Amateur or Beginning Photographers: Upgrade Or Not? (Page 5): "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Best quote to live by. If the equipment you have is producing the product you are...

orrie smith Loc: Kansas

ltcarizona wrote:

I post this question for discussion for those beginners in photography regarding upgrading cameras. This is based on other questions I have seen posted on this site. I understand everyone has the opinions and there are those who have to have the best. But I always look at this question based on your level of photography expertise. I have gone thru the process and I am glad I had a professional to work with. I had the opportunity in my time to learn from photography instructors, professional photographers, and Playboy. It really does make a difference!

For example a person has a Nikon D7200 and is thinking about upgrading to the Nikon D850. Money is not a problem. So what do we tell him that is realistic and best for him?

Since this person has said money is no problem why not just tell him to buy it since he can grow into it even if he does not have the experience, skills, or needs the abilities the new camera offers him for what he wants to do with it. Heck why not just tell him to buy a Leica or the medium format cameras. But?

The one thing every photographer knows is that an amateur or beginner has to start somewhere. While camera are so smart they basically become a high price fix lens rangefinder camera with the professional look. Therefore until the amateur or beginner has the following I do not recommend going into the high priced cameras: 1. Developed level of photography basics through some on hands training with another experienced photographer. 2. The photography he is going to be undertaking or specialize in needs an advanced pro level camera. 3. And he is willing to spend the money on the level of glass or lenses that support that camera to its fullest.

After all why spend money on a 44 Magnum when the 9mm can shoot more rounds more accurately and be just a deadly. Maybe because you want to be the big boy on the block. But in real life shooting cases the 9 mm for rounds on target accuracy would win out. Don't forget the other guy will be shooting at you.

So much the same with photography in a way. Right now I own a Nikon D810 after owning since 1973 a variety of Nikon and Canon film, FX and DX cameras; from the very expensive to least. I know that the camera doesn't truly make the photographer but his skills as such. A entry level DSLR can win photography contests just like the professional cameras, and that is a fact.

So I ask myself should I upgrade to the D850? My answer is NO. Why you ask? Because I am a landscape photographer mostly, do not take astrophotography, but still could with the D810, do not really need the extra MP, don't need the little faster motor drive, etc. So for me I will wait for something else to come along. Here I am looking a my needs as a photographer ever though I could buy the most expensive camera in the world; though it would not make me a better photographer. I could go on with other points that I think others to this forum could make.

SO, What does everyone else think?

I post this question for discussion for those begi... (show quote)

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Best quote to live by. If the equipment you have is producing the product you are happy with, keep it, if not, replace it.

Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA

If the person can afford the 810 and new lens have them purchase that. Why learn on one camera then later change to another. Each camera has its own quirks. May as well spend the time on the better camera and learn it well.

Hbuk66 Loc: Oswego, NY

I have been taking photos, mainly sun rise and set for a couple of years. I started with a Samsung NX 30 and and a Panasonic g7. About a year ago I took all my gear to a photo shop and traded for a Sony a7 and the Sonnar ZA 55mm lens. More of an upgrade than I originally thought. And part 2 of my upgrade will be a Nikon D700, and more Nikon lenses. If money were no problem, I would have purchased a Sony a7rII and several thousand dollars worth of lenses; and a Nikon D750 and another several thousand in lenses... so I say go and buy whatever you want, and learn as you go...

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

orrie smith wrote:

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Best quote to live by. If the equipment you have is producing the product you are happy with, keep it, if not, replace it.

