Looking to buy new equiptment? budget and spec inside.

A

AndyG123

Suspended / Banned
Messages
398
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys, I hope I'm in the right place, I'm in the UK and currently looking for an entry level camera, I'm wanting a DSLR with a basic lens good for portrait photography some wide landscape, so not too concerned about macro just yet or telephoto.
One of the things i will want is control of aperture speed. preferably to keep it open as long as possible at my control.
I'm looking for something which will accept a range of filters in the future if i require ND Filters or IR Filters etc.

But for now, just a basic body and lens, my budget is around £250-300 top end.

I've seen some canon EOS1300D's going for around that price. which i was contemplating..
Also, if i do get something in this budget, how much more superior is it going to be over the latest mobile devices out there at the moment (as I currently have an S7)

Many thanks

Andy
 
AndyG123 said:
Hi guys, I hope I'm in the right place, I'm in the UK and currently looking for an entry level camera, I'm wanting a DSLR with a basic lens good for portrait photography some wide landscape, so not too concerned about macro just yet or telephoto.
One of the things i will want is control of aperture speed. preferably to keep it open as long as possible at my control.
I'm looking for something which will accept a range of filters in the future if i require ND Filters or IR Filters etc.

But for now, just a basic body and lens, my budget is around £250-300 top end.

I've seen some canon EOS1300D's going for around that price. which i was contemplating..
Also, if i do get something in this budget, how much more superior is it going to be over the latest mobile devices out there at the moment (as I currently have an S7)

Many thanks

Andy
Click to expand...
Most DSLRs will be much better than any mobile phone camera, but whether you can see the difference will depend a lot on what size you will be viewing the image.
 
Any DSLR or mirrorless system will allow you to have full manual control (you set aperture/shutter speed/ISO sensitivity). You can also use them anywhere in between manual and full automatic so the camera sets the shutter speed according to the aperture you choose (Aperture Priority), vice versa (Shutter Priority) or completely automatic like your phone.

All lenses for these cameras will take filters. Either individual screw on filters at the size that matches the front element of each lens (the size is printed in mm inside the lens cap), or filter systems that use a clip on holder and square filters that allow you to stack multiple filters and align them to the scene more easily.

Any DSLR will deliver considerably better results and future skill improvements over a mobile device due to them having larger sensors (better low light performance) and interchangeable lenses so you can shoot with the most suitable lens for the situation, as well as giving you the choice of manual control.
 
Last edited:
I can get an eos1300d for £289 body only or £320 with a 15/55 lens.
What could I expect from a lens like this? And when choosing new lenses are they interchangeable between models and makes or is
A Canon lens for a Canon camera etc..
 
The kit lens will be a lot better than any phone camera lens. The lenses you can use will be the ones that match the lens mount of your camera. Lots of older lenses will be manual focus only. I use nikon, which uses the same lens mount on all their cameras, but not the same autofocus system all the way through the ranges. I'm not sure about canon mounts, but I'm sure someone here can clarify that. The kit lenses are a good start to get used to the camera and find what you need next. You can find the limits and you will know better what you need next, be it more range, or wider angle. Or even wider apertures if you need better low light performance.
 
Thanks, also there are nikons out there with 24mp for a bit more money. Without spending thousands on lenses etc is a 18mp image going to be much different from a 24mp image? I'm not going to be using these for full size. It will mainly be portraits of my baby boy, and the odd scenery etc.. But will not be using the images for high quality printouts of a large canvas etc..
 
AndyG123 said:
Thanks, also there are nikons out there with 24mp for a bit more money. Without spending thousands on lenses etc is a 18mp image going to be much different from a 24mp image? I'm not going to be using these for full size. It will mainly be portraits of my baby boy, and the odd scenery etc.. But will not be using the images for high quality printouts of a large canvas etc..
Click to expand...
In that case even 18mpx will be more than you need, in fact a dslr of yesteryear with 10 or 12 mpx would be more than fine ...
 
AndyG123 said:
Thanks, also there are nikons out there with 24mp for a bit more money. Without spending thousands on lenses etc is a 18mp image going to be much different from a 24mp image? I'm not going to be using these for full size. It will mainly be portraits of my baby boy, and the odd scenery etc.. But will not be using the images for high quality printouts of a large canvas etc..
Click to expand...
1. Megapixels are relatively meaningless for your needs, a DSLR will beat a phone camera that has twice the number of mpix.
2. It's not about the camera, though I'd pick a Nikon over a Canon at that price level (FYI I have 5 Canon cameras),
3. The 18-55 kit lens is fine but it won't do all you want, the reason we buy interchangeable lens cameras is so we can choose an appropriate lens.
4. You can fit lenses from Nikon and 3rd party mfrs too, the crucial detail is the lens mount, which is specific, i.e. Nikon F mount.
 
Thanks guys so I'm probably looking for the Canon 1300d or. Nikon D3400. Will weigh my Options up but any input is highly appreciated thanks.
 
Yes.

Definitely go second hand.

Lumix G1 and 14-42 kit lens will be around £100 - 120 if you shop around and will offer a great start which can be built on as you go.
 
droj said:
In that case even 18mpx will be more than you need, in fact a dslr of yesteryear with 10 or 12 mpx would be more than fine ...
Click to expand...

Absolutely. My only DSLR is a nine year old 10MP Nikon D60 with the 18-55mm kit lens which I bought second hand three months ago. Perfectly fine for what I use it for - viewing on computer, phone, internet and 6x4 & 8x5 prints.

@huxleypiggles recommendation of a Lumix G1 is a great suggestion.
 
Thanks, 2 more things... With buying used, I'd read somewhere about a shutter count? Like physically how many times a shutter has opened in its life which dies have some kind of limited amount? Ie 10,000 shots. And the f1.8 to f22 I know this related to death of field. And if I take a shot with a f22 it will not blur the background. Where a f4 will pick out the portrait and blur the background. Is this a given? Or can the amount of dof be controlled?
And does it mean a f4 lens would give a blurred landscape shot?
 
AndyG123 said:
Thanks, 2 more things... With buying used, I'd read somewhere about a shutter count? Like physically how many times a shutter has opened in its life which dies have some kind of limited amount? Ie 10,000 shots. And the f1.8 to f22 I know this related to death of field. And if I take a shot with a f22 it will not blur the background. Where a f4 will pick out the portrait and blur the background. Is this a given? Or can the amount of dof be controlled?
And does it mean a f4 lens would give a blurred landscape shot?
Click to expand...
Ok. You're right at the start of your journey.
If buying second hand, yes shutter count *can* be something to bear in mind, but only if the number is over 100,000 or much more. Shutters are rated for hundreds of thousands of shots. So a camera that's taken 10,000 shots it's hardly anything. Don't worry about it. If you buy from a reputable secondhand dealer like MPB they'll give you a guarantee anyway.

Depth of field is related to the aperture (f-stop). f1.8 will give you a shallow depth of field and f22 will keep almost everything in focus. But it's not quite so simple. The aperture controls the amount of light coming in, so f1.8 lets in lots of light (so useful in dimly-lit rooms) and f22 reduces the amount of light dramatically, so it's useful if shooting on a very bright day. But these are the extremes. It's very rare to use f22.
There are loads of great tutorials online. This might help:
View: https://youtu.be/F8T94sdiNjc
 
I've had good quality 100cm X 75cm prints produced from shots taken using a 450d, which is a 12 megapixel camera. Don't fall into the more megapixels = better trap.
 
Csaba said:
I've had good quality 100cm X 75cm prints produced from shots taken using a 450d, which is a 12 megapixel camera. Don't fall into the more megapixels = better trap.
Click to expand...

No quite correct There was a huge difference between my nikon D70s and my Nikon D800, from 6 to 36 megapixel
 
Last edited:
AndyG123 said:
Hi guys, I hope I'm in the right place, I'm in the UK and currently looking for an entry level camera, I'm wanting a DSLR with a basic lens good for portrait photography some wide landscape, so not too concerned about macro just yet or telephoto.
One of the things i will want is control of aperture speed. preferably to keep it open as long as possible at my control.
I'm looking for something which will accept a range of filters in the future if i require ND Filters or IR Filters etc.

But for now, just a basic body and lens, my budget is around £250-300 top end.

I've seen some canon EOS1300D's going for around that price. which i was contemplating..
Also, if i do get something in this budget, how much more superior is it going to be over the latest mobile devices out there at the moment (as I currently have an S7)

Many thanks

Andy
Click to expand...

The most basic entry level dslr with a very inexpensive lens (such as a 50mm) will be vastly better in every way than any kind of phone / tablet.
 
AndyG123 said:
Thanks, also there are nikons out there with 24mp for a bit more money. Without spending thousands on lenses etc is a 18mp image going to be much different from a 24mp image? I'm not going to be using these for full size. It will mainly be portraits of my baby boy, and the odd scenery etc.. But will not be using the images for high quality printouts of a large canvas etc..
Click to expand...

Forget about MP, anything over 8MP is more than sufficient. Worry about lenses!
 
realspeed said:
No quite correct There was a huge difference between my nikon D70s and my Nikon D800, from 6 to 36 megapixel
Click to expand...

From one extreme to another, not a great example!

Remember, even 4k monitors effectively downscale images to 8mp as that is their max resolution, so unless you're zooming in on most monitors even here you won't notice the difference.

The difference you'll see will be between the other qualities of the sensor, such as dynamic range and noise handling, which will be vastly different between those two examples.
 
Last edited:
AndyG123 said:
I've seen some canon EOS1300D's going for around that price. which i was contemplating.
Click to expand...
AndyG123 said:
Getting given a d3300 today to have a test and a play with from sister in law hoping to tempt Her to sell as well.
Click to expand...
It would be a really good idea to get some hands-on time with both brands, if you can, before you decide.

Don't get suckered into comparing specifications. Most DSLRs have way more functionality than most people need. And if you find that you're hitting a limitation on your DSLR - if you need better AF performance, say, or better low light capability, or a faster frame rate - then you can get that by upgrading within the same range. There's a healthy second hand market in DSLRs and upgrading is easy.

But the one thing you can't "fix" by upgrading is how well you get on with the controls and the menu layout. Those things are baked into the manufacturers' DNA and don't change from one model to another.

For example I handle Canon and Nikon DSLRs every day, and I find that:
- one of them has the control dials in exactly the right places, and one has them in places where my hands don't find it natural to use them;
- one has lenses that rotate in what seems to be the intuitive direction for focus and zoom, and one rotates in the opposite - "wrong" direction;
- one has a menu structure which I find completely intuitive and logical, and one doesn't.
Fortunately in each case it's the same one which feels "right", so that makes it very easy for me to decide which brand to use. But I know people who disagree on every point here, and are very comfortable using the "other" system.

I wouldn't want to buy into a system where, every time I zoomed the lens, it felt like I was zooming it the wrong way. I wouldn't want to buy into a system where I had to stretch and bend my fingers unnaturally to use the controls. I wouldn't want to buy into a system with an illogical and unintuitive menu structure. So that's why handling them is more important than comparing the specs.
 
AndyG123 said:
Thanks, 2 more things... With buying used, I'd read somewhere about a shutter count? Like physically how many times a shutter has opened in its life which dies have some kind of limited amount? Ie 10,000 shots. And the f1.8 to f22 I know this related to death of field. And if I take a shot with a f22 it will not blur the background. Where a f4 will pick out the portrait and blur the background. Is this a given? Or can the amount of dof be controlled?
And does it mean a f4 lens would give a blurred landscape shot?
Click to expand...
This is true to an extent, but depth of field is affected by focal length and distance from the subject too.
Simple explanation with diagram
 
Been a very helpful post guys, going to make a decision over the next couple of days. Next step, lenses.
 
Definitely a learning curve, I've got a d3300 used a handful of times. A 18-55 kit lens and a 70-300 lens with a carry bag, some uv filters, cpl filter and a fld filter. Also what looks like a telephoto screw on lens (fits on and of lens) and a macro one also. With cleaning kit, aftermarket vividar flash and spare battery.
Looking to pay £350 for it.
 
Knowing what I know now I would say don't get an entry level Go for a step up. If you really get the photography bug then you will out grow an entry level very quickly.
 
droj said:
On what basis?
Click to expand...

I won't speak for wave01 here but I do agree with the sentiment. Before I say why, I'll say first of all that these frustrations won't apply to everyone and that my experience is based on Nikon only. I started with a D5000 in 2010 which, like the current entry level cameras, has limited external controls and almost all setting adjustments had to be made using the menu system. Once I'd got up to speed with using a DSLR, I started to get very frustrated with that. I ended up swapping to a d300 which had the same sensor so no change in IQ but found using it so much more natural. I think with benefit of hindsight I should have just started with a D90 (D7xxx equivalent nowadays) which still has all the auto controls but a big step up in terms of external controls and the viewfinders are far better.

I will say though that the entry level cameras have always been equipped with decent sensors and are more than capable of delivering fantastic results, it's just that you sometimes have to faff around a little more to achieve it. I don't think there is anything they can't do.

Anyway, it's all a bit of a moot point right now as the OP will be using the best type of camera, a free one. Great way to find out if it works for you or not without having to open the purse strings.
 
I had a play last night and was quite impressed so will be opening the purse strings, but do think £350 is a fair price for what I'm getting.
 
Ste_S said:
*Shrugs* I've generally found that unless you've got some very specific needs, then equipment is not the limiting factor
Click to expand...
I'm with Wave.
Of course great images can be produced with entry level cameras, however they're often less easy to use than more expensive kit.

If entry level cameras were good enough for everything there'd be no market for mid range or pro cameras.


I've always said people should consider a 'first camera' as exactly that... the first; they'll either get into the hobby and upgrade or the camera will languish in a cupboard.

Given both of those things really suffer from the new cameras depreciation, it makes more sense to buy s/h, and I'd rather have a 7 year old mid range camera than any entry level model for the same price.
 
You're much more likely to want to upgrade your lenses before your body, the best lenses on an entry level body will give you far better photographs than a prosumer / pro body with a poor lens.
 
At the moment I'm moving from a 8-10 year old compact 12mp Panasonic lumix 7. To a 12mp galaxy s7 phone to a 24mp nikon, even though some of the controls are hidden within the menus I've got much more control than I've ever had, I remember making a ND filter of an IR filter out of a milk bottle lid and an old camera film to increase shutter time on the lumix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top