.

 

[MikeJhn]

Off subject, those of you who know how, on Macro photograph how do you take pictures with flash without causing shadow, tried divergent flash, but seems to make the subject dull?

 

[paulrbarnard]

Off subject, those of you who know how, on Macro photograph how do you take pictures with flash without causing shadow, tried divergent flash, but seems to make the subject dull?

Ring flash is the usual go to but you can also use off camera flash units and reflectors. Ring flash can be a bit sterile and I prefer the off camera flash and reflectors or better still natural light and reflectors. Depends on the subject of course. Simply using a white sheet of paper as a reflector can transform an image.

 

[Spectric]

DSLR are the past, mirrorless are the future.

Yes if you are a pro photographer but how many people would look at the image and go yes that is from a mirrorless camera ? Many DSLR's had the mirror up feature so you framed your shot which needs the mirror to see through the lens, it then raised the mirror before the image is taken so no mirror vibrations.

Th one thing that is odd is that a given camera might be the best thing since sliced bread and expensive, when the next best thing comes out it's value falls like a lead ballon so it can be a very expensive hobby, maybe woodworking is cheaper.

 

[Spectric]

The place I found very good when into photography and looking at the various camera specifications was

https://bythom.com/reviews--books/index.html

Covers camera's to tripods

Also if looking to buy the full kit then years ago I knew people who would take a long weekend break in New York and buy in places like Adorama & B&H so maybe worth price checking.

 

[Jameshow]

You could go for something like a Lumix gx1 onwards which are small, cheap as chips can be used manually and good prep for a expensive mirrorless down the line..