Intro to DSLR/Mirrorless

[monarchco]

So This will be my 3rd run at looking into getting a DSLR.

 

I have no cameras with interchangeable lenses, I have no lenses.

Right now I'm looking at a budget of 2,000 and not 1 penny over.

 

I'm looking at the Sony a6500 but have heard the kit lens(the 16-50), isn't very good.

I'm also looking at the Sony A77 II, and have seen the kit lens it has actually recommended for the a6500 as an upgrade in several places(they mention adapters), but see its lacking a lot of features of the a6500 and other modern cameras, such as touch screen AF, etc. I just spent the past hour learning about the differences between prime and zoom lenses - something I've never had to deal with before, dealing with All in ones(like my Sony RX100 V).

 

I understand a fair amount about cameras themselves. More specifically the software, tech, & sensors. But I know very very little about lenses.

 

I could really use some help. If someone could provide recommendations for a 2,000$ price point(body AND lenses -holy hell every single video and list online only lists body for X price point-, and ideally sd card too, although I have plenty, both micro and standard). No need to include a case. I already have 1 of my pelican cases set aside for whatever camera I end up picking up, and has plenty of room for anything.

 

P.S. Most of my content is of larger, static objects. Typically vehicles standing still, against nature filled backgrounds. Not moving. Does involve a fair bit of nighttime shooting.

[PokiDaSpitz]

aren't sony's minorless? lols...

[monarchco]

2 minutes ago, PokiDaSpitz said:

aren't sony's minorless? lols...

The A77 I mention is DSLR.

 

Thanks for the not help though. 

[PokiDaSpitz]

I got a used nikon d610 and it works great... but i would recommend a d750 and if you really have to save money there is a 50mm prime lens on the nikon which is amazing.

[PokiDaSpitz]

3 minutes ago, monarchco said:

The A77 I mention is DSLR.

 

Thanks for the not help though. 

this is the 50mm.. its super sharp for its cheap price  10/10 recommend

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-50mm-1-8D-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1530601529&sr=1-3&keywords=50mm+f1.8+nikon

and my bad... i am really sick and i have a headache haha...

[Enderman]

5 minutes ago, monarchco said:

The A77 I mention is DSLR.

 

Thanks for the not help though. 

He's referring to the A6500 you mentioned in your post which is seemingly asking about DSLRs only.

Why does it need to be DSLR?

[monarchco]

6 minutes ago, PokiDaSpitz said:

this is the 50mm.. its super sharp for its cheap price  10/10 recommend

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-50mm-1-8D-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1530601529&sr=1-3&keywords=50mm+f1.8+nikon

and my bad... i am really sick and i have a headache haha...

Awesome.

Do I have to worry about how versatile it is, since its only 50mm, as that seems like a pretty high focal length compared to most things I've seen.

 

Ideally I'd like to have a wide angle lens(I've liked the kinda shots I've seen from stuff around 10-18mm from other content creators), as well as something more versatile(like the 16-50mm kit on the A77 ii)

[monarchco]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

He's referring to the A6500 you mentioned in your post which is seemingly asking about DSLRs only.

Why does it need to be DSLR?

It doesn't. What it is doesn't really matter so long as it works as good as possible for my use case within my price range.

 

EDIT: Changed the title.

[PokiDaSpitz]

4 minutes ago, monarchco said:

Awesome.

Do I have to worry about how versatile it is, since its only 50mm, as that seems like a pretty high focal length compared to most things I've seen.

nah, it's honestly such a good lens for its price i bought two lols... maybe i could ship it to you, but i live in asia :c

i have other kit lenses but i usually that this 50mm as it performs super super well and if i break it, its only 100$.. heehee just its focus is abit loud but if you get the sightly more expensive one it has the silent auto-focus but i don't think it's worth as the image quality is about the same. (the louder one actually looks better to me)

[Enderman]

5 minutes ago, monarchco said:

It doesn't. What it is doesn't really matter so long as it works as good as possible for my use case within my price range.

 

EDIT: Changed the title.

Ah that makes much more sense.

I have an a6000 and really like it because both video and photos are great.

For 2k you can get a really good camera and lens.

Almost all of my photographer/videographer friends use sony A7 cameras.

 

What lens you pick really depends on what types of pictures you're trying to get but a high end lens doesn't need to cost more than ~$500.

This one would be excellent for low light: 

 

[monarchco]

5 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Ah that makes much more sense.

I have an a6000 and really like it because both video and photos are great.

For 2k you can get a really good camera and lens.

Almost all of my photographer/videographer friends use sony A7 cameras.

What lens you pick really depends on what types of pictures you're trying to get but an excellent lens doesn't need to cost more than ~$500.

