JoeJoe

I often get asked "What do you recommend for a beginner into photography with a maximum budget of $530 or £400 …"

I know what I'd recommend and do so quite instinctively.... It would be nice to see what others recommend So.…...

Whats your recommendation and why??

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Without knowing more about what things they want to do with their photography, how they want to use their camera and the type of photography that interests them most, I would refrain from giving recommendations. The last thing I would want is that they spend money on gear that is not ideal for what they want to do. A recommendation should be based on logic, not instinct.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

First- I agree. It's a tool: what job are you trying to think of getting around to trying out?
2) I'd suggest based on the info that a good 2 or 3 year old bridge camera would be good.
No wrong lens, filter, bag, nuttin. Battery, card, camera, run and gun. Take the shots you want.
Maybe with a year of ecperience, and a couple hundred hours of shooting, and reading all the mish mash hear, the OP will have better questions to ask.
C) Or just settle in wth the bridge for a while- a good one will do almost anything almost anyone else wants.

User ID

Really disagreeing with all that "analyze
needs and uses" crap. All rank beginners
always have the same "needs and uses":
They NEED a camera to USE ... for the
purpose of learning basic photography.

There's no point in pretending that some
cameras are more appropriate for use at
any given subject or situation. All will do
equally well or poorly in the hands of a
user with no experience.

Given the low budget, the camera should
be chosen not buy "intended uses" but by
whatever best deal pops up on a reliable
and not overly complex camera, and with
whatever lens is in the deal.

Getting started from scratch on a minimal
budget is all about affordability, not about
which camera is a photographically wiser
choice. Still Life, School Sports, Vistas or
Portraits, or whatever ... all the affordable
cameras will produce the same beginner's
type of results. Only a more advanced user
with hopefully a bigger budget, will be able
to appreciate how certain types of gear are
oriented toward certain types of subjects.
For a brand new beginner, anything works.

JoeJoe

Have to agree with 99% of this.....

We go into photography initially with a predetermined idea of what photographer we want to be...

Its only when we explore the techniques that we get a passion and direction as we gain experience..

I personally went into photography to become a landscape photographer... I've still honestly yet to do landscape... I took a portrait and loved it...

Versatility dictates a beginners camera … The ability to grow in the early formative years and not be restricted by a lack of Auto or Manual functions and also the ability to add on when needed....

Regards
Joe

hammond

I also agree with this for the most part - especially the opening sentence.

Here are some thoughts based on my experience getting into photography...

- Don't get a 'bridge camera' - get something with interchangeable lenses. I believe the lens is generally more important than the camera, and didn't really understand this when I jumped into photography. If you just want to document what you see, a bridge camera is fine. Then again, so is your iPhone.

- Get in the habit of saving a little more to get a camera that you won't feel limited by in a year. When I first got into photography, I bought equipment that I could afford to buy right away, instead of saving a little more to buy equipment that I would use as my skills and interests grew. Nearly everything I bought in the first year has now been rendered obsolete as I learned the value of saving for better equipment.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Actually, there are beginners today who don't have a budget of $530 buying photography gear. But, if you have that amount of money, you could buy a Nikon D3500 Bundle Kit, with 2 lenses. The camera has 24 megapixels. You can spend less and get a decent Bridge camera in the mid $250 range. And a 20 megapixels pocket camera with a focal range to 200mm for less than $150. Photography does not need to be a very expensive hobby. With iPhones and Smartphones, many that are more expensive than $530. That would be over budget to the above mentioned cameras. It all depends what one wants in a camera? And maybe it won't matter what camera you get, if you never had a camera at all.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

A mint D7200 off ebay with a mint 35mm 1.8 D lens. Why? Because you will get good results and you can grow with a D7200.

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

I tell those that ask, to use their smartphones and save their money. The results they will get will likely be better than a cheap camera can produce, and it is always in their pocket. Once they decide on a specific taste for subject matter, then they can do the research and find a camera that suits them. The cheap camera that one can buy to shoot flowers insects and other closeups is not the same camera that would make a good choice for shooting active subjects, etc.

