Worst investment ever…
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
Jola
Honorary Master
TehStranger
Executive Member
I think your S2/S5 example is a great one here. Get an all-rounder bridge to learn about shots, you'll naturally experience it's limitations and know when it's time to upgrade (if you even get there, most people who buy DSLRs aren't serious enough about photography to reach those limits).
I think it comes down to what's more frustrating: not being able to control depth of field (advanced technique), or not being able to get a proper wide angle/macro shot (arguably far more basic) without spending at least the value of your camera body on a dedicated lens?
Back to Venice: after noise is taken into account, the phone still performed a bit better IMHO. Remember the F4.5 was only at 10mm, which is seriously wide. Zooming in to 20mm (still wide) gave me F5.6, which was basically unusable. The way my phone handled the noise impressed me beyond expectation, especially when it came to reviewing the images on an external monitor after the fact. I do have full manual mode on the phone, and could do quite a bit with all of the images (Phone and Camera) in post after the fact.
No offence but I think a 50mm is a pretty lousy choice for street photography on a crop body. It's a decent enough portrait lens though.
An SX60 costs what? R6k? You can get a 1200D with two lenses and a SD card for same/less.
It depends on your style.
Sure you can theoretically do it at any focal length so that's why I said I think. Let's just say 80mm seems like an unconventional length.
Foxhound5366
Honorary Master
Here's the thing, this was my first digital camera (back in the lofty days of 2004 when a 3.2MP camera was awesome):
I bought it when I was trying to decide whether I should apply to specialise in photojournalism at University or not. In one holiday, I took around 1500 photos with it.
What I learned at the end of it is that I truly enjoyed photography, and a handful of those 1500 photos weren't entirely awful.
My suggestion to the OP is that you do the same. Before you invest the kind of money that a serious DSLR will set you back (and forget about buying an entry-level sub-R10 000 model), you need to be sure of two things:
1: You actually WANT to be a photographer; and
2: You actually have the raw ABILITY to be one (we all would love to be a rockstar but 99.9% of us just lack the basic fundamental ability to).
Once you've answered both of those questions positively, then it's worthwhile investing into some mid-entry-level kit (R15 000 - R20 000), because that will give you a solid platform (tripod+camera+flash+accessories) that you can enjoy and build off for the next ten years. You also won't be worried about making that kind of commitment, because you'll have taken the doubt out of it for yourself.
For the rest of it, all you need to remember is what Robert Capa said: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough."
I bought it when I was trying to decide whether I should apply to specialise in photojournalism at University or not. In one holiday, I took around 1500 photos with it.
What I learned at the end of it is that I truly enjoyed photography, and a handful of those 1500 photos weren't entirely awful.
My suggestion to the OP is that you do the same. Before you invest the kind of money that a serious DSLR will set you back (and forget about buying an entry-level sub-R10 000 model), you need to be sure of two things:
1: You actually WANT to be a photographer; and
2: You actually have the raw ABILITY to be one (we all would love to be a rockstar but 99.9% of us just lack the basic fundamental ability to).
Once you've answered both of those questions positively, then it's worthwhile investing into some mid-entry-level kit (R15 000 - R20 000), because that will give you a solid platform (tripod+camera+flash+accessories) that you can enjoy and build off for the next ten years. You also won't be worried about making that kind of commitment, because you'll have taken the doubt out of it for yourself.
For the rest of it, all you need to remember is what Robert Capa said: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough."
Yeah but the picture was awesome.
Binary_Bark
Forging
.
Last edited:
TehStranger
Executive Member
For a novice I'd still suggest the SX60, at least until they know they want to go with photography as a hobby. I know too many people who got a cheap DSLR bundle, and have it just lying around in favour of a much smaller point and click because of the effort required. Obviously if the OP develops a keen passion for photography the DSLR is the next step.
Foxhound's post is good.
Maybe he's been shooting with a cellphone over the years and already knows?
TehStranger
Executive Member
Then he's not really a novice is he? Read my posts again. My point is don't jump straight into a DSLR until you know you want to pursue photography as a hobby. When you outgrow the cellphone/bridge then by all means, DSLR.
I never said he was, neither did he. he just wanted advice on DSLR bundles so maybe he's already thought this through and actually wants a DSLR bundle?
I'm pretty sure I also read a post from someone claiming the entry level dslr bodies are a waste but I couldn't disagree more. The differences between the XXXXD/XXXD ranges and the XXD range are negligible for a beginner. Then again I've always thought the XXD was a waste of money. I think I paid less for my first two 400Ds than I would have, at the time at least, for a single 40D. @koffiejunkie and I sparred regularly on the subject and I don't think either of us managed to convince the other
Not a bad camera at all from what I can remember. It's a little long in the tooth but as far as what a beginner needs it should tick all the important boxes. Can't remember if it shoots video, so if the OP has any aspirations of being the next Jimmy Olsen or Peter Parker he/she might want to check that before he/she buys.
garyc
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2010
- Messages
- 5,322
- Reaction score
- 3,887
Learning photography is very different to learning how to use a camera. Here is my work-flow for getting a picture. Since it is a personal list someone here may be able to come up with a better one.
Planning – What is going to photographed and where, and therefore what kit is needed.
Scene evaluation – Identify specific subjects on location and come up with an approach.
Composition – Determine the best composition for each specific subject.
Take the photo – That is the thing to do with the camera itself.
Processing – Delete the photos that are not wanted and edit those that left. Then evaluate the edited photos.
Distribution – On-line / prints / etc.
Backup – Important.
One needs a camera that is up to a certain quality level to learn the entire work-flow, of which the entry level SLR bundles are the cheapest and well up to the task. One example would be scene evaluation. A lower level camera has limited dynamic range, colour depth and usable ISO. This limits the use of the camera to very specific scenarios and would remove most of the aspects associated with the evaluation. Another area that would be compromised by a lower level camera is the processing. The person doing this would not be learning anything about shadow and highlight recovery since there isn't any to recover. A similar argument would apply to colour and saturation adjustment due the the very limited gamut of these cameras. Most of the editing ends up as fighting noise.
Disclaimer: The above comments apply to my non-professional activities which easily make up 2/3 of the photos that I take. The work-flow that I use for clients can vary considerably depending on the requirements and is usually dominated by the most cost-effective way to get the desired result.
Planning – What is going to photographed and where, and therefore what kit is needed.
Scene evaluation – Identify specific subjects on location and come up with an approach.
Composition – Determine the best composition for each specific subject.
Take the photo – That is the thing to do with the camera itself.
Processing – Delete the photos that are not wanted and edit those that left. Then evaluate the edited photos.
Distribution – On-line / prints / etc.
Backup – Important.
One needs a camera that is up to a certain quality level to learn the entire work-flow, of which the entry level SLR bundles are the cheapest and well up to the task. One example would be scene evaluation. A lower level camera has limited dynamic range, colour depth and usable ISO. This limits the use of the camera to very specific scenarios and would remove most of the aspects associated with the evaluation. Another area that would be compromised by a lower level camera is the processing. The person doing this would not be learning anything about shadow and highlight recovery since there isn't any to recover. A similar argument would apply to colour and saturation adjustment due the the very limited gamut of these cameras. Most of the editing ends up as fighting noise.
Disclaimer: The above comments apply to my non-professional activities which easily make up 2/3 of the photos that I take. The work-flow that I use for clients can vary considerably depending on the requirements and is usually dominated by the most cost-effective way to get the desired result.
You know not so much as you might think given the huge variance in pricing. I took the 1200D, 70D, and 7Dmk2 crop bodies and compared them on DxOMark and the results were interesting:
Considering you can get the 1200D for R4500 and the 7Dmk2 will cost you R21000 you have to ask yourself if you need the bells and whistles the more expensive body offers.
I can't remember the last time I deleted a photo…
Last edited: