Recommend a cheap DSLR - quality photos (new or 2nd hand)

Crotal Bell

Crotal Bell

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,470
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

I'm struggling to get good images with a budget bridge camera, things like birds at 12 - 25 yards. Although the bridge has the zoom lens, the drop in achievable settings/quality when you use the telephoto makes it a real challenge ! I'm not looking to be a pro, just shoot sharper images with something that can take quality photos when I do my bit.

I won't be making large prints or anything, I just want to save some really nice shots of flowers, trees, birds, scenery, etc when I go for walks.

And I'll need to do this "on the cheap" I'm afraid. Any suggestions greatly received. Links to used equipment are helpful, but I really don't know a good deal from a bad on or what will do a good job (and there's some many old models out there ! it's a minefield for a beginner)

Many thanks.
 
I'm no expert on birds and hardly ever take pictures of them so take this with a large pinch of salt :D

I like to start at the end picture and work backwards, so if we want a nice picture of a bird... Things to possibly think about...

Birds are quite small and at 12-25 yards even more so so you're going to need a long lens and even then you may need to crop the picture. 300mm or equivalent possibly wont be enough, you may need longer.

I'm a bit biased as I moved away from DSLR's to mirrorless years ago and now have a full frame Sony A7 and Micro Four Thirds Panasonic cameras. A FF camera and long lens could be expensive so as toohuge says, you need a budget :D A decent used MFT Panasonic (or Olympus maybe...) camera might be £200-300 and a 300mm equivalent lens might be about £100+ but the reach might not be enough, a 100-400mm might be £700+.

Image quality wise you'll possibly need to keep the shutter speed up and that could mean the ISO increasing and you still might be cropping so a larger sensor could help. A 1" sensor bridge might be enough but I've no idea what 1" sensor bridge cameras are available. Moving up the sensor size range maybe MFT or APS-C could be worth a look?
 
In my experience, this is not an easy ask. To achieve a sharp, frame-filling image of a typical bird at 25 yards needs the equivalent of 1200mm focal length for a full-frame sensor. You can check the calculations here and adjust for different sensor sizes and so on - https://www.scantips.com/lights/fieldofview.html#top I never found a way to do this on the cheap that I found satisfactory, it needed a big investment.
 
TimHughes said:
In my experience, this is not an easy ask. To achieve a sharp, frame-filling image of a typical bird at 25 yards needs the equivalent of 1200mm focal length for a full-frame sensor. You can check the calculations here and adjust for different sensor sizes and so on - https://www.scantips.com/lights/fieldofview.html#top I never found a way to do this on the cheap that I found satisfactory, it needed a big investment.
Click to expand...

Yup. 400mm on my MFT for an equivalent 800mm is barely adequate for a pigeon let alone anything smaller and would most likely need cropping... or a hide. That's another answer, get closer.
 
Yeah I kinda thought this might be the case, realistically you can't do it on a budget (I was thinking £500) because even with a used DSLR you are going to need a serious lens for a goldfinch on a fence post at 20 yards. Some of the images I see on this forum and other places are superb, but the people who took them invested a lot of money in order to get them.
 
Crotal Bell said:
Yeah I kinda thought this might be the case, realistically you can't do it on a budget (I was thinking £500) because even with a used DSLR you are going to need a serious lens for a goldfinch on a fence post at 20 yards. Some of the images I see on this forum and other places are superb, but the people who took them invested a lot of money in order to get them.
Click to expand...

Could you set up a bird table or something to tempt them to come closer?

I think some do this and shoot from indoors through a window, open or not.

I've had birds react to the sound of a shutter so a camera capable of shooting silently might be an idea.
 
The camera doesn't really matter as long as it's a reasonably modern one. I prefer Nikon cameras and lenses FWIW.

However, you're right - it's the lens that matters. You'll need to spend between £1,000.00 - £3,000.00 on a new one or £600.00 + £XXXX on a used one to achieve what you're looking for. Then you have to get a camera . . .
 
Crotal Bell said:
And I'll need to do this "on the cheap" I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
Before spending any more money on cameras, have you tried a camera support?

A monopod can also be used as a walking stick and will do a lot to get rid of camera shake, which I suspect is the problem you're having at the moment. The longer the focal length, relative to the frame size, the more the image will degrade through tiny movements of the camera.

A tripod will give even better results at long relative focal lengths but for the requirement you've so far told us about, would not allow you to be as spontaneous as you wish to be. The best type of monopod has no more than two sections. Some people have made their own monopods from long walking sticks, simply screwing a 1/4 inch adapter to the top of the stick and (optionally) fitting a ball and socket head to that. I use a Benbo Trecker monopod that costs less than £30 new and will last a lifetime.

Manfroto 494RC2 ball and socket head on Benbo Monopod...

Manfroto 494RC2 on Benbo Monopod GX7 P1140565.jpg
 
Had a quick look at camerapricebuster.co.uk to get an idea of current used prices. A few years ago before the 150-600mm lenses became popular, sigma did a 150-500mm that was quite highly regarded, and you can get one of those used in either Nikon or Canon mount for just over £400. Add a body of choice such as a Canon 600d or a Nikon D7000, again, not the latest but still more than capable and you have a decent setup for only a few quid over your budget and the IQ will be far better than a bridge camera

Mike
 
Not a bird shooter but managed at times to get some decent bird shots on a Canon crop sensor 77D and the 55-250mm lens. You are going to be limited but as you are a casual shooter it might be ok. This setup won’t be good for lowlight, birds inflight and for birds that are nervous of humans but in parks and gardens. I found them to be more approachable especially if there is a food source nearby
 
Crotal Bell said:
Hi all

I'm struggling to get good images with a budget bridge camera, things like birds at 12 - 25 yards. Although the bridge has the zoom lens, the drop in achievable settings/quality when you use the telephoto makes it a real challenge ! I'm not looking to be a pro, just shoot sharper images with something that can take quality photos when I do my bit.

I won't be making large prints or anything, I just want to save some really nice shots of flowers, trees, birds, scenery, etc when I go for walks.

And I'll need to do this "on the cheap" I'm afraid. Any suggestions greatly received. Links to used equipment are helpful, but I really don't know a good deal from a bad on or what will do a good job (and there's some many old models out there ! it's a minefield for a beginner)

Many thanks.
Click to expand...

Cheap can mean many things depending on a persons circumstances Keith. Buying used will be your best option, used prices can vary considerably. I have seen the D500 going for anything between £650 - £780 plus used privately, the same sort of prices for the 200-500m or Tamron G2. And the Sigma -c for around £500. Quite a few are changing over to mirrorless and to me they are going to get a far better price selling privately than the next to nothing from a dealer.
 
pooley said:
Had a quick look at camerapricebuster.co.uk to get an idea of current used prices. A few years ago before the 150-600mm lenses became popular, sigma did a 150-500mm that was quite highly regarded, and you can get one of those used in either Nikon or Canon mount for just over £400. Add a body of choice such as a Canon 600d or a Nikon D7000, again, not the latest but still more than capable and you have a decent setup for only a few quid over your budget and the IQ will be far better than a bridge camera

Mike
Click to expand...
Thanks buddy
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Before spending any more money on cameras, have you tried a camera support?

A monopod can also be used as a walking stick and will do a lot to get rid of camera shake, which I suspect is the problem you're having at the moment. The longer the focal length, relative to the frame size, the more the image will degrade through tiny movements of the camera.

A tripod will give even better results at long relative focal lengths but for the requirement you've so far told us about, would not allow you to be as spontaneous as you wish to be. The best type of monopod has no more than two sections. Some people have made their own monopods from long walking sticks, simply screwing a 1/4 inch adapter to the top of the stick and (optionally) fitting a ball and socket head to that. I use a Benbo Trecker monopod that costs less than £30 new and will last a lifetime.

Manfroto 494RC2 ball and socket head on Benbo Monopod...

View attachment 352290
Click to expand...

That's a good idea, thaks
 
Some great advice folks. I think I have to be realistic about this, possibly look for a decent second hand DSLR body and smaller lens and use the bridge for long work until I can save up for other lenses. I do actually have an old Canon EOS SLR with portrait lens, just needs a new battery. Maybe I should shoot on film retro style for a while and see what the results look like.
 
You can do it on your budget if you shop round and are prepared to accept used items , but take into account that a lot of the sparkling sharp photos you see on here and elsewhere might have been enhanced on the computer with software that is also expensiv3 .. so equipment wise your looking at body,lens,computer,and software .. and you can’t really ignore any of them
 
D3 and 70-300mm VR? Should be able to do that for around £500 I reckon.
 
I'm going to suggest this pairing
www.parkcameras.com

Used Nikon D5200 | Park Cameras

Buy Used Nikon D5200 at Park Cameras today. Free delivery available!
www.parkcameras.com www.parkcameras.com
www.parkcameras.com

Used Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX APO IF HSM F Mouny Lens | Park Cameras

Buy Used Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX APO IF HSM F Mouny Lens at Park Cameras today. Free delivery available!
www.parkcameras.com www.parkcameras.com

Coming in at a total of 458 squids
You get a pretty decent apsc dslr and a very very capable f4 lens, cannot think of a better option at anywhere near this price.


 
I spend most of my time on bird photography - Nikon D3200 + Sigma 50-500 (older non OS) was my first setup and I managed some reasonable pictures for less than £500. Updated to the Sigma 150-600 OS and things improved considerably but this will push your budget to nearer £750. Check usedlens.co.uk for 2nd user.
PS I also had a 70-300 Nikon which was great quality but too short for small birds.
PSPS As others have said - improving your field craft should allow you to get closer with practice and patience. ( I took 20 minutes to get a picture of a Whitethroat recently)
 
I know this thread is quite old now, however im in a similar situation, budget around £500 and wanting to get decent wildlife shots, better than I can get with my iPhone 15 pro, and well as sharp as possible. I was looking at the FZ82 but now im not certain I will like it, would a used DSLR setup be better?
 
Emma385 said:
I know this thread is quite old now, however im in a similar situation, budget around £500 and wanting to get decent wildlife shots, better than I can get with my iPhone 15 pro, and well as sharp as possible. I was looking at the FZ82 but now im not certain I will like it, would a used DSLR setup be better?
Click to expand...
I use several cameras including a FZ82.

There are things that the other cameras do better but the FZ82 is light enough to take everywhere. The lens range gives you many options but as with all "superzoom" lenses there are limitations. I'm by no means a specialist bird photographer but here are some examples to give you an idea of how the FZ82 performs in that role...


Crow on grass by road FZ82 P1010541.jpeg
Small brown bird through window FZ82 P1010323.JPGRobin on garden fence FZ82 P1010566.jpeg
 
Emma385 said:
I know this thread is quite old now, however im in a similar situation, budget around £500 and wanting to get decent wildlife shots, better than I can get with my iPhone 15 pro, and well as sharp as possible. I was looking at the FZ82 but now im not certain I will like it, would a used DSLR setup be better?
Click to expand...

Minimum acceptable quality means different things to different people, and there is also a range to what they're willing to spend in order to get to that quality.

There's a few factors to consider in choosing what you might want to use. All things being equal, a smaller sensor means that optics can be smaller and long telephoto lenses will be lighter and more compact, but image quality will be less good than with a larger sensor. Also the wider range of focal lengths a lens covers, the less good it will be at any of them, and especially at the long end of the telephoto range.

Now I assume that when talking about wildlife you mean birds and animals that you see at a distance - so presumably you want something with a telephoto lens in order to make the small subjects large in the image? A superzoom compact/bridge type will do that, but image quality may be quite poor as I think you are starting to understand. I would probably suggest something like a micro four thirds (M43) camera that can take different lenses, together with a telephoto zoom in the 50-200mm or 100-300mm range in order to 'get close' to wildlife. Image quality should be quite a lot better than with a compact/bridge type camera, and it will also have the flexibility to take small light lenses that will make it handbag or pocket sized. Many of these cameras also have systems designed to reduce camera shake, which can be very helpful when using a long telephoto lens.

Why not have a look at photos on the site and see if there are some that stand out, then investigate a little more about what equipment they used?
 
ancient_mariner said:
I would probably suggest something like a micro four thirds (M43) camera that can take different lenses, together with a telephoto zoom in the 50-200mm or 100-300mm range in order to 'get close' to wildlife. Image quality should be quite a lot better than with a compact/bridge type camera, and it will also have the flexibility to take small light lenses that will make it handbag or pocket sized. Many of these cameras also have systems designed to reduce camera shake, which can be very helpful when using a long telephoto lens.
Click to expand...

I agree about taking a look at MFT. MFT gives me better IQ than I got from any of my Canon APS-C DSLR's and beat the FF 5D on many occasions too. I have the Panasonic 45-150 and 100-400mm and can recommend both for good light shooting.
 
I had an FZ82 briefly, and I replaced it quite quickly with an FZ2000. It's a bit bigger and heavier, but the image quality is great and the zoom (although not as long as the 82) is still really good.
The main thing I didn't like about the FZ82 was not having a ring on the barrel for manual focus; focusing using buttons on the back felt really counterintuitive.
 
sk66 said:
Quite likely. The recent "mirrorless revolution" has caused prices to plummet for used DSLRs and their lenses. And they are just as good today as they were before...
Click to expand...

But technology has moved on.

DSLR's can be limiting as the AF points are usually clustered around the central area and with some DSLR's the outer AF points were less good. Mirrorless gives you the option of focusing just about anywhere in the frame and with more accuracy and consistency than a DSLR ever could because of the way in which DSLR's v mirrorless do their AF. Plus mirrorless cameras, depending on what you buy, may well have face, eye or even animal or bird tracking. Just the ability to focus anywhere in the frame is enough for me as it gives more compositional freedom than a DSLR ever could with its focus points clustered around the central area.

Honestly the only advantage I can think of for DSLR's is the cost but even then the price of a used entry level mirrorless is worth checking as they may be competitive.
 
woof woof said:
But technology has moved on.

DSLR's can be limiting as the AF points are usually clustered around the central area and with some DSLR's the outer AF points were less good. Mirrorless gives you the option of focusing just about anywhere in the frame and with more accuracy and consistency than a DSLR ever could because of the way in which DSLR's v mirrorless do their AF. Plus mirrorless cameras, depending on what you buy, may well have face, eye or even animal or bird tracking. Just the ability to focus anywhere in the frame is enough for me as it gives more compositional freedom than a DSLR ever could with its focus points clustered around the central area.

Honestly the only advantage I can think of for DSLR's is the cost but even then the price of a used entry level mirrorless is worth checking as they may be competitive.
Click to expand...
I don't quite agree. There are differences, but I am very hesitant to say my Z9 is really any better than my D5 was in any significant way; and in some ways I would say it is worse. The Z9 has a lot more automation/features; and when they work it can be an advantage, but when they don't work it's a definite disadvantage.

And an APS DSLR is quite likely to have focus points that go nearly to the edge (e.g. D500).
 
Crotal Bell said:
Maybe I should shoot on film retro style for a while and see what the results look like.
Click to expand...
Lose the AF requirements and coax the subjects in or get a little closer and older film era telephotos can still give decent results on a moderner DSLR or mirrorless. A Canon 5Dii(FF) or a crop sensor like a 7D with and a Tair3 300mm f4.5 could be had for £200-250 shopping around. Would it be able to match modern stuff, heck no but used within its capabilities can create some very pleasing images.

Go for a mirrorless body and old FD mount L glass (amongst many many other options) is a lot more affordable than its modern AF IS enabled glass but still capable of stunning images.

I'm no bird photographer but these were shot with a 5D and a Tair3 handheld while sitting on the patio watching a bird feeder about 20ft away, I would imagine a practiced hand would be able to get much better.
5P8A5465.jpg
5P8A5402v2.jpg
5P8A5886.jpg
 
sk66 said:
I don't quite agree. There are differences, but I am very hesitant to say my Z9 is really any better than my D5 was in any significant way; and in some ways I would say it is worse. The Z9 has a lot more automation/features; and when they work it can be an advantage, but when they don't work it's a definite disadvantage.

And an APS DSLR is quite likely to have focus points that go nearly to the edge (e.g. D500).
Click to expand...

Then we'll agree to disagree. I don't see this as comparable to a half decent mirrorless camera and I stand by my comments regarding accuracy and consistency and freedom of composition. From DPR...

1-Untitled-1.jpg
 
Crotal Bell said:
I'm not looking to be a pro, just shoot sharper images with something that can take quality photos when I do my bit.
Click to expand...
To go back to the above, original question, I'm wondering if the Nikon D600 paired with something like a Tamron 28~300mm would meet the requirement? The cost of such a combination should be well under £500. The great advantage of the Nikon would be that you could choose from many old manual lenses as well and there are excellent bargains to be found among those.

Here's a pigeon shot through our double glazed kitchen window and the Tamron 28-300mm.

Blackbird on roof through kitchen window D600 D60_5090.jpg
 
woof woof said:
and I stand by my comments regarding accuracy and consistency
Click to expand...
That's fine... but I have found that there are times/situations where the Z9's AF is both slower and less accurate than my DSLRs; to the point of being frustrating. And I don't find my keeper rate has increased significantly in any way/situation that I can identify...

TBH, I had expected more based on the hype/feedback/reviews. Although firmware updates have helped a little...
 
sk66 said:
That's fine... but I have found that there are times/situations where the Z9's AF is both slower and less accurate than my DSLRs; to the point of being frustrating. And I don't find my keeper rate has increased significantly in any way/situation that I can identify...

TBH, I had expected more based on the hype/feedback/reviews. Although firmware updates have helped a little...
Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. For those of us who transitioned from enthusiast mid level cameras like the D610/750, Sony mirrorless with the A7III and above was a fantastic upgrade, and even Olympus M43 was noticeably better.
 
Im thinking of going mirrorless then myself , id like to be able to capture video too so maybe that discounts DSLR.

My main issue right now is figuring out what body to get that is a good base forever. Like so I can start cheaply with just that and a cheaper lens, then as I get better maybe get some more expensive lenses to improve it? Theres so many options though its so confusing!
 
Emma385 said:
Im thinking of going mirrorless then myself , id like to be able to capture video too so maybe that discounts DSLR.

My main issue right now is figuring out what body to get that is a good base forever. Like so I can start cheaply with just that and a cheaper lens, then as I get better maybe get some more expensive lenses to improve it? Theres so many options though its so confusing!
Click to expand...

It may be worth you handling some of these cameras to at least get an idea of what feels right in the hand, even if you then buy used.

First questions then:
What's the limit on budget?
Any size or weight constraints?
Wildlife was mentioned - do you need a telephoto for distant birds etc?
Any other kinds of photography you want to do?
Are you happy to edit the pictures on a computer?

That will help giude suggestions for both body and lenses. It may be that mirrorless is simply too expensive, and a cheaper used DSLR outfit will offer *enough* of what you need for now.
 
ancient_mariner said:
It may be worth you handling some of these cameras to at least get an idea of what feels right in the hand, even if you then buy used.

First questions then:
What's the limit on budget?
Any size or weight constraints?
Wildlife was mentioned - do you need a telephoto for distant birds etc?
Any other kinds of photography you want to do?
Are you happy to edit the pictures on a computer?

That will help giude suggestions for both body and lenses. It may be that mirrorless is simply too expensive, and a cheaper used DSLR outfit will offer *enough* of what you need for now.
Click to expand...
Im open to anything up to £700, I dont mind any size/weight, yes, id mainly be photographing birds, plants + insects (macros) and some portraits of people. Im a graphic designer so im comfortable with using photoshop, however never edited raw images before

Just looking at a the Panasonic Lumix G9, will this be what im looking for?

Hope that helps, thank you!
 
Last edited:
Emma385 said:
Just looking at a the Panasonic Lumix G9, will this be what im looking for?
Click to expand...

Yes, although I'm not tremendously familiar with Panasonic.

I'd probably have suggested an Olympus E-M5II https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-E-M5-II_467858.html £279
14-42 compact https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-14-42mm-f3.5-5.6-HD_471836.html £129 for daily use
40-150mm zoom https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-40-150mm-F4-5.6_469442.html £99 Medium telephoto OR
75-300 zoom https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-75-300mm-f4.8-6.7-MkII-ED-MSC_472077.html £199 for the long distance stuff.

It's important when buying lenses to ensure that they are compatible with your camera body.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Yes, although I'm not tremendously familiar with Panasonic.

I'd probably have suggested an Olympus E-M5II https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-E-M5-II_467858.html £279
14-42 compact https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-14-42mm-f3.5-5.6-HD_471836.html £129 for daily use
40-150mm zoom https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-40-150mm-F4-5.6_469442.html £99 Medium telephoto OR
75-300 zoom https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Olympus-75-300mm-f4.8-6.7-MkII-ED-MSC_472077.html £199 for the long distance stuff.

It's important when buying lenses to ensure that they are compatible with your camera body.
Click to expand...
this look like exactly what im looking for, for a really good price
thank you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top