👍👍👍 best words ever to live buy

NBBPH Loc: Indiana

Money no object? Who cares what they buy. I know folks who buy the latest and greatest and then set it on automatic and enjoy themselves. Money an object? As it is in my case and the situation for most folks I know, buy the best you can afford. If I spend the big bucks I prefer to use it on the best glass and use a adequate body, which I usually purchase used. The discussion like this on cameras reminds me of the discussions and debates on stereo equipment that raged on and on. The experts would usually go to electronic gear and oscilloscopes to detect differences. I have never listened to music with an oscilloscope.

kevinscamera

Versatility, is the key to any camera system. Available components is the next area. Camera bodies are best bought new. Components can be purchased used. Next step is investigation. Stay with Canon or Nikon (they have the largest group of components available). Checkout the amateur bodies, pick them up handle them. If you plan on video checkout 70d or 80d in canon. Nikon has an equivalent. The camera store or electronic store should have both.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Charlie157 wrote:

If the person can afford the 810 and new lens have them purchase that. Why learn on one camera then later change to another. Each camera has its own quirks. May as well spend the time on the better camera and learn it well.

That is a valid perspective, but most of us buy multiple new cameras ( or other products ) during our lives. As technology evolves there will clearly be new functions and capabilities, but if they build upon one another then it helps the evolutionary process. It isn't just what is considered best at a point in time, but also what changes over time. A time based system level approach has some benefits, and I appreciate companies that provide that longitudinal continuity.

Both Nikon and Canon, also Pentax I believe, have maintained this decades long continuity - some with a few discontinuities every now and again - but has strongly influenced my choice to stay with my preferred brand Canon. If I was a Nikon user then, I would probably be one now. The system level has a huge influence.

In my own situation, my current camera (80D) has much incommon with my first Canon (AE-1) from 1976, T90 from 1986, various P&S systems from 2004 onwards, but all share many of the same operational familiar controls. Regardless of brand, that consistency seems to have some value, rather than skiping from brand to brand, and new system to new system.

hankswan

With so many topics about what camera, how advanced a camera do I need and lens questions. A better direction for most beginners and amateurs and even advanced photographers in many cases would be as follows. The Great Courses (www.ordergreatcourses.com) and take a look at the Learn how to take better pictures with National Geographic. Right now there is a very special price until 10/26/2017. You can receive Fundamentals of Photography and National Geographic Masters of Photography on DVD for $57.90 (Fundamentals of Photography only for $34.95). Believe it or not the regular price is $539.90. I think you could load in on to your smart phone, tablet, or laptop and then it would be available on site wherever you are shooting. Just IMHO.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

I agree👍🏻👍🏻. As a comparison: in the fishing world, more fish are caught from a lowly John Boat than all of the other varieties of boats combined. More fish are caught with the lowly earth worm than all of the high dollar lures combined. The point is, it is the photographer or fisherman that really knows his equipment or quarry is the winning team. That is also why most colleges require photo students to use a basic cameras as a freshman to learn the craft before moving on to more advanced cameras. In my case at Ohio University it was the Diana. At the University of Alaska and Savannah College of Art and Design, they use the "one time use, throw away" camera. One of my favorite shots is from a "throw a way" camera. It is much harder to learn with an advanced camera than a beginners camera. Like your microwave oven, you end up not using all the fancy features and just use the "popcorn, potato, and 30 sec buttons only. Happy Shooting

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

Peterff wrote:

Do we really need gun analogies for this discussion? Can you even get bump stocks for cameras? Most people that have their photo taken don't die, unless you're Princess Diana of course. Or possibly Kim Kardashian who merely thinks that she has.

we're wandering away ...

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

jccash wrote:

Does the D850 have full auto? .

No. The D850 is a one of Nikon's "Professional" camera bodies.. By this time, if you have $3300 to drop, you are supposed to know what you are doing. There is Program mode, which I only use for the built in light meter, copying the recommended settings to Manual Mode as a place to start with exposure.

Capnyos

And you and I are in the same boat!

barbie.lewis Loc: Livingston, Texas

If "money is no object" than a high-end camera is just as reasonable as a Brownie Hawkeye if the purchaser enjoys it. I suspect that most Clé de Peau Beauté Synactif Intensive Cream ($1,000 a jar) is bought by women it will never help, that most Ferrari automobiles spend more time being parked by valets than they spend on the race track, and that most 4-wheel drive Jeeps never go off road.

But those purchases help keep the exotic face creams, cameras, and cars afloat in a world of drugstore brands,cellphone selfies, and Toyota Camrys.

Peterff wrote:

Do we really need gun analogies for this discussion? Can you even get bump stocks for cameras? Most people that have their photo taken don't die, unless you're Princess Diana of course. Or possibly Kim Kardashian who merely thinks that she has.

There is a beautiful world outside of San Francisco in which many ordinary citizens are comfortable with guns and are living safer lives than San Franciscans. In that world such analogies make perfect sense as easily as face cream analogies, car analogies or any other analogies.

"The overall San Francisco, CA crime rate is 105% higher than the California average and is 117% higher than the national average. Looking at violent crime specifically, San Francisco, CA has a violent crime rate that is 60% higher than the California average and 84% higher than the national average. For property crime, San Francisco, CA is 113% higher than the California average and 122% higher than the national average." (http://www.areavibes.com/san+francisco-ca/crime/).

And BTW, I was in San Francisco yesterday and noticed a great many billboards declaring that San Franciscans are apparently using cars as weapons. At least from the builboards, it appears that running over pedestrians is a popular local sport. I almost took pictures of the billboards.

therwol Loc: USA

Peterff wrote:

Yes, and there are plenty who don't want any kind of pro or anti political or non photography discussion in the main photography discussion area. It was the OP that started the problem that you should be castigating.

I didn't read the analogy as pro or anti-gun. It was an analogy between two different cameras and two different guns, something that many people in our culture would understand. I didn't give it a second thought.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

ltcarizona wrote:

I post this question for discussion for those beginners in photography regarding upgrading cameras. This is based on other questions I have seen posted on this site. I understand everyone has the opinions and there are those who have to have the best. But I always look at this question based on your level of photography expertise. I have gone thru the process and I am glad I had a professional to work with. I had the opportunity in my time to learn from photography instructors, professional photographers, and Playboy. It really does make a difference!

For example a person has a Nikon D7200 and is thinking about upgrading to the Nikon D850. Money is not a problem. So what do we tell him that is realistic and best for him?

Since this person has said money is no problem why not just tell him to buy it since he can grow into it even if he does not have the experience, skills, or needs the abilities the new camera offers him for what he wants to do with it. Heck why not just tell him to buy a Leica or the medium format cameras. But?

The one thing every photographer knows is that an amateur or beginner has to start somewhere. While camera are so smart they basically become a high price fix lens rangefinder camera with the professional look. Therefore until the amateur or beginner has the following I do not recommend going into the high priced cameras: 1. Developed level of photography basics through some on hands training with another experienced photographer. 2. The photography he is going to be undertaking or specialize in needs an advanced pro level camera. 3. And he is willing to spend the money on the level of glass or lenses that support that camera to its fullest.

After all why spend money on a 44 Magnum when the 9mm can shoot more rounds more accurately and be just a deadly. Maybe because you want to be the big boy on the block. But in real life shooting cases the 9 mm for rounds on target accuracy would win out. Don't forget the other guy will be shooting at you.

So much the same with photography in a way. Right now I own a Nikon D810 after owning since 1973 a variety of Nikon and Canon film, FX and DX cameras; from the very expensive to least. I know that the camera doesn't truly make the photographer but his skills as such. A entry level DSLR can win photography contests just like the professional cameras, and that is a fact.

So I ask myself should I upgrade to the D850? My answer is NO. Why you ask? Because I am a landscape photographer mostly, do not take astrophotography, but still could with the D810, do not really need the extra MP, don't need the little faster motor drive, etc. So for me I will wait for something else to come along. Here I am looking a my needs as a photographer ever though I could buy the most expensive camera in the world; though it would not make me a better photographer. I could go on with other points that I think others to this forum could make.

SO, What does everyone else think?

I post this question for discussion for those begi... (show quote)

Actually I fall into this category....started with a D3300 several years ago...upgraded to the D7200 for the 100% viewfinder and perhaps more ISO range....now thinking FF a la D850 for better IQ, FF experience ... sure a D800/800e/810 will do but I have some money for a GAS attack. If money were tight, I would go with a used D8xx and hope for a future used/refurb 850.