[Canon EOS] Can someone explain this?

[Indus Monk]

11 hours ago, bob345 said:

the d5300 is a far better camera than the canon 1200d is pretty much every aspect and this is coming from a canon shooter. The 1200d is just a very poor performer especially by today's standards. The 700d/t5i is the cheapest i would go in the canon lineup of dslr's.

i agree there, it is slow as hell. But that is all.

[ALwin]

6 hours ago, bob345 said:

It is definitely possible for a professional to get amazing results out of any camera, but it is very different when it comes to a beginner. The image quality is a non issue. The problem is usability and practicality from a beginners standpoint. How reliable is the auto focus? How is it in a dim environment?, how easy is it to use for a beginner?, how easy is it to share photos quickly? These are some of the things that may be more important to a beginner than what kind of images the camera can take when given to a professional photographer.

Some of these are better things to consider than just the sensor's benchmark scores, which DxOMark tests.  Which was my whole point.

[ALwin]

6 hours ago, AmbarChakrabarti said:

all that stuff is stuff i don't really care about anymore. It is usable, auto focus is best left OFF though, A dim environment can be dealt with 0.3 sec shutter speed and a tripod, It was actually not very hard to use at all, sharing stuff is easy due to the fact that i use a micro-sd card (but i think this objection is not necessary). As for what was important to me? learning to take stills and do it right. And hey, if the pros aren't worried about these things, then i am not either, even though i am just a beginner.

Actually both Canon and Nikon AF are pretty good, as long as you set them up correctly.  Even on my D4 and D800E, I pretty much customize how the camera handles AF instead of using the default settings, else they don't perform the way I expect them to.  And I have owned a Canon camera before, it had a pretty good AF system.

 

As for dim lighting, that's why camera manufacturers also sell speedlights/flash units.  All too often, because beginners being beginners, and non-beginners are afraid of using flash.  I don't consider the built-in pop up flash to be a proper speedlight at all.

 

As for file sharing... well having wifi built into the camera is nice, but do you honestly want to share your photos straight out of the camera without first checking them over on a computer using Photoshop, Lightroom, or some other software?

 

There are two arrogant thoughts of photography that's being perpetuated by those who are misinformed and those who think they know it all:

• Natural lighting is best and that's all you should use
• Doing everything in-camera makes you a better photographer (I call this the Ken Rockwell* school of bullshit)

Both of these are wrong.

 

While it is a good idea to use natural lighting as much as possible, natural lighting (or even artificial lighting such as street lights, wall lights, ceiling lights) are not controlled by the photographer.  The only lights that a photographer has full control over are lights coming from speedlights and strobes.  They can be adjusted, modified, and put in almost any position.

 

As for doing things in camera, there are may instances where even if you use the right exposure settings, with the word "right" being subjective to your needs, it pays to go over the photo using a software like Photoshop and doing some adjustments.  Even in journalistic photography, such as those required by news agencies and magazines like National Geographic that prefer straight out of the camera photos, they still allow you to adjust colors, contrast, "fix" the photo as long as it you don't add/remove elements or show something that is different from what was originally in the composition.

 

 

*Ken Rockwell is a guy who runs a camera and lens review website and his main teaching is get everything right in camera and shoot JPEG, you don't need RAW.

[d3sl91]

5 hours ago, ALwin said:

Doing everything in-camera makes you a better photographer (I call this the Ken Rockwell* school of bullshit)

*Ken Rockwell is a guy who runs a camera and lens review website and his main teaching is get everything right in camera and shoot JPEG, you don't need RAW.

This made me laugh. It also made me realise how much of a Geek I am when it comes to cameras that I laughed at that.

[ALwin]

10 minutes ago, d3sl91 said:

This made me laugh. It also made me realise how much of a Geek I am when it comes to cameras that I laughed at that.

I was very reluctant to move into the realm of digital photography, and when I bought my first DSLR I was reading online everywhere to see what people had to say about digital. I wasted about a year of my time focused on "gear" that I nearly forgot that it was about creating the image.  I even read a couple of his reviews and blog articles (big mistake) and tried getting everything right in camera with just JPEG.  I took better photos with film than with digital.

 

Luckily I realized in time and now my digital photography is just as good, if not better, than when I was using film.  In fact I think digital gives more control to the photographer and has the potential to bring out the inner artist.  With film, unless you had access to a dark room and all the gear, you relied on a third party to develop the film for you.  With digital, all the things that one could do in a darkroom is in one's hands.

Quote

 

If you want to improve any one thing on any camera that will make the most difference in the outcomes, fix the photographer.

Try not to become a gearhead or pixel-peeper. Try to become a photographer....;)

 

 

This is dodging and burning in the days of film.

 

 

And now in the digital age.

 

 

[TurkarYash]

The only problem for you now is that 1200D has a poor shutter life and will probably die sooner. My had is the official service personnel for hasselblad and phase one so i know a thing or two.

the kit lenses can give you great results but because they are made from plastic wear out and the focus becomes less accurate. If you are planning too upgrade and if you are really into photography i would suggest going for a xxD body from canon or if you dont really care about other features that xxD bodies provide and only care about image quality a 750D or a 700D would be great.

Yes you should have waited for 700D and yes D5300 is much better.

Coming from a canon user.

 

I still use a 550D which has the same cpu and sensor as the 1200D. The lenses matter more than the body so i recently bought a 70-200 f2.8L.Once you get a decent body concentrate on the lenses.