gessman Loc: Colorado

Let me be a little more specific given all the responses up to here - if you want to safely shoot the big wildlife where you appear to be, you will want no less than a 400mm lens on whatever camera you have. 400mm lens can be very costly on top of your DSLR purchase and other lens you may buy like a good wide angle lens for the vast landscape shots you will encounter where you can see for 100 to 150 miles on a clear day, a lens anywhere from a 20mm, 24mm lens. The Sony RX10IV cameras have a sharp Zeiss 24 to 600mm zoom lens built in so you don't need multiple lens to start with. In addition, Sony has a patented feature not available on other cameras called "Clear Image Zoom(CIZ)." It effectively doubles the strength of your lens to 1200mm with very minimal loss in picture quality by utilizing an artificial intelligence algorithm that maintains quality images in the majority of circumstances. Up to 1200mm lens come in real handy when shooting wildlife at a distance that you cannot close in on safely even if you can physically. To equal the capability that the 24-600mm lens in the quality of the glass and the images it produces with comparable fast focus, 24 frames per second shooting rate, in pieces like with a DSLR and complimentary lens to cover the range you get in a RX10IV would cost you well up into the five figure range for only minimal quality increase you wouldn't likely even be able to detect as a beginner.

Earnest Botello Loc: Hockley, Texas

Welcome to the Hog, Debra, good luck in your search, enjoy.

maxlieberman Loc: 19027

The issue is not so much which camera, as which system you might prefer. Once you make the initial investment in camera and lens or lenses, you will be pretty much wedded to that manufacturer.

I would go to a local camera store and ask to hold different cameras, and ask the sales person which manufacturer he or she recommends and why. Then I would buy the camera I felt comfortable with and was part of a system that you think will fulfill your needs in the future as you progress. I made the switch from Canon to Nikon almost 40 years, and had to rebuy all the lenses.

dick ranez

Debra, welcome to UHH and more importantly to photography. It's a lifelong never ending learning experience which will give you opportunities to express yourself that very few other art forms offer. As a beginner, any camera system you choose will be more than adequate to both learn on and grow with. Each of the major camera manufacturers offer entry packages with lens options that can get you started. The two most important features to look for are 1. it fits within your budget and 2. it feels good in your hands. I'd recommend you got to a camera store, handle several models and pick the one you're most comfortable with regardless of brand. Everyone here has "experience" and "expertise" and the recommendations are slanted by personal experiences.
You'll get as many options as you have responders. This first step is one you have to make yourself.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

It depends on budget. I’m a Nikon guy but the entry level package from either Nikon or Canon will give you a capable DSLR and a system you can grow into. If I was starting now I’d probably skip the DSLR and look at the Nikon Z50 mirrorless. They have a great deal right now with a two lens kit.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

I would start with a mirrorless MILC not a dslr. This technology is fast replacing the older prism and mirror technology, allowing less expensive and more compact lenses. I have abandoned my digital SLR Nikons in favor of Fugi mirrorless, but all the major camera companies are now making MILCs. Hopefully you will go on for many years to enjoy your photographic hobby, so it will pay to hitch your wagon to the newer technology.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Hi Debra,

Landscape and wildlife are two very different types of photography, with the "ideal" kit for each of them quite different.

Landscape generally means wide angle, "normal" (or "standard") to short telephoto lenses, small lens apertures for very deep depth of field,, large image sensors with a high pixel count. Landscape photography requires accurate, but not necessarily fast focusing. In fact, manual focus can be used for landscape photography. The process of making a single image can be a careful, methodical process.

Wildlife generally means powerful telephoto lenses, large lens apertures for shallow depth of field effects, and may be best done with smaller format image sensors with moderate pixel count. Often wildlife is active and that can require high performance autofocus that's fast to acquire and good at tracking movement. Faster moving wildlife requires rapid camera handling and bursts of images can help catch fleeting "peak action" moments.

In my opinion, a lot of beginners over-spend on the camera and neglect the importance of the lenses they use upon it. In fact, it's arguable that the lenses you choose will make far more difference in your images, than the camera they are used upon.

Today you have a LOT of choices. There are non-interchangeable lens cameras, as well as DSLRs and mirrorless that both allow various lenses be chosen and used. There are different sensor size: 1" (CX), Micro Four/Thirds (M4/3), APS-C, "full frame" (24x36mm) and even "medium format". You asked about DSLRs specifically, and I will focus on those in a moment. But first, be aware of the alternatives. A non-interchangeable lens camera can be compact, easier to use and some rival image quality possible with DSLRs. But they also have limitations. Mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras have some advantages as well as some disadvantages compared to DSLRs. Many wildlife and sports shooters still prefer a DSLR for the optical viewfinder and high image count per battery charge... Other people prefer a mirrorless for potentially smaller size and lighter weight, when hiking places to take landscape shots. There are other pluses and minuses to both types of camera. One thing that keeps me using DSLRs is that they've been around a lot longer so there is much greater selection of lenses both OEM and 3rd party. Prices for DSLRs and their lenses also tend to be lower, on average. Due to their "latest greatest thing" nature, prices of mirrorless cameras tend to be high... maybe not the camera, but then the more limited choice of lenses for them. Compare carefully!

As to format, while I use and suggest a full frame camera and wouldn't mind a medium for landscape photography, you have to be making huge prints from your images to really take advantage of the larger format and it's possible to accomplish very similar results with a smaller sensor. Medium format tends to be very expensive, and there simply aren't any super telephotos for use with them, so you'd have to get awfully close to wildlife. Full frame may be a bit more practical, but you still need huge, powerful, expensive telephotos to shoot wildlife with it.

I'm going to recommend a more moderate, but high potential alternative: Canon 90D. This is an APS-C camera and great for wildlife, but it still has 32.5MP, which is the most of any APS-C camera today and, in fact, is higher resolution than a lot of full frame cameras offer! In addition, it's got a higher performance AF system that's up to the task, as well as being able to shoot up to 10 frames per second (with continuous focus). It also is backed by a huge selection of lenses and accessories, developed over the last 30+ years.

The 90D is four or five steps up from Canon's most entry-level cameras, but also four or five steps down from more advanced. But, as one of their newest models it has a lot of the latest and greatest tech, so it actually "punches way over it's weight class", so to speak. From most entry level to most advanced, Canon's DSLR line-up in the US: T7, SL3, T8i, 77D... 90D... 7D Mark II APS-C models, as well as 6D Mark II, 5D Mark IV, 5DS/5DS-R, and 1DX Mark III full frame models. Among these, only the 5DS/5DS-R full frame cameras have higher resolution than the APS-C format 90D!

90D in kit with the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.5 IS USM lens sells for $1599. That's $200 less than the camera and lens sell for separately. There are cheaper available, but the 18-135mm "USM" is the best of the kit lenses. And an ultra high resolution camera like the 90D demands high quality lenses. Other very good alternatives are the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. Those aren't offered in kit with the camera, would need to be bought separately and will end up costing approx. $300 to $400 more.

For landscape photography, a lot can be done with the 18-135mm (or 15-85mm or 17-55mm)... but you might want even wider at times, so may want to consider either a low cost Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM ($280) or the more expensive, but better built and higher performance EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ($549).

These lenses don't come with lens hoods, which I would highly recommend (I almost never use a lens without one, except on very rare occasion when the hood is in the way for some reason). Budget another $15-$35 per lens for the hood (either Canon's own or cheaper "clones" from 3rd party like Vello).

For wildlife I would recommend a 100-400mm lens. Canon's EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM "II" is superb. But it's also rather big, somewhat hefty (3.5 lb.) and rather expensive ($2200). Alternatives are Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD ($799 + $129 for the separately sold tripod ring)... or the Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM ($799). The Tamron and Sigma have pretty good image quality, but not as great as the Canon. The Sigma is the lightest of the three, but also doesn't come with or even have option to fit a tripod mounting ring. Note, too, that the Tamron and especially the Sigma are 1/3 stop to 2/3 stop "slower" than the Canon.... they have somewhat smaller lens apertures that allow less light to pass through the lens. This requires higher ISO or slower shutter speed to compensate, and may reduce AF performance in some situations.

The Canon 100-400mm II also work very well with Canon 1.4X teleconverter (especially the current "III", $429... but I use with the "II", which can be found used for $250 to $200). I honestly don't know how the Tamron or Sigma lenses work with teleconverters (many zooms suffer a lot of loss of image quality when used with a teleconverter).

Other alternatives include the Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 VC USD G2 ($1199), the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "Contemporary" ($899), Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "Sport" ($1699) or Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 OS HSM ($1759)... However, note that all these lenses are considerably larger and heavier than the 100-400s above (particularly the Sigma 150-600 "Sport" and their 60-600mm).

In addition to a full range of easy to use, dedicated flashes available for use with the 90D, Canon also offers a BG-E14 Battery Grip that doubles the battery capacity and provides a vertical grip with secondary controls for portrait orientation shooting. There are also a host of third party flashes, as well as cheaper 3rd party "clone" grips. One of the advantages of a well-established system like Canon (also Nikon) is that a LOT of other manufacturers off compatible lenses and other accessories. Some other brands don't enjoy anywhere near as much 3rd party support.

A 90D with 18-135mm kit lens, 10-22mm wide angle and Canon 100-400mm II.... covering everything from wide scenics to telephoto wildlife shots... will cost you about $4600 or a little more by the time you also get some memory cards, one or two spare batteries and some software such as Adobe Elements 2020. If you also get a 1.4X teleconverter, you'll be close to $5000.

That's what I'd call a "mid-price" system. Yes, there are lower cost, but less capable. Heck, you can buy a super entry-level and much less capable Canon T7 with slow 18-55mm and low quality 75-300mm lens for $500! Or, there's a better SL3 with 18-55mm as well as a better 55-250mm for around $800. But there are also higher and MUCH higher priced. A Canon 5DS-R camera body alone costs about $3700. A Canon 1DX Mark III sells for $6500. Those are both "full frame" cameras, too... so to enjoy the same "reach" as a 100-400mm on 90D, you will also need to spend upwards of $10,000 on an 8 to 10 lb. telephoto lens, and another $1000+ for a hefty tripod to set it all upon!

If $4500-$5000 is too much right now, you could forego the wide angle lens for now (18mm that the 18-135mm offers is moderately wide). You also could substitute the Tamron or Sigma 100-400, for the more expensive Canon. A 90D with 18-135mm and 3rd party 100-400mm would set you back approx. $2600 to $2900, by the time you get memory cards, spare battery, etc. You can always upgrade stuff or add things later.

You can probably find similar in other brands. But it's pretty hard to beat the combination of features and value in the 90D and the extensive Canon system behind it.

Thorough review and add'l info about 90D: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-90D.aspx
Canon EF-S 18-135mm "USM" lens: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx
Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-10-22mm-f-3.5-4.5-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Canon EF 100-400mm "II" lens: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100-400mm-f-4.5-5.6-L-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx

At the above website you can do side-by-side comparisons of image quality of various lenses, as well as other factors.

Welcome to UHH. We're always happy to help folks spend their money here!

Hope this helps!

dick ranez

Debra, after re-reading some of the posts, I'd recommend some further research on your part. There are two websites I frequently check, dpreview.com and shotkit.com. If you scroll through them, both offer suggestions as "best camera" articles which appear to be relatively un-biased. The recommendations are remarkable similar but it should give you some background before you go to a store.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

First, welcome to UHH!

The first choice to be made is which type of camera. They are point & shoot, bridge, mirrorless, DSLR. P&S is the smallest and lightest and, usually, least, but often more than acceptable, image quality (IQ). Within the bridge group you will find the mega-zooms. While not affording IQ on a par with the ILCs (Interchangeable Lens Cameras), they are a reasonable compromise. They can offer extraordinary zoom range in a package smaller and are lighter than an ILC. They can offer viewfinders (good to compose image in bright sunlight), hot shoes (for strong flashes), and RAW files in addition to jpeg (better for post processing). I happen to have an older Canon SX50 HS and find the quality great for prints of 8 X 10 or less, and for email and social media. They can be much less expensive than ILCs with lenses going from wide angle to telephoto.

The most capable are the DSLR and mirrorless types (the ILCs). While having the best IQ, they are the most expensive and heaviest.

The best way to decide is to handle each type. Doing so in a store is, of course, the best way. I would suggest renting to make sure you will be happy with the choice. Once you have decided on which type, then you will select which make and model and which lens. I'll leave that for a later discussion.

The types of lenses for ILCs are prime (single focal length/magnification), zoom (variable-focal length), macro (very close-up), wide angle, and telephoto (high magnification for distant objects). You can get most any of those in high quality or economy. For those who want the very utmost in image quality, it is recommended that a zoom have a range of focal lengths that don’t exceed 3:1. However, I find my Sigma 18-300mm lens very handy as one doesn’t need to change lenses when going from wide to moderate tele.

Then consider refurbished. The 3 stores most often recommended for refurbished are Adorama, B&H, and KEH.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

Welcome to the Hog, Debra. I would suggest what I have read many others suggest, if possible go to a camera store and handle some cameras. If you are not close to a store, check with your friends who have cameras and ask to hold their cameras and look the over. Talk with your friends and discuss the pros and cons of their particular make and model. Maybe even rent a camera or two and try them. With all the different makes and models out there, the possibilities are nearly endless. I use Pentax because that is what I used in the days of film and the lenses fit on my DSLRs. I have also briefly handled and used Canon and Nikon. They are all good cameras and will have bodies and lenses that will fit your needs. Good luck.

Sentinel4

Consider starting with Fuji XT 2 used. The jpgs are excellent and will allow you to spend more time behind the camera not behind the computer processing raw files. Shooting Raw+jpg will allow files to be processed in camera- much abbreviated process compared to a processing program.

You can also shoot multiple jpgs in camera. This will provide alternative looks using both color and mono settings.

I highly recommend Dan Bailey's web site for further explanation. Bill Fortney is also a Fuji X photographer who only shoots jpg.

Sentinel4

Hasviolin

I chose the D5600 due to its articulated display. Plenty features for my old noggin.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

That's also how I see it. Before wide and ultra-wide lenses were readily available, there were plenty of photographers taking fantastic landscape photos, and there were even photography journals entirely dedicated to landscape photography. Before the 1960's, relatively few photographers owned a wide angle lens.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Before the 1960's many landscape photographers used large format sheet film cameras where a wide or ultra-wide angle lenses was a focal length that on a 35 mm would be a telephoto. For 8x10 150 mm was considered wide angle and my 4x5 (long since gone) had a 100 that gave a wider view than my 35 on my 35 mm.

Those who used 6x6 or 4.5x6 120/220 film cameras considered 50 to be ultra wide and 100 mm to be wide angle. The "normal" lens for my Bronica 645 was I believe a 135.

willaim Loc: Sunny Southern California

Which camera to buy? I think you opened a can of worms because you'll get so many different makes and models. If there is an honest to goodness camera store where you live, just go there and asked the salesperson. Tell them what you'll like and such. He'll or she'll show you some cameras and you can feel how the fit in you hand and see what the features are. Remember one thing. The camera doesn't shoot the pictures, it's the person looking through the viewfinder who does. Good luck.