glyphtrix

After a nights sleep and re visititing the OP:
IF the heart of this matter is merely semantics in nature (which some people seem to get stuck on around here..):
than the reason we differentiate between starter and other cameras is that by doing so we denote that that one will be a starting point for which the learner progresses past on to better equipment, gear which is implied to be, easier to use with less features while a more advanced camera will be held and presumed to be used without upgrading.

In short, a beginner could be trained on ANY camera even the highest most complicated pro grades especially if the one learning would go to use that equipment in a position hired by the agency that did the training.

IF someone is going to mentor, apprentice, or otherwise thoroughly instruct a beginner of photography then it doesn't matter how complex of a pro camera they start with so long as the teacher can adequately teach the operation ( or at a minimum the desired processes )AND If the mentor/teacher furnishes the gear.


BUT if one expects someone without camera operation knowledge to OBTAIN pro gear up front with a substantial investment on their own and NOT receive instruction but rather to stumble and learn themselves without any future guarantee of employment or continued use .. this is just stupidity. The beginner will go into debt for equipment they cant use ; will likely become frustrated and there's no assurance that the complex camera would even be appropriate for whatever genre of photography the beginner gravitates too.

Buying less costly, less featured gear allows the beginner to time to gain experience at a relative low cost
; minimizing expense and risk- where the gear doesn't fit the needs of the style of photography being pursued - which can change.


And so I return to my original counter question:
WHY IS THIS QUESTION BEING ASKED?

Is the poster unnecessarily upset or hung up with words and word usage?
or does the OP mean to say he began with a complicated camera so why can't others?

WHAT is the REASON for this question?
How can the poster NOT be aware that others might not have the same amount of photography interest, financial resources, or accesses to training in photography as the poster began with?

BebuLamar

My idea is to buy from the start the type of camera you want to stop at. It could be anything from a P&S to a medium format camera. But I think it's better to determine what level of camera you want to ended up with from the start rather than starting low then upgrade. I cite my case that from the start I determined that a 35mm SLR is good for me and so I got a high end 35mm SLR and stopped there. I never went to medium format or large format. The only thing I couldn't foresee 30 years in the future was that film was made difficult to buy and processed. Otherwise I would still use the 35mm SLR.

Acountry330 Loc: Dothan,Ala USA

When I bought my first SLR in 1973. Their where several different model Nikon's at the time.Since I was just starting, I purchases the cheapness one. So what I am saying their will always be a entry level camera.

Motorbones Loc: Fair Oaks, CA

The problem is that you need to achieve a certain level of knowledge and experience before you can say with any certainty what you want to do with it. It would be almost impossible to know what your exact goal is without first knowing what you're getting into. As is with anything in life, you must first know the basics before achieving any level of refinement.

toxdoc42

I so agree with you. I would add that the camera would be upgradable, with some interchangeable "parts." In the film era, Nikon really only made a camera and it had parts that could be interchanged. I even remember taking off the viewfinder top and being able to see the focusing screen and using it at either waist level or holding it above my head, above crowds, etc. Now we live to dispose of "outmoded" equipment. I have to admit that i based my first DSLR purchase on price. Did I really need to invest in a $5k camera? On my recent trip I was amazed to see so many travelers with Nikons and Canons, often with huge lenses. I hope they bought them for their quality, not just to show off their wealth. It is sort of the same as those driving very high end cars capable of incredible pick up and speeds which they will never use.

glyphtrix

glyphtrix

If one only has a limited amount of finances with which to make purchases this would be a fine idea. Much money will be expended through experimentation. This approach, seemingly, has a safe, thought ought , cautious planned, approach.
Regrettably life doesn't work this way.

Different work opportunities present themselves; different equipment becomes required.
Additional interests arise. Interest in different photographic genres develops the need for additional or different gear, including cameras.
That stated approach is overly simplistic.

I thank you , however, that your question and beliefs were sincere.
And so i propose to agree to disagree.

PRodacy Loc: New Mexico

I have a 750, as well as a "starter" camera and use both. The starter camera goes when I want something very lightweight and when there's a decent chance that it'll get damaged. Much less costly to replace the starter than the 750.