User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:26:55 PM EDT
[#1]
Only differences *right now* is Nikon is more popular and better at the game. That's "at the moment." Each company goes through its highs/lows when competing against each other, and Canon seems to be on the lower end at this moment in time. A couple of years from now that might change. As a beginner hobbyist, you'll get a quality camera either way you go. The choice in lenses is where you'll want to concentrate, but either way you'll be good to go.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:29:16 PM EDT
[#2]
I am biased towards Nikon...Years ago when i was starting out Nikon cameras just felt better in my hands compared to Canon cameras, and the Nikon layout seemed to make more sense to me.
Edited... fuck it...Nikon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:32:56 PM EDT
[#3]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:42:28 PM EDT
[#4]
Either one would be ok. Do any of your friends shoot one brand or another? We have been able to share gear with other friends that shoot Canon. I would recommend
if you ever add more lenses, buy ones that are for full size sensors in case you ever buy a camera that has a full size sensor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:55:47 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Either one would be ok. Do any of your friends shoot one brand or another? We have been able to share gear with other friends that shoot Canon. I would recommend if you ever add more lenses, buy ones that are for full size sensors in case you ever buy a camera that has a full size sensor. These aren't full sensors? Not sure what that would mean picture wise. I will remember that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:57:25 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 6:59:10 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am biased towards Nikon...Years ago when i was starting out Nikon cameras just felt better in my hands compared to Canon cameras, and the Nikon layout seemed to make more sense to me. Edited... fuck it...Nikon. I was leaning toward Nikon, my boss has one. Says pictures are awesome, in low light he's amazed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 7:06:15 PM EDT
[#8]
I have a PVS-14 night scope, could I attach it to these cameras too?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 7:33:34 PM EDT
[#9]
The biggest difference is ergonomics. Things like button placement and menu configuration. You need to try both. You might find one feels better in your hand than the other. This is why I went with nikon. The choices of cameras and lenses are about the same between the two in any practical sense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 7:41:16 PM EDT
[#10]
Since you have a Best Buy plan, I'd suggest going to the store and
handling the cameras side-by-side and see if one or the other fits your hands better. I've used a lot of cameras, most of which I really liked, but eventually got rid of them due to issues with control placement and useability, and pain (arthritis). Quoted: Quoted: Either one would be ok. Do any of your friends shoot one brand or another? We have been able to share gear with other friends that shoot Canon. I would recommend if you ever add more lenses, buy ones that are for full size sensors in case you ever buy a camera that has a full size sensor. These aren't full sensors? Not sure what that would mean picture wise. I will remember that. A "full-frame" sensor in the DSLR world generally means the sensor is the same approximate size as the old 35mm negative - 24mm x 36mm. The cropped sensors are various different smaller sizes, but larger than P&S sensors. Of course, it's all relative - the "full-frame" sensors most people talk about are small when compared to the cropped medium format sensors. The main technical differences between full-frame and crop are 1) that the lens focal length appears to change due to the fact that the crop affects (narrows) the field of view, and 2) the full-frame sensors generally have better low-light performance. The low-light performance has been getting better with each sensor generation, and the difference is narrowing over time. There's some other differences (like depth of field) that I've personally never really seen as a huge issue. As for the lenses - both Canon and Nikon make some lenses that were designed to work specifically with the smaller sensors, and have a correspondingly smaller image circle. The rest of their lenses are designed to work film and digital, so the image circle is large enough to cover a 35mm negative and the full-frame sensor. They are larger and heavier, and usually more expensive than the lenses designed for the crop sensors. I'd stick with the kit lenses to start, then after you use the camera and lenses for a while, make a decision on whether or not you might go full-frame at a later point before spending a lot of money on new lenses. Photography can be more expensive than BRD. IMHO and YMMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 7:47:36 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The biggest difference is ergonomics. Things like button placement and menu configuration. You need to try both. You might find one feels better in your hand than the other. This is why I went with nikon. The choices of cameras and lenses are about the same between the two in any practical sense. I originally went with Nikon when switching to digital (D70 back in 2004) exactly for this reason. Fast forward to 2015. Looked at a D7200. Absolutely did not like how it fit in my hand. Just for giggles, picked up the 7DmkII. Oops. I'm now using Canon for crop-sensor stuff, and still have my Df and a few non-Ai lenses. Now going through the learning curve trying to figure out the new beasts AF modes and such.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2015 8:42:31 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
I'm looking to get my first DSLR camera and these two deals seem about right for my budget and for what I would do with them. The Canon or the Nikon ? I don't know anything about cameras. Have a Fuji digital point and shoot, my pics sucked, always blurry. I'm thinking a nic home camera to get those memories. Maybe a new hobbies if I can understand what it can do. Wi-Fi seems like it would be a nice option. Any real big differences that might push me one way or the other? The nikon d3200 is superior to the canon T5. http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/nikon/d3200/vs/canon/t5/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/canon-eos-rebel-t5-vs-nikon-d3300/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 4:48:42 AM EDT
[#13]
Would I have a problem connecting a PVS-14 night scope to the front? I see other people taking night pics, seems like fun. Would the sensors be a problem here? I have gen 3 NV so I don't need any light going thru the tube.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 12:14:19 PM EDT
[#14]
I'm pretty sure you can get an adapter for a PVS-14.
I never tried using one, I just put the camera on a tripod and held the PVS-14 in front of mine the few times I tried it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 10:29:28 PM EDT
[#15]
http://slickdeals.net/
Always camera deals coming up on slickdeals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 10:38:35 PM EDT
[#16]
Damn, there's some derp in here.. If you're buying a camera and you're just in it for fun.. Get whatever you want..
If you want to take the best pictures that you are capable of taking at your skil level. You buy canon. They have MUCH better lenses, and lenses are EVERYTHING when it comes to 1.6 crop or full frame DSLRs. In other words, the difference between camera bodies (up to the 5D III) isn't going to be as big as the difference between EF-S lenses and any EF "L" lenses |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 10:40:33 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn, there's some derp in here.. If you're buying a camera and you're just in it for fun.. Get whatever you want.. If you want to take the best pictures that you are capable of taking at your skil level. You buy canon. They have MUCH better lenses, and lenses are EVERYTHING when it comes to 1.6 crop or full frame DSLRs. In other words, the difference between camera bodies (up to the 5D III) isn't going to be as big as the difference between EF-S lenses and any EF "L" lenses The debate between nikon and canon pro level glass is irrelevant (and there isn't that much difference anyways). He's talking about beginner cameras. Kit lenses are fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 10:45:44 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The debate between nikon and canon pro level glass is irrelevant (and there isn't that much difference anyways). He's talking about beginner cameras. Kit lenses are fine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Damn, there's some derp in here.. If you're buying a camera and you're just in it for fun.. Get whatever you want.. If you want to take the best pictures that you are capable of taking at your skil level. You buy canon. They have MUCH better lenses, and lenses are EVERYTHING when it comes to 1.6 crop or full frame DSLRs. In other words, the difference between camera bodies (up to the 5D III) isn't going to be as big as the difference between EF-S lenses and any EF "L" lenses The debate between nikon and canon pro level glass is irrelevant (and there isn't that much difference anyways). He's talking about beginner cameras. Kit lenses are fine. Not when you can pick up "as new" L lenses on eBay for $500-$1100 Why buy a camera system that you can't really upgrade? My L lenses let my brother take phenomenal pictures with his 10 year old camera body.. His crap kit lenses never even come out of his bag any more. With DSLRs, everything is about the glass. I've picked up almost $4,000 of lenses on eBay over the years and spent less than $1,800 Including the lens that is the undisputable perfect lens. 70-200 2.8L II. ( got it on auction last year for $1,200) OP, buy whatever you want.. But make no mistake, Nikon glass is inferior to canon. (There are lenses that are better than canon, but most start around $3,000) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 10:53:32 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not when you can pick up "as new" L lenses on eBay for $500-$1100 Why buy a camera system that you can't really upgrade? My L lenses let my brother take phenomenal pictures with his 10 year old camera body.. His crap kit lenses never even come out of his bag any more. With DSLRs, everything is about the glass. I've picked up almost $4,000 of lenses on eBay over the years and spent less than $1,800 Including the lens that is the undisputable perfect lens. 70-200 2.8L II. ( got it on auction last year for $1,200) Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Damn, there's some derp in here.. If you're buying a camera and you're just in it for fun.. Get whatever you want.. If you want to take the best pictures that you are capable of taking at your skil level. You buy canon. They have MUCH better lenses, and lenses are EVERYTHING when it comes to 1.6 crop or full frame DSLRs. In other words, the difference between camera bodies (up to the 5D III) isn't going to be as big as the difference between EF-S lenses and any EF "L" lenses The debate between nikon and canon pro level glass is irrelevant (and there isn't that much difference anyways). He's talking about beginner cameras. Kit lenses are fine. Not when you can pick up "as new" L lenses on eBay for $500-$1100 Why buy a camera system that you can't really upgrade? My L lenses let my brother take phenomenal pictures with his 10 year old camera body.. His crap kit lenses never even come out of his bag any more. With DSLRs, everything is about the glass. I've picked up almost $4,000 of lenses on eBay over the years and spent less than $1,800 Including the lens that is the undisputable perfect lens. 70-200 2.8L II. ( got it on auction last year for $1,200) I'll bake some cookies later. You deserve one. You're missing the point. Easily 90% of pictures taken by any amateur or pro photographer outside of situations where a fast aperture is required (think sports, other low light stuff) can be accomplished just as well with kit lenses. They've come a long way. He doesn't need to go straight out and buy a top of the line camera and a used car's worth of glass. Most people don't. Most pictures I take would be just as possible with a kit lens, but for the occasional situation where I need better performance, I've got the good stuff. It comes in handy when trying to shoot higher shutter speeds. Practically speaking (yes, the scientific lens tests will disagree with me) there's not much difference between a kit lens at 200mm f/8 and a 70-200 at f/8. Especially for images that are scaled down and posted online (the most common thing to do these days, by far.) He may one day decide to upgrade to a higher performance camera or better glass. My advice to him is the same it always has been - do it when it solves a problem. A good camera and good glass serve no purpose at all for someone that doesn't know how to use them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 11:12:30 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A good camera and good glass serve no purpose at all for someone that doesn't know how to use them. That's actually where you're wrong. Someone with a small amount of camera knowledge (even using priority program settings) can take amazing photos with the right glass. And please pay attention.. I didn't tell him to buy a 5Diii, in fact I suggested that just about any canon body will still take great pics with canon's pro lenses. I was using my purchases as an example of what's possible, not as a measuring stick for minimum threshold. You're just not accurately representing the facts. It doesn't matter why, but you're not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 12:22:27 AM EDT
[#21]
I'm renting a Sony A7s this weekend, been listing for one for a while so I thought I'd try one out for a bit. The outfit I'm renting from also has a program to purchase the gear you rent, with the first rental price going 1:1 towards their valuation of the gear, which is pretty close to the market.
6 days with insurance came to under $160. I'd recommend anyone messing around to go the rental route once you've whittled your list down to a couple of bodies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 7:36:34 AM EDT
[#22]
Thanks for all the responses. Theres a lot of talent here, wish I knew half of what you guys know. I started out wanting to get a good camera to help my gf. She lost two sons, one just a year ago. She loves her family, thought taking photos, photoshopping, might get her thru some difficult times. I honestly thought the cameras I was choosing was pretty good. I realize they are just good beginner cameras. I'm going to start with this beginner camera and follow this forum. Maybe I can pick up some tips on how to use it. The guy at best buy suggested I take a class on photography to learn how to use this camera. A lot of buttons, setting to understand here. I always could use another hobby.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 11:36:33 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for all the responses. Theres a lot of talent here, wish I knew half of what you guys know. I started out wanting to get a good camera to help my gf. She lost two sons, one just a year ago. She loves her family, thought taking photos, photoshopping, might get her thru some difficult times. I honestly thought the cameras I was choosing was pretty good. I realize they are just good beginner cameras. I'm going to start with this beginner camera and follow this forum. Maybe I can pick up some tips on how to use it. The guy at best buy suggested I take a class on photography to learn how to use this camera. A lot of buttons, setting to understand here. I always could use another hobby. IMHO - there's nothing wrong with either of the cameras. They are just different tools with different option sets from cameras higher in the lineups. They are smaller and lighter and have fewer features in order to be more affordable to entry-level users. If they work for what you need, there's no reason to have to upgrade to a more expensive model. I hope your efforts help your gf. There's a tacked thread at the top of this forum, with some good resources that might help you out: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_121/994304_Intro_to_Photography_and_Photoshop____Resource_Guide.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 8:56:14 PM EDT
[#24]
As others have said, Canon and Nikon both have great bodies and great glass. I've shot with both and while I shoot Nikon I've also shot Canon when shooting for someone else.
I did want to touch on the WiFi part, though. It's probably not as useful as you'd expect. I'm pretty sure (at least in the case of Nikon) that you can only transfer images to your phone, not your computer. I don't know if they still have the capability (like I did with my beloved D2H) to send shots to the computer. That was flippin' awesome. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 8:57:57 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Only differences *right now* is Nikon is more popular and better at the game. That's "at the moment." Each company goes through its highs/lows when competing against each other, and Canon seems to be on the lower end at this moment in time. A couple of years from now that might change. As a beginner hobbyist, you'll get a quality camera either way you go. The choice in lenses is where you'll want to concentrate, but either way you'll be good to go. Sums it up nicely, IMO. IOW, Ford versus Chevy. Allow me to suggest you go with a full format processor, i.e. FX processor. Much better pics! *I* went with Nikon due to their range of optics experience: scopes, spotting scopes, etc. instead of just cameras (Canon). |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 4:54:01 PM EDT
[#26]
Ask Best Buy which version of the 55-200 lens they're offering.
Make damn sure it's the version with VR (image stabilization). Don't let'em sneak the non VR version in there. That being said, I bought the D3100 version of that package from BB several years ago. It's a good starter package. I still use the 55-200 as my #1 lens. I have the 18-55 but it was replaced by the 35mm f1.8 prime lens. Budget another $200 or so for accessories. You'll need another battery, lens hoods for both lenses and a better camera strap. The standard Nikon strap sucks bad. A proper case for your spare lens etc.etc. If I had it to do again I'd have bought from Adorama instead of BB. Their CSR's actually know something about photography. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 4:58:34 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sums it up nicely, IMO. IOW, Ford versus Chevy. Allow me to suggest you go with a full format processor, i.e. FX processor. Much better pics! *I* went with Nikon due to their range of optics experience: scopes, spotting scopes, etc. instead of just cameras (Canon). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Only differences *right now* is Nikon is more popular and better at the game. That's "at the moment." Each company goes through its highs/lows when competing against each other, and Canon seems to be on the lower end at this moment in time. A couple of years from now that might change. As a beginner hobbyist, you'll get a quality camera either way you go. The choice in lenses is where you'll want to concentrate, but either way you'll be good to go. Sums it up nicely, IMO. IOW, Ford versus Chevy. Allow me to suggest you go with a full format processor, i.e. FX processor. Much better pics! *I* went with Nikon due to their range of optics experience: scopes, spotting scopes, etc. instead of just cameras (Canon). Seconded on the full format sensor if you can afford it. I got Canon because at the time they had the best sensor when I was starting out and I just stuck with them. At this point in the game, only pixel peepers really care about brand. If I were starting out, I would pick a brand and not invest heavily in a camera body, but lenses and flashes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2015 5:52:02 PM EDT
[#28]
If you're not limited to buying at BestBuy, Slickdeals has some nice offers as someone stated.
I run Canon here, but doubt you could go wrong with Nikon either. You might take a look at factory refurbished cameras at the manufacturer's websites. I have bought from Canon and you could never tell it wasn't a "new" camera. Full factory warranty as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2015 5:57:45 PM EDT
[#29]
http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-rebel-t5-ef-s-18-55mm-is-ii-lens-kit-refurbished
Same camera you listed, 2nd lens is $70 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2015 7:14:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn, there's some derp in here.. If you're buying a camera and you're just in it for fun.. Get whatever you want.. If you want to take the best pictures that you are capable of taking at your skil level. You buy canon. They have MUCH better lenses, and lenses are EVERYTHING when it comes to 1.6 crop or full frame DSLRs. In other words, the difference between camera bodies (up to the 5D III) isn't going to be as big as the difference between EF-S lenses and any EF "L" lenses As a former camera sales guy, you sound like a Canon rep. Most of your advice presumes that he is in it to spend thousands on gear. He isn't there yet. Even if he does, don't pretend there isn't some amazing glass in the Nikon line-up. You will have a hard time convincing me I can't take great pictures with my 80-200 f2.8 that is probably a decade old. Or my 24-85D that Ken Rockwell hates but that I absolutely love. Heck, my Tamron 12-24 is more than respectable, and there are lots of others. The 85 f1.4 is spectacular. The newer 70-200s are certainly very competitive with Canon in the same zoom range. The difference in quality of gear is far less important to taking a great shot than taking some time to learn about exposure. Shooting in"idiot mode" may do well, but it won't do great. -shooter |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 5:55:18 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ask Best Buy which version of the 55-200 lens they're offering. Make damn sure it's the version with VR (image stabilization). Don't let'em sneak the non VR version in there. That being said, I bought the D3100 version of that package from BB several years ago. It's a good starter package. I still use the 55-200 as my #1 lens. I have the 18-55 but it was replaced by the 35mm f1.8 prime lens. Budget another $200 or so for accessories. You'll need another battery, lens hoods for both lenses and a better camera strap. The standard Nikon strap sucks bad. A proper case for your spare lens etc.etc. If I had it to do again I'd have bought from Adorama instead of BB. Their CSR's actually know something about photography. I'm glad you said something about VR (Image stabilization). The description says it has Optical image stabilization. That could be just the body it self? I'm looking at the picture and it shows one lens with VR, the other doesn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 6:01:51 AM EDT
[#32]
Might be easier to ask some local photographers/ photo clubs on what they use, since you can ask them for help if you have issues. I have a brace of different brands from Fuji,Nikon, Minolta and Toyo. So to me it is like different hammers. Each hammer serves differently.
For me, I went with the best lens I afford for the genre of photography, which is portraits, and roller derby. Two lenses that stick out is the 70-200mm zooms, and the 105mm/135mm primes. So I went with the Nikon for the Nikon 70-200mm lens with the Gen1 VR-S. The Nikon 105/135 is almost famous on a lot of portraits. So I got those and stuck it on the body I can afford after getting some sweet lenses. And to tell the truth, getting a monster DSLR means getting bigger computers/Hard drives to hold the bigger files... I have a D800 Nikon, and it can create some big files to process. You mentioned Wi-Fi.. both offers models with wi-fi, and it works well with the tablets... If you get a model without the wi-fi, don't despair ; Google 'hacking mr-3040' to make a $200 CamRanger from a $30 router. I got that mr-3040 router from Wal-Mart for $22, and it works on the Nikon D800. and any other Nikon.. Take some time to find what works and what doesn't.. I have joint pain, so I can't use those DSLR all day, I have to set them down and do something else like do lighting or photoshop. OR I can use a smaller camera.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 6:04:41 AM EDT
[#33]
Even though I own Nikons, if you don't have any of the older lenses etc, you may want to go with Canon. Nikon decided that all of their old lenses would work on their new digital cameras.
Canon went the opposite route, they designed a whole new lens mounts etc, so that none of the older lenses would work on their digital SLRs. If you are looking for a SotA DLSR, the Canon top of the line wi way better than any Nikon. BUt the Nikon storbes(electronic flashes and their TTLR is way ahead of Canon's). So there pick your pick, "6 of this or half a dozen of the other." |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 11:26:38 AM EDT
[#34]
The one thing Nikon did to stay ahead of Canon was to outsource sensors from Sony. Nikon doesn't make their own sensors for their dSLRs (at least with their full frame bodies). Canon needs to either make some serious headway in their in-house sensors, or just finally admit they can't make a sensor as good as Sony and start using Sony sensors.
I say this as a Canon shooter. I don't see myself upgrading from my Canon 5D Mark III anytime in the foreseeable future. In all seriousness, the 5D3 has everything I need, and unless the 5D4 (or whatever) comes out with a significantly better sensor, I'll stick with the 5D3. That being said, if I were starting from scratch and picking between Canon and Nikon, I would go with Nikon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 1:33:12 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm glad you said something about VR (Image stabilization). The description says it has Optical image stabilization. That could be just the body it self? I'm looking at the picture and it shows one lens with VR, the other doesn't. Neither Nikon nor Canon put the stabilization in the DSLR bodies. For them, it is all in the lenses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 3:19:00 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The one thing Nikon did to stay ahead of Canon was to outsource sensors from Sony. Nikon doesn't make their own sensors for their dSLRs (at least with their full frame bodies). Canon needs to either make some serious headway in their in-house sensors, or just finally admit they can't make a sensor as good as Sony and start using Sony sensors. I say this as a Canon shooter. I don't see myself upgrading from my Canon 5D Mark III anytime in the foreseeable future. In all seriousness, the 5D3 has everything I need, and unless the 5D4 (or whatever) comes out with a significantly better sensor, I'll stick with the 5D3. That being said, if I were starting from scratch and picking between Canon and Nikon, I would go with Nikon. I'm wondering if the new Sony DSLRs are going to be a lasting thing or not. I've seen some beautiful work out of them so far. Either way, I'm so glad camera makers are starting to move beyond the MegaPixel game and focusing on other areas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 4:16:53 PM EDT
[#37]
Found out the 3200 package doesn't have the VR for both lens, only one. It would be the same cost as getting the 3300 package with the VR lens.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 4:44:11 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Found out the 3200 package doesn't have the VR for both lens, only one. It would be the same cost as getting the 3300 package with the VR lens. Don't get too caught up in VR. Yes, it's useful but it isn't a dealbreaker. Most times you'll be using the camera, the shutter speed will be set high enough that you'd want to be turning VR off anyways. You'll also be turning VR off if you are using a tripod. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 6:43:14 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't get too caught up in VR. Yes, it's useful but it isn't a dealbreaker. Most times you'll be using the camera, the shutter speed will be set high enough that you'd want to be turning VR off anyways. You'll also be turning VR off if you are using a tripod. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Found out the 3200 package doesn't have the VR for both lens, only one. It would be the same cost as getting the 3300 package with the VR lens. Don't get too caught up in VR. Yes, it's useful but it isn't a dealbreaker. Most times you'll be using the camera, the shutter speed will be set high enough that you'd want to be turning VR off anyways. You'll also be turning VR off if you are using a tripod. Really? I don't know anything, but sounds like a cool hobby. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 6:54:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really? I don't know anything, but sounds like a cool hobby. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Found out the 3200 package doesn't have the VR for both lens, only one. It would be the same cost as getting the 3300 package with the VR lens. Don't get too caught up in VR. Yes, it's useful but it isn't a dealbreaker. Most times you'll be using the camera, the shutter speed will be set high enough that you'd want to be turning VR off anyways. You'll also be turning VR off if you are using a tripod. Really? I don't know anything, but sounds like a cool hobby. Yep, really. The general rule for shutter speed is you want it to meet or exceed your focal length. So, as an example, if you have an 18-55mm lens (a common kit lens for entry level cameras) and you've got it at the 55mm setting, you'd want your shutter speed to be 1/60 or faster. Any slower and you can introduce motion blur into the image from your own natural body movements and the camera moving and so on. What VR does is it helps you use a *slightly* slower shutter speed without having those motion blur issues, or at least in theory. Results in practice may vary depending on the situation. As an example I've found that I can hand hold my 70-200 at 200mm and get sharp images at 1/125 every time, and 1/60 most of the time. This would be a disaster without the image stabilization. Here's the other side of that. With VR enabled on a modern AF-S lens you will frequently notice that it takes a little bit longer for autofocus to lock on than it does without VR. This is why it's a good idea to switch it off when it isn't needed, and it will also help extend your battery life a bit. The good news is with modern cameras abilities to handle higher ISO levels, having to drop the shutter speed that low JUST TO GET THE IMAGE doesn't really concern me anymore. This means that VR isn't really a factor in my decisions of whether or not I get a lens. I currently have 4 lenses in the collection, 2 with VR and 2 without. It just isn't an issue. There are still artistic and compositional reasons to use a slower shutter speed, but that ain't the point here. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2015 10:18:21 PM EDT
[#41]
For me as a beginner wouldn't it be better for me to have it and not need it, or is technology just that good I wouldn't notice.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2015 1:12:21 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For me as a beginner wouldn't it be better for me to have it and not need it, or is technology just that good I wouldn't notice. Just like with guns, extra tech you put on your tool can become a krutch. VR has its uses, and can be convenient. If you can afford the extra couple hundred dollars, go Fer it. But that extra couple hundred dollars can translate into other essential gear, like a nicer tripod, speedlite, another lens, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2015 9:31:22 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just like with guns, extra tech you put on your tool can become a krutch. VR has its uses, and can be convenient. If you can afford the extra couple hundred dollars, go Fer it. But that extra couple hundred dollars can translate into other essential gear, like a nicer tripod, speedlite, another lens, etc. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
For me as a beginner wouldn't it be better for me to have it and not need it, or is technology just that good I wouldn't notice. Just like with guns, extra tech you put on your tool can become a krutch. VR has its uses, and can be convenient. If you can afford the extra couple hundred dollars, go Fer it. But that extra couple hundred dollars can translate into other essential gear, like a nicer tripod, speedlite, another lens, etc. This!!! Cameras are a lot like guns. Sure, you need a gun and some mags, but that is just the tip of the iceberg right? My last handgun acquisition was followed by a stack of spare mags, three holsters, a new WML, lots of ammo, and some familiarization time. Cameras tend to be followed by speedlite/strobe, tripod, extra glass, cases (because one case seldom meets all of your needs if you are very active or travel), batteries, chargers, computer adapters, external storage (I use an iPad for this, others use dedicated drives)...You can ease into the hobby, but if you take a long view of investing in camera gear you may be making some trade-offs. For example, I don't use an exceptional high-dollar tripod, but I shoot through some pretty good ("Prosumer" level) glass. I will also add that I have been a Nikon user since about 1990. I don't own a ton of gear, but I have saved until I could get good gear. I don't routinely use any of my original lenses anymore as I have upgraded, but staying with the same brand has allowed me to transition/grow in increments. For example, my long-time favorite 24-85D series lens has done time on an N80, D70s, and now a D90. -shooter |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2015 2:48:04 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm wondering if the new Sony DSLRs are going to be a lasting thing or not. I've seen some beautiful work out of them so far. Either way, I'm so glad camera makers are starting to move beyond the MegaPixel game and focusing on other areas. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The one thing Nikon did to stay ahead of Canon was to outsource sensors from Sony. Nikon doesn't make their own sensors for their dSLRs (at least with their full frame bodies). Canon needs to either make some serious headway in their in-house sensors, or just finally admit they can't make a sensor as good as Sony and start using Sony sensors. I say this as a Canon shooter. I don't see myself upgrading from my Canon 5D Mark III anytime in the foreseeable future. In all seriousness, the 5D3 has everything I need, and unless the 5D4 (or whatever) comes out with a significantly better sensor, I'll stick with the 5D3. That being said, if I were starting from scratch and picking between Canon and Nikon, I would go with Nikon. I'm wondering if the new Sony DSLRs are going to be a lasting thing or not. I've seen some beautiful work out of them so far. Either way, I'm so glad camera makers are starting to move beyond the MegaPixel game and focusing on other areas. Sony's niche seems to be their mirrorless offerings rather than their DSLR's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2015 3:27:23 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sony's niche seems to be their mirrorless offerings rather than their DSLR's. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The one thing Nikon did to stay ahead of Canon was to outsource sensors from Sony. Nikon doesn't make their own sensors for their dSLRs (at least with their full frame bodies). Canon needs to either make some serious headway in their in-house sensors, or just finally admit they can't make a sensor as good as Sony and start using Sony sensors. I say this as a Canon shooter. I don't see myself upgrading from my Canon 5D Mark III anytime in the foreseeable future. In all seriousness, the 5D3 has everything I need, and unless the 5D4 (or whatever) comes out with a significantly better sensor, I'll stick with the 5D3. That being said, if I were starting from scratch and picking between Canon and Nikon, I would go with Nikon. I'm wondering if the new Sony DSLRs are going to be a lasting thing or not. I've seen some beautiful work out of them so far. Either way, I'm so glad camera makers are starting to move beyond the MegaPixel game and focusing on other areas. Sony's niche seems to be their mirrorless offerings rather than their DSLR's. D'oh! you're right I've been calling them DSLRs lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2015 1:34:08 PM EDT
[#46]
I would call myself a "serious" amateur with GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) with probably $30,000 worth in equipment. I bring this up because, with all of that, I am still capable of taking many "crap" photos. I won't get into the "which brand" argument, but would say whichever you get, don't use the "green box" and learn all of the features of your camera. Also shoot in RAW format. RAW allows you to better save those photos which are not properly exposed than you can by using jpeg.
There are a few good books which can help in the understanding of exposure and what different camera settings will accomplish. I'm sure there are a lot of good YouTube videos that can be helpful. But, there are many more which are not. While Canon, and I presume Nikon as well, pack various programs with their cameras which will allow working with images, I suggest buying Adobe Lightroom, which will let you do most of the post processing that you will want to do. It will also serve as a database to keep track of your photos (esp. keywords) as your collection builds. Lightroom is non-destructive editing, which means that you can do anything you want to an image as many times as you want, and will always be able to return to the original. Don't be afraid to toss the images which are not up to par (digital is practically free) and Google "Photography on the Net" (POTN), and read the forums. It is probably the most comprehensive photography forum on the net. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2015 1:45:35 PM EDT
[#47]
Thanks again to everyone and the advise. I have another question. Do you guys print your photos, send out? What printer if that's what you use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2015 2:44:07 PM EDT
[#48]
I have a run-of-the-mill all-in-one that I use in a pinch, but in all honesty I tend to have Costco print my pictures. The price is REALLY right, and if you tell them not to make corrections you get exactly what you upload.
-shooter |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2015 3:27:43 PM EDT
[#49]
I use MPIX.com
They have super fast shipping, an easy user interface, and their prints are well done and inexpensive. There are a ton of places who will print your photos, and I'm sure there are better options, I've just been working with them for almost a decade and have never had a hiccup. I used to print but was never satisfied with the cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2015 4:13:25 PM EDT
[#50]
Ok I finally pulled the trigger. Got the Nikon D3300 , extra battery, 32GB Extreme Pro SD card, 2 year accident plan. It seems intimidating with all the controls and buttons.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
