Camera recommendations?

[Philo_Vance]

Food for thought, thanks very much. At the mo I'm thinking second hand SLR. Still finding the CSCs tempting though, as I know I'll be more likely to take it with me when I'm out and about.

[herbie747]

Dave - have you looked at a Canon G11 or G12? Both compact, but fully manual if needed.

[Philo_Vance]

Dave - have you looked at a Canon G11 or G12? Both compact, but fully manual if needed.

 

A friend actually mentioned those in passing a while back. Will check them out, cheers.

[King Pitcos]

The 7D is lovely. We used a 550D and a 7D for both of our films for my Uni course last year. We will probably be doing so for our final degree film too. Brilliant cameras.

It depends on the kind of shoot, really. Great images from them but you have to be careful. They're really unsuitable for shooting documentary/mockumentary style because as soon as you zoom (at least with all the lenses I've used), the exposure goes fucking haywire. Makes me long for the Z1 sometimes, but if you're not zooming and fucking about and reframing within a shot as I am wont to do, the quality of the picture you get with the 550 and 7D is incredible. They're utterly irrelevant to this discussion, mind, as even the 550 is still about

[chokeout]

The 7D is lovely. We used a 550D and a 7D for both of our films for my Uni course last year. We will probably be doing so for our final degree film too. Brilliant cameras.

It depends on the kind of shoot, really. Great images from them but you have to be careful. They're really unsuitable for shooting documentary/mockumentary style because as soon as you zoom (at least with all the lenses I've used), the exposure goes fucking haywire. Makes me long for the Z1 sometimes, but if you're not zooming and fucking about and reframing within a shot as I am wont to do, the quality of the picture you get with the 550 and 7D is incredible. They're utterly irrelevant to this discussion, mind, as even the 550 is still about

[King Pitcos]

Aye, I've noticed that as well. It's partly why I've held off buying one myself, they're generally not that feasible for me. I'm hoping it won't be long until there's a proper video camera with adaptable lenses in the same kind of price range as the 7D.

[Surf Digby]

If you not interested in using manual modes, id say stick to a GOOD bridge or compact.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this. Anything below a "semi-pro" SLR will have an Auto mode and the usual Av/Tv semi-auto modes. Autofocus and processing is notably faster in even the most basic of DSLRs.

 

As there seem to be a fair few knowledgeable types in here, I'd like to pose acouple of q's. I'm in the market for a new camera myself, would like to take it up as a hobby too. Always had decentish compact cameras in the past, but want to have the freedom of manual controls to really explore photography as a hobby. At first I was set on a full DSLR, but I'm reading more about 'compact system' type cameras (is this what 'bridge' type means?), which still have interchangeable lenses and manual controls, but closer in size and easier to use than SLRs.. I like the idea of these as I'll be wanting to keep the camera on me so something small and handy will be good, plus I'll be wanting to take it to the sort of events where smaller cameras are allowed but full professional looking setups are frowned upon. I guess the main question is would one of these be a good starting point for a hobby photographer or should I forget about it and get an SLR?

 

Edit: I'm thinking about cameras like the new nikon v and j1 types, essentially look like a compact but with interchangeable lenses.

Firstly, fuck the Nikon V1 and J1. They're the new APS format. All gimmick at the expense of quality. Interchangable lenses but compact sized sensor? No thanks. How big must a dust spot look on a sensor smaller than your little fingernail?

 

Compact system cameras have sensors that are smaller than the majority of DSLRs, but significantly bigger than those in compact or bridge cameras. They have smaller bodies mostly due to having no mirror in the camera body, relying on an electronic viewfinder instead of an optical "periscope" system like a true SLR. As long as you're not whacking the sensitivity up to shoot in low light, then they'll hold their own against a DSLR in most situations.

 

The Olympus models (also known as Micro Four Thirds system) can also use the lenses from Olympus's's's proper DSLR cameras with an adaptor. The Panasonic's might aswell.

 

Regarding the "no professional cameras allowed" venues, some venues define