Is it silly to get an 85mm f1.8 as my first lens?

[woof woof]

That's exactly what i did... A D750 and Nikon 24-70mm f2.8G. Awesome combo.

The arguments against will be cost and weight.
The arguments for will be the ability to shoot at faster shutter speeds or lower ISO's and also the creative possibility offered by the wider aperture at the longer focal lengths.

 

[snerkler]

That's exactly what i did... A D750 and Nikon 24-70mm f2.8G. Awesome combo.

I would buy the 24-70mm f2.8 in a heartbeat if I had the cash. In fact I'd even buy the Tammy 24-70mm f2.8 if I had the cash.

 

[minnnt]

I like the instantaneous focus and build quality. It is heavy and expensive but for me it was worth it. I went around the houses to get it, but I'm a happy bunny now. I had it's smaller brother on DX, the 17-55mm f2.8G and that was a similar story. Awesome lenses imo.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I would buy the 24-70mm f2.8 in a heartbeat if I had the cash. In fact I'd even buy the Tammy 24-70mm f2.8 if I had the cash.

Me too - and a pile of other wonderful optics.

 

[Winter]

Okay, you guys have added another option for me, lol. I asked about the 24-85 f2.8-4 or 24-85 f3.5-4.5, but you've all suddenly come up with 24-70 f2.8, which is way more expensive than the first two. Do you think I should invest in the much more expensive zoom straight off, instead of the cheaper one?

 

[Phil V]

Okay, you guys have added another option for me, lol. I asked about the 24-85 f2.8-4 or 24-85 f3.5-4.5, but you've all suddenly come up with 24-70 f2.8, which is way more expensive than the first two. Do you think I should invest in the much more expensive zoom straight off, instead of the cheaper one?

A 24-70 2.8 for full frame or a 17-55 2.8 for a cropper is expensive, but versatile, and if bought S/H won't lose much value.

 

[Cistron]

Okay, you guys have added another option for me, lol. I asked about the 24-85 f2.8-4 or 24-85 f3.5-4.5, but you've all suddenly come up with 24-70 f2.8, which is way more expensive than the first two. Do you think I should invest in the much more expensive zoom straight off, instead of the cheaper one?

If you don't know the answer to this question yourself, you should really go and buy a cheaper used (mirrorless) camera. You can always sell it again with little to no loss. There are plenty available with exquisite AF systems, some as good as the D750's.

Lots of this comes down to your own personal preference; and even this is subject to change over time and with experience. When I bought my first dSLR I fuzzed a lot about ISO capabilities and even trivial things such as VR/IS and self-sensor-cleaning-thingy. Duh (!), right?

 

[huffy]

Okay, you guys have added another option for me, lol. I asked about the 24-85 f2.8-4 or 24-85 f3.5-4.5, but you've all suddenly come up with 24-70 f2.8, which is way more expensive than the first two. Do you think I should invest in the much more expensive zoom straight off, instead of the cheaper one?

I have been reading your posts both here and the on the one about the Canon 5dIII v the Nikon d750 and wonder if you have tried to handle these body/lens combinations in a camera shop as I think you will surprised as to how much they will weigh. This may be a factor that you have not considered when looking at the specs.

 

[Winter]

If you don't know the answer to this question yourself, you should really go and buy a cheaper used (mirrorless) camera. You can always sell it again with little to no loss. There are plenty available with exquisite AF systems, some as good as the D750's.

Lots of this comes down to your own personal preference; and even this is subject to change over time and with experience. When I bought my first dSLR I fuzzed a lot about ISO capabilities and even trivial things such as VR/IS and self-sensor-cleaning-thingy. Duh (!), right?

This is sound advice, but I've thought about it and decided I really don't like mirror less cameras, probably for all the wrong reasons. Like, they look too much like the compact cameras I've used all my life, they look silly with tiny bodies and big lenses, and I really like the feel of a biggish DSLR body in my hands.

 

[Winter]

I have been reading your posts both here and the on the one about the Canon 5dIII v the Nikon d750 and wonder if you have tried to handle these body/lens combinations in a camera shop as I think you will surprised as to how much they will weigh. This may be a factor that you have not considered when looking at the specs.

Hmm, unfortunately, I haven't. Curry's was kinda limited. They had all the cameras and lenses in different cabinets and like you could only look at one thing at one time and they'd lock up the one thing before showing you the other thing.

Ok this might sound silly but I didn't want to go to a small proper camera shop near me because I'd feel guilty playing with their cameras and possibly not buy from them because they haven't got the best deals and if I wanted to buy second hand I would have to buy online, then I'd just feel bad for wasting their time.

 

[snerkler]

Okay, you guys have added another option for me, lol. I asked about the 24-85 f2.8-4 or 24-85 f3.5-4.5, but you've all suddenly come up with 24-70 f2.8, which is way more expensive than the first two. Do you think I should invest in the much more expensive zoom straight off, instead of the cheaper one?

Well ask yourself why you bought the D750 in the first place? Was it for the autofocus, was it for the excellent noise handling, was it for the potential to produce 'the best' images? More than likely it was a combination of the above, but let's consider the last point. Stick a rubbish lens on a great camera and the images won't be great. Stick a great lens on a rubbish body and the images will still be great. Stick a great lens on a great body and the images will be even better still in a number of situations.

When discussing lenses people will often tell you how sharp a lens is, in simple terms referring to how crisp it is and how much detail there is. Whilst this is often important there's other things that you need to think about when considering lens qualities, such as contrast/micro contrast, colour, bokeh and overall rendering. So whilst it's true that the 24-85mm and 24-120mm f4 are pretty much as sharp as the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 they don't have the je ne sais quoi of the 24-70mm IMO.

Another example is the 58mm f1.4 which is one of the softest of Nikon's G lenses but for me produces arguably the best images.

I agree with huffy though, I think you might get a bit of a shock when you feel the weight of the D750 with 24-70mm, approaching 2kg.

 

[snerkler]

Hmm, unfortunately, I haven't. Curry's was kinda limited. They had all the cameras and lenses in different cabinets and like you could only look at one thing at one time and they'd lock up the one thing before showing you the other thing.

Ok this might sound silly but I didn't want to go to a small proper camera shop near me because I'd feel guilty playing with their cameras and possibly not buy from them because they haven't got the best deals and if I wanted to buy second hand I would have to buy online, then I'd just feel bad for wasting their time.

Some camera shops will price match, or do their best to match. Always nice to get a good relationship with a local camera shop.

Oh, and curry's is pants for photography in terms of getting good advice or the opportunity to use stuff.

 

[Winter]

Well ask yourself why you bought the D750 in the first place? Was it for the autofocus, was it for the excellent noise handling, was it for the potential to produce 'the best' images? More than likely it was a combination of the above, but let's consider the last point. Stick a rubbish lens on a great camera and the images won't be great. Stick a great lens on a rubbish body and the images will still be great. Stick a great lens on a great body and the images will be even better still in a number of situations.

When discussing lenses people will often tell you how sharp a lens is, in simple terms referring to how crisp it is and how much detail there is. Whilst this is often important there's other things that you need to think about when considering lens qualities, such as contrast/micro contrast, colour, bokeh and overall rendering. So whilst it's true that the 24-85mm and 24-120mm f4 are pretty much as sharp as the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 they don't have the je ne sais quoi of the 24-70mm IMO.

Another example is the 58mm f1.4 which is one of the softest of Nikon's G lenses but for me produces arguably the best images.

I agree with huffy though, I think you might get a bit of a shock when you feel the weight of the D750 with 24-70mm, approaching 2kg.

Thanks! That's all very informative. And sounds really heavy! Maybe I will try holding some bags of flour and sugar to simulate the weight just to get a feel.

 

[snerkler]

This is sound advice, but I've thought about it and decided I really don't like mirror less cameras, probably for all the wrong reasons. Like, they look too much like the compact cameras I've used all my life, they look silly with tiny bodies and big lenses, and I really like the feel of a biggish DSLR body in my hands.

You've been looking at the wrong mirror less then, Olympus and Fuji do some of the nicest looking cameras on the market

 

[kendo1]

This is sound advice, but I've thought about it and decided I really don't like mirror less cameras, probably for all the wrong reasons. Like, they look too much like the compact cameras I've used all my life, they look silly with tiny bodies and big lenses, and I really like the feel of a biggish DSLR body in my hands.

All the wrong reasons...

It sounds like 'small penis syndrome' - look at the size of my equipment.
There are some very capable mirrorless cameras available.

To be a bit more serious:
It's good to buy the best equipment you can, but on the other hand it's best to walk before you can run.
Learning how to take photographs comes first.

 

[Winter]

All the wrong reasons...

It sounds like 'small penis syndrome' - look at the size of my equipment.
There are some very capable mirrorless cameras available.

To be a bit more serious:
It's good to buy the best equipment you can, but on the other hand it's best to walk before you can run.
Learning how to take photographs comes first.

Well, all I can say is that I've used small cameras all my life, now I want a big camera. I've handled (briefly) SLRs and DSLRs in the past when I was working as a model and I'd considered having one myself one day. Just never got around to it till now because I'd been afraid of the technical difficulties of mastering a DSLR. I've enjoyed taking photos for decades (with compacts) and I think I take pretty good photos as much as a lack of technical knowledge can allow. I've gone through many compact cameras and, in the last few years, have started feeling frustrated by their limitations.

E.g. There was this time I started feeling sad about missing many great moments because my camera couldn't handle movement in low light. So I started shooting in ISO 1200 (or something like that, the highest ISO my compact could go) just to have my pictures in focus. It worked but then there was a ridiculous amount of grain I couldn't do anything about.

And, like, my current camera can do auto shallow depth of field which is lovely but it has a strict distance requirement to trigger the dof, so it's a bit hit and miss. It doesn't allow me to change the ISO which baffles me, so when I'm shooting my nieces and dogs indoors, I would have to take 100 photos to get a few good shots that are in focus, since they're moving around all the time. Or, I need the camera to take the picture a lot faster, before the two-year-old walks up and tries to eat the camera.

So,I know what kind of pictures I want to take, and I just want my next camera to be able to give me what I want without having to wait for all the stars to align for the good photos to happen. I do realise I'd have to master the skills first in order to perfect my shots, which is fine. My thinking is that the best camera that I can afford will help me along faster and leave things to chance less! Right?

 

[Winter]

You've been looking at the wrong mirror less then, Olympus and Fuji do some of the nicest looking cameras on the market

Okay, I just did a Google search and decided that the best looking mirrorless are Sony Alpha 3000 and Panasonic GH4. Any opinions about them? You can guess I like rounded cameras. Even my compact cameras tend to be cute and rounded, not boxy square things.

 

[kendo1]

A good response to a tongue in cheek post

It helps to verbalise what your needs and intentions are.

 

[kendo1]

Okay, I just did a Google search and decided that the best looking mirrorless are Sony Alpha 3000 and Panasonic GH4. Any opinions about them? You can guess I like rounded cameras. Even my compact cameras tend to be cute and rounded, not boxy square things.

I use a Sony Nex 6, amongst several (lots!) other cameras. Well, to be fair I have several Nexes
Best one just now seems to be the A6000, or if you have wads of money languishing about, the A7 series.

I find the Nex 6 perfect for my needs, but everyone is different.

 

[cw318is]

Sounds like a reasonable plan to me to get a body and 50mm, but I'd hang back a smidge on the 85mm f1.8 for a short time. Master the nifty, then it'll illustrate any shortcomings from the lens rather then technique. Would it be fair to say you love the results you've seen from others with an fast 85? Without sounding patronising if you were modelling you would have been working with someone with at least a bit of experience, and working with primes take a bit of practice to get good results.

Have you thought about adding a cheapo kit small zoom in, something like an 17-70, that way you can have a bit of fun and flexibility until you find what your style needs then pull the trigger on the next lens.

 

[snerkler]

Okay, I just did a Google search and decided that the best looking mirrorless are Sony Alpha 3000 and Panasonic GH4. Any opinions about them? You can guess I like rounded cameras. Even my compact cameras tend to be cute and rounded, not boxy square things.

Not about them, but you need to go to specsavers

Joking aside the look of the camera shouldn't be at the forefront of your opinions, of it was I'd be shooting with the Nikon DF rather than the D750. If you're taking pics of your family and dogs but struggling due to light and movement then I would suggest that you're right to stay away from mirrorless as this is their weak area. Whilst you can get shots like this, and many people do, it is so much easier and with a better hit rate using a capable DSLR like the D750. I have mirrorless (Olympus EM5-II) and the D750 and the difference is night and day. Yes I've got shots of the dog running around, and birds (although not moving fast) with the EM5-II but it's infuriating compared to the D750.

 

[Cistron]

I have mirrorless (Olympus EM5-II) and the D750 and the difference is night and day. Yes I've got shots of the dog running around, and birds (although not moving fast) with the EM5-II but it's infuriating compared to the D750.

That might be so, but (a) has the EM5-II no phase detection (other mirrorless have them on sensor) and (b) that doesn't make that the D750 the ideal first camera.

Now if cute and round comes into play, if think we should all give up

 

[Winter]

Now if cute and round comes into play, if think we should all give up

Life is all about compromises.

 

[Ed Sutton]

I know I said earlier you'll get as many responses as there are replies and end up no better off. But here's what I'd do if I was starting from scratch anyway.

D750
24-85 VR
50mm/f1.8

That will give you a nice lightweight zoom for taking out in the wide world where the sun shines and a fast lens to use in low light indoors/give you shallow depth of field. You'll have fun using them because they don't weigh a ton like the f2.8 24-70 everyone seems to be advising, you'll learn how to use them and your camera, and your pictures will still look 'different' to those from a compact.

If you push the ISO up on the D750 even the zoom will give better results than a compact in low light.

After some time using those lenses you'll discover whether you need longer focal lengths or shorter, or if a wider aperture zoom really will be a benefit. Buy those lenses used and if you do chop one or both in you'll not lose much but will have learned a fair bit.

FWIW I own both the 24-70/2.8 and the 24-85 and only use the former when I need to shoot it wide open.

But I'm not representative of the majority of amateur photographers and prefer convenience to perfection. 'Good enough' is better than most people will admit.

 

[Winter]

Sounds like a reasonable plan to me to get a body and 50mm, but I'd hang back a smidge on the 85mm f1.8 for a short time. Master the nifty, then it'll illustrate any shortcomings from the lens rather then technique. Would it be fair to say you love the results you've seen from others with an fast 85? Without sounding patronising if you were modelling you would have been working with someone with at least a bit of experience, and working with primes take a bit of practice to get good results.

Have you thought about adding a cheapo kit small zoom in, something like an 17-70, that way you can have a bit of fun and flexibility until you find what your style needs then pull the trigger on the next lens.

Thanks for your input! Yes, I've decided to hold off on the 85mm for now like many have suggested. I'm considering the 24-70mm f2.8 as many have also suggested. Then I'll decide what primes to get. But I hear you about mastering the nifty. That sounds like good advice and will be something I want to work on at some point.

To answer your question, the photos I liked from 85mms were just random photos I found on the Internet while researching lenses. They would have been the f1.8 ones.

 

[Winter]

I know I said earlier you'll get as many responses as there are replies and end up no better off. But here's what I'd do if I was starting from scratch anyway.

D750
24-85 VR
50mm/f1.8

That will give you a nice lightweight zoom for taking out in the wide world where the sun shines and a fast lens to use in low light indoors/give you shallow depth of field. You'll have fun using them because they don't weigh a ton like the f2.8 24-70 everyone seems to be advising, you'll learn how to use them and your camera, and your pictures will still look 'different' to those from a compact.

If you push the ISO up on the D750 even the zoom will give better results than a compact in low light.

After some time using those lenses you'll discover whether you need longer focal lengths or shorter, or if a wider aperture zoom really will be a benefit. Buy those lenses used and if you do chop one or both in you'll not lose much but will have learned a fair bit.

FWIW I own both the 24-70/2.8 and the 24-85 and only use the former when I need to shoot it wide open.

But I'm not representative of the majority of amateur photographers and prefer convenience to perfection. 'Good enough' is better than most people will admit.

It's definitely helpful to hear what others would do or would have done if they were starting out, whether or not they make me more conflicted, so thank you for that. What you said about pairing the 24-85 with the 50 makes sense to me. I'll have to think more about the whole thing. And maybe more googling just to add more voices into my poor old brain.

 

[snerkler]

That might be so, but (a) has the EM5-II no phase detection (other mirrorless have them on sensor) and (b) that doesn't make that the D750 the ideal first camera.

