01-03-2017, 01:21 PM
User Info
I switched (after 6 or 7 years) from Canon to Sony. The a6000 with a Zeiss 16-70 lens is great for walking around and has amazing image quality.

6 1,168
Reply
 01-03-2017, 07:52 PM
  • GreeneMD
  • Senior Member
  • Grand Island, NY
User Info
Sadly my iPhone 6.

0 600
Reply
 03-03-2017, 12:29 AM
User Info
Mike to be honest, most cameras in a given price point are going to be about the same in quality.

First, If I was new to this digital photography I probably wouldn't start that expensive.

Find something a bit cheaper and it will teach you exactly what you want.

Even when later you have that state of the art monster, you will still be glad to have a knock about camera for grab shots that you didn't have the big gun for. Also with less to loose, you may take it to places you wouldn't think of taking the big gun....

When people ask me what kind of computer they should get I explain that this cannot be answered by me but if they get any computer at the local place they get that stuff, after just a very short time they will know exactly what they want in the next one.

Believe it or not, there is a longer learning curve to mastering a digital than the old 35mm for which we can no longer get film.

Jim

0 38
Reply
 03-04-2017, 07:47 PM
User Info
For simple look for a Cannon around 300. You will learn about digital and when your ready to move up you will have a second camera around for grab shots ( where you might not take or have that big one with )

0 38
Reply
 03-16-2017, 12:42 AM
User Info
(09-04-2012, 06:28 PM)MickToley Wrote: Thanks.  Could you guys post some links or let me know some places to shop around?  Basically, I'm looking for something simple for a beginner to use that takes quality pics and good close ups. If I need to spend a bit more for a lens on top of what I'm willing to spend it's not a problem.

Something simple would be a Cannon but a ton less than 650, say around 300. Use that to learn about digital and if you move up later you will have a good camera   to have around for  Grab shots.

0 38
Reply
 04-30-2019, 05:01 AM
User Info
I had a 35mm film roll Canon, an eos 650.
I was an amateur but had fun with. Somehow I lost interest in photography 20years ago.

Along came smartphones and ... photography built in themSmile
I started to take pics with them.

Some 2 years ago I bought from reptile funds
a Canon eos 6d Mk II and hoped ti get along with my old ef 35-135 and 100-300 zooms.
Those weren’t disappointing but a Sigma 50mm art f1.4 opened a can of worms.
Sigma 20mm art, Canon L 100-400 Mk II, EF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macro, 35mm L Mk II 1.4 and Canon 17-35 L f4 were added.

Still an amateur and a lot of glass to carry around, but I love itSmile


Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk

0 546
Reply
 04-30-2019, 11:05 AM
  • RyznRio
  • Senior Member
  • Connecticut
User Info
I have a Lumix FZ 1000. in your budget. 

1 inch 20 megapixel sensor.  (always know the size of your sensor)

25-400mm non interchangeable zoom lens. the camera is made by panasonic. the lens is made by Leica. (what sold me)

weighs 831g = 1.83lb with card and battery in place.

records 4K video (doesn't care if the human eye can appreciate that level of sharpness or not)

excellent image stabilization and color reproduction.

shoots in raw or jpg or both at once.

does more than I will ever ask or realize that it can do. (I just care that it takes great pics)

0 556
Reply
 10-25-2020, 06:22 PM
User Info
I have a Canon T6 and bought it because I can download my photos to my IPhone. ?

0 24
Reply
 10-25-2020, 07:01 PM
User Info
Finally went full frame and got the Canon 6D Mark II.

5 819
Reply
 10-27-2020, 04:24 AM
User Info
(10-25-2020, 07:01 PM)Mike Distress Wrote: Finally went full frame and got the Canon 6D Mark II.

Nice camera.
What lenses do you use?

0 546
Reply
 10-27-2020, 09:44 AM
User Info
(10-27-2020, 04:24 AM)apogee. Wrote:
(10-25-2020, 07:01 PM)Mike Distress Wrote: Finally went full frame and got the Canon 6D Mark II.

Nice camera.
What lenses do you use?

Thanks. I had to replace most of my lenses as they were EF-S lenses. I have the Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L, Tamron 75-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC.