Larger static objects against a variety of backgrounds. From nighttime with limited lighting, to normal day nature backgrounds(e.g. truck in forest), but also A LOT of photos of vehicles in snow. So dynamic range is very important.

 

Most of the prices I've seen for A7s have been too high for me, but I didn't look too far into them. I'll take a look now

[PokiDaSpitz]

and btw nikon camera's are built like tanks, every part feels high quality that's why i got a nikon instead of a canon.

[monarchco]

12 minutes ago, PokiDaSpitz said:

and btw nikon camera's are built like tanks, every part feels high quality that's why i got a nikon instead of a canon.

I like build quality, but its really not as much of a concern as image quality. My camera equipment doesn't come out of custom foam pelican cases unless I'm immediately shooting with it. They aren't in cloth bags or hanging around my neck ever. 

 

17 minutes ago, Enderman said:

 

 

That's actually already a lens I have saved to my cart. Glad to see you further solidify that choice. I just need to figure out what camera to put it on(probably an a6500?), as well as a more versatile zoom lens for day-to-day activity, that's still quality. (I do a lot of night shots, but the vast majority are still daytime, and often with direct light).

 

Should I consider filters as well?

[Enderman]

33 minutes ago, monarchco said:

That's actually already a lens I have saved to my cart. Glad to see you further solidify that choice. I just need to figure out what camera to put it on(probably an a6500?), as well as a more versatile zoom lens for day-to-day activity, that's still quality. (I do a lot of night shots, but the vast majority are still daytime, and often with direct light).

 

Should I consider filters as well?

Well the A6500 is basically the next best thing to an A7, not bad at all.

Only problem is that that lens won't be good for video because it has no stabilization, and the 6500 has no in-body stabilization. EDIT actually it does, my bad, but apparently it's not as good as the OSS lenses.

I don't have experience with filters though.

[monarchco]

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

Well the A6500 is basically the next best thing to an A7, not bad at all.

Only problem is that that lens won't be good for video because it has no stabilization, and the 6500 has no in-body stabilization.

I don't have experience with filters though.

Video isn't a concern. Anything I do that requires video uses gopros(The only things that actually need to be rugged).

This is a lot of why I was considering an A77 is because I've heard its very strong with photos, but not on video(again, I don't really care about it).

[xQubeZx]

Since you rarley do video or action sports an used A7ii (or new) seems like a more fitting option. Or the A6300 since th benefits of the A6500 is mainly focused on video and action sports photography. 

 

Lens wise you probably want a wide angle or a good normal zoom. If you get a a6xxx series body get the 18-105 f/4 for a go to ”kit lens”. And then use that untill you know what other lens you need. If going with the A7ii the 24-105 f/4 is an amazing lens that is very versatile. If too expensive the 24-70 zeiss f4 is pretty good too. 

 

Speciality lenses you need will you get a much better feel of when you have used a normal zoom lens for a while. 

[cc143]

If you won't be shooting video, and are looking for an APS-C camera, I'd go with fuji all the way. The x-t2 is cheaper, has waaay better ergonomics, dual sd cards and the fuji lens system is much more comprehensive and has much better offerings than the sony lens system for APS-C and lenses are much cheaper as well. 

 

I would certainly go used dslr for FF. The d810 is a great camera, especially for higher res etc. and is sharper given its higher mp count and lack of AA filter. If you need something more suited to low light, the 750d has a great sensor for high iso shooting, but is quite old in the tooth. Nikon have the advantage of a much more extensive lens system at this point, especially given 3rd party and older F mount lenses, which are often bargains in the used market. 

 

The 5d mk3 is also a fairly good camera and quite cheap now days, but technologically, the d810 is more advanced. 

 

Given what you shoot I would also look at  buying a tripod too. 

 

For your style of shooting, a 35mm or 24mm equivalent might be the best option. If you go fuji, the 16mm f/1.4 is bloody amazing, so is the 23mm f/2. I would probably end up with a 16mm f/1.4 and a 27mm f/2.8 on an xt2 or x-e3 if I were you.

 

Nikon or Canon would allow you to go for Sigma's art series as well which has amazingly priced offerings like the 35mm, 24mm and 20mm.  

[monarchco]

On 7/3/2018 at 5:30 AM, cc143 said:

If you won't be shooting video, and are looking for an APS-C camera, I'd go with fuji all the way. The x-t2 is cheaper, has waaay better ergonomics, dual sd cards and the fuji lens system is much more comprehensive and has much better offerings than the sony lens system for APS-C and lenses are much cheaper as well. 

 

I would certainly go used dslr for FF. The d810 is a great camera, especially for higher res etc. and is sharper given its higher mp count and lack of AA filter. If you need something more suited to low light, the 750d has a great sensor for high iso shooting, but is quite old in the tooth. Nikon have the advantage of a much more extensive lens system at this point, especially given 3rd party and older F mount lenses, which are often bargains in the used market. 

 

The 5d mk3 is also a fairly good camera and quite cheap now days, but technologically, the d810 is more advanced. 

 

Given what you shoot I would also look at  buying a tripod too. 

 

For your style of shooting, a 35mm or 24mm equivalent might be the best option. If you go fuji, the 16mm f/1.4 is bloody amazing, so is the 23mm f/2. I would probably end up with a 16mm f/1.4 and a 27mm f/2.8 on an xt2 or x-e3 if I were you.

 

Nikon or Canon would allow you to go for Sigma's art series as well which has amazingly priced offerings like the 35mm, 24mm and 20mm.  

Literally everything you mention is out of price range.

Especially the 5d mk3(2300 body) and d810(2800 body)

 

On 7/3/2018 at 3:33 AM, xQubeZx said:

Since you rarley do video or action sports an used A7ii (or new) seems like a more fitting option. Or the A6300 since th benefits of the A6500 is mainly focused on video and action sports photography. 

 

Lens wise you probably want a wide angle or a good normal zoom. If you get a a6xxx series body get the 18-105 f/4 for a go to ”kit lens”. And then use that untill you know what other lens you need. If going with the A7ii the 24-105 f/4 is an amazing lens that is very versatile. If too expensive the 24-70 zeiss f4 is pretty good too. 

 

Speciality lenses you need will you get a much better feel of when you have used a normal zoom lens for a while. 

I don't think I've got the cash to get into the full frame E mount lens ecosystem for a A7ii.

And despite not having hands on experience with picture stabilization, and only video stabilization, I've heard that sensor picture stabilization is really good. And something the a6500 has that the a6300 doesn't.

 

My current cart category is a:

 

a6500 from B&H coming with a 64gb 90mb/s memory card & spare battery & carrying bag for free(likely won't use the case, and instead use a pelican hard case, but whatever, its a free bonus pack).

Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS Lens(heard its very good)

Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DC DN Contemporary Lens for Sony E(heard its excellent)

and B+W 67mm XS-Pro Kaesemann High Transmission Circular Polarizer MRC-Nano Filter (for the 16mm, not the 18-105 which is 72mm thread iirc, as from what I've seen from other content creators, I predict I'll use the 16mm more often for wide view close up shots to vehicles)

 

puts me a smidgen over budget but I can live with it.

Does anyone have any other suggestions for a quality camera & 2 lens setup for 2,000?

[monarchco]

~ Does anyone know the implications of using an APSC E mount lens on a full frame E mount?

Would it negate any benefits of using a full frame in the first place?

 

Or does anyone have suggestions for Full Frame E lens setups?

The cheapest lens I've seen described as at least "good" for full frame is an 800 A mount that needs an adapter. Everything else I've seen on any recommendation list is 4 digits and higher.

[whoisjaya]

I'm sorry, I can't really recommend a camera(I think), but there's one thing I'd like to mention/ask: Technically, you don't need as fast of a fast lens and/or "that" strong high-iso performance, as your objects do not move, so you could just expose for longer. Am I seeing this right?

[monarchco]

16 minutes ago, Jonas_2909 said:

I'm sorry I can't really recommend a camera, but there's one thing I'd like to mention: Technically, you don't need as fast of a fast lens and/or "that" strong high-iso performance, as your objects do not move, so you could just expose for longer. Am I seeing this right?

Sure but there's numerous places where not even a tripod is capable of supporting the camera on the surface. Most of my stuff does use tripods, but there's numerous cases when I'm up on steep slopes with extremely loose gravel that not even a tripod can stay stable on.

 

So yes, that is an option, but higher iso performance would be great. And obviously stuff like the dynamic range advantage would be nice(for the same reason that the camera can't really stay still long enough for multiple photos with adjusted exposure for multi-photo HDR done in post.)

[cc143]

3 hours ago, monarchco said:

Literally everything you mention is out of price range.

Especially the 5d mk3(2300 body) and d810(2800 body)

As I said, if going full frame, go used, refurbished and camera store used options. The d850, that was just released retails at 3500US or there about, the d810 can't sell at 2800. Hell, I've found 5d mk4s in ebay trending at £2,200, so probably under $2500 in the US. Look through ebay, I bet you'll find a number of them for about 1200-1300$. My own 5d3 was bought from a retailer selling used gear for £1,200 a year and a half ago.

 

If you are not comfortable buying used, the fuji system is still within price range. The xt2 is actually on offer over here right now for under the usual used price. That is because the xt3 is due in September, so that's something to keep in mind but still.  

[monarchco]

7 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Look at used, refurbished and camera store used options. The d850, that was just released retails at 3500US or there about, the d810 can't sell at 2800. Look through ebay, I bet you'll find a number of them for about 1200-1300$. 

 

If you are not comfortable buying used, the fuji system is still within price range. The xt2 is actually on offer over here right now for under the usual used price. That is because the xt3 is due in September, so that's something to keep in mind but still.  

Sorry, I can't take a recommendation of it.

It's still 1600 everywhere I can find it. Leaving only 400$ for lenses.

 

Furthermore, on this comparison site I see it ranked worse than the 6500 for pretty much everything.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-a6500-vs-Fujifilm-X-T2

 

Beyond that, it's not even rated by Dxomark while everything else mentioned in this thread I've been able to look at there.

 

So all I have is effectively hearsay while every statistic in comparison shows it worse(no image stabilization, and I don't care that it has faster burst shooting than the 6500), or the same, while being more expensive by nearly 50%(1100 vs 1600):

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1263381-REG/fujifilm_x_t2_mirrorless_digital_camera.html

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T2-Mirrorless-F2-8-4-0-Lens/dp/B01I3LNMAM?th=1

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/fujifilm-x-t2-mirrorless-camera-body-only-black/5580632.p?skuId=5580632

[cc143]

9 minutes ago, monarchco said:

Sorry, I can't take a recommendation of it.

It's still 1600 everywhere I can find it. Leaving only 400$ for lenses.

 

Furthermore, on this comparison site I see it ranked worse than the 6500 for pretty much everything.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-a6500-vs-Fujifilm-X-T2

 

Beyond that, it's not even rated by Dxomark while everything else mentioned in this thread I've been able to look at there.

 

So all I have is effectively hearsay while every statistic in comparison shows it worse(no image stabilization, and I don't care that it has faster burst shooting than the 6500), or the same, while being more expensive by nearly 50%(1100 vs 1600):

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1263381-REG/fujifilm_x_t2_mirrorless_digital_camera.html

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T2-Mirrorless-F2-8-4-0-Lens/dp/B01I3LNMAM?th=1

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/fujifilm-x-t2-mirrorless-camera-body-only-black/5580632.p?skuId=5580632

Don't look at comparison sites and dxo mark for Cameras, look at reviews from people who actually know what they are on about. Comparison sites are a list of features side to side and dxomark shoots charts for a living. Both scenarios aren't especially applicable in the real world. Also, no other aps-c lens system is nearly as complete as fuji's. Especially Sony's who have 7 lenses for crop sensors that cost 2 times as much as they should. In body Stabilisation is irrelevant for stills, you are better off using a tripod. The only thing that is actually significant on the comparison site is the lack of a touchscreen, and even that, you won't miss if you didn't have one before. 

 

Now the price thing is weird, Fuji just dropped the MSRP down to £980 yesterday in the UK, I'm actually on the brink of selling a kidney. I don't know why US retailers have it listed so expensive. 

 

Again though, why don't you just look at a used d810? its a way better camera than the a6500 (even dxomark will agree) and has a way better ecosystem. 

[monarchco]

17 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Don't look at comparison sites and dxo mark for Cameras, look at reviews from people who actually know what they are on about. Comparison sites are a list of features side to side and dxomark shoots charts for a living. Both scenarios aren't especially applicable in the real world. Also, no other aps-c lens system is nearly as complete as fuji's. Especially Sony's who have 7 lenses for crop sensors that cost 2 times as much as they should. In body Stabilisation is irrelevant for stills, you are better off using a tripod. 

 

Now the price thing is weird, Fuji just dropped the MSRP down to £980 yesterday in the UK, I'm actually on the brink of selling a kidney. I don't know why US retailers have it listed so expensive. 

 

Again though, why don't you just look at a used d810? its a way better camera than the a6500 (even dxomark will agree) and has a way better ecosystem. 

Ok I just decided I'd humor you and look it up.

 

The lowest I can find a used d810 is 1600(that isn't sketchy as hell. I'm not interested in buying a 300$ "used" d810). The lowest I can find a refurbished d810 is 1800.

Furthermore, the lowest price 'good' lenses for it listed on the 6 or so sites I just looked at, bottom out at around 600$

Again, I want 2 lenses. There's no way I'm getting 2 lenses with 400$

 

And even if I could, I don't want to deal with used, or refurbished. 

 

tldr; Still out of price range. As previously said.