K-3II + 16-85mm HD WR for around $1000 as a first DSLR

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Eugleo Junior Member • Posts: 45
Re: K-3II + 16-85mm HD WR for around $1000 as a first DSLR
1

Oiche wrote:

Massao wrote:

Eugleo wrote:

I mentioned the Canon 6D because I've owned one for six years and enjoy shooting with it. Very little experience with Nikon.

And it’s something that resonated in my ears for a long time. I even got to the store to check the cameras out a little bit and I definitely prefer the Canon feel over the Nikon (both 7200 and 750). The best for me was the Sony, though.

In the store they told me to get a 35mm IS canon lens, instead of the one you suggested; the price is quite different, of course. I guess I can always buy that one later...

I haven't used Sony at all, but the consistent word on the webs seems to be poorly designed menus and controls. Both Canon and Pentax have excellent control systems, which make them a pleasure to use.

I didn’t test the ergonomics, didn’t even take a single picture. I’ll have to do that tomorrow, on my second visit. However, you’re the first one to mention some UX issues with Sony; I only hear praise (not about UX, but generally) and also “If I had the option to choose now, I’d get into Sony”. They might be talking about the super high-end new models, of course.

Finally, before being seduced by full frame, you might read through this discussion on FM forum about gear for landscape.

Nice thread, thanks. I don’t think I have much to gain by going APS-C (apart from around 200$ and 200g in saved weight), especially if I decide to get the Sony.

It seems like you want to buy a perfect first-time camera equipment. That never happened. Photography is a journey and it's the journey that is fun

Yes he doesn't know enough to know what he wants and has seemed to have 'picked' landscape photography and jumping from one system to another and no doubt swayed by YouTube videos where they all use a7r.

Actually, I didn't! I looked through some reviews here on DP to define my priorities and then through the offerings on the second-hand market which were in my budget. A7II, together with the Pentax and Canon (and also Nikon D750 and Fuji X-T2) popped up, and I'm deciding between those ever since.

Of course I noticed FF is a polarizing topic — many guys say they want it, or that they lost tons of money because they didn't go FF right from the start and had to switch systems, and OTOH many are of the opinion that 90% of shooters don't really need it. After some thinking I arrived at the opinion that those two views aren't really contradicting each other and that I'm probably in the 90% of shooters, at least for now. It took me a day or two to get past the fever of following the experts and buying the best of the best, I admit. But now I see that e.g. I'd rather have a good UX and good ergonomics over the last 8% in low-light IQ.

Wait for the shock of 'why do my landscape photos look awful?', how can this be as I bought an a7r?

I did landscape photography for a long time with SLR film and a compact camera before I went DSLR so I knew what I wanted, a lot of these YouTube guys will be responsible for plenty of a7r cameras left under the stairs forever after a few tries, maybe that's why there are so many on Ebay?

That's why I recommended a compact APS-C DSLR but no "you must go FF straight away with 42MP of whatever"

Any 2nd hand entry level DSLR and 18-55 kit lens for £100 is perfect for starting landscape photography, the knowledge required to become good is immense, takes years of experience and the post processing skills alone take years. 😎

I agree, one can shoot good images with an old, wacky camera, and there's certainly many people that shoot garbage images with the latest top-notch gear. However, there's no need for me to hinder myself when I have the funds to go higher than £100 — I might not be able to use all of the stuff that I'll pay for from the get go, but some of it will certainly make the experience of shooting less painful and more fun, which is after all exactly what I want; to have fun. I'm talking about extra QoL things like better battery life, bigger and brighter EVF, two physical dials, or weather sealing; not 5 extra megapixels, 0.5ms faster AF and better IQ in ISO 25600.

Most of camera features I can easily toss into one of two categories: "NEED" and "DON'T NEED" (see the short list above). However, FF (and IBIS, for that matter) are so hard to evaluate without prior experience, that I felt the need to ask about those, in the context of the cameras I can afford. The same can be said about camera ecosystems in general.

I know it's almost impossible to buy the perfect camera on the first try (not only does that depend on my needs which I don't yet fully know, but those needs will change in time as well), so it's not useful to sweat about every minor detail and try to get it right. But, OTOH, I'd like to get as close to the perfect solution as I can within a reasonable amount of time spent in discussing with people, reading reviews, and watching videos.

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