which camera should i get?

P

pegs

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2
Edit My Images
No
Hi currently I use my phone camera , now I am trying to decide whether to buy a bridge or SLR digital camera ? I do alot of walking and need something light.Many years ago I used an SLR camera and printed own B and W photographs . Thanks in advance for any suggestions .
 
If you want something light a DSLR is probably not the best option. Bridge cameras unless you are looking at the high end versions generally don’t have great image quality.

Maybe a good half way option would be one of the micro four thirds cameras that Olympus and Panasonic offer.

Something like this as an example provides a camera which will have a better sensor than most bridge cameras and 2 lenses giving you an equivalent range of 28mm-300mm on a full frame DSLR.


https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/mirrorless-starter-kit-olympus-e-m10-iii-11556-p.asp
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
If you want something light a DSLR is probably not the best option. Bridge cameras unless you are looking at the high end versions generally don’t have great image quality.

Maybe a good half way option would be one of the micro four thirds cameras that Olympus and Panasonic offer.

Something like this as an example provides a camera which will have a better sensor than most bridge cameras and 2 lenses giving you an equivalent range of 28mm-300mm on a full gram DSLR.


https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/mirrorless-starter-kit-olympus-e-m10-iii-11556-p.asp
Click to expand...
:agree:
 
f/2.8 said:
If you want something light a DSLR is probably not the best option. Bridge cameras unless you are looking at the high end versions generally don’t have great image quality.

Maybe a good half way option would be one of the micro four thirds cameras that Olympus and Panasonic offer.

Something like this as an example provides a camera which will have a better sensor than most bridge cameras and 2 lenses giving you an equivalent range of 28mm-300mm on a full frame DSLR.


https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/mirrorless-starter-kit-olympus-e-m10-iii-11556-p.asp
Click to expand...

:agree:

although I use the Panasonic equivalent. I can't really remember why I chose Panasonic ... might have been something to do with stabilization.
 
f/2.8 said:
If you want something light a DSLR is probably not the best option. Bridge cameras unless you are looking at the high end versions generally don’t have great image quality.

Maybe a good half way option would be one of the micro four thirds cameras that Olympus and Panasonic offer.

Something like this as an example provides a camera which will have a better sensor than most bridge cameras and 2 lenses giving you an equivalent range of 28mm-300mm on a full frame DSLR.


https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/mirrorless-starter-kit-olympus-e-m10-iii-11556-p.asp
Click to expand...

This is the obvious outfit for someone wanting a lightweight camera capable of good image quality and very versatile. The camera with 14-45 EZ lens is barely bigger than a typical compact, and extremely portable.

Other excellent options would be a Sony RX100 or if you're wealthy a RX10 or RX1.
 
Don’t bother with a bridge camera unless it’s the 1” type like the Sony RX10. What type of photography are you wanting to do?

The best compromise between weight and image quality is the Micro 4/3 (such as the Olympus OMD EM10) or the Sony A6xxx models
 
I hike a lot and invested in an Olympus system last year - I thought it would be a good solution in terms of quality:weight ratio and I have not been disappointed. If your budget will stretch to the new E-M1 Mk III, I'd go for it, otherwise something further down the list. You'll probably need to compromise your lens options and buy multiple rather than one lens to fit all situations as I have done, but it's less hassle than I thought. Let me know if you want any more input.
 
You don’t mention what camera phone you have but it worth saying that there are some really god ones out there. What you have maybe your best option as it is light and very portable. Plus easy to use. Having a larger system does have its own problems. Plus it will save a lot of money
 
First off; forget any 'buy x, y or z camera' type 'advice'.

The first thing you need to think about is what do you want to do with a new camera? What kind of photos do you want to take, that your 'phone can't? What is it about the 'phone that limits you? And what's your final output for images? Will you be printing up large A0 sized prints? Or just a digital photo album? Sharing online etc? What subjects interest you, photographically? What did you used to take photos of? Did you shoot with full manual controls, or rely on automation? Will you just use a camera inside? Or will you want to travel around with it, in potentially all weathers? And lastly but importantly; what is your budget?

Answer questions like these, and you'll be much closer to knowing what sort of camera you want. So have a think, then come back with some answers, and people will have a much clearer idea of how to advise you.
 
Hi ALL many thanks for all your replies .My camera phone is Moto G 7 play camera is 6.2 pixels. I used to take mostly people, shooting with manual controls ,so I would like to get back to this probably though I realise technology has moved on a lot since then ! . Now I focus more landscape photos, not really wide or long shots, but I would like to take more of these . I will share online but would like to print if possible . I will travel around mostly walking in all weathers -not extreme probably summer and winter though.My budget is around up to £500ish.
 
It depends whether you want photography to be another hobby in addition to hiking, or merely something to record your walks.

If you are a photographer who hikes to places specifically to take pictures, then invest in a dslr or mirrorless setup. You'll be taking a sturdy tripod with you plus filters.

If you are hiker who wants to take some nice photos on their walks, then I would consider a high-end compact - eg Canon G5 / G7 / SX70, or lower level dSLR/mirrorless. They will still take nice pictures which will print out on a large scale but won't fill your backpack with heavy gear. They will accept filters as well.
 
pegs said:
Hi ALL many thanks for all your replies .My camera phone is Moto G 7 play camera is 6.2 pixels. I used to take mostly people, shooting with manual controls ,so I would like to get back to this probably though I realise technology has moved on a lot since then ! . Now I focus more landscape photos, not really wide or long shots, but I would like to take more of these . I will share online but would like to print if possible . I will travel around mostly walking in all weathers -not extreme probably summer and winter though.My budget is around up to £500ish.
Click to expand...
Olympus EM10-II or EM5-II (if you can get used one in budge), or A6000, or even consider an RX100-3
 
As a Nikon user, obvs I'd recommend a Nikon. This kit has a general purpose zoom, and a 35mm (50mm equivalent on 35mm film) lens. so great for landscapes etc, and portraits.

https://www.jessops.com/p/nikon/d35...55mm-lens-and-af-s-35mm-f-1-8g-dx-lens-167315

Another £100 gets you this great kit:

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/camer...00-mm-f-4-5-6-3g-ed-vr-lens-10199083-pdt.html

There's so much choice around the £500 mark though. That D3500 is fairly small, extremely versatile and an entry into a fantastic system of lenses, flash, etc. Loads of great second hand lenses to be found. A 'proper' optical viewfinder may suit you better, coming from film cameras. Battery life will be a bit better than most smaller cameras, and the APS-C sensor will be better for overall image quality, particularly in lower light, than similarly priced smaller sensor cameras like Micro 4/3rds.
 
AZ6 said:
First off; forget any 'buy x, y or z camera' type 'advice'.
Click to expand...
AZ6 said:
a Nikon user, obvs I'd recommend a Nikon. This kit has a general purpose zoom ...
Click to expand...
:D


Small, light, affordable, go for micro four thirds as suggested above either Olympus or Panasonic. The compromise is that a smaller sensor, whilst giving a smaller camera with smaller lenses gives you a much deeper apparent* depth of field so if you want those shallow DoF shots (e.g. portraits with a blurred background) you need a lens that has a wide aperture (f2.8 on MFT is effectively f5.6 on full frame). On the other hand that is great for lanscapes where you typically want everything in focus front to back.



(* before someone mentions it and with apologies to the OP for the nerdiness, the depth of field is the same for the same focal length but for a given angle of view, an MFT lens is half the focal lenth which gives twie the depth of field, e.g. a 25mm lens on MFT give the same field of view as 50mm on full frame).
 
f/2.8 said:
If you want something light a DSLR is probably not the best option. Bridge cameras unless you are looking at the high end versions generally don’t have great image quality.

Maybe a good half way option would be one of the micro four thirds cameras that Olympus and Panasonic offer.

Something like this as an example provides a camera which will have a better sensor than most bridge cameras and 2 lenses giving you an equivalent range of 28mm-300mm on a full frame DSLR.


https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/mirrorless-starter-kit-olympus-e-m10-iii-11556-p.asp
Click to expand...


Exactly this, spot on
 
sirch said:
:D


Small, light, affordable, go for micro four thirds as suggested above either Olympus or Panasonic. The compromise is that a smaller sensor, whilst giving a smaller camera with smaller lenses gives you a much deeper apparent* depth of field so if you want those shallow DoF shots (e.g. portraits with a blurred background) you need a lens that has a wide aperture (f2.8 on MFT is effectively f5.6 on full frame). On the other hand that is great for lanscapes where you typically want everything in focus front to back.



(* before someone mentions it and with apologies to the OP for the nerdiness, the depth of field is the same for the same focal length but for a given angle of view, an MFT lens is half the focal lenth which gives twie the depth of field, e.g. a 25mm lens on MFT give the same field of view as 50mm on full frame).
Click to expand...
The depth of field thing is exactly why I prefer FF, the fastest AF M4/3 lenses are f1.2 (and aren’t cheap) which gives the same depth of field as approximately f2.4 on FF when you take into account crop factor and field of view etc.

But as you say it can be a benefit as you can shoot at two stops wider but still maintain the sane degree of front to back sharpness, very handy for travel imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top