Beginning into photography

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
PhotoTeach2 Senior Member • Posts: 9,439
Re: Beginning into photography

AlbertTheLazy wrote:

Hight Fly wrote:

... Would it be better to put a bit more in an upper-model camera? Or a Mirrorless with lenses? Nevertheless, the DSLR option is the one I feel most comfortable with:

Mirrorless v DSLR is immaterial, really. Most of this discussion has revolved around 'all in one' v interchangeable lenses. A lot of people (including me!) believe that getting a cheap first camera/lens combination and learning its limits is the best way to start.

Why is that the "best" ??? (other than the correct fact a more-expensive camera will not guarantee better-images)

And is not $600 "cheap" ???

  • I have to say that the only thing that makes me reluctant with this camera is the "Future-Proof" part. It scares me to invest on a camera if I can't upgrade things on this camera in the future (because it's a bridge).

That's understandable.

Of course it is ... but the D300 is already obsolete in many respects.

NEVERTHELESS I want to stress that this probably won't happen, I just keep my horizons broadened to see what is the best for any type of scenarios. I'll ask him very soon.

Furthermore, I am wondering:

Because I want to learn a lot, I also am very interested into post-processing production i.e softwares like Lightroom do edit the pictures. What would suit better then? A DSLR or the bridge? (I consider mirrorless like DSLR in this scenario).

Just as long as the camera can supply raw images as well as JPEG the post production process is pretty much the same.

I agree ... (both the D300 and FZ-1000 has RAW).

But ETTR can still produce better eventual results, (and pre-exposure ETTR is impossible on dSLR).

Other than that, I was considering some wider-range options, like the 24-120,

That is indeed a nice lens, but very expensive, (and slower than the 25-400mm-EFL @ f/2.8-4 of FZ).

what do you think of it? I could zoom more, but wouldn't get the 16-24mm range.

This is where that 50€ 70-300mm comes in!

True, but (for 50-EU), is it stabilized ???  (many are not)

And he won't have a practical option for higher-ISO to allow faster Shutter-Speeds required for longer-tele, (and maybe non-stabilized), lens.

In another post you ask about getting maximum quality out of your budget. A fast prime lens (f:2 or better) in the 35-50mm range would be worthwhile.

True, but costs more money, but I suggest the newer-technology sensor already has higher IQ.

Finally, Your English is very good, but doesn't read like an Irishman. What is your native language, just to be nosey?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow