Are "Beginners" Cameras Really Best for a Beginner? (Page 4): :sm24: :sm24:...

tjim Loc: Far Northern California

Retina wrote:

There is nothing for which to apologize regarding your first sentence other than perhaps the use of a contraction in writing. Trailing prepositions are not nearly as bad as admitting to have upgraded cameras. I envy all the experts who bought only one digital camera which will remain their one and only camera for good. I envy them because they still have the good sense to realize that they still need to grow into their first. My hat is off to them.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

wdross wrote:

This is Uglyhedgehogs! It is almost always a big can of worms!

It varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. With Olympus, most of the controls on the E-M10 mrIII, E-M5 mrII, and E-M1 mrII are basically in the same location and basically operate the same. The same can be said for the Pen series. It not a big step from beginner to top level.

All modern Pentax DSLR’s have at least two dials that provide control of aperture and shutter-speed without lowering camera from your eye. Main difference of top Pentax DSLR’s today is ability to control ISO also - not an enormous step.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Kuzano wrote:

If everyone could afford Ferrari's, notwithstandin... (show quote)

I'd be driving this:

https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/16/tesla-unveils-the-new-roadster/

I'll take a guess that you haven't handled an entry level camera in a while. I do on a regular basis with my students. I would not be so quick to say "There is very little one can do with a $3000 camera body that can't be done with a $600 camera body" because it simply isn't true. Aside from handling performance, low light/highISO, AF speed and accuracy, access to camera features, maximum frame rate, intervalometer, 14 bit raw capture, etc, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

If you are already a good photographer the better gear will not hold you back like the lower end stuff.

That's just logic and common sense.

BebuLamar

Gene51 wrote:

I'd be driving this:

https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/16/tesla-unveils-the-new-roadster/

It has speed and long range but when battery is dead you must take a long nap.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

wjones8637 wrote:

First I want to acknowledge that this is from a Ni... (show quote)

My theory for deciding what to purchase is to buy the best you can afford! For me that meant a digital point-and-shoot for a while. When I began to feel restricted by that camera, it was time to try researching cameras and buy a DSLR. In 2012, I bought the D7000 which was at that time the best of the crop-sensor cameras. It served me well, and gave me plenty of room to grow into it. The thing that people don't seem to realize when recommending those "entry level" cameras, is that all DSLRs have a lot of features in common. The differences is where to look to decide what camera is best for you. After all, it is possible to take pictures with them regardless of knowing how to handle all the features. So by purchasing the best you can afford, you won't need another camera for a longer time. And buying better lenses made it possible for me to be able to purchase a full-frame camera without the extra expense of upgrading my lenses! That took 5 years of learning, exploration, and acquisition well spent.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

edellington wrote:

My first and only camera is the Canon 5D Mark IV with a Gitzo tripod and many L glass lenses. Don't skimp

My first and only camera is the T6s have fun!!!!!!

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

rmorrison1116 wrote:

My philosophy also. I learned early on not to buy cheap entry level lenses. They may make decent toys but not decent images. As for the camera body, if one is serious about photography, get a body that will challenge you to learn and will last.
True beginner cameras are meant for those who don't plan on or care to expand beyond a beginner, and there's nothing wrong with that.

My T6s allows me to be creative and will last many many years stop the BS!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

BebuLamar wrote:

It has speed and long range but when battery is dead you must take a long nap.

Just like when you run out of gas in the Ferrari and you are 10 miles from the gas station. Good planning is the solution in both cases, though AAA is not quite ready to deal with dead Teslas.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

rmorrison1116 wrote:

My philosophy also. I learned early on not to buy cheap entry level lenses. They may make decent toys but not decent images. As for the camera body, if one is serious about photography, get a body that will challenge you to learn and will last.

Apparently you have never had to live on a tight budget. My feeling is that a picture in the camera is worth more than a perfect one not taken because one doesn’t have camera because one was being perfectionist in selecting equipment.

tjim Loc: Far Northern California

A D850 is a "beginner" camera in the hands of a beginner. A point and shoot is a "pro" camera in the hands of a pro. Where an advanced photographer started and where she/he ends in equipment is a wild ride that doesn't seem to end. Someday we will be asking "Why in the world would anyone want a D850?"

Edia Loc: Central New Jersey

This came up a few weeks ago. As far as I am concerned, there are no starter cameras, only starter photographers. The cheapest DSLR is capable of taking wonderful photos. Composition, lighting and lens quality make more of a difference in the clarity and quality of the photos than what DSLR camera was used. Where the camera abilities do come into play are for sports, wildlife and low light photography. If you do not plan to shoot any of these, then save your money on the camera and spend it on better lenses.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

There is some truth in what you say about an inexpensive camera being able to do some things as well as a Pro body. But you are making a very broad generalization. Most all the Pro or semi Pro shooters that I know use the best cameras and lenses they can afford. They are not out there shooting with $600 cameras. They could and would get some great shots, but they understand the value of quality bodies and lenses in their kit too.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Kuzano wrote:

If everyone could afford Ferrari's, notwithstandin... (show quote)

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

tjim wrote:

A D850 is a "beginner" camera in the hands of a beginner. A point and shoot is a "pro" camera in the hands of a pro. Where an advanced photographer started and where she/he ends in equipment is a wild ride that doesn't seem to end. Someday we will be asking "Why in the world would anyone want a D850?"

Probably sooner than we think too...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Does not necessarily say anything about budget at all. There are people on the forum that have 6-10 low to mid priced cameras and 15-25 moderate priced lenses. That is fine if they are happy with what they have. I rather have one or two Pro level bodies and a half dozen lenses. The is just my approach. It is a choice, as are most things in life. People look at the camera gear and tools that I have an say wow, how do you afford all that stuff. In part it is because I am happy driving a 15 year old Suburban with 200,000 miles that cost me $8,000 when I bought it and not the $70,000 it would cost new. I also spend about 2 years hunting for that Suburban that I felt was the right deal for me and my needs. It is as much about choices as budget in many cases...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

rehess wrote:

Apparently you have never had to live on a tight budget. My feeling is that a picture in the camera is worth more than a perfect one not taken because one doesn’t have camera because one was being perfectionist in selecting equipment.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Gene51 wrote:

I'd be driving this: br br https://techcrunch.com... (show quote)