|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 14:29:16 GMT
I'm thinking of getting back into photography after a 20 year break. I've still got my old Contax 159 body and a couple of (in their day) tasty lenses and I'm thinking about investing in a up to £800 on a new DLSR body and using my old manual lenses with a converter until I can afford replacement lenses. I had a little play with a Canon 70D and it left me cold as it felt a bit fragile compared with my Contax.
I'm going to take a trip out to John Lewis soon to have a closer look at what's out there, but if anyone has any suggestions as to what I should look at, please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Okie Stokie. on Apr 13, 2014 14:40:33 GMT
I'm thinking of getting back into photography after a 20 year break. I've still got my old Contax 159 body and a couple of (in their day) tasty lenses and I'm thinking about investing in a up to £800 on a new DLSR body and using my old manual lenses with a converter until I can afford replacement lenses. I had a little play with a Canon 70D and it left me cold as it felt a bit fragile compared with my Contax. I'm going to take a trip out to John Lewis soon to have a closer look at what's out there, but if anyone has any suggestions as to what I should look at, please let me know. Check out youtube for reviews on different models. like GEEKANOIDS.......
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 14:43:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 15:43:00 GMT
I bought this a while back to connect to my telescope....superb for me and the hd video is great too, especially the mic sound Canon eos600DMaybe too cheap for you tho..... .....you swanky cunt
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 15:56:24 GMT
I bought this a while back to connect to my telescope....superb for me and the hd video is great too, especially the mic sound Canon eos600DMaybe too cheap for you tho..... .....you swanky cunt Looks gay.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 17:27:29 GMT
I bought this a while back to connect to my telescope....superb for me and the hd video is great too, especially the mic sound Canon eos600DMaybe too cheap for you tho..... .....you swanky cunt Looks gay. You should see my pictures
|
|
|
Post by stokieian on Apr 13, 2014 19:39:58 GMT
i have the 600d and was looking to upgrade to the 7d. it may be worth spending 200 quid more and getting the full frame 6d with a 20mp sensor, thats my next hopefully before the summer.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 20:01:58 GMT
Full frame is very tempting. Otherwise, the cameras that have got my interest are the Pentax K3, Nikon 7100 and I like the look of the Olympus OMD 1 and 10. I'm not sure about the Micro Four Thirds format or going mirror-less for that matter. I've seen some decent prices for the K3, and on paper it looks the business.
A used full frame Nikon and fast wide zoom is probably what I want...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 20:51:45 GMT
Full frame is very tempting. Otherwise, the cameras that have got my interest are the Pentax K3, Nikon 7100 and I like the look of the Olympus OMD 1 and 10. I'm not sure about the Micro Four Thirds format or going mirror-less for that matter. I've seen some decent prices for the K3, and on paper it looks the business. A used full frame Nikon and fast wide zoom is probably what I want... While on set .....oh yes I've hung around with the luvvies I got to chat with a professional model/portrait photographer as he was taking photos of lilfraise and he said he still to this day uses his Nikon D40 on a regular basis I have one of those too but it's not as good as canon for astronomy Anyway a pic is a pic....bet I could take better with my phone yer big ponce
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 13, 2014 21:10:25 GMT
Full frame is very tempting. Otherwise, the cameras that have got my interest are the Pentax K3, Nikon 7100 and I like the look of the Olympus OMD 1 and 10. I'm not sure about the Micro Four Thirds format or going mirror-less for that matter. I've seen some decent prices for the K3, and on paper it looks the business. A used full frame Nikon and fast wide zoom is probably what I want... While on set .....oh yes I've hung around with the luvvies I got to chat with a professional model/portrait photographer as he was taking photos of lilfraise and he said he still to this day uses his Nikon D40 on a regular basis I have one of those too but it's not as good as canon for astronomy Anyway a pic is a pic....bet I could take better with my phone yer big ponce Do you have to read lots of stuff ??
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 21:11:37 GMT
Full frame is very tempting. Otherwise, the cameras that have got my interest are the Pentax K3, Nikon 7100 and I like the look of the Olympus OMD 1 and 10. I'm not sure about the Micro Four Thirds format or going mirror-less for that matter. I've seen some decent prices for the K3, and on paper it looks the business. A used full frame Nikon and fast wide zoom is probably what I want... While on set .....oh yes I've hung around with the luvvies I got to chat with a professional model/portrait photographer as he was taking photos of lilfraise and he said he still to this day uses his Nikon D40 on a regular basis I have one of those too but it's not as good as canon for astronomy Anyway a pic is a pic....bet I could take better with my phone yer big ponce I dare say that you're probably right, but I like a camera that feel like it can be dropped and do more damage to the floor than the camera. These new fangled things have got more features than I'll ever use, but since I'll keep it for donkeys years, I don't mind splashing out on quality and a serious sensor.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 21:14:24 GMT
While on set .....oh yes I've hung around with the luvvies I got to chat with a professional model/portrait photographer as he was taking photos of lilfraise and he said he still to this day uses his Nikon D40 on a regular basis I have one of those too but it's not as good as canon for astronomy Anyway a pic is a pic....bet I could take better with my phone yer big ponce Do you have to read lots of stuff ?? What?
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 13, 2014 21:17:21 GMT
Do you have to read lots of stuff ?? What? That's right !!! Those little books they put in the boxes that you normally throw away .
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 21:18:18 GMT
While on set .....oh yes I've hung around with the luvvies I got to chat with a professional model/portrait photographer as he was taking photos of lilfraise and he said he still to this day uses his Nikon D40 on a regular basis I have one of those too but it's not as good as canon for astronomy Anyway a pic is a pic....bet I could take better with my phone yer big ponce I dare say that you're probably right, but I like a camera that feel like it can be dropped and do more damage to the floor than the camera. These new fangled things have got more features than I'll ever use, but since I'll keep it for donkeys years, I don't mind splashing out on quality and a serious sensor. In that case you should buy the old brick......the zenith em.....my first....made by the Ruskies
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 21:20:02 GMT
That's right !!! Those little books they put in the boxes that you normally throw away . I throw them and play about it's more fun Because I conna read
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 21:22:10 GMT
That's right !!! Those little books they put in the boxes that you normally throw away . Real men don't read instructions or know where to find a clitoris.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 13, 2014 21:26:33 GMT
I dare say that you're probably right, but I like a camera that feel like it can be dropped and do more damage to the floor than the camera. These new fangled things have got more features than I'll ever use, but since I'll keep it for donkeys years, I don't mind splashing out on quality and a serious sensor. In that case you should buy the old brick......the zenith em.....my first....made by the Ruskies I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard).
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 13, 2014 21:26:46 GMT
That's right !!! Those little books they put in the boxes that you normally throw away . Real men don't read instructions or know where to find a clitoris. Real men know that the clitorus is a mythical beast that doesn't exist , like the griffin or unicorn
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 6:20:55 GMT
In that case you should buy the old brick......the zenith em.....my first....made by the Ruskies I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard). Admin, this cunt is filth
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 14, 2014 8:06:56 GMT
I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard). Admin, this cunt is filth See! I knew what you were thinking of, before I said it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 15:29:20 GMT
In that case you should buy the old brick......the zenith em.....my first....made by the Ruskies I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard). They are all lightweight, in comparison. But you get used to it quickly. I didn't have the old lens that you have (or the budget!) I have a couple of year old a55, for the record ... well, for taking photos ... but if I did have old-lens / budget, I would get ... www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D7100-Digital-Camera-24-1MP/dp/B00BJCTHAW/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-2Or maybe ... www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EOS-70D-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B00DQQKUSC/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-4www.amazon.co.uk/Pentax-DSLR-Camera-24MP-Sensor/dp/B00FOPHY0U/ref=sr_1_14?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-14(but very probably the D7100 ... sigh ...) It is all about the sensor and the effective megapixels, because you will get into post-processing. And once you get into post-processing, you'll be buying a new body every 3-5 years (minimum ). All that said, I love my a55 It's a great machine to work with. Go play in John Lewis, you'll find one that fits you (and tbh, 16MP has proved more than enough, so far, for the stuff I do). Have fun you lucky b*gger
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 19:32:34 GMT
I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard). They are all lightweight, in comparison. But you get used to it quickly. I didn't have the old lens that you have (or the budget!) I have a couple of year old a55, for the record ... well, for taking photos ... but if I did have old-lens / budget, I would get ... www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D7100-Digital-Camera-24-1MP/dp/B00BJCTHAW/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-2Or maybe ... www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EOS-70D-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B00DQQKUSC/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-4www.amazon.co.uk/Pentax-DSLR-Camera-24MP-Sensor/dp/B00FOPHY0U/ref=sr_1_14?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-14(but very probably the D7100 ... sigh ...) It is all about the sensor and the effective megapixels, because you will get into post-processing. And once you get into post-processing, you'll be buying a new body every 3-5 years (minimum ). All that said, I love my a55 It's a great machine to work with. Go play in John Lewis, you'll find one that fits you (and tbh, 16MP has proved more than enough, so far, for the stuff I do). Have fun you lucky b*gger What do you mean by effective megapixels? i want to get a nice camera for airshows but am a newbie, i'm used to 14meg point & shoot. At Eastbourne airshow last year i was behind some guy who was taking photos that could zoom in via his viewfinder & show the pilot in the plane with great clarity..mind you his lens was about 18inches long & it turned out he was a newspaper photographer. he was using a 24meg camera but said his lenses cost 4 times as much as the camera... TEST
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 14, 2014 21:50:06 GMT
I've got two old bricks - a Contax and a Yashica and they'll still take a good picture, but I've finally realised that I've gotta get down with the kids and get digital. (And I don't mean with my fingers - you dirty bastard). They are all lightweight, in comparison. But you get used to it quickly. I didn't have the old lens that you have (or the budget!) I have a couple of year old a55, for the record ... well, for taking photos ... but if I did have old-lens / budget, I would get ... www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D7100-Digital-Camera-24-1MP/dp/B00BJCTHAW/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-2Or maybe ... www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EOS-70D-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B00DQQKUSC/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-4www.amazon.co.uk/Pentax-DSLR-Camera-24MP-Sensor/dp/B00FOPHY0U/ref=sr_1_14?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488196&sr=1-14(but very probably the D7100 ... sigh ...) It is all about the sensor and the effective megapixels, because you will get into post-processing. And once you get into post-processing, you'll be buying a new body every 3-5 years (minimum ). All that said, I love my a55 It's a great machine to work with. Go play in John Lewis, you'll find one that fits you (and tbh, 16MP has proved more than enough, so far, for the stuff I do). Have fun you lucky b*gger Went to John Lewis this evening and saw the D7100 and the OMD-EM10. I quite liked the Nikon and it looked like it would easily handle a manual focussing lens. I was hoping to see an Olympus OMD EM1, but they only had the EM10, and I was shocked about how small it was. Too small. That said it would bulk up quite well with a vertical grip. I was hoping to see a Pentax K3, but they did not have one. I'm still not much further forward as I'm leaning towards mirrorless, yet something is telling me to go for the Nikon.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2014 3:42:28 GMT
What do you mean by effective megapixels? i want to get a nice camera for airshows but am a newbie, i'm used to 14meg point & shoot. At Eastbourne airshow last year i was behind some guy who was taking photos that could zoom in via his viewfinder & show the pilot in the plane with great clarity..mind you his lens was about 18inches long & it turned out he was a newspaper photographer. he was using a 24meg camera but said his lenses cost 4 times as much as the camera... TEST I'll put up front ... That photo of the pilot will cost you thousands and thousands. I don't know how seriously you want to get into it? How much do you want to spend "for the odd airshow"? If you are taking "snaps" - and that is what I consider I take, snaps that I try to make as nice as possible; I'm not a photographer - then what you want is something that will support a decent set of lens and has a decent "sensor". You can spend thousands (as Mr Out is in danger of doing!) and still take rubbish photos because the camera is "too good for you". I am barely able to get the most out of my A55. And I've had it almost 2 years. My a55 was chosen because it will do "Point and Shoot" (brilliantly) and it will let me play with it so I can at least feel like David Bailey (while acknowledging I am not!) This is a very good write up. It's easy to understand and taught me lots: photo.net/equipment/digital/basics/Effective Pixels: The number you see on the box or advert is not necessarily the number you will get in your photos. It's a marketing gimmick. The link above explains it and that should explain why the guy next to you at the airshow (or the bloke with the fantastic pictures of the milky way) is able to kick the 4rse out of your camera. Other than the lens you use, the sensor is everything (else). Again, see the article above, it explains it pretty well. In the bit about Sensors he links a longer article on More on Sensors ("Size Matters"). That goes into stupid detail; but if you want to know why the sensor is everything; that is the best, clear, write up I have ever found. Zoom - That photo of the hairs up the pilot's nose. Was not done with Digital-Zoom. It was done with a very expensive detachable lens (exactly like the lens in an old SLR film camera), and a great camera body with a fabulous sensor. The more high powered the lens, the closer you can get. The better quality the lens - and the sensor - the better the quality of a magnified image. So, to get the best quality, up close shots you need a very good camera body attached to a very good lens. (For £350) I believe that is what I bought in the a55 FOR MY BUDGET (and I spent way more than £350 on it, but I got a couple of lens and other bits and pieces and it was a just released machine when I got it ... and I live in Australia!). However, while I might get the go-faster stripes on the pilots helmet, I wouldn't be getting the hairs up his nose! Have a good read of the article I linked ... Should explain the tech involved and what you should look for, for your budget. Post up again for a chat ... I'm a very keen (but only sporadically good) photographer (and I love the tech) Went to John Lewis this evening and saw the D7100 and the OMD-EM10. I quite liked the Nikon and it looked like it would easily handle a manual focussing lens. I was hoping to see an Olympus OMD EM1, but they only had the EM10, and I was shocked about how small it was. Too small. That said it would bulk up quite well with a vertical grip. I was hoping to see a Pentax K3, but they did not have one. I'm still not much further forward as I'm leaning towards mirrorless, yet something is telling me to go for the Nikon. I will be honest and say that - even though DSLR has been around "years" - you will be buying something that you want to replace in 2 or 3 years (if not next week!). They are still improving the technology. So your mirrorless comment is spot on. But that will cost you an arm and a leg right now, and it will get better (and cheaper) in the next year or two (and so, need replacing). Also, post-processing can certainly improve your images (almost) as much as a better sensor/lens. If you have never done this (or even better, liked doing your own with film) then it will blow you away. Reading your couple of posts on this ... I would consider getting ... not a cheap one ... but something like my a55 (a58 is the newest version, I think). Pay say £400. Use it for a year (or 6 months) trade it in on the one you decide you want (be it mirrorless, or whatever). This will give you time to decide what you really want, teach you post processing and you will still get brilliant photos while you weigh it all up. That's the only way I can see of you going forward without chucking £800+ at something you aren't sure about. The results from a "half way there" model will show you whether the full monty is worth it, or not. And you will get 50% or so back as a trade in. I can't be any more help. And neither can almost anyone else! I can chat with you about it, but like you found with the EM10, it is a very personal thing about more than just the technology involved. It needs to fit your hand and fingers as much as have the best sensor. I spent yonks and yonks researching; including playing with most of the demos in the local camera shop I was never going to buy from! My final word(s): The D7100 is a fabulous camera. However, just like with every other model (regardless of cost) you can buy; in one or two years time you will feel "cheated" and want to upgrade. Given where the technology is, right now (and was, two years ago) I went with a £500 (at the time, inc lens) solution that won't make me cry when I do trade it in.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 15, 2014 6:59:19 GMT
What do you mean by effective megapixels? i want to get a nice camera for airshows but am a newbie, i'm used to 14meg point & shoot. At Eastbourne airshow last year i was behind some guy who was taking photos that could zoom in via his viewfinder & show the pilot in the plane with great clarity..mind you his lens was about 18inches long & it turned out he was a newspaper photographer. he was using a 24meg camera but said his lenses cost 4 times as much as the camera... TEST I'll put up front ... That photo of the pilot will cost you thousands and thousands. I don't know how seriously you want to get into it? How much do you want to spend "for the odd airshow"? If you are taking "snaps" - and that is what I consider I take, snaps that I try to make as nice as possible; I'm not a photographer - then what you want is something that will support a decent set of lens and has a decent "sensor". You can spend thousands (as Mr Out is in danger of doing!) and still take rubbish photos because the camera is "too good for you". I am barely able to get the most out of my A55. And I've had it almost 2 years. My a55 was chosen because it will do "Point and Shoot" (brilliantly) and it will let me play with it so I can at least feel like David Bailey (while acknowledging I am not!) This is a very good write up. It's easy to understand and taught me lots: photo.net/equipment/digital/basics/Effective Pixels: The number you see on the box or advert is not necessarily the number you will get in your photos. It's a marketing gimmick. The link above explains it and that should explain why the guy next to you at the airshow (or the bloke with the fantastic pictures of the milky way) is able to kick the 4rse out of your camera. Other than the lens you use, the sensor is everything (else). Again, see the article above, it explains it pretty well. In the bit about Sensors he links a longer article on More on Sensors ("Size Matters"). That goes into stupid detail; but if you want to know why the sensor is everything; that is the best, clear, write up I have ever found. Zoom - That photo of the hairs up the pilot's nose. Was not done with Digital-Zoom. It was done with a very expensive detachable lens (exactly like the lens in an old SLR film camera), and a great camera body with a fabulous sensor. The more high powered the lens, the closer you can get. The better quality the lens - and the sensor - the better the quality of a magnified image. So, to get the best quality, up close shots you need a very good camera body attached to a very good lens. (For £350) I believe that is what I bought in the a55 FOR MY BUDGET (and I spent way more than £350 on it, but I got a couple of lens and other bits and pieces and it was a just released machine when I got it ... and I live in Australia!). However, while I might get the go-faster stripes on the pilots helmet, I wouldn't be getting the hairs up his nose! Have a good read of the article I linked ... Should explain the tech involved and what you should look for, for your budget. Post up again for a chat ... I'm a very keen (but only sporadically good) photographer (and I love the tech) Went to John Lewis this evening and saw the D7100 and the OMD-EM10. I quite liked the Nikon and it looked like it would easily handle a manual focussing lens. I was hoping to see an Olympus OMD EM1, but they only had the EM10, and I was shocked about how small it was. Too small. That said it would bulk up quite well with a vertical grip. I was hoping to see a Pentax K3, but they did not have one. I'm still not much further forward as I'm leaning towards mirrorless, yet something is telling me to go for the Nikon. I will be honest and say that - even though DSLR has been around "years" - you will be buying something that you want to replace in 2 or 3 years (if not next week!). They are still improving the technology. So your mirrorless comment is spot on. But that will cost you an arm and a leg right now, and it will get better (and cheaper) in the next year or two (and so, need replacing). Also, post-processing can certainly improve your images (almost) as much as a better sensor/lens. If you have never done this (or even better, liked doing your own with film) then it will blow you away. Reading your couple of posts on this ... I would consider getting ... not a cheap one ... but something like my a55 (a58 is the newest version, I think). Pay say £400. Use it for a year (or 6 months) trade it in on the one you decide you want (be it mirrorless, or whatever). This will give you time to decide what you really want, teach you post processing and you will still get brilliant photos while you weigh it all up. That's the only way I can see of you going forward without chucking £800+ at something you aren't sure about. The results from a "half way there" model will show you whether the full monty is worth it, or not. And you will get 50% or so back as a trade in. I can't be any more help. And neither can almost anyone else! I can chat with you about it, but like you found with the EM10, it is a very personal thing about more than just the technology involved. It needs to fit your hand and fingers as much as have the best sensor. I spent yonks and yonks researching; including playing with most of the demos in the local camera shop I was never going to buy from! My final word(s): The D7100 is a fabulous camera. However, just like with every other model (regardless of cost) you can buy; in one or two years time you will feel "cheated" and want to upgrade. Given where the technology is, right now (and was, two years ago) I went with a £500 (at the time, inc lens) solution that won't make me cry when I do trade it in. You've got me virtually spot on. I've watched the development of digital cameras from afar, knowing that I would have to get into them one day. It irritates me how cameras have become a "consumerable" product and I can see that I'm about to get onto a treadmill. I'm now focusing (geddit) my attention on fast zoom lenses, in particular, what will be my ideal real world set up. Having looked at the Pentax range, I'm not going to bother looking at the K3. Nikon has the lenses I would want, but they're eye watering expensive. Having realised I'll never be a pro, which was once a realistic proposition, I'm leaning towards the Olympus range and they've got a great f2.8 wide zoom at a just affordable price. My f1.4. 50mm Zeiss lens will become a very tasty 100mm portrait lens and my Tamron SP f3.5 70-210 will do me until Olympus bring out a telephoto zoom to match that wide zoom. So it looks like Olympus will be getting my cash (via Hong Kong), only question not is, shall I be sensible and go with the EM10 (and a grip) or go for the sexy EM1 'cause it's more expensive and better and stuff...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2014 7:23:33 GMT
You've got me virtually spot on. I've watched the development of digital cameras from afar, knowing that I would have to get into them one day. It irritates me how cameras have become a "consumerable" product and I can see that I'm about to get onto a treadmill. I'm now focusing (geddit) my attention on fast zoom lenses, in particular, what will be my ideal real world set up. Having looked at the Pentax range, I'm not going to bother looking at the K3. Nikon has the lenses I would want, but they're eye watering expensive. Having realised I'll never be a pro, which was once a realistic proposition, I'm leaning towards the Olympus range and they've got a great f2.8 wide zoom at a just affordable price. My f1.4. 50mm Zeiss lens will become a very tasty 100mm portrait lens and my Tamron SP f3.5 70-210 will do me until Olympus bring out a telephoto zoom to match that wide zoom. So it looks like Olympus will be getting my cash (via Hong Kong), only question not is, shall I be sensible and go with the EM10 (and a grip) or go for the sexy EM1 'cause it's more expensive and better and stuff... Yeah, I figured. I was in the same place when I made the leap (6 or 7 years ago ... something like that); not all that long before we came out here (which was one of the reasons ... sharing photos long distance). I had a pentax (damn, I can't remember!) and a couple of hyrid lens, when I used film; so price wise, probably a comparable level to the a55. My first digital SLR was a Sony. I can't remember what the hell the model was, now - But it seemed ace at the time. But when - two years ago - I decided to upgrade, I realised how "bad" that first one had become. And so now I know how bad this a55 will become! (Indeed, it's successor already kicks it's arse, looking at the specs!) So you are dead right (and I have been clear, all along). Whatever you buy - just like a PC or a laptop (they are now the same thing) - there will be a better one in 18-months. Every 18 months. However, the cost of processing and sharing is (virtually) zero and printing is way, way cheaper than when we did our own, went to Boots or posted them off to Kodak! So, if you are sensible with your upgrades (I am on 3 to 4 years, and sticking to it!) it is not as bad as it seems (but it is bad ) Obviously lens are still good for life. And obviously you will want the next great one of those ... but we always did when it was film cameras; so no change there. I'm making no comment on brand/model - Like I put; you get the one you are comfy with. They all take a decent photo! But I will again put that getting a cheaper one will still amaze you, hold some trade in value (if that will be less 2 years or so) and teach you how to make the change. Then, if you're still loving it ... go re-mortgage the house
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Apr 15, 2014 9:08:20 GMT
Just ordered an Olympus OMD EM1 with that lens. The body is bigger than the EM10 and suits me better. The price difference is not that great as long as I don't get clobbered by import duty...
I'm going to stop reading about cameras for at least five years to help keep any urges under control.
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Apr 15, 2014 13:03:43 GMT
You either choose Canon or Nikon I suppose. I chose Canon when I first got into photography. First one (point and shoot) broke out of warranty, second one (SLR) broke a few months in and had to be fixed under warranty. I'd go with Nikon if i had my time again.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2014 13:08:11 GMT
... I'm going to stop reading about cameras for at least five years to help keep any urges under control. Sound thinking
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 15, 2014 16:28:04 GMT
I'm thinking of getting back into photography after a 20 year break. I've still got my old Contax 159 body and a couple of (in their day) tasty lenses and I'm thinking about investing in a up to £800 on a new DLSR body and using my old manual lenses with a converter until I can afford replacement lenses. I had a little play with a Canon 70D and it left me cold as it felt a bit fragile compared with my Contax. I'm going to take a trip out to John Lewis soon to have a closer look at what's out there, but if anyone has any suggestions as to what I should look at, please let me know. I can highly recommend this little beauty , never let me down Attachment Deleted
|
|