Wannabe Photographer

[Rider]

A lot of good advice in this thread. I just wanted to add that at one point I was looking at the same camera set as you. The advice I have is that most of those sets include stuff of low quality that you don't need. All the filters and cleaning stuff and tripods are crap and you can get better quality on Amazon for what only what you will actually need/use. Spend your money on the body and lens and a good case. I got a Nikon kit that included a kit lens (the 18-55) but splurged on a nicer telephoto than comes in the kits you usually see online.

The only thing I wish I might have done differently is (as recommended earlier in this thread) is get a better body used. I bought a new D5600 but I probably could have gotten a higher end for the same price or cheaper. Oh well, I'll remember that a few years from now.

Some pictures from this weekend at AK using my telephoto:

 

[fractal]

Well heck, since everyone else is showing off their photos;

Here's some examples of shots I took with the 50mm 1.8 OSS in dark rides. I believe the "OSS" really does help in low light conditions handheld.

Also wanted to mention that Sigma makes some good to great prime lenses for Sony E-mount.

The 19mm 2.8 is a small, lightweight lens that's good for wider shots. Costs $199
The 60mm 2.8 is a very sharp lenses that runs about $250 ( but I rather have the 50mm 1.8 OSS from Sony)

and a very good lenses with a huge aperture of f/1.4 is the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for Emount that runs around $340 which is not bad for a f/1.4 lens.
It can be considered a great carry around lens, would be perfect for dark rides and can still be used for portraits. In fact, if I were starting all over again with an APS-C A6000 that would probably
be the lens I would buy, even over the 50mm 1.8. Sorry to change my mind on you but I just remembered the Sigma line of lenses.

Here's a review of the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (not to be confused with the Sigma 30mm 2.8).



https://petapixel.com/2016/07/01/sigma-30mm-f1-4-best-e-mount-lens-dxo-ever-tested/

More 3rd party lens manufactures are making lenses for Emount. One of my favorite and "fun" lens is my Rokinon 8mm fisheye which I think costs about $150.

 

[Zipadeelady]

A lot of good advice in this thread. I just wanted to add that at one point I was looking at the same camera set as you. The advice I have is that most of those sets include stuff of low quality that you don't need. All the filters and cleaning stuff and tripods are crap and you can get better quality on Amazon for what only what you will actually need/use. Spend your money on the body and lens and a good case. I got a Nikon kit that included a kit lens (the 18-55) but splurged on a nicer telephoto than comes in the kits you usually see online.

The only thing I wish I might have done differently is (as recommended earlier in this thread) is get a better body used. I bought a new D5600 but I probably could have gotten a higher end for the same price or cheaper. Oh well, I'll remember that a few years from now.

Some pictures from this weekend at AK using my telephoto:

View attachment 201241 View attachment 201242 View attachment 201243

That gorilla photo is phenomenal!!

Well heck, since everyone else is showing off their photos;

Here's some examples of shots I took with the 50mm 1.8 OSS in dark rides. I believe the "OSS" really does help in low light conditions handheld.

Also wanted to mention that Sigma makes some good to great prime lenses for Sony E-mount.

The 19mm 2.8 is a small, lightweight lens that's good for wider shots. Costs $199
The 60mm 2.8 is a very sharp lenses that runs about $250 ( but I rather have the 50mm 1.8 OSS from Sony)

and a very good lenses with a huge aperture of f/1.4 is the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for Emount that runs around $340 which is not bad for a f/1.4 lens.
It can be considered a great carry around lens, would be perfect for dark rides and can still be used for portraits. In fact, if I were starting all over again with an APS-C A6000 that would probably
be the lens I would buy, even over the 50mm 1.8. Sorry to change my mind on you but I just remembered the Sigma line of lenses.

Here's a review of the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (not to be confused with the Sigma 30mm 2.8).



https://petapixel.com/2016/07/01/sigma-30mm-f1-4-best-e-mount-lens-dxo-ever-tested/

More 3rd party lens manufactures are making lenses for Emount. One of my favorite and "fun" lens is my Rokinon 8mm fisheye which I think costs about $150.

Now that's what I'm talking about!! The more the pictures the better. I appreciate the information on lens, once I get this camera decisions down then I'll move onto lens

 

[thomas998]

I'm going to recommend you don't get a dslr at all just yet. I would suggest you look at a Sony RX10 II.... it is a 1 inch sensor point and shoot that will give you pretty much all that you are looking for in a very small easy to carry camera. The lens is equivalent to a 24 to 200mm zoom with a f2.8 throughout the zooom. Now you can get some faster lenses by getting a dslr but honestly the added cost and complication for someone that is just starting make that a difficult step to recommend. Even if money were no object in your quest I wouldn't suggest you get a dslr because as you say your kind of just starting out and haven't really used any controls on your current camera besides automatic. The RX10 II will still allow you to do all the manual things you might ever need the only difference is the camera and lens are combined and can't be changed... If you do consider this option then just make sure you get the RX10 II because their are 3 version of the RX10 out there, the older first version and a slightly newer version called the RX10 III which is exactly like the RX10 II except that it has a different lens that has more zoom but loses the constant aperture and costs about 400 dollars more...if you want a chance at darker shots you need the constant aperture on the RX10 II.

Get a camera like this and then spend the time you need to understand all the controls and how to use them... this camera would last you for years and might even be good enough that you don't see a need to jump into the DSLR market at all. Often people think that getting a DSLR will magically make their picture look better, that's not the case and often because of the greater complication the offer the photos will look worse because the user hasn't taken the time to understand all the controls and how they impact the photo he/she is taking... We've got a house full of cameras but with my wife she never uses any of the better cameras because she doesn't want to do anything beyond pointing and shooting and as sure as she takes one of the DSLRs she will turn a dial or push a button she doesn't intend to and then every photo she takes will be messed up... point being you will need to invest some time to get the best out of any step up camera you buy so make sure you are willing to put in the time.

 

[fractal]

I'm going to recommend you don't get a dslr at all just yet. I would suggest you look at a Sony RX10 II.... it is a 1 inch sensor point and shoot that will give you pretty much all that you are looking for in a very small easy to carry camera. The lens is equivalent to a 24 to 200mm zoom with a f2.8 throughout the zooom. Now you can get some faster lenses by getting a dslr but honestly the added cost and complication for someone that is just starting make that a difficult step to recommend. Even if money were no object in your quest I wouldn't suggest you get a dslr because as you say your kind of just starting out and haven't really used any controls on your current camera besides automatic. The RX10 II will still allow you to do all the manual things you might ever need the only difference is the camera and lens are combined and can't be changed... If you do consider this option then just make sure you get the RX10 II because their are 3 version of the RX10 out there, the older first version and a slightly newer version called the RX10 III which is exactly like the RX10 II except that it has a different lens that has more zoom but loses the constant aperture and costs about 400 dollars more...if you want a chance at darker shots you need the constant aperture on the RX10 II.

Get a camera like this and then spend the time you need to understand all the controls and how to use them... this camera would last you for years and might even be good enough that you don't see a need to jump into the DSLR market at all. Often people think that getting a DSLR will magically make their picture look better, that's not the case and often because of the greater complication the offer the photos will look worse because the user hasn't taken the time to understand all the controls and how they impact the photo he/she is taking... We've got a house full of cameras but with my wife she never uses any of the better cameras because she doesn't want to do anything beyond pointing and shooting and as sure as she takes one of the DSLRs she will turn a dial or push a button she doesn't intend to and then every photo she takes will be messed up... point being you will need to invest some time to get the best out of any step up camera you buy so make sure you are willing to put in the time.

I agree in principal, however I don't know if f2.8 is fast enough with that sensor to take good dark ride photos (on her "hit list"). I recommended the Panasonic Lumix L10 as a high end point & shoot. Same sensor as the RX10 but with a Leica f/1.4 (wide end) lens. Not as much range but will perform much better in low light.

The thought of getting this or the RX10 vs. a DSLR is valid. These cameras are as good as or better than a DSLR + kit lens. They would also be a good camera to learn on and decide if one would want to make the $ and time investment to expand their photography.

 

[Zipadeelady]

@thomas998 I really appreciate the advice and looked into the rx10 ii a little and compared it to the Sony A6000. I still like the a6000 better and it seems to be a little more inexpensive even if I add a lens to the A6000. Maybe I'm not looking correctly but that's what I have found. Like @fractal mentioned I seem to be in a lot of situations where low light is an issue with my current camera and that's why i'm looking at the a6000 and the Nikon d5500. If you have an opinion on the mirrorless vs the dslr please share. I'm still on the fence but need to decide soon. I am very interested in taking the time to learn and figure what I need to do for a great photo and what lens would work best for me.

 

[sporadic]

Whichever you choose, just stay out of the green box (auto mode on Canons)!!!

 

[Zipadeelady]

Whichever you choose, just stay out of the green box (auto mode on Canons)!!!

I promise, no auto mode!!

 

[fractal]

One more interesting and important thing to add for mirrorless. You can adapt almost any lens every made to use on your A6000. Manual focusing will be required (although that's even changing), but mirrorless has "focus peaking" which when viewed in your viewfinder, highlights in color what is in focus. Focus peaking makes manual focusing rather easy (and fun).

I took the following shots with an old Minolta Rokkor 50mmm 1.4 lens that cost me $30 + $12 for the adaptor.

Autumn morning by Chris Dikos, on Flickr

Antonia by Chris Dikos, on Flickr

Port of Harambe by Chris Dikos, on Flickr

 

[sporadic]

Another +1 for mirrorless and vintage manual focus lenses. That's another rabbit hole you can go down thanks to the manual focus assists on mirorrless bodies. I found myself buying old $20 lenses and adapters for a while just to play with them.

Here's an old Canon FD 50/1.8 I acquired from my mom's AE-1 (vintage ate 70's)

DSCF0752 by smerrick, on Flickr

And a Vivitar 135/2.8 that I picked up with a few other lenses for $20 iirc. Was playing around with a dirt cheap strobe on this one. Details on the shot are here - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=17813253.

Wassup by smerrick, on Flickr

 

[Zipadeelady]

Wait!! What!!? You can get adapters? This is a game changer!! And both your daughters are gorgeous!

 

[sporadic]

Wait!! What!!? You can get adapters? This is a game changer!! And both your daughters are gorgeous!

You can, but you lose auto-focus and electronic aperture control (at least on Fuji). It works best with older lenses that have manual aperture control, unless you want to shoot the lens wide-open. I believe Sony has Canon EF auto-focus capability with the proper adapters, but I'm not up to speed on that. All of the Fuji adapters are mechanical only, no electronic control of the lens. It's literally a sub-hobby within itself though. You'll find yourself at flea markets and in pawn shops trying to score old primes for dirt cheap. And thanks!

 

[thomas998]

@thomas998 I really appreciate the advice and looked into the rx10 ii a little and compared it to the Sony A6000. I still like the a6000 better and it seems to be a little more inexpensive even if I add a lens to the A6000. Maybe I'm not looking correctly but that's what I have found. Like @fractal mentioned I seem to be in a lot of situations where low light is an issue with my current camera and that's why i'm looking at the a6000 and the Nikon d5500. If you have an opinion on the mirrorless vs the dslr please share. I'm still on the fence but need to decide soon. I am very interested in taking the time to learn and figure what I need to do for a great photo and what lens would work best for me.

Well here is what you can expect from a a6000 with a f2.8 lens, I took this on a trip to WDW last year... it will give you an indication of what a 2.8 lens is going to be capable of though the RX10 II has a newer generation sensor and could probably go up on the ISO as much as a stop to provide better results than you see in the a6000 sample.

I would caution you on setting out dark rides as a criteria for your camera... I have gone down that slope in the past only to realize afterwards that I was spending way too much money and time chasing something that was really pointless... Fact is when you get a shot on a dark ride it isn't going to have any of your family or friends in it because they aren't there posing, so you might as well just use any number of photos others have taken of dark rides and call it a day. I can't remember which trip but on one I realized that I had stopped enjoying the ride for what it was because I was so consumed with trying to get the picture at the angle I wanted and just the right moment, and for what? That was the moment I stopped being consumed by trying to get a shot and started enjoying the rides again.... So be warned what you are thinking about can come at a price beyond the money you'll spend on equipment - it can suck the fun out of the dark rides.

 

[thomas998]

You can, but you lose auto-focus and electronic aperture control (at least on Fuji). It works best with older lenses that have manual aperture control, unless you want to shoot the lens wide-open. I believe Sony has Canon EF auto-focus capability with the proper adapters, but I'm not up to speed on that. All of the Fuji adapters are mechanical only, no electronic control of the lens. It's literally a sub-hobby within itself though. You'll find yourself at flea markets and in pawn shops trying to score old primes for dirt cheap. And thanks!

Yes you can get adapters, but the best ones that allow the Sony to auto-focus the Canon EF lenses aren't cheap Metabones makes one that will give you auto-focus (but not continuous or for video) but it cost about $450.... There are others out there but I understand they are iffy... and even the Metabones isn't considered great because it is going to give you slower focusing than you would get with a Sony lens on the Sony camera.

I use adapter probably 50% of the time I use my mirrorless but only so I can use some older full manual lenses. I don't get that great of results using newer lenses with the adapters and example would be using an old Nikon 50mm f1.2 on an adapter, it works great because it was designed to be manual... however when I use a newer Nikon 50mm f1.8 that was intended to be on a auto-focus camera it doesn't work so well.... biggest issue is the focus on a auto-focus lense is way to easy to adjust so you have a hard time focusing because you need more resistance in the focus ring. The older lens was made to be focused by hand and is therefore very easy to use on an adapter... So bear that in mind if you go down the mirrorless road.

In the end if you don't already have a collection of old lenses using adapters isn't something that should probably factor into your decision. You will get your best results by using the lenses that were made for your camera. The mirrorless having a very short to film distance just allows for lots of adapters in a way that a standard dslr never will.

If you know the lenses you are going to want then just price your options based on the prices of the lenses from that manufacturer and skip assuming you'll use adapters.

 

[thomas998]

A lot of good advice in this thread. I just wanted to add that at one point I was looking at the same camera set as you. The advice I have is that most of those sets include stuff of low quality that you don't need. All the filters and cleaning stuff and tripods are crap and you can get better quality on Amazon for what only what you will actually need/use. Spend your money on the body and lens and a good case. I got a Nikon kit that included a kit lens (the 18-55) but splurged on a nicer telephoto than comes in the kits you usually see online.

The only thing I wish I might have done differently is (as recommended earlier in this thread) is get a better body used. I bought a new D5600 but I probably could have gotten a higher end for the same price or cheaper. Oh well, I'll remember that a few years from now.

Some pictures from this weekend at AK using my telephoto:

View attachment 201241 View attachment 201242 View attachment 201243

I'll second the used route... Only caveat is make sure if you do it on ebay that it is from a seller with high ratings. I've gotten several cameras that were better than what I could have gotten using the same money for a new camera... you probably wont find a great deal on the newest version of camera but lots of hobby folks will sell off there current camera when a new camera pops up.... just doing a quick check you can find a used Nikon D610 or D600 for under 1000 which would give you better results than the a6000 and would be a full frame sensor to boot.

 

[fractal]

I'll second the used route... Only caveat is make sure if you do it on ebay that it is from a seller with high ratings. I've gotten several cameras that were better than what I could have gotten using the same money for a new camera... you probably wont find a great deal on the newest version of camera but lots of hobby folks will sell off there current camera when a new camera pops up.... just doing a quick check you can find a used Nikon D610 or D600 for under 1000 which would give you better results than the a6000 and would be a full frame sensor to boot.

Then you would need much more expensive full frame lenses and have an overall significantly bigger kit (she wants small) - plus I wouldn't buy a used D600 with the oily sensor issues. D610 maybe, if I want a full frame DSLR.

 

[Zipadeelady]

I thought I should make a little update of what my intentions are so that anyone joining in will know where I'm at. I will be buying the Sony A6000 or Nikon D5500. I will also be buying a 50mm f/1.8 lens for whichever camera I choose. I won't buy any additional lens until I learn a little more about photography in general. I also have Understanding Exposure on order and our local Library is having a photography class in 2 months that I'll be joining.

The issues I'm having on deciding are just because of my lack of knowledge on things like, if the number focal points make a difference and the Max ISO between the two. The weight and battery life aren't affecting my decision.. Ahhh decisions decisions. So far I haven't heard much from the DSLR fans.

 

[Rider]

Well here is what you can expect from a a6000 with a f2.8 lens, I took this on a trip to WDW last year... it will give you an indication of what a 2.8 lens is going to be capable of though the RX10 II has a newer generation sensor and could probably go up on the ISO as much as a stop to provide better results than you see in the a6000 sample.

I would caution you on setting out dark rides as a criteria for your camera... I have gone down that slope in the past only to realize afterwards that I was spending way too much money and time chasing something that was really pointless... Fact is when you get a shot on a dark ride it isn't going to have any of your family or friends in it because they aren't there posing, so you might as well just use any number of photos others have taken of dark rides and call it a day. I can't remember which trip but on one I realized that I had stopped enjoying the ride for what it was because I was so consumed with trying to get the picture at the angle I wanted and just the right moment, and for what? That was the moment I stopped being consumed by trying to get a shot and started enjoying the rides again.... So be warned what you are thinking about can come at a price beyond the money you'll spend on equipment - it can suck the fun out of the dark rides.

I agree with this. Think about it... Millions of people can take that same snapshot of some dark ride that never changes. Hell you'll find a lot of those shots on this website. You might get some good pictures but someone else will always have taken a better one.

Think about what you can shoot that is unique and interesting to others. Then aim for equipment for that. You can still shoot your vacation but don't spend hundreds or thousands on a camera for pictures only you will look at.

 

[drizgirl]

You can still shoot your vacation but don't spend hundreds or thousands on a camera for pictures only you will look at.

People spend hundreds or thousands on hobbies only they see and enjoy all the time. I guess I don't see this as being a deciding factor. Some just enjoy the challenge of seeing what they can do with the right equipment.

 

[fractal]

People spend hundreds or thousands on hobbies only they see and enjoy all the time. I guess I don't see this as being a deciding factor. Some just enjoy the challenge of seeing what they can do with the right equipment.

Agree. It's different when you take the shot vs. someone else. To take a good shot in Splash Mountain not only requires a proper camera and lens, but also knowing the correct settings and technique. The photo won't take itself. A DSLR (or mirrorless ) with a fast lens set on AUTO will not get you the shot. It's the accomplishment of getting the shot yourself which is satisfying, which is what we want from a hobby. Heck, I can find a photo of practically anything in the world. That doesn't mean I'm not going to take my camera if I visit Paris.

Walt Disney World is popular with photographers because of the different challenges and photographic opportunities it presents. Low light, action, wildlife, landscape, long exposure, macro, portraits, "street" type photos, etc.

I will concede that always having your camera out while on an attraction takes away from the experience, but now that I've gotten many of those shots I don't photograph as much in rides especially on second and third times through.