Wannabe Photographer

Zipadeelady

Zipadeelady

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Thanks everyone for your input. I've been given enough information and resources to help me continue to learn more and feel like what I have read over the last few days has got me on a good start. I would like to purchase a new camera before June so I'll let you know what I choose. I still haven't decided between the DSLR or the mirrorless.

@fractal one more question. I thought I read that mirrorless may take longer to focus. Did I read right? Is it much of a difference? Or pretty insignificant? I'm wondering about spontaneous photos in the moment and if the mirrorless take longer to focus.

Thanks @Jahona for the additional information!
 
fractal

fractal

Well-Known Member
Zipitidoda said:
Thanks everyone for your input. I've been given enough information and resources to help me continue to learn more and feel like what I have read over the last few days has got me on a good start. I would like to purchase a new camera before June so I'll let you know what I choose. I still haven't decided between the DSLR or the mirrorless.

@fractal one more question. I thought I read that mirrorless may take longer to focus. Did I read right? Is it much of a difference? Or pretty insignificant? I'm wondering about spontaneous photos in the moment and if the mirrorless take longer to focus.

Thanks @Jahona for the additional information!
Click to expand...

That used to be the case but no more. The A6000 is one of the fastest focusing cameras (including DSLRs) on the market. Now my NEX-3 and NEX-7 not so fast.

Mirrorless cameras do take a second or two to start up from off vs. a DSLR will start up immediately. You have to weigh that against the size and weight advantages. I never felt it was a major negative but I guess theoretically you could miss a shot with a slower startup.
 
fractal

fractal

Well-Known Member
cheatsheat-exposure-triangle.jpg
 
Jahona

Jahona

Well-Known Member
21stamps said:
This has been so enjoyable to read!

My iPhone is my camera now.lol..

@fractal and @Jahona , will the Point and shoot that you talked about do the blurry backgrounds?
Click to expand...

It depends on the point and shoot and the lens it's using. Some higher end point and shoots can but it won't be as nice looking as a DSLR. There are some point and shoots, and phones, that have software features that try to emulate the shallow depth of field but rarely pull it off as well. Usually certain items in the foreground or background get mixed up. They do this by shooting one image in focus and one blured and then try to define the edges of the subject in focus to combine the two.

This image was shot on my Samsung Galaxy S5 using it's depth of field mode. You can see that the edges around the statue don't line up correct and show a bit of the background in focus. It's a cool trick you can do but not perfect, at least not yet. You also lack the great Bokeh you get from shooting shallow depth of field with the lens vs software.

20150711_091510.jpg


This image was shot with my Nikon D610 with a Nikon 50mm F/1.8 lens.
Image settings when shot. F/4 1/20th of a second ISO 1600
The F/1.8 lens that I have has less blades in the iris giving the Bokeh a more geometric look instead of the more traditional rounded look.

DSC_4001_wdi.jpg
 
sporadic

sporadic

Well-Known Member
Regardless of camera brand, I always recommend this site for learning how Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO will affect your photos - http://www.canonoutsideofauto.ca. It has a learning portion and simulation portion that lets you virtually take pictures in manual mode, adjusting each setting to see how it affects the results - Motion blur, depth of field, and noise. In regards to focusing speed, it's a combination of both the body and the lens. Some of the cheaper lenses are just dog slow focusing regardless of how good the AF system is in the body.

I myself moved from a Canon DSLR (7D) to a Fuji Mirrorless (X-T1) a few years ago because I got tired of packing all the heavy DSLR gear around for travel and vacation. Fast glass for DSLR's is VERY heavy. I would only recommend a DSLR nowadays if your sole intention is to shoot field sports, or if you have some other need for a long fast prime. I recently picked up another used Canon 7D and used 300 F/4 IS L as our oldest made JV soccer and I needed the extra reach. A 300 F/4 isn't really considered fast, but was fast enough for our late afternoon outdoor games. The Fuji 100-400 lens would have set me back $1900 new. I have less than $1k invested in the 7D + 300 F/4 combo. Which brings me to another 2 points...

1) Bodies come and go, Good glass lasts forever
The resell value of bodies drop like rocks. Good "professional" glass however holds its value for years as long as you take care of it. I've bought lenses, use them for 3 years, and sold them for more than what I paid. And these were even new, just picked up with good discounts. But this brings me to the 2nd point...

2) Buy used!!!
Whenever a 2nd generation body comes out, the previous generation body will flood the market. Take for instance the Fuji X-T2. It's $1600 new for the body alone. Fuji currently has a $500 rebate on the X-T1 now dropping it to $800. I've seen tons of X-T1's on the used market for ~$600 that aren't moving!! Once they drop below that point however, they sell quickly. Point being, don't be afraid to buy used from someone with a good rep, like the people on Fred Miranda - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10. That's where I recently scored the killer deals on my 7D and 300 F/4.

With all that being said, my recommendation would be a Fuji X-T1, the 18-55 lens (included in kits), XF35/1.4, and two extra 3rd party batteries from Amazon. All used, except for the extra batteries. You should come in under $1200 if you shop around. With Fuji, you'll find all of the XF lenses are very well built and quality glass, unlike many of the cheaper "kit" lenses that Canon and Nikon include. The former's kit lenses are nothing at all like the stellar 18-55 that Fuji includes with its kits. Again, this is all coming a X-T1 user who loves his camera. I plan on upgrading to a X-T2 once the used market starts to drop a little, so it'll be a while. The 35/1.4 is a beautiful lens, albeit a little slow on the focusing side. The Rokinon 12/2 is a cheap and fast ultra wide if you don't mind manual focusing, which is pretty easy to do it on ultra wide lenses. The Fuji 10-24/4 is a stellar lens, however is much pricier. Whichever route / brand you decide, research it, then research the used market.

Here are some Disney and Universal Flickr Albums all done with the X-T1:
Disney 2014 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157651121895628
Disney 2015 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157654515140332
Universal - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157668565432950

10-24/4:

Rolling through Big Thunder by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

DSCF2214 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Makeup time by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Kitty Cat Princess by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

DSCF2291 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Relaxing in Germany by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:
DSCF2374 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Reign of Kong by smerrick, on Flickr

10-24/4:

Gringott's Dragon by smerrick, on Flickr

And some recc league soccer shots with the XF 55-200:

DSCF4583 by smerrick, on Flickr


DSCF4445 by smerrick, on Flickr


DSCF4406 by smerrick, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Jahona

Jahona

Well-Known Member
sporadic said:
2) Buy used!!!
Whenever a 2nd generation body comes out, the previous generation body will flood the market. Take for instance the Fuji X-T2. It's $1600 new for the body alone. Fuji currently has a $500 rebate on the X-T1 now dropping it to $800. I've seen tons of X-T1's on the used market for ~$600 that aren't moving!! Once they drop below that point however, they sell quickly. Point being, don't be afraid to buy used from someone with a good rep, like the people on Fred Miranda - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10. That's where I recently scored the killer deals on my 7D and 300 F/4.
Click to expand...

That's actually a good point. my first few cameras we're used. Only reason I bought new was the Nikon D600 was flawed and the D610 fixed it's issues. I see some decent deals on the a6000 with lenses on B&H for only a little bit more for the Camera (body only) new.
 
sporadic

sporadic

Well-Known Member
sporadic said:
I myself moved from a Canon DSLR (7D) to a Fuji Mirrorless (X-T1) a few years ago because I got tired of packing all the heavy DSLR gear around for travel and vacation. Fast glass for DSLR's is VERY heavy. I would only recommend a DSLR nowadays if your sole intention is to shoot field sports, or if you have some other need for a long fast prime. I recently picked up another used Canon 7D and used 300 F/4 IS L as our oldest made JV soccer and I needed the extra reach. A 300 F/4 isn't really considered fast, but was fast enough for our late afternoon outdoor games. The Fuji 100-400 lens would have set me back $1900 new. I have less than $1k invested in the 7D + 300 F/4 combo.
Click to expand...
One caveat to this... Another reason for me picking up the 7D + 300 F/4 aside from price and faster glass is that the X-T1 also lags a bit in the EVF when shooting in burst mode which makes it more difficult to track erratic subjects like in soccer. Supposedly its much better in the X-T2. You can get used to it and still get keepers, but its much easier to track with a DSLR while shooting in burst mode. If you're not shooting sports / wildlife action, it's a non-issue imo. That's the only gripe I really have with the X-T1.
 
Last edited:
fractal

fractal

Well-Known Member
Mirrorless just makes so much sense as a Disney/travel camera. I've never shot hi-speed/burst with my shutter at Disney. I guess you could use it on the Safari, but a mirrorless is just fine as the animals are not moving all that fast.

Besides, I've used my NEX-7 for sports for several years and while a DSLR would have been technically better I have hundreds of great shots.
 
Zipadeelady

Zipadeelady

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
sporadic said:
Regardless of camera brand, I always recommend this site for learning how Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO will affect your photos - http://www.canonoutsideofauto.ca. It has a learning portion and simulation portion that lets you virtually take pictures in manual mode, adjusting each setting to see how it affects the results - Motion blur, depth of field, and noise. In regards to focusing speed, it's a combination of both the body and the lens. Some of the cheaper lenses are just dog slow focusing regardless of how good the AF system is in the body.

I myself moved from a Canon DSLR (7D) to a Fuji Mirrorless (X-T1) a few years ago because I got tired of packing all the heavy DSLR gear around for travel and vacation. Fast glass for DSLR's is VERY heavy. I would only recommend a DSLR nowadays if your sole intention is to shoot field sports, or if you have some other need for a long fast prime. I recently picked up another used Canon 7D and used 300 F/4 IS L as our oldest made JV soccer and I needed the extra reach. A 300 F/4 isn't really considered fast, but was fast enough for our late afternoon outdoor games. The Fuji 100-400 lens would have set me back $1900 new. I have less than $1k invested in the 7D + 300 F/4 combo. Which brings me to another 2 points...

