The best part is that you can take a photo, see if it is any good and if it isnt, just take another better one.
Calling all keen photographers.
- Thread starter gavroche
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Cycleops
Legendary Member
- Location
- Accra, Ghana
I think what all the previous comments show is that you don't need the latest all singing and dancing DSLRs to take great shots. Very often you just happen to get lucky being in the right place at the right time, you also need a bit of aptitude.
I'd also add that you're better off buying a compact which can just go in your pocket so you can always capture those unexpected moments, not possible with larger cameras.
I'd also add that you're better off buying a compact which can just go in your pocket so you can always capture those unexpected moments, not possible with larger cameras.
Last edited:
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
Most 'guides' to photography suggest buying a compact camera as well as your main kit, something simple and automatic.
In addition to my Pentax kit (2 bodies and 6 lenses) I ended up with an Olympus Mju-ii , 35mm F 2:8 autofocus lens in a weatherproof body, great little thing.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...shoot/&usg=AFQjCNG7RVngTwml2tmTU-qke5hw4BSA_Q
mybike
Grumblin at Garmin on the Granny Gear
- Location
- Not 'emel 'empstead
It helps me see through US presidential candidates.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
There's a lot in the old saying that the best camera is the one you have with you.
byegad
Legendary Member
- Location
- NE England
I'm dedicated micro 4/3 user with 7 bodies and also a couple of old 4/3 DSLR cameras in the photo room.given the OPs selection I'd go Nikon every time. The photos I see at photo club meetings give me every reason to believe that while both Canon are very good Nikon just edges them at most price points. My only connection to either brand is that I own two Nikon manual focus primes.
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
Plus one that is 'brainfart' proof.
These days it isn't too important with digital cameras but with film ones you never know what is on the film until it is processed and mistakes/accidents can happen there too.
I agree with the comments about having a compact camera which you can carry easily at all times, but if you set out to actively pursue your photographic hobby then you want the best camera/lens for the subject that you can afford. In most instances a DSLR camera will give you more control over the photographic process than a compact/phone camera.
OP
OP
gavroche
Getting old but not past it
- Location
- North Wales
I am going to wait till after Christmas, when the January sales are on. At the moment, I am edging towards the Nikon D3300 kit. Two lenses included: 18-55mm and 70-300mm for about £450.
Hoping it will be even cheaper in January.
Thank you all for your input. Photography equipment has certainly changed a lot since the 70s and 80s.
Going through cupboards, I have just found an old 35mm Fujica STX1. My very first slr which was bought at Dixon's , early 70s. It still works, except for the light meter.
Hoping it will be even cheaper in January.
Thank you all for your input. Photography equipment has certainly changed a lot since the 70s and 80s.
Going through cupboards, I have just found an old 35mm Fujica STX1. My very first slr which was bought at Dixon's , early 70s. It still works, except for the light meter.
Cycleops
Legendary Member
- Location
- Accra, Ghana
There's compact and compact of course.
A few years ago I bought a tiny camera in Guernsey. The main reason I chose it was because it had a viewfinder and had a great 7.5x optical zoom. I was staggered by the pictures it took and blown away by the panoramas. It was so good that we went back to the shop and purchased a second one for my partner, at £325. I have taken this camera to India, Oz and NZ, Chile, Namibia and Peru. I recently bought a Nikon 5500 SLR, but its a pain to lug around and it doesnt do Panoramas so its not so good for landscapes. I have a nifty fifty and the Nikon does great portraits. I also have a Sigma18 35 f1.8 lense that gives full frame pictures, and low light stuff. Its a great camera, but who wants to lug around a backpack?
But my favourite camera is the Panasonic LF1. At only 170 grammes it sits in a tiny Lowepro hard case on my belt with my credit card and spare battery. Or, in my jeans pocket on shorter trips. It has a lens shutter so no lens cap is needed. It goes almost everywhere with me. On rides, walks, to gigs, festivals, wildlife trips, shopping trips for street photos. With its F 2 Leica lens you can get pretty good bokeh, its tiny, so street photography is easy. Videos are pretty good on my 40" TV.
I looked at the Panasonic TZ100 but its pricey, twice as heavy and bulkier, not really pocketable. LF1s are still around, although no longer manufactured.
Just a thought…
But my favourite camera is the Panasonic LF1. At only 170 grammes it sits in a tiny Lowepro hard case on my belt with my credit card and spare battery. Or, in my jeans pocket on shorter trips. It has a lens shutter so no lens cap is needed. It goes almost everywhere with me. On rides, walks, to gigs, festivals, wildlife trips, shopping trips for street photos. With its F 2 Leica lens you can get pretty good bokeh, its tiny, so street photography is easy. Videos are pretty good on my 40" TV.
I looked at the Panasonic TZ100 but its pricey, twice as heavy and bulkier, not really pocketable. LF1s are still around, although no longer manufactured.
Just a thought…
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Have you ever considered changing your screen name to Mr Passremarkable?
Grant Fondo
Legendary Member
- Location
- Cheshire
You have totally lost me on that one GC?
Reynard
Guru
- Location
- Cambridgeshire, UK
Mmmm, well my 1Dmk2 with either 100-400 or 300 2.8 gives me hand ache...
I went digi back in 2003 with a used D60 (which I still have) plus the lenses I had for my EOS5. it was a revelation not having to scrabble about for a new roll of film at the most inopportune moments - usually race cars exiting stage left, stage right etc, plus I had complete control over the editing process and could get photos to where they were needed before the guys shooting film could. That and the fact that processing got hideously expensive and I wasn't thinking "ouch this is going to cost me" every time I depressed the shutter.
Have done stuff totally manual focus - out of necessity, mind, when one of the contact pins for the AF snapped off...
My idea of a compact camera is my venerable 10D with a 50mm prime. Zoom function is supplied by my plates of meat
@gavroche - kit lenses are ok to get you started until you find out what kind of focal lengths you like to work with, but they do have their limitations and can be rather variable in their quality. When I got my Eos5 film body, it came with a sigma 28-105 and a canon 75-300. The sigma was a great little walk around / landscape lens, but I sold it when I upgraded cameras as the lens wasn't compatible with the electronics on newer digi bodies. I actually regret selling it, but that's life. I'd still have it otherwise. On the flip side, I was glad to get shot of the 75-300 as it was mediocre at best and too short for what I really needed it for - ended up splurging on a 100-400 which I still have some 14 years down the line and has become my main workhorse together with the 50mm prime. I can't say for the equivalent Nikon 70-300, but I'd imagine it'd be fairly similar to the canon at that price point...