Now if cute and round comes into play, if think we should all give up

Yeah I know, I was using it as an example The EM1 and A6000 are probably the best mirrorless in terms of autofocus (and and one of the Panny's, I forget which), but they still can't compare with the best DSLRs yet, especially when light isn't ideal. It's only a matter of time though

 

[Cistron]

Just so we don't loose track of weight:

D750 - 840g
24-85mm - 465g

Yes, this _is_ lightweight, but if you carry it around the whole day, you might change your mind. Eventually it might stay at home, after the novelty has worn off.

 

[Winter]

Just so we don't loose track of weight:

D750 - 840g
24-85mm - 465g

Yes, this _is_ lightweight, but if you carry it around the whole day, you might change your mind. Eventually it might stay at home, after the novelty has worn off.

lol, I tried carrying 2 bags of flour (1.5 kg in total) and pretending it's a DSLR. It feels light but I can see how it'll start getting heavy holding it at eye level for a sustained period of time. I don't think the novelty of taking good photos will ever wear off, but maybe if one day I get tired of lugging around a heavy box, I'll switch to mirrorless or maybe just do landscapes on a tripod.

 

[snerkler]

lol, I tried carrying 2 bags of flour (1.5 kg in total) and pretending it's a DSLR. It feels light but I can see how it'll start getting heavy holding it at eye level for a sustained period of time. I don't think the novelty of taking good photos will ever wear off, but maybe if one day I get tired of lugging around a heavy box, I'll switch to mirrorless or maybe just do landscapes on a tripod.

If you're out for the day get a slingstrap, distributes the weight much better.

 

[Cistron]

lol, I tried carrying 2 bags of flour (1.5 kg in total) and pretending it's a DSLR. It feels light but I can see how it'll start getting heavy holding it at eye level for a sustained period of time. I don't think the novelty of taking good photos will ever wear off, but maybe if one day I get tired of lugging around a heavy box, I'll switch to mirrorless or maybe just do landscapes on a tripod.

If you're out for the day get a slingstrap, distributes the weight much better.

That is a good idea.

My reports of personal experience are probably getting annoying by now -- because I'm a pesky advocate of light cameras --, however, think what else you usually carry around with you. In my case this turns out to be a tiny laptop for work (~1kg), water bottle and obligatory brolly, in a Hadley Pro bag. Most of the time the 5D+35mm/f2 stayed at home, because it was bulky and heavy to lug it around in a sling bag for most of the day, despite being a 6'1" guy. If you are a rucksack-girl and your kids don't burden you with additional stuff, then you'll probably be very happy with the D750.

 

[Winter]

That is a good idea.

My reports of personal experience are probably getting annoying by now -- because I'm a pesky advocate of light cameras --, however, think what else you usually carry around with you. In my case this turns out to be a tiny laptop for work (~1kg), water bottle and obligatory brolly, in a Hadley Pro bag. Most of the time the 5D+35mm/f2 stayed at home, because it was bulky and heavy to lug it around in a sling bag for most of the day, despite being a 6'1" guy. If you are a rucksack-girl and your kids don't burden you with additional stuff, then you'll probably be very happy with the D750.

I can see the appeal of light cameras, I really can. Well, I think the weight is something I'm willing to put up with for getting the photos I want. Like I said, life is about compromises. I don't have kids myself so I don't have any kid stuff to carry! All I take with me when I go out usually are just my wallet, iPhone, and, if I'm expecting to have time to kill, either my iPad Mini or Kindle, both of which are relatively light.

 

[Winter]

If you're out for the day get a slingstrap, distributes the weight much better.

Hmm... Actually, I kind of thought camera straps were non-negotiable. I don't know a photographer who doesn't use one when out shooting for any length of time. So I was gonna have one anyway! Is it necessary to buy a separate strap rather than just use the one that comes with the camera?

 

[Diving Pete]

To the OP:
It would help if we have more understanding of your budget...

However,
The D750 is a very fine camera - in car terms think of a BMW M3.....

This 'may be more' (much more) than you require.....
It works best with 'fast, expensive lenses - (these are the really expensive tyres)
but will also work 'well' with 'kit lenses' (remolds) - lol

If this is still good then the 24-70 is an ideal match for this..
But as was mentioned:

These are just tools - to get the best from them requires practice & training - lots of practice...
A Full Frame isn't geared at a beginner - in the same reason that you wouldn't learn to drive in a M3... There are just 'better' tools to learn on.

A few more questions for you:

Do you shoot in manual mode>?

Do you take more than 2000 pics a years >?

Do you edit your pictures using LR / PS ?

Do you use a flash (not the inbuilt one)

 

[Winter]

To the OP:
It would help if we have more understanding of your budget...

However,
The D750 is a very fine camera - in car terms think of a BMW M3.....

This 'may be more' (much more) than you require.....
It works best with 'fast, expensive lenses - (these are the really expensive tyres)
but will also work 'well' with 'kit lenses' (remolds) - lol

If this is still good then the 24-70 is an ideal match for this..
But as was mentioned:

These are just tools - to get the best from them requires practice & training - lots of practice...
A Full Frame isn't geared at a beginner - in the same reason that you wouldn't learn to drive in a M3... There are just 'better' tools to learn on.

A few more questions for you:

Do you shoot in manual mode>?

Do you take more than 2000 pics a years >?

Do you edit your pictures using LR / PS ?

Do you use a flash (not the inbuilt one)

Hi Pete, thanks for your comments (questions). I started out with a small budget but got talked out of getting a crop, so since then my budget has expanded to the point where I don't have a budget anymore (although I'm trying to keep it as low as possible to prevent a certain murder by a certain sure-to-be-irate spouse).

Yes, I do get your car analogy. But I've had feedback that it's perfectly alright, and even good, for beginners to start with a full frame, so I'm sticking with that! lol.

I know I'll need lots of training and practice and I'm all up for it. However long it takes!

Do I shoot in manual mode: No. My current camera doesn't have one lol.

Do I take more than 2000 pics a year: Yes. I probably took ONLY 2000 pics last year because I was starting to get very disgusted with my compact's limitations.

Do I edit my pictures: Yes, photoshop.

Do I use flash: No.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Is it necessary to buy a separate strap rather than just use the one that comes with the camera?

No.

Carry the camera with the strap over one shoulder (lens pointing backwards, hand resting on camera), and it won't start making your neck ache like it will if you hang it round your neck.

 

[bdslr]

So when I was starting out (2011) I did the research and then bought myself a brand new entry level camera - despite looking at second hand mid-range cameras. That was a mistake - I should have taken the mid-range advice and gone for second hand. Mind you, if I knew that this would become an obsession (photography not gear) then I would have bought FF straight away.

If you are certain it is going to be an obsession then the D750 would do you fine. If you are happy with that level of weight and are not certain about the obsession my advice would be to get a D700 second hand. Then any lens choices you get will be compatible if you want to upgrade body in the future.

However, if I was starting now and could advise myself what to get it would be a second-hand D7000 and Tamron 28-75 F2.8 (I dont shoot very wide)

But stop looking at gear on furums, get yourself a camera and get using it!

 

[Diving Pete]

Sheylara,

Do I shoot in manual mode: No. My current camera doesn't have one lol.

Ok, thats good to know - AP & SP modes will help you a lot... - there is NO AUTO mode on this camera...

Do I take more than 2000 pics a year: Yes. I probably took ONLY 2000 pics last year because I was starting to get very disgusted with my compact's limitations.

The reason for this question was; you will end up spending between £1500 & £2000 this year (D750 / 24-70, bag, memory cards, strap - budget £50 on Black Rapid curve S-7, flash, etc,etc.... so will in essence cost you £1 a picture next year...

Do I edit my pictures: Yes, photoshop.

Excellent

Do I use flash: No.

You will - once you gain a greater understanding of light - lol

 

[snerkler]

Hmm... Actually, I kind of thought camera straps were non-negotiable. I don't know a photographer who doesn't use one when out shooting for any length of time. So I was gonna have one anyway! Is it necessary to buy a separate strap rather than just use the one that comes with the camera?

No, but I said sling strap not neck strap Neck straps are fine, and as posted above you can put the neck strap over your shoulder too. However, sling straps distribute the weight across your body and are so much more comfortable to wear all day, especially when you have a big heavy lens on. Plus the camera's always right there ready to take the shot as it just slides up the strap. If you have the neck strap around your shoulder you have to remove it to take the shot if you don't want it to be awkward

 

[snerkler]

A Full Frame isn't geared at a beginner - in the same reason that you wouldn't learn to drive in a M3... There are just 'better' tools to learn on.

)

Why is a FF any worse to learn on than an entry level crop? You can just use the basic features to start with and then the camera will 'grow' with you as you learn more and start to use the advanced features.