1) Bodies come and go, Good glass lasts forever
The resell value of bodies drop like rocks. Good "professional" glass however holds its value for years as long as you take care of it. I've bought lenses, use them for 3 years, and sold them for more than what I paid. And these were even new, just picked up with good discounts. But this brings me to the 2nd point...

2) Buy used!!!
Whenever a 2nd generation body comes out, the previous generation body will flood the market. Take for instance the Fuji X-T2. It's $1600 new for the body alone. Fuji currently has a $500 rebate on the X-T1 now dropping it to $800. I've seen tons of X-T1's on the used market for ~$600 that aren't moving!! Once they drop below that point however, they sell quickly. Point being, don't be afraid to buy used from someone with a good rep, like the people on Fred Miranda - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10. That's where I recently scored the killer deals on my 7D and 300 F/4.

With all that being said, my recommendation would be a Fuji X-T1, the 18-55 lens (included in kits), XF35/1.4, and two extra 3rd party batteries from Amazon. All used, except for the extra batteries. You should come in under $1200 if you shop around. With Fuji, you'll find all of the XF lenses are very well built and quality glass, unlike many of the cheaper "kit" lenses that Canon and Nikon include. The former's kit lenses are nothing at all like the stellar 18-55 that Fuji includes with its kits. Again, this is all coming a X-T1 user who loves his camera. I plan on upgrading to a X-T2 once the used market starts to drop a little, so it'll be a while. The 35/1.4 is a beautiful lens, albeit a little slow on the focusing side. The Rokinon 12/2 is a cheap and fast ultra wide if you don't mind manual focusing, which is pretty easy to do it on ultra wide lenses. The Fuji 10-24/4 is a stellar lens, however is much pricier. Whichever route / brand you decide, research it, then research the used market.

Here are some Disney and Universal Flickr Albums all done with the X-T1:
Disney 2014 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157651121895628
Disney 2015 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157654515140332
Universal - https://www.flickr.com/photos/sporadic/albums/72157668565432950

10-24/4:

Rolling through Big Thunder by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

DSCF2214 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Makeup time by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Kitty Cat Princess by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

DSCF2291 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Relaxing in Germany by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:
DSCF2374 by smerrick, on Flickr

35/1.4:

Reign of Kong by smerrick, on Flickr

10-24/4:

Gringott's Dragon by smerrick, on Flickr

And some recc league soccer shots with the XF 55-200:

DSCF4583 by smerrick, on Flickr


DSCF4445 by smerrick, on Flickr


DSCF4406 by smerrick, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Your photos are spectacular!

I didn't even think to buy used, I'll look in to that. I was wanting to go get a camera and just start practicing to learn about the camera but the more I read I think I'm starting to confuse myself even more on what camera to buy. :rolleyes:
 
wdwmagic

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
fractal said:
Mirrorless just makes so much sense as a Disney/travel camera. I've never shot hi-speed/burst with my shutter at Disney. I guess you could use it on the Safari, but a mirrorless is just fine as the animals are not moving all that fast.

Besides, I've used my NEX-7 for sports for several years and while a DSLR would have been technically better I have hundreds of great shots.
Click to expand...
Mirrorless is just made for Disney, or any travel. Small, light, discrete - beats DSLRs in every regard. And now with the A9, even sports.
 
Zipadeelady

Zipadeelady

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
@virpraa I love your pictures! They are spectacular! I was actually leaning towards the D5500 from Nikon but with three of you praising Sony's mirrorless and some great pictures as proof I'm afraid I'll regret not getting the A6000. The main reason I was choosing the D5500 was because adding on lenses in the future would be less costly. Maybe I should rethink.

One question I have for you and @fractal is if I was going to go with the A6000 and could only afford one extra lens would you go with the 55-210 or the 50/1.8
 
fractal

fractal

Well-Known Member
Zipitidoda said:
@virpraa I love your pictures! They are spectacular! I was actually leaning towards the D5500 from Nikon but with three of you praising Sony's mirrorless and some great pictures as proof I'm afraid I'll regret not getting the A6000. The main reason I was choosing the D5500 was because adding on lenses in the future would be less costly. Maybe I should rethink.

One question I have for you and @fractal is if I was going to go with the A6000 and could only afford one extra lens would you go with the 55-210 or the 50/1.8
Click to expand...

I would get the 50mm 1.8. It's a great lens for portraits. The 55-210 you can find really cheap used if you want to add it at a later date.

One caveat - the 50mm 1.8 is a bit long for "typical" dark ride shots, however some of my favorite and most "liked" shots came from using the 50mm in dark rides.
 
Zipadeelady

Zipadeelady

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
fractal said:
I would get the 50mm 1.8. It's a great lens for portraits. The 55-210 you can find really cheap used if you want to add it at a later date.

One caveat - the 50mm 1.8 is a bit long for "typical" dark ride shots, however some of my favorite and most "liked" shots came from using the 50mm in dark rides.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the confirmation on the 1.8. I'll definitely be buying that with whichever camera I choose. Hopefully by next week I'll make my decision!!
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom