Pegnich

Hi all,
Looking to purchase digital camera in the 600.00 range
I have been looking at the Rebel and Nikon 3200.
Would like to use it for various topics mostly to help with my painting.
Landscapes ,flowers and portrait . I have some experience with film slr.
Thx

Bwarn Loc: Northern Kentucky

I currently own a D3200. Loved using, its pretty versatile and has served its purpose. I have used it for nature, macro and portrait work. I am going to upgrade hopefully by the end of the year to a full frame. I am still learning but gaining more knowledge each day. It is a crop sensor so your focal length won't be true. The only time I have struggled with that is in tight places. I'm the rebel is good too, I just prefer my Nikon.
Good luck and enjoy whatever one you get.
Bev

RKL349 Loc: Connecticut

I would suggest you check out Cameta Camera for a refurbished body and lens. Since you mentioned the Nikon D3200, you will find that they usually have those in stock and they will be able to match that up with a lens that will meet your needs within your budget. They come with a one year warranty and usually arrive in mint condition. The D3200 has received excellent reviews over the years. Canon sells refurbished units as well on their web site. I only suggest refurbished because you mentioned a budget and they are tremendous value, plus have the benefit of a hand inspection in the manufacturers factory by their technicians. Last but not least, if you do not want to go with a DSLR, you may want to purchase a good "bridge" camera. Canon, Nikon, Sony and Fugifilm, to name just a few, all offer excellent models, but would not have the features and some of the options you could get with a DSLR, notably the ability to have interchangeable lenses. Good luck with your purchase.

Pegnich

Thanks I definantly want to change lens and not just shoot on automatic. What do you think is the best product for my budget? Mirrorless? Open to all just used rebel and Nikon as examples

RKL349 Loc: Connecticut

I would have to defer to others on the subject of mirror less since I have not used one or do I own one. I suggest that you go to a store and handle each, then determine what you like about the feel and where the controls are located. What feels right to you will help you decide. I have always shot Nikon, so I am used to their set up and they just feel right to me. Others will say the same about Canon. You could not go wrong with either. Others on this site will try to convince you that the brand they shoot is best for what ever reasons they can conjure up. MT Shooter and Amehta usually present great analyses, and they are far better qualified to do that than I am, as I consider myself still learning. Good luck.

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

Do you currently/still have a 35mm SLR + lens(es)?

If you do, then an option which will cost you less than $200US will be a USED m4/3 camera body + "kit" lens + dumb (hollow) tube lens adapter for your current 35mm lens(es) via eBay.

OLYMPUS bodies have Image Stabilization (IS) in the body (a good thing!!) ...

PANASONIC bodies have their own advantages ... older m4/3 bodies have the IS in the lens ... only the latest Panasonic bodies have the IS in the body.

IMO, most mirrorless (Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, etc.) cameras benefit GREATLY when used with a $10 "thumb grip" (unfortunately, using a thumb grip precludes the use of an optional Electronic Viewfinder ... an expensive & NOT a necessary option).

A Panasonic L1 is a 4/3 SLR ... large/bulky ... very usable with 35mm lenses + a dumb adapter ... very inexpensive ($200-to-$400+), now ... if you can handhold a 35mm SLR then you can use a Panasonic L1 or its Leica equivalent.

FYI. The dumb lens adapters are generally under $20 via eBay when shipped directly from China.

There are 35mm-to-m4/3 adapters for almost all post-War camera mounts (Praktina is the probable exception) ...

There are only a few 35mm-to-4/3 adapters (e.g., Nikon, Canon, Olympus OM, Leica-R, Exakta ...) ...

SOME reviewers have indicated that there is a difference between a $15 adapter (via eBay) and an $80+ adapter (via a domestic retailer) ... maybe, maybe not.

Pegnich

Wow thanks going to look for my old camera and Lens and check that out.

PVR8 Loc: Raleigh, NC

Just as a matter of personal preference I don't care for the feel of the mirrorless cameras that I'm familiar with. They are lighter in weight but they don't feel very substantial in my big hands. I will stick with using my Nikon p&s when I want to carry a light camera for quick shots. I suggest you go and get a feel for any camera that you consider before deciding to buy one.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Pegnich, welcome to the Hog.
I personally would NOT be basing, my future buying decisions on the fact that I have a couple of old manual lenses! If you had decent old lenses you would already know that. You would not have to hunt them down to see if you have nice stuff.
I would strongly recommend that you look at a modern dslr kit such as those Rebel kits you see at places like costco that include a couple of lenses. Even cheap kit lenses are a much more enjoyable shooting experience on a new and up to date body. Unless you are on a super tight budget, leave the manual shooting to those that already know that manual is what they like, or want to do!! If your old lenses are worth anything, sell them to those that are manual freaks or collectors and use the money to subsidize a decent system.
If your going to go digital, go all the way.
Pegnich, just purely my personal opinion, but I base it on many years of shooting, and most of those were shooting on manual! :lol:
Again, welcome and good luck.
SS

cntry Loc: Colorado

The only problem with "dumb" adapters is you lose most of what you paid for with your new camera..."dumb" adapters are just that "dumb"...meaning no electrical connections between camera and lens so no autofocus, metering...like those pre-sets for Action, Travel, etc? You can kiss them goodbye too.

You can get really good lenses for cheap prices BUT you're going to pay for them in that you are buying into the same technology (or lack thereof) as when they were made.

You can get better adapters that will allow you to use almost any lens with full (or close to) functionality, but you're going to pay a lot more for them.

If your old 35mm was an AF Minolta (A-Mount, any of the Maxxum series) , ALL of your old lenses will work with a Sony A-Mount dslr. I have an Sony A65 and most of my lenses are Minolta and I love them! Given your budget, you really should check out a Sony - you can get a refurbished A58 with a 18-55mm lens for less than $400 (sony.com, outlet). Go on eBay or to Adorama, B&H or any place that sells used lenses and get a couple Minolta lenses to round out your bag for another $100 and still have money left for a bag and tripod.

sr71 Loc: In Col. Juan Seguin Land

Uh Photographers have been using "Dumb" lenses/adapters for longer that your "Smart" lenses/adapters, you can look to one of the greats Ansel Adams and others for examples of using dumb lenses/adapters.

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

While I agree that a potential disadvantage of a mirrorless camera is its small size & light weight, some would consider the size & weight to be a PLUS.

Regardless, when most lenses from a 35mm camera are mounted, then I think the balance becomes just-about-right for hand held shooting with-or-without an auxiliary viewfinder ...

And, for people who do not use a tripod, the fore mentioned "thumb grip" is possibly the best accessory which one can spend $10 on when using most mirrorless cameras (an accessory shoe is required which precludes using one on some mirrorless & P&S cameras) when a auxiliary viewfinder is not being used ...

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

HMmmmm ...

....Interesting ...

I'm all for shooting in Instamatic-mode (absolutely NOTHING wrong with that!), but when did focusing become so difficult?!?

Regardless, for how-and-what pegnich wants to use the camera, there is (IMO) often little reason to have MORE camera with all the accompanying bells-and-whistles which a "modern dslr" has ...

....Video (just ONE example)?

............Really?!?

If you don't need the features (e.g., auto-focus), then Why pay more?

After all, not everyone looks at photography as a hobby worthy of their non-essential funds.

And, FWIW, in my case I know that I simply want(ed) a digitial camera body which substituted/(-s) a digital capture vs. film; so, everything beyond being able to mimic what a roll of film does is more than I needed OR need.

In other words, if a person has almost any 35mm camera lens (there are exceptions, of course), then for $100 a person can buy a lightly used m4/3 camera body + the "dumb" adapter via eBay and probably-or-possibly have a better camera configuration for taking simple* digital images.

....* of course, many "simple" images are actually quite sophisticated!

Don't get me wrong ... an m4/3 camera body is far from perfect ... it would be great if it had a full size sensor because then I would be able to use my 17mm lens as a true ultra-wideangle lens, etc. ...

....For the time being, the "kit" (14-42 zoom ... 28mm-84mm equivalent) lens which I have will have to suffice for when I want to use a wideangle lens.

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

.. :thumbup: :thumbup:

jw32003 Loc: Oklahoma

I think you are asking about a good choice for a $600.00 camera. There are a lot of choices that only you can decide. I currently own a d200 and a d5100. My preference is the d200. I like the feel but really like having most settings available without having to go through a bunch of menus.
That's a long way around to saying the refurbished d7000 is an excellent camera and can be had for about $600 refurbished. It handles great and just seems to feel right.