But, like buying a guitar, if you start off trying to learn with an entry-level instrument, you are likely to lose interest because the cheaper ones are hard to keep in tune, they don't sound that great, are hard to play because the action is too high, and so on. Getting a used better guitar will help the budding musician enjoy the journey.

So my vote is for either continuing to use the cellphone and focus on subject matter, learning to understand lighting, etc and not worry about camera settings, or getting a decent used better camera and start studying to learn the camera, post processing etc - taking lots of pictures.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

My first question would be DSLR or mirrorless? After that, I would suggest he read reviews and comparisons of cameras in that price range and see what features different cameras have. he might not be interested in a viewfinder or a movable LCD.

ggab Loc: ?

It's simple.
If they have chosen either DSLR or Mirrorless (yes it's their choice not yours) buy used. Get the best deal available regardless of MFG. Have them do some research instead of doing everything for them.
Have them invest some time learning before buying.

If they want to continue, they can make their own educated decision. Your job then is to provide guidance.

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

In My Opinion, this statment is Right On!

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

My recommendation is for the beginner to pair with someone more experienced (like you) and look into some nice used gear from a reputable dealer (KEH, MPB, UsedPhotoPro, B&H, Adorama) or Ebay (if you know the ropes there) or hook up with someone on UHH who has an older kit they want to move/move on from. A decent capable body in good condition, a wide/normal lens and a short tele, or wide zoom, or if buying new, a good little kit deal with the basics. If I had my druthers, I'd start out with a manual camera and a light meter, oh wait, that was 1970.........

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

I work with a DP wonderful cinema shooter. He had an early Red which I got a lot of understanding of
what a great camera can do. When we first went out of lunch he had a Canon Rebel whatever model can't remember their are many. he took pix everywhere we went. He said the rebel did the job for him.
With a little practice I can take good photos. I have heard these are pretty good cameras. A lot of folks here are Canon owners. Don't own but love some of the Canon still and video camera's.
Am I wrong that a deal like this starter package would work?

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I remember way back when I started into photography (mid-60’s) I bought an SLR, a Yashica TL Super, that came with a 50mm f/1.8 lens. I got some basic instruction from my work partner and went from there. I learned quickly and enjoyed it. Then life got in the way—military, Vietnam, career, etc.—and I pretty much dropped out of photography other than snapshooting. Enter the digital era and I had a series of simple point and shoot cameras, but I didn’t need to know anything other than pointing and shooting. In 2010 I bought my first DSLR, a Nikon D90. I wanted a good camera, and back then, that was at the top of the heap and it cost a lot. At that point I was back to the status of a beginner and was absolutely intimidated by the camera. So I went back to the dealer to ask some questions, and his response was to simply set it on auto and ignore the rest of the features, as the camera was smarter than I was, which was true at that point. I was encourage by him telling me he was a professional photographer and that’s what he does. I put the camera away and seldom used it.

My point is that many here recommend a DSLR or mirrorless interchangeable lens camera for a beginner, and I don’t necessarily agree with that. I’d hate to recommend a complicated camera to a rank beginner, have them spend several hundred dollars on a camera, only to be disillusioned and have wasted their money. It’s not a simple matter to learn about lenses and all the feature of modern digital cameras. I would recommend a simpler camera, such as a bridge camera, and then connecting with a local camera club or take a photography class at a university or community college to learn the camera and some of the basics of photography. If the interest is still there, then a more sophisticated camera and equipment may be in order. Learning photography is a gradual and ongoing endeavor, and I believe starting out fairly simply is better than jumping on a complicated piece of equipment and becoming frustrated trying to learn it. Then, of course, there is UHH which is a vast source of knowledge and experience that a beginner can draw on. I guess you could say that if you are learning to drive, you wouldn’t start out learning in a Peterbuilt or a Ferari.