5 819
Reply
 07-02-2021, 03:35 PM
User Info
(10-27-2020, 09:44 AM)Mike Distress Wrote:
(10-27-2020, 04:24 AM)apogee. Wrote:
(10-25-2020, 07:01 PM)Mike Distress Wrote: Finally went full frame and got the Canon 6D Mark II.

Nice camera.
What lenses do you use?

Thanks. I had to replace most of my lenses as they were EF-S lenses. I have the Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L, Tamron 75-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC.

I like the L series lenses, but I don't spend the money on really good glass.  
I recently went from a Canon T4i to the Canon T7.   I like the small-ish body.  I had an 18-135 and traded it in and picked up the EF-S 18-200.  With that range I can do most everything with a one-lens travel rig.   But I also have a 50mm STM 1.8 too and that's not a L series but it lets in a lot of light.

9 256
Reply
 07-02-2021, 04:25 PM
  • Bax
  • Active Member
User Info
Canon SX-30IS.  Compared to you guys, mine's a toy.
Probably an obsolete toy by now, but it works for me!
  :-)
- Bax

0 391
Reply
 07-02-2021, 04:28 PM
User Info
(07-02-2021, 03:35 PM)1981Eagle Wrote:
(10-27-2020, 09:44 AM)Mike Distress Wrote:
(10-27-2020, 04:24 AM)apogee. Wrote: Nice camera.
What lenses do you use?

Thanks. I had to replace most of my lenses as they were EF-S lenses. I have the Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L, Tamron 75-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC.

I like the L series lenses, but I don't spend the money on really good glass.  
I recently went from a Canon T4i to the Canon T7.   I like the small-ish body.  I had an 18-135 and traded it in and picked up the EF-S 18-200.  With that range I can do most everything with a one-lens travel rig.   But I also have a 50mm STM 1.8 too and that's not a L series but it lets in a lot of light.
I added some lenses to this list, but only have 2 L series lenses. Third parties like Sigma and Tamron are competing and making great lenses for like 1/2 the cost of an L. I believe in good glass, but also that it doesn't have to break the bank. I bought a Sigma 150-600mm for $899 as opposed to Canon's 100-400mm for $2,249. The L lenses are great, but I can't justify the cost personally. The Canon is slightly faster and built better, but, at over 2X the price, it should be. I would like a all in one lens but there aren't many full frame options. I did find a Tamron 28-300 but haven't decided. Canon makes an L lens thats like 35-mm350mm, but its a fortune and huge for a walk around lens. I also saw some pics and it didn't blow me away. The question is, do you enjoy taking pictures? Do you like the pictures you take? If you answered yes, you're a winner. Don't let anyone tell you HAVE to buy this or NEED this. Good gear doesn't hurt, but a good picture is how it is taken. You can take a shitty pic with great gear. Sorry this was so long. Haha!!!

5 819
Reply
 07-02-2021, 05:01 PM
User Info
(07-02-2021, 04:28 PM)Mike Distress Wrote:
(07-02-2021, 03:35 PM)1981Eagle Wrote:
(10-27-2020, 09:44 AM)Mike Distress Wrote: Thanks. I had to replace most of my lenses as they were EF-S lenses. I have the Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L, Tamron 75-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC.

I like the L series lenses, but I don't spend the money on really good glass.  
I recently went from a Canon T4i to the Canon T7.   I like the small-ish body.  I had an 18-135 and traded it in and picked up the EF-S 18-200.  With that range I can do most everything with a one-lens travel rig.   But I also have a 50mm STM 1.8 too and that's not a L series but it lets in a lot of light.
I added some lenses to this list, but only have 2 L series lenses. Third parties like Sigma and Tamron are competing and making great lenses for like 1/2 the cost of an L. I believe in good glass, but also that it doesn't have to break the bank. I bought a Sigma 150-600mm for $899 as opposed to Canon's 100-400mm for $2,249. The L lenses are great, but I can't justify the cost personally. The Canon is slightly faster and built better, but, at over 2X the price, it should be. I would like a all in one lens but there aren't many full frame options. I did find a Tamron 28-300 but haven't decided. Canon makes an L lens thats like 35-mm350mm, but its a fortune and huge for a walk around lens. I also saw some pics and it didn't blow me away. The question is, do you enjoy taking pictures? Do you like the pictures you take? If you answered yes, you're a winner. Don't let anyone tell you HAVE to buy this or NEED this. Good gear doesn't hurt, but a good picture is how it is taken. You can take a shitty pic with great gear. Sorry this was so long. Haha!!!

Absolutely ... I have a friend that is a professional photographer and he keeps telling me to shoot RAW and in manual mode.  I know that is the way the pros do that quite often, but I don't want to spend a lot of time on post-processing.   Of course, it all depends on what I want to shoot.

9 256
Reply
 07-02-2021, 05:10 PM
User Info
(07-02-2021, 05:01 PM)1981Eagle Wrote:
(07-02-2021, 04:28 PM)Mike Distress Wrote:
(07-02-2021, 03:35 PM)1981Eagle Wrote: I like the L series lenses, but I don't spend the money on really good glass.  
I recently went from a Canon T4i to the Canon T7.   I like the small-ish body.  I had an 18-135 and traded it in and picked up the EF-S 18-200.  With that range I can do most everything with a one-lens travel rig.   But I also have a 50mm STM 1.8 too and that's not a L series but it lets in a lot of light.
I added some lenses to this list, but only have 2 L series lenses. Third parties like Sigma and Tamron are competing and making great lenses for like 1/2 the cost of an L. I believe in good glass, but also that it doesn't have to break the bank. I bought a Sigma 150-600mm for $899 as opposed to Canon's 100-400mm for $2,249. The L lenses are great, but I can't justify the cost personally. The Canon is slightly faster and built better, but, at over 2X the price, it should be. I would like a all in one lens but there aren't many full frame options. I did find a Tamron 28-300 but haven't decided. Canon makes an L lens thats like 35-mm350mm, but its a fortune and huge for a walk around lens. I also saw some pics and it didn't blow me away. The question is, do you enjoy taking pictures? Do you like the pictures you take? If you answered yes, you're a winner. Don't let anyone tell you HAVE to buy this or NEED this. Good gear doesn't hurt, but a good picture is how it is taken. You can take a shitty pic with great gear. Sorry this was so long. Haha!!!

Absolutely ... I have a friend that is a professional photographer and he keeps telling me to shoot RAW and in manual mode.  I know that is the way the pros do that quite often, but I don't want to spend a lot of time on post-processing.   Of course, it all depends on what I want to shoot.
Yep, the big RAW vs. JPG argument. My understanding is the jpg is compressed much like an mp3. The RAW file retains more info which makes processing and correcting some things easier. I do some post processing, but not much. If I was a pro, perhaps. I'm not. I'm not getting paid (if at all), much less wedding prices for shoots.

5 819
Reply
 07-03-2021, 12:43 PM
User Info
It’s not just pros that post-process - nearly everyone shooting with a mobile phone has access to post-processing via apps. The main reason to post-process is because the human eye operates differently than a physical camera & lens - and therefore what you see  is much more rich in dynamic range & low-light detail than most images show without further processing. Further: shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and white-balance affect the entire frame whereas with post-processing you can focus on individual elements separately. E.G., you can raise the detail of the shadow areas without affecting the light areas, and you can balance the tone of specific colors independently. Take the following two example images: 

1. Sunset in Utah: Very wide dynamic range between the sun, clouds, and the landscape. If I expose for foreground detail, the remainder of the image is blown out. If I expose for the brightest portion of the image, I lose all detail in the shadows. I chose the latter, and returned the dark area detail in post for a much more pleasing result (and what my eyes saw). 

2. Looking through to the sky in Colorado: The dynamic range isn’t as wide here, but the problems are the same. The foreground structure features detail and different shadow variations that the eyes clearly see - but are easily lost in-camera. Post-processing enables you to achieve this shot that without, wouldn’t happen. 


[Image: VHDvd2r.jpg]

[Image: MuEdv6p.jpg]

36 2,265
Reply
 07-05-2021, 07:16 AM
User Info
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)