I don’t plan on doing anything that needs a lot of zoom. Most of what I used to do was with a macro lens. I see myself starting out with one macro and one fixed.I am a Nikon guy since 1963. My digitals are all Nikon. I don't do pictures that wiggle (video) so keep that in mind. If I was looking for a new camera or camera system I would look at Fuji or Olympus. They are 4/3 camera but have the same resolution as most of the full frame cameras. Nikon has a couple that have over 30 megapixels but unless you intend to severely crop you don't need them.
Really we need more info as to what you will be shooting, uses for the images, editing software you have or will get and a bunch of other information before we can give good recommendations.
That said, Adobe has a monthly subscription for photographers that includes Photoshop and Lightroom for $10 a month. Whatever camera you get will have some free software too.
I’ll probably have to pay 1200-2000 to get started with something that’s worth a crap.Budget?
The money is in the lenses…so you gotta decide if you want Nikon, Canon or some other compatibility.
IMHO sticking to the two above will yield the most lens and accessory options, which helps keep prices sane as many third-party brands also make stuff for them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I’m eyeing the D850.The money is in the lenses.
The choice of available lenses is also important.
With a full frame camera the number of lenses that offer a full frame image is reduced….as in less to choose from.
If you get a camera with a crop sensor the you can use both style lenses (DX for Nikon crop sensor, FX for Nikon Full Frame).
Additionally, if you get a body that has the focus drive motor in it, then you can autofocus the older D style lenses as well as the newer AF-S style lenses with the motor in the lens. (Nikon data only, not sure how it is with Canon)
In many ways the crop sensor camera is your best bang for the buck with more lenses available to choose from.
The Full frame non pro bodies to look at depending on your budget are D750 and D850. They are still pricey. I have an older D700 full frame that is a great camera..
I prefer using the camera for still images…that is why non of mine do video.
Every one of my Nikons I have bought used..currently have 3 digital bodies and 1 film. They can all use the same lenses.
Once you get into the high megapixel full frame cameras you will find they show you which lenses have faults…so you end up chasing better glass…
good glass = money
Good fast glass = more money
The glass is the most important part other the the person behind the camera.
Excellent resources include DPreview.com, Dxco, and others.
Thom Hogan reviews and documents Nikon gear for a living and has a ton of good info. If you look at Ken Rockwell’s site be sure and have a few good chunks of rock salt in hand. You can tell he is very biased.
I've got a Nikon D3200 which is close to 6 years old I think and it still takes fantastic pictures. The lenses for Nikons generally speaking are more than the same level on a Canon since the auto focus mechanism is located in the body, where Nikons autofocus motor is located in the lens itself if I remember correctly.Any opinion on brands? Brains shared briefly. I’m looking at Nikon d series and Panasonic LUMIX.
I've got a Nikon D3200 which is close to 6 years old I think and it still takes fantastic pictures. The lenses for Nikons generally speaking are more than the same level on a Canon since the auto focus mechanism is located in the body, where Nikons autofocus motor is located in the lens itself if I remember correctly.
Never used a Minolta XK, did ya?Minolta was middle of the road. It was a good camera to learn on. My dads Olympus was great. The difference in build quality was obvious.
Don’t remember. It looks like my old camera.Never used a Minolta XK, did ya?
I'm a Nikon diehard from the days of my first Nikon F but it's debatable if they still have the best glass.Nikon. They have the best glass.
I used one for a while. It was a tank. Then I had to give it back to the guy who lent it to me.It looks like my old camera.
Different brands have different strengths and weaknesses. I run 5 different brands for different applications in my business. Currently, the Canon gets used for ground shoots, while the Nikon is our primary aerial camera. Then you get into specialty stuff like 360 photo and video, stabilized action cameras, and all kind of niche' stuff.Any opinion on brands? Brains shared briefly. I’m looking at Nikon d series and Panasonic LUMIX.
I hear good things about the Affinity products; cheaper than Adobe too.As far as Photoshop goes, Photoshop Elements is the non subscription version. Got it packaged with Adobe Premiere for around $100 iirc. Works great. Most of the other software does require subscriptions though, like after effects and Lightroom.
I remember when the rebel line first came out. I was interested in it then and after considering your opinion I’m considering it again. It’s not really behind at all from some of nicer Nikons in its class.I’m gonna probably be going against some of the grain here, and it’s only my opinion. No issues if someone wants to tell you I’m wrong.
Unless you’ve just got the money to burn I don’t think it’s necessary to pay over 1k to get started. If astrophotography is something to try a full sensor matters a lot, otherwise you get precropped images due to the way the camera mounts. But then the camera cost is only the tip of the money iceberg.
Learning how to use the camera means way more than having the newest top of the line camera. If you the money is just there, sure. You can dive in deep. Or just get one of the Cannon Rebels and start learning how to use the settings to get the results you want. Use the money saved for just whatever you want.
As far as Photoshop goes, Photoshop Elements is the non subscription version. Got it packaged with Adobe Premiere for around $100 iirc. Works great. Most of the other software does require subscriptions though, like after effects and Lightroom.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk