First real camera

[radmanhs]

I'm looking for my first real camera and I'm ready to open a can of worms in this thread. I was looking at a few different options and I'm trying to decide between the sony a6500, Canon 6d ii or wait for the 90d. It could come out as soon as this fall or early next year.

I'll be using it probably 95% of the time for photos and for landscape/architectural mostly. I've researched a lot, but I thought it doesn't hurt to get a few more opinions.

Let's hear your biased or general reasons why you would choose one of these, or something else within the 1000-1500 price range.

[Guest]

I have always preferred the Canon DSLRs. Mainly because that is what I have used for many years now.

 

I just think the ideas are limitless with photo idea creativity if you get to learn the camera.

 

But this isn't a sales pitch, just my opinion  

 

 

[YellowJersey]

This is always a tough call. Since you've mentioned the 6D mk II, I'm going to assume your budget is max $2500 CAD.

 Picking a brand is hard enough, let alone picking an individual model. I shot Canon for many years, but I've found their bodies rather lack lustre recently, and have since switched to Sony. I really only recommend Canon these days if there's a specific Canon lens you have your heart set on (Canon does make some really nice glass, though). I also shoot landscapes and a bit of architectural. I'd recommend a full frame camera as you'll be better able to take advantage of the wide angles generally used for those genres, but that's not a must.

In the full frame range I'd recommend:
-Sony A7III (probably a bit out of your budget, but you're getting one hell of a camera for its price)

-Nikon D750 (older camera, but well ahead of its time and still very relevant and amazing image quality, especially if you don't intend to shoot much/any video)

In the APS-C Range I'd recommend

-Fuji XT-2 (or wait for the XT-3).
-Nikon D500

 I hesitate to recommend the A6500 simply because Sony seems to be neglecting the APS-C lens line up in favour of pushing out more full frame lenses.
 
 Another way of helping to narrow down your choices would be to look at what lenses are available for each system. Never forget the importance of the lens.

Right now, my gut says Nikon or Fuji for you.
 

[cc143]

I agree with the comment above, but even though I have been a Canon shooter for the past 15 years almost, these days I tend to recommend used nikons. Specifically, a d810 coupled with some appropriate for what you do glass, due to the lack of a low pass filter and higher resolution sensor, that is if you know what you are doing.

 

I generally steer people away from sony's apsc lineup because their apsc lens offerings are not that extensive, they don't seem to care about the apsc landscape at all. 

 

If you need something light, an xt2 or I'd actually wait for an xt3 instead, simply becauase it is truly lightweight, amazingly reliable (I just went on a highland's trip over the weekend, it got rained on etc. and never missed a beat).

 

The 6d2s most prominent issue for me is the AF system, since I only use liveview when I'm on a tripod and the system on the OVF is too restrictive. Also, again, another card slot and no AA filter would be a plus.

[xQubeZx]

Also agrees with the guys above. For your needs the A6500 is not right. I’d look at the A7 mark iii as you seems to have the funds for a 6D mark ii, which I would not reccomend. Sure its a solid camera that wont let you down. But value wise its not a great buy. 

 

If you want a traditional DSLR look at a used D810 or a D750, two very solid FF cameras. 

 

 

[cc143]

2 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

Also agrees with the guys above. For your needs the A6500 is not right. I’d look at the A7 mark iii as you seems to have the funds for a 6D mark ii, which I would not reccomend. Sure its a solid camera that wont let you down. But value wise its not a great buy. 

 

If you want a traditional DSLR look at a used D810 or a D750, two very solid FF cameras. 

 

 

Actually, I'm gonna have to disagree on that, currently the thing is selling new on amazon for £1,560, and on ebay, you can find them in new condition for under £1000. Yes the a7iii is great value for what it is and its good its in the marketplace, but, if only for exactly that reason. But is it 25%-100% better than the 6d2? no it is not. Actually, if you are willing to look for used cameras and want something fairly recent, its hard to argue against a 5d4 or 6d2 at this point. Granted, its only because they can't compete at new prices, but if you look at the forest instead of the trees, the value proposition is quite decent.

[xQubeZx]

4 hours ago, cc143 said:

Actually, I'm gonna have to disagree on that, currently the thing is selling new on amazon for £1,560, and on ebay, you can find them in new condition for under £1000. Yes the a7iii is great value for what it is and its good its in the marketplace, but, if only for exactly that reason. But is it 25%-100% better than the 6d2? no it is not. Actually, if you are willing to look for used cameras and want something fairly recent, its hard to argue against a 5d4 or 6d2 at this point. Granted, its only because they can't compete at new prices, but if you look at the forest instead of the trees, the value proposition is quite decent.

Well I assumed the prices of the 6D was kinda similar since the release but considering that price drop its a more compelling option even if I personally might not chose it but for 1000$ I’d probably get it because that is hard to beat. But I was assuming it carried the initial 2000$ pricetag. 

[radmanhs]

I'm kinda liking  the D750. You can get them on eBay for 1200 "new" and with that instead of putting a lot on the body I can pick up a nice piece or 2 of glass with it. 

[YellowJersey]

13 hours ago, cc143 said:

Actually, I'm gonna have to disagree on that, currently the thing is selling new on amazon for £1,560, and on ebay, you can find them in new condition for under £1000. Yes the a7iii is great value for what it is and its good its in the marketplace, but, if only for exactly that reason. But is it 25%-100% better than the 6d2? no it is not. Actually, if you are willing to look for used cameras and want something fairly recent, its hard to argue against a 5d4 or 6d2 at this point. Granted, its only because they can't compete at new prices, but if you look at the forest instead of the trees, the value proposition is quite decent.

 I'm not really following you on the value of the 5D4 or 6D2 at this point, even with price drops since release. Save for Video, I'd say the D750 is still better value and capabilities than the 6D2 save for DPAF live view focusing), and I think the 5D4 is rather over priced for what it offers. Out of all the DSLRs out there, the D750 offers the best value for money for stills, imho, while still being an excellent camera in and of itself. (price is also going to vary a lot from country to country)

I agree with radmanhs; D750 with two nice pieces of glass to go with it. A Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VC (I had this lens and it was really nice when I shot Canon. Great for landscapes and architectural) and a Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC G2 (covers most other situations. Slap a x2 teleconverter on it and you got yourself a decent wildlife lens, too) would be a pretty rocking combo that would cover most situations.

[cc143]

10 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

 I'm not really following you on the value of the 5D4 or 6D2 at this point, even with price drops since release. Save for Video, I'd say the D750 is still better value and capabilities than the 6D2 save for DPAF live view focusing), and I think the 5D4 is rather over priced for what it offers. Out of all the DSLRs out there, the D750 offers the best value for money for stills, imho, while still being an excellent camera in and of itself. (price is also going to vary a lot from country to country)

I agree with radmanhs; D750 with two nice pieces of glass to go with it. A Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VC (I had this lens and it was really nice when I shot Canon. Great for landscapes and architectural) and a Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC G2 (covers most other situations. Slap a x2 teleconverter on it and you got yourself a decent wildlife lens, too) would be a pretty rocking combo that would cover most situations.

I am saying that if you look at used pricing, you will find that 5d4s and 6d2s are actually fairly well priced in comparison to current competition, especially if you factor in the EF mount. The d750 has historically been plagued by anufacturing issues. Its a great camera, if you get one that doesn't need to be returned to fix the shutter, in which case, I'm not sure if you buy used Nikon will even honour their warranty.

 

Yes the 5d4 is a bit overpriced if its at £3200 competing with the d850, but is it overpriced at £2000? come on! I mean, its missing by my count 3 features, had it had those 3 things, it would be the perfect all round camera. Granted its 3 quite important things, (Cfast card, no AA filter and Full width 4k(don't personally care about that one but whatever)).

 

Also, about the 6d2, if it had a hybrid viewfinder so that you can use DPAF while you look through the viewfinder and another card slot, I think you'd be singing an entirely different song. Unfortunately it doesn't, but if its half the price of the competition....

 

OP look at the d800e, its fairly close to the d810, older body obviously, but if its similarly priced to the d750 at a reasonably good condition, then the features it has over the d800e might be beneficial to you. You will have to work with better lighting, but the higher res sensor might be of use to you.  That being said, the d750 is well known as a great low light performer, and 24mp is more than enough for most things. The tamron 15-30mm as mentioned above is an excellent choice, for architecture etc.

 

I'd also look into a cheap standard prime or maybe a more universal focal length like a 24-70 or 24-120 at some point, the Tamron G1 should go for pretty cheap these days.

 

[YellowJersey]

13 hours ago, cc143 said:

I am saying that if you look at used pricing, you will find that 5d4s and 6d2s are actually fairly well priced in comparison to current competition, especially if you factor in the EF mount. The d750 has historically been plagued by anufacturing issues. Its a great camera, if you get one that doesn't need to be returned to fix the shutter, in which case, I'm not sure if you buy used Nikon will even honour their warranty.

 

Yes the 5d4 is a bit overpriced if its at £3200 competing with the d850, but is it overpriced at £2000? come on! I mean, its missing by my count 3 features, had it had those 3 things, it would be the perfect all round camera. Granted its 3 quite important things, (Cfast card, no AA filter and Full width 4k(don't personally care about that one but whatever)).

 

Also, about the 6d2, if it had a hybrid viewfinder so that you can use DPAF while you look through the viewfinder and another card slot, I think you'd be singing an entirely different song. Unfortunately it doesn't, but if its half the price of the competition....

 

OP look at the d800e, its fairly close to the d810, older body obviously, but if its similarly priced to the d750 at a reasonably good condition, then the features it has over the d800e might be beneficial to you. You will have to work with better lighting, but the higher res sensor might be of use to you.  That being said, the d750 is well known as a great low light performer, and 24mp is more than enough for most things. The tamron 15-30mm as mentioned above is an excellent choice, for architecture etc.

 

I'd also look into a cheap standard prime or maybe a more universal focal length like a 24-70 or 24-120 at some point, the Tamron G1 should go for pretty cheap these days.

 

I think where OP lives is going to be a major factor, as prices from country to country will vary wildly.

[radmanhs]

I live in the US so prices aren't too bad. D750s you can get for around 1200 new as stated above, I see a few  810s for 1400 used. A few people have mentioned elsewhere the sony a7r ii for its huge pixel count. Those also go for 1400ish used or the a7iii for a bit more.  With any of these options I can get some nice glass, especially if I get a 6d for sub $1000.

[radmanhs]

 double 

[YellowJersey]

3 hours ago, radmanhs said:

I live in the US so prices aren't too bad. D750s you can get for around 1200 new as stated above, I see a few  810s for 1400 used. A few people have mentioned elsewhere the sony a7r ii for its huge pixel count. Those also go for 1400ish used or the a7iii for a bit more.  With any of these options I can get some nice glass, especially if I get a 6d for sub $1000.

What's your total budget for camera + lenses to start off with?

[radmanhs]

13 minutes ago, YellowJersey said:

What's your total budget for camera + lenses to start off with?

Around 2000

[YellowJersey]

14 minutes ago, radmanhs said:

Around 2000

I'd say a used D750 or D810 would be a good choice for the body.

For the lens, since you're specifically mentioned landscape and architectural, there are two lens paths I'd recommend. 

  Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VS to start off. This is hefty beast of a lens with fantastic image quality, but it's big, heavy, and doesn't accept traditional screw-on filters. From there, I'd save up for a Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 G2 (or a Tamron 70-200mm f/4 if you don't need the 2.8), and between those two lenses you could shoot just about whatever life throws at you. Maybe throw a 50mm 1.8 lens in there to cover the gap between 30mm and 70mm. (this is exactly what I did when I shot Canon). This route would probably be more expensive, but give you a better kit overall.

Alternatively, go with the Laowa 15mm f/2 Zero-D to start off with. It's manual focus only, but competitively priced (manually focusing at wide angles and stopped down is easy), takes 72mm screw-on filters, and has very little distortion, which is particularly important for architectural. From there, if you saved up for a Sigma 24-105 f4 Art lens, you'd, again, have a pretty versatile kit. This would probably be the less expensive route and a little less versatile, but still pretty damn good.

[YellowJersey]

sorry, double post

[cc143]

Yah I'd say something similar, I'm a big believer in the 35 85mm combo of primes and an ultrawide, specifically a 16-35 f/2.8 myself tbh, but for architectural photography, the wider your ultrawide the better. All lens recommendations given above sound right, the only thing is, if you want to use filters without spending too much, there's a I believe 17-35mm nikkor I'd look at since it takes regular filters.

 

I'd go with the d810 as well. Now, there's a caveat here though, if weight and size is an issue, I have personally found myself reaching for the xt2 more and more these days, even though I'm still in love with my 5d, and the reason is that its so much smaller and lighter. Under normal circumstances, I'd be lugging around a 10kg backpack, or best case scenario, at least a body 3 lenses and a flash. With the fuji, I was able to pack everything I needed, that is:

 

Xt2 +2 batteries

16mm f/1.4

23mm f/2

50mm f/2

Landscape filters (I took my dslr kit since I don't have a polariser and 10nd for the lee seven5 kit)

Clothes etc. for 2 days and a sleeping bag, toiletries etc.

 

This all fit in my thinktank retrospective 7.

 

I would never take the xt2 alone to shoot something in a more professional capacity or if I didn't know more or less that I wouldn't need the versatility of my dslr or flashes and triggers etc. But, for street style architecture etc...I'd have a hard time not recommending an xt2 with a 10-24 or 8-16 once it comes out with a nice tripod and compact filter kit.

 

The d810 will get you better results probably, but the fuji will probably be better to work with overall.

[radmanhs]

Now I just need to find a decent cage.  Long story short, I can only really grip stuff with my right hand and intentionally hitting the buttons on anything is out of the question.  So my plan is to attack a cage, handle on the right to grip, then a remote shutter to hold along with the lens with my left hand.

 

This is a long shot, does anyone know id the d810 fits on the smallrig d850 cage?

[cc143]

57 minutes ago, radmanhs said:

Now I just need to find a decent cage.  Long story short, I can only really grip stuff with my right hand and intentionally hitting the buttons on anything is out of the question.  So my plan is to attack a cage, handle on the right to grip, then a remote shutter to hold along with the lens with my left hand.

 

This is a long shot, does anyone know id the d810 fits on the smallrig d850 cage?

I should imagine it would fit.

I mean I saw them side by side, they weren't that different.

 

Think of getting a tripod maybe? its pretty useful for the sort of stuff you wanna do and you can just set it up and control it while its on the tripod.

[radmanhs]

I think the frame of the cage is thin enough to not intrude any buttons 'think'.  I have a manfrotto 390 aluminum tripod, nothing that impressive, but should work for a bit.

[EsaT]

On 8/31/2018 at 9:56 AM, radmanhs said:

Now I just need to find a decent cage.  Long story short, I can only really grip stuff with my right hand and intentionally hitting the buttons on anything is out of the question.  So my plan is to attack a cage, handle on the right to grip, then a remote shutter to hold along with the lens with my left hand.

If you have good use of only right hand because of some injury that's certainly major aspect.

And equipment definitely needs to be comfortable to handle.

Which actually brings one conflicting thing:

While bigger camera has bigger grip, they also weight more, especially with 35mm format lenses.

And having that mirror, not really needed architecture/landscapes, just makes wide angle lenses optically more complex and lot bigger/heavier.

 

Have you visited camera shops trying what kind camera feels comfortable in hand and whose weight you can comfortably handle?

If your use of left hand is limited that likely means right hand has to carry more of the weight of camera and lens.

[radmanhs]

7 hours ago, EsaT said:

If you have good use of only right hand because of some injury that's certainly major aspect.

And equipment definitely needs to be comfortable to handle.

Which actually brings one conflicting thing:

While bigger camera has bigger grip, they also weight more, especially with 35mm format lenses.

And having that mirror, not really needed architecture/landscapes, just makes wide angle lenses optically more complex and lot bigger/heavier.

 

Have you visited camera shops trying what kind camera feels comfortable in hand and whose weight you can comfortably handle?

If your use of left hand is limited that likely means right hand has to carry more of the weight of camera and lens.

I meant I can only hold on to stuff with my right hand, my left is fine.  I am going to support some the weight with the handle on the right side, then the rest, along with any manual lens control with my left, while also holding a remote trigger with my left, assuming I'm freehand shooting.

[radmanhs]

One option I have is to get the a7 iii for 200 more brand new, which would drop the weight by 330 grams and the body is far smaller, which would still probably be smaller and lighter with a cage. The one huge loss is the lens options 

[YellowJersey]

4 hours ago, radmanhs said:

One option I have is to get the a7 iii for 200 more brand new, which would drop the weight by 330 grams and the body is far smaller, which would still probably be smaller and lighter with a cage. The one huge loss is the lens options 

I have the A7rIII, which is the same body, and I really like it. Having an EVF to show your exposure before you take the shot is incredibly handy, though it doesn't work quite as well as an optical view finder in really low light.

 In terms of bodies, the A7III is in an incredibly well spec'd out camera. If you can afford it, I'd definitely recommend that you take a serious look at it. EVF, IBIS, tilty touch screen, smaller, lighter, edge-to-edge focus points are all benefits of the A7III.

 Fortunately, third parties have been picking up some of the slack in terms of lenses and Sony has been putting a lot more focus on their full frame lenses than their APS-C lenses. You could still go for the Laowa 15mm 2.8 Zero D lens in the Sony mount, but you'd have the added benefit of focus peaking and punch-in zoom to help you nail focus. Fortunately, landscape and architectural photos give you a bit more time to compose and focus.

 At BH you can get the A7III with a 28-70mm lens as a kit for an extra $200 over the price of body-only. It's not the best lens in the world, but it would give you some flexibility.