Sub 200£ budget camera recommendations

[AndreiArgeanu]

I want to get into photography and possibly videography but I don't want to make a really big investment off the start so I'm looking for used camera recommendations around that budget.

So far I've looked at some Sony mirorrless cams like the NEX series, A5000 and the A3000. For non mirorless I've looked at the Sony A58 some Nikon cameras including the D3200, D3300, D5100 and Canon EOS 4000D, and a few other canons.

The one's that I'm leaning towards the most are the The Sony A3000, A58 and the Nikon D3200, especially the Sony models due to their lower cost and I want some advice on what to choose and what other options are available.

 

[adm0n]

The recommendation I always get when asking people who are into photography is, to just start with your smartphone camera. It is pretty competent and it's mostly more about what to photograph and not how you do it. So work on composing your pictures or try to be on the look out for nice landscapes and things to photograph. If you are really held back by the quality of your phone or the type of photos you can take with it, you'll know exactly what you actually want to do and can buy a camera and more importantly a lens that fits that usecase.

 

If you want to set all the settings manually, you can usually still do that on a smart phone anyway. And if you want something actually shoots significantly better pictures than a modern smartphone, you'll have invest some money and in a lot of cases also some time with editing or composing multiple (differently exposed) pictures into one.

 

 

[porina]

Is £200 for body only or do you want a starter lens in that price too?

 

Do you have any particular subject areas of interest, or is it a case of get the kit then see where you go?

 

Edit: I forgot something very important so adding it here. The feel of a camera. You have to like it if you're going to use it. There is no substitute to getting hands on and experiencing that. Paper specs matter less.

 

I'm very out of date as I was last active in Canon DSLR era but leaning towards stills, I'll suggest the 7D. It built on the xxD line and moved APS-C sensors to their single digit high end series. It is just a versatile and high performing DSLR camera of the time. Tracking AF is weak by modern standards. I still have mine but it is relegated to backup to the later improved mk2 which is outside your budget. The mk1 is £164 at MPB for an "excellent" condition unit and less for more worn ones. I don't recall the video performance of it as it was way back in the early years of DSLR video. It did release after the 5D2 which was the camera that bought "big sensor" video to the masses and was popular for that. In a quick search the 7D video does not do AF if that matters.

 

The 5D2 would be challenging in budget. "Well used" examples are available sub £200. You get a big sensor to play with and as I said, it was the camera that opened the doors to big sensor videography as long as you're not afraid of manual focus. I also still have one of these, although for my shooting style I don't really benefit from a bigger sensor so it gets left behind my 7D2. The original 5D is within budget, but doesn't do video, and as an older camera the sensor tech is a noticeable step back.

 

The consumer line is still reasonable. I still have a 600D too, in part for its tilt screen. I got this as a cheap body and it spent most of its time doing astrophotography, where other body features don't add value.

[AndreiArgeanu]

25 minutes ago, porina said:

Is £200 for body only or do you want a starter lens in that price too?

Including a kit lens. I think I've ended up narrowing things down anyway. I'm now comparing a Sony A58 DSLR and a Sony A5000 mirorrless. They're 160£ with a lens and have the exact same sensor. Edit: 12 month warranty included in the 160£ price as well.

 

The A5000 I've seen touted as a great low budget beginner camera but I haven't seen any major recent reviews of the A58, although the A58 seems better in quite a few regards, like having an actual view finder, sensor shift stabilization, phase detection autofocus instead of contrast autofocus, microphone input and hotshoe mount and few other things here and there.

 

I have looked at the 7D as well, it does cost more than the A58 and has it's own advantages and disadvantages like a smaller sensor, a worse DXOmark score if that means anything, no stabilization and it will be a challenge to try and get one with a lens sub 200£.

 

Edit 2: Mind you when I make these comparisons I look at websites like camspex.com and cameradecision.com and some reviews and videos but for all I know those websites could be UserBenchmark 2.0

 

[porina]

40 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

I'm now comparing a Sony A58 DSLR and a Sony A5000 mirorrless. They're 160£ with a lens and have the exact same sensor.

Be aware the A58 is a SLT, which has different advantages/disadvantages to SLR and mirrorless. SLT is kinda in between with an electronic viewfinder image rather than optical of SLR, so closer to mirrorless in that aspect. But since it keeps a mirror the AF system works like a SLR.

 

40 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Edit: 12 month warranty included in the 160£ price as well.

Out of interest who are you looking at buying from? 12 months is decent. I've used MPB in the distant past and they currently offer 6 months as standard.

 

40 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

I have looked at the 7D as well, it does cost more than the A58 and has it's own advantages and disadvantages like a smaller sensor, a worse DXOmark score if that means anything, no stabilization and it will be a challenge to try and get one with a lens sub 200£.

The sensor size difference isn't worth worrying about, they're both APS-C class. DXOmark is another one of those things to take with caution. Look at specific aspects that you think might matter to you. From memory Canon sensors of that era lagged Sony/Nikon in dynamic range, which wouldn't have helped. Colour separation of the filter array may also be a little weaker. Neither of these stop people from getting great photos and ends up being pointless arguments about gear if you get sucked into those types of forums.

 

At MPB it is possible to get a "well used" 7D for £134 and a "excellent" 18-55 IS USM for £60 as an example.

 

40 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Edit 2: Mind you when I make these comparisons I look at websites like camspex.com and cameradecision.com and some reviews and videos but for all I know those websites could be UserBenchmark 2.0

I haven't heard of either of those sites so can't comment on them. I will caution again that if you want to take great photos, don't get bogged down in the details of specs. A parallel here could be arguing about getting 2% more fps in a game than actually playing it.

 

DXO I have heard of from the past and I even bought their processing software, which I can't use now even though I have the install and serial, they turned off the activation server as it is an unsupported version. 

[RabbidEwok]

Personally would start with your phone. The issue with bargain bin cameras is you can’t really invest in the mount that much because if you want a better, more modern body it just won’t support your glass without maybe some adapters. If you get a cheap X mount or E mount lens camera like the A3000 you can take those with you. 

[AndreiArgeanu]

2 hours ago, porina said:

Out of interest who are you looking at buying from? 12 months is decent. I've used MPB in the distant past and they currently offer 6 months as standard.

I had to recheck, it's 24 months and it's from CEX, they offer 24 month warranty on pretty much everything they sell besides consumables like batteries.

As for the 7D I'm not sure I want to buy one because of the higher cost. Between the A58 and A5000 which one would you choose? I've seen that the A5000 is compatible with Sony E mount lenses while the A58 is on a different lens mount which may make it a better investment, especially if I'm going to end up buying lenses for it.

 

 

[porina]

1 hour ago, RabbidEwok said:

The issue with bargain bin cameras is you can’t really invest in the mount that much because if you want a better, more modern body it just won’t support your glass without maybe some adapters.

On the flip side, older system glass is relatively cheap. If I were to replace my existing DSLR era lenses with current mirrorless equivalents, I'd be looking at 4 figures, each. Ok, you don't need top of the line lenses, but there's a lot of older stuff out there that still has a lot of life left in it. Unlike PC tech, optics don't evolve that quickly so as long as it remains mechanically fine, lenses from 10, 20 years ago still work great today. Sensors have improved, but IMO most within last 10-15 years is still great performing. Software processing has also improved a lot so you could probably get more out of older cameras than when they were new.

 

1 hour ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Between the A58 and A5000 which one would you choose? I've seen that the A5000 is compatible with Sony E mount lenses while the A58 is on a different lens mount which may make it a better investment, especially if I'm going to end up buying lenses for it.

Double check as I'm not 100% on what I'm about to say. I think the A58 as a SLT uses the same A-mount as their earlier Alpha SLR cameras, which is a rebrand when they bought Minolta. So you have those lenses to natively work on it as well as offerings from third parties like Sigma, Tamron. There probably haven't been new lenses on that for a long time so what is out there is all you'll get for it.

 

A5000 uses E-mount which I think is still their current mirrorless mount. So you can get new releases for it, at a price. It can also adapt to use A-mount lenses (and even others if you really want to).

Check out the used pricing and availability for possible lenses of interest. Forward looking the A5000 has more possibilities, especially if you keep at it and upgrade in future. A58 doesn't have the same path, but offsetting that you might be able to find some bargains.

[RabbidEwok]

On 12/8/2023 at 3:28 PM, porina said:

On the flip side, older system glass is relatively cheap. If I were to replace my existing DSLR era lenses with current mirrorless equivalents, I'd be looking at 4 figures, each. Ok, you don't need top of the line lenses, but there's a lot of older stuff out there that still has a lot of life left in it. Unlike PC tech, optics don't evolve that quickly so as long as it remains mechanically fine, lenses from 10, 20 years ago still work great today. Sensors have improved, but IMO most within last 10-15 years is still great performing. Software processing has also improved a lot so you could probably get more out of older cameras than when they were new.

It’s not just sensors it’s the image processing, autofocus, low light performance, EVF, weight, size, battery life etc that’s all improved. You also have issues buying used stuff that’s older because it’s harder to find it in good condition. Hell i’ve had issues with used lens on X mount from retailers and that’s a fairly new mount. 

[porina]

1 hour ago, RabbidEwok said:

It’s not just sensors it’s the image processing, autofocus, low light performance, EVF, weight, size, battery life etc that’s all improved.

Image processing certainly has improved, but this can be done outside of the camera. AF outside of fast moving tracking has been generally "good enough" for decades. Anyone taking photography seriously will learn how it works, and get the intended result with any limitations. Knowing what any auto function does and when you might want to go manual if part of the process. Battery I'd even argue has gone backwards with mirrorless era. On DSLRs a single battery can usually last me a whole day shooting. 

 

The first generations of digital cameras were pretty rough, but within the last 15 years or so we hit diminishing returns and improvements are relatively minor.

 

I look at mirrorless and it is a hard sell for me to replace DSLRs with it. For my use cases, the scenario where it might have an advantage is in tracking AF, which was always challenging as my favourite subjects are less predictable wildlife. For most other use cases, the bigger limit to how good photos are will be my skill level, not the hardware.

 

1 hour ago, RabbidEwok said:

You also have issues buying used stuff that’s older because it’s harder to find it in good condition. Hell i’ve had issues with used lens on X mount from retailers and that’s a fairly new mount. 

Buying used always has risks which can be mitigated by buying from a reputable seller with good warranty.

[Vilacom]

On 12/8/2023 at 2:37 AM, AndreiArgeanu said:

I want to get into photography and possibly videography but I don't want to make a really big investment off the start so I'm looking for used camera recommendations around that budget.

So far I've looked at some Sony mirorrless cams like the NEX series, A5000 and the A3000. For non mirorless I've looked at the Sony A58 some Nikon cameras including the D3200, D3300, D5100 and Canon EOS 4000D, and a few other canons.

The one's that I'm leaning towards the most are the The Sony A3000, A58 and the Nikon D3200, especially the Sony models due to their lower cost and I want some advice on what to choose and what other options are available.

 

So you've gotten some suggestions already but I want to start at the beginning here, you say "get into photography and possibly videography".  If you can, please refine that.  If you're really just getting into it at all and don't have any specific purpose in mind yet beyond "Take some cool photos and video and see what is fun" then please PLEASE stick with your cell phone and look into some apps that will allow you to play with the settings more directly, there are lots of good ones out there that will do all you could ever want when it comes to just learning the basics and being able to take all kinds of cool shots.

The fact is "Photography" in itself is a lot of disciplines and styles that all can require/utilize very different lenses and even cameras, a lot of them can have a lot of overlap depending on what you want.  For instance most decent lenses can be a portrait lens if you're willing to be a little creative but if you're looking for say macro, sports, or wildlife those are generally much more specialized with those kinds of photographers placing a lot of value on specific technical specifications or lens options.

For your budget you're really paying the 200 to just have the feel of an actual camera as opposed to a phone in your hands, nothing wrong with that at all if it's what you want but your results will likely be much better with just about any reasonably modern cell phone and then you can get some experience and make a much more informed decision.  

 

[ToboRobot]

I highly recommend getting a disposable film camera to play around with. 

If you like film, find a used 35mm camera.  If not, look into digital.

[AndreiArgeanu]

@porina I ended up getting the A5000, boxed. I got lucky since it came in white which looks pretty The grip isn't the most comfortable but it's pretty decent. And it works given the small size of the camera. The photos look good, especially the natural bokeh but I've only taken photos in my room for the time being. The raw photos are 20mb in size which pretty large,my thinkpad L380 can struggle a little bit loading them, but my desktop can handle them no problem. I'm going to London later today so I should get a lot more experience with the camera. So far the camera seems really good.