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

In general I think this is good advice about how one learns - or how different people learn. I agree that creative modes can be confusing from the learning perspective, I don't think I've ever used any of the ones on any of my Canon digital cameras, but that doesn't mean that something like a Canon Rebel kit is a bad thing. Like you I learned when cameras were simpler, I may have even started earlier, with fully manual cameras, but even the most basic Canon DSLRs, mirrorless, bridge, or P&S cameras usually have all the main controls for exposure. I've just looked at my latest Canon DSLR and discovered it doesn't even have creative modes, I've had it for over two months and had to check to find that they weren't there!

For myself, even though I knew what all the features did from prior experience, my first digital camera was quite a learning curve, even though the Canon terminology has remained consistent from around 1976 when the AE-1 was introduced. Any modern camera has many layers of complexity, and in some ways the pro models can be even more confusing given the number of options that can be set, even though they lack the automated creative modes.

At the end of the day, learning the basics of photography, what effect they have upon an image, and how to control them on any camera is the most fundamental thing. This can be done with most modern cameras - not so much smart phones - but the basic principles need to be mastered if one wants to take control of the images created.

An interesting anecdote (to me) from recent history was related to the recent California wildfires. Although San Francisco wasn't affected by the fires directly we had some serious air quality problems, sunsets were spectacular - a bit like the skies over Mordor or from Edvard Munch's 'The Scream' painting - so many people wanted to capture the scene. My wife who was traveling home on public transport ended up with people having to get off the street car. Lots of people immediately got out their smart phones to take pictures of the sky, and the overwhelming (overheard) comment was that the smart phones couldn't capture the image people could see in their minds. Since she is a photographer, some would say a beginner, she just stayed silent while thinking "Yep". She uses her smart phone quite a bit, but was thinking I need my old Nikon SLR or my Canon DSLR for this. She didn't have those of course, did have her smart phone, and just decided not to bother.

Hbuk66 Loc: Oswego, NY

If you are just starting out, I would suggest that you get on eBay and buy a used panasonic interchangeable lens camera. If you decide you like what's happening, youth can upgrade... Start out simple, move on as you gain experience...

ppage Loc: Pittsburg, (San Francisco area)

I would counsel you that if you are going to get a camera with interchangeable lenses, please buy the body only and lenses later. Don't buy the Costco (or other store) kits that have all the junk included. Then you can do a little research and buy an appropriate lens to start with, a better camera strap, a better tripod if you need it and so forth. Choose a body, do the research and add a lens or two and other gear when you learn what to buy. Get your stuff from Amazon or B&H online. Camera stores are excellent for touching and looking. You pay more if you buy there but that is for their guidance and expertise. Research, reviews, touch, buy... research, reviews, touch, buy and so on.

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

Although I mostly agree with your comment, some bundles can be very good value. The question is how to tell? One way would be to post a "I'm considering this bundle" question to UHH and listing all the included items. There will usually be a volume of opinions posted, from which one can learn, and possibly even get better recommendations or suggestions.

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

My first DSLR was a Canon Digital Rebel in 2002. I didn't find it a learning challenge but perhaps that was because I had shot film for nearly 30 years at that point and perhaps more so because I had worked in computers and with digital files for over 15 years at that point. I guess it all depends on what your experience is an how you like to learn. Some are just take it and go shoot and others what to study the manual for a week before they turn it on. My daughter bought a Canon starter kit camera a few years ago and I base some of my observations on what I saw her experience. I guess I am just not a fan of the Creative Modes as I think they can be more of a crutch than just learning the basics of exposure which should serve you well in any shooting situation.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Grand Loc: Lebanon, Pa

Listen to your heart(Nikon)

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

Isn't that how 1 in 2 marriages end in divorce...

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Or what brand of condom? Followed by recommendations for names....

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Regarding which brand is better mirrorless debate between Nikon and Canon, I view it this way. I see Nikon as third graders, Canon as junior high students, Sony has graduated high school and is in their second year of college. Without a doubt, Sony easily leads the pack in the field of MILC's.

RodB Loc: Dallas/Mckinney

Great recommendations and both Canon and Nikon covered well... Lots of good discussion on budget and how to get the most bang for your buck.



http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

Nlaw1219

Okay, here's more detail. I have an 11 year old Cannon, 8mp. I use my cell phone now beacuse it takes pics about as good. I take pictures all of the time, but I have never had any formal training, just a good eye. My son has no formal training, he has had a Cannon for about a year. He's a IT geek. He hasn't done a lot of pics other than traveling and family pics. So I am very inexperienced. So yes, Hadon, to me it's like buyng a car and never driven one. And BTW I'm a she, not a he. This is why I'm asking for opinions. Thanks!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Nikon 1 mirrorless cameras don't impress me and other folks seem to feel the same... I have heard that Nikon may be phasing them out and replacing them with new models that use a larger sensor.

Nikon's mirrorless are unique in that they use a so-called 1" sensor (13.2mm x 8.8mm). That's about half the size or less than Olympus'/Panasonic's micro Four/Thirds (mirrorless, 17.3mm x 13mm) or Canon APS-C (DSLRs and mirrorless, 22.8mm x 14.8mm) or Pentax', Sony's or even Nikon's own APS-C DSLRs (23.6mm x 15.7mm). And the 1" is sensor has only about one eighth the sensor area of so-called full frame (both DSLR from Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax... and mirrorless from Sony).

In fact, many manufacturers use 1" sensors, but only in their non-interchangeable lens "bridge" and "point-n-shoot" cameras. I think Nikon was the only manufacturer to put them in interchangeable lens cameras, probably to be able to make the cameras and lenses especially compact. But I suspect that was a mistake. A smaller sensor necessarily uses smaller individual pixel sites that are more crowded.... reducing resolution and increasing the potential for noise in images at higher ISOs. There's just too much image quality compromise with 1".

I also would be a bit concerned if the autofocus system Nikon has used in their mirrorless is up to the task of shooting kids and dogs (which tend to be quite active and much like sports photography). I really don't, so investigate this carefully. In fact, do so with any brand or model. AF performance will be important, when you're trying to get shots of those kids and pets.

If you REALLY want mirrorless, I'd at least look at models with an APS-C sensor. For landscape photography where great depth of field, and lots of detail from edge to edge, and normal to wide angle lenses would all be desirable... the best digital would be an even bigger "full frame" such as Sony or "medium format" such as Fuji GFX. However for action/sports (kids and pets) where higher performance autofocus, a usable viewfinder (either an optical VF or a highly responsive electronic VF), and more powerful, fast focusing telephoto lenses are all desirable... an APS-C DSLR is ideal, but some APS-C mirrorless might come close. There aren't a lot of powerful telephotos offered for mirrorless, but many of them can use DSLR lenses via an adapter.

Why do you want mirrorless? For the smaller size and lighter weight? If those are your primary concerns, you might instead want to look at some of the particularly compact DSLRs instead, such as the Canon Rebel SL2 (EOS 200D outside N. America). That's one of the smallest/lightest DSLRs on the market, though it still offers 24MP with an APS-C size sensor. Pair it up with some fairly compact, lightweight lenses such as the Canon EF-S 10-18mm IS STM (wide angle for landscapes), EF-S 18-135mm IS USM (fast autofocus for sports/action in good light) or perhaps instead an EF-S 17-55mm IS USM (for both lower light/indoor shooting and fast AF) paired up with a high performance zoom such as the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. Of course, if needed there are even longer telephotos such as 70-300mm, 100-400mm, 300mm f/4, etc. from Canon and other manufacturers.

The biggest limitation of the SL2 is probably it's autofocus, which is rather simplistic with only 9 points, usable to -0.5 EV and has only the center AF point a higher performance "dual axis/cross type". Other bigger, heavier Canon DSLRs have as many as 65 AF points, all cross type and are able to focus in -3EV lighting, which is approx. "moonlight". While those may be more ideal for action photography, in years past I've successfully done lots of fast sports shooting with older models that used AF systems virtually identical to the SL2's.

Landscape photography and kids/pets photography are a bit at odds with each other in what each type of work ideally requires from camera and lenses. Taking size and weight concerns into account, to my way of thinking the above SL2 and lenses are a reasonable compromise that might serve both purposes very well, even if not the most ideal choices for either one. It's not going to be as small a kit as might be possible with many mirrorless, but is a lot lighter and smaller than most DSLRs... so it's a compromise in these respects, too.

Another reason to consider DSLR over mirrorless is that the latter tend to be pretty pricey. Due to their popularity, you won't find mirrorless for much less than $1000 for the body only. You can find a DSLR with similar specifications and performance for about half that.

BTW, Canon has been pretty slow to develop mirrorless cameras, too... It's taken them five years to get around to offering one with a built in viewfinder (electronic), so I've never even considered one before now. They still have a pretty miserable selection of lenses specific for mirrorless, too. Thankfully there are some third party manufacturers making some interesting lenses for them. I am considering a Canon M5 (also 24MP, APS-C) as a camera for street photography, for hiking and biking and the occasional portrait. But I definitely will NOT be giving up my APS-C DSLRs for sports/action... And for some occasional, serious landscape/architectural shooting, and a few other things I'll continue to use a full frame DSLR. The mirrorless camera will complement the DSLRs, not replace them.

P.S. You say your son is shooting with a Canon camera. That might be a reason to consider Canon yourself. Get something similar and be able to share lenses and other accessories... Plus he might give you some guidance while you're learning to use it.

Silverman Loc: Michigan

Buying a Camera is a personal choice. You must look at a physical Camera, Hold it, if possible shoot images. Many, many choices, Mirrorless is new technology, so I am not qualified to recommend or not recommend. Do you want a Crop-sensor DSLR. Or a Full frame DSLR, different lens, more expensive. I personally started with a used Crop-sensor Nikon D3300 (read reviews). 4 lens, 35mm 1.8g, 50mm 1.8g, 18-55 kit lens, 55-200 zoom, all Nikon. Many experienced Photographers here on UHH, provide excellent advice and recommendations. Possibly buy USED on Ebay, or NEW on B&H Photo, Adorama, Cameta Camera, etc. Also check for "Refurbished" Cameras, Lens, etc. (Save $$$.)

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Neither. They are both far behind the best available. Both Canon and Nikon have botched the mirrorless effort. The best of both is probably the Canon M5, but it is so lacking in features and capability as to be worthless for decent photography. Look instead at Sony a6300, or Fujifilm X- cameras. There is a wide range in the Fuji line but all are well made and have many valuable features. I am shooting a Sony a6000 and a Sony a6300 (But I could have been happy with Fuji x-t2 or x-t20.) They all have an aps-c sensor which is large enough to provide you with good landscape and other prints up to 16x24 or even 20x30. (I always print any photograph.)

I examined the MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera) field very thoroughly before I stepped away from my many years of Nikon and occasional Canon use. I was not to be satisfied with anything less than I was used to. Sony and Fuji are, in my opinion, the only game in town worth pursueing.

Do not be fooled by the "1 inch" sensors. This is an industry wide fraud as the sensor is really about 1/3 of an inch. See http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/one-inch-sensor.htm for more information about this.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Hi Peter,

I think you might be mixing up some terminology.

Canon calls Av, Tv, P and M their cameras' "Creative Modes".

When you say you never used them, I think you're referring to the "Icon Modes", which are sort of "super auto" modes: "Running Man" icon for sports, "Mountain" icon for scenic photography, etc. (As you say, some of the more advanced models don't even have the Icon Modes.)

There's also "Creative Auto" (labelled "CA") on many Canon cameras now. That allows you to adjust things, but gives you guidance on the rear screen of the camera, what the different settings will do. Might be a good learning tool for someone first picking up one of the cameras... but ultimately is likely to slow things down too much, so probably isn't a mode that most would want to use once they've learned all it can teach them.