Beginning into photography

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Hight Fly Forum Member • Posts: 54
Re: Beginning into photography

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Hight Fly wrote:

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.

  • 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.

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.

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

I know, excuse me for saying 'wide range options'. I meant from wide angle to almost telephoto. I have thought of an idea: I considered the Nikon 17-55 but seen that it still was pretty expensive. Then i have continued my research and seen that the sigma 17-50 was less sharper, but only by a tiny bit and was way more worth it. I thought I could then get a nice prime portrait lens, like the Nikkor 50mm 1.8G, used -which we can now get for 100/130 euros- (or the 1.4g version, which I can get for 200 euros used, so I have to see if it is worth it to spend 100 more euros on the 1.4g version) and the Sigma 70-300 for 50 euros! What do you think of that? That would be for a budget of 350 if I wait for the good opportunities to com

Those are indeed options.

But are those lenses, (2-axis), stabilized ???

The Sigma 17-50 is stabilised. (OS Version)

The others, I don't think so.

I do recommend VR lenses because you have very limited ISO options to allow higher SS.

I keep that in mind.

(Most ML have 5-axis IBIS.)

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.

Of course.

But the 3-stop ISO advantage (of FZ) surpasses the advantage of a f/2 lens.

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

Oh no, you discovered me!

My dream is to seem like I am a native English speaker, but it sure looks like it isn't the case yet

I am French and have learnt English on the Internet, because the teachers at school were really bad

Could you please tell me what led you to think that? That would help me improve my English and thus get closer to my goal!

Regards

Your english is excellent.

Thanks a lot !

 Hight Fly's gear list:Hight Fly's gear list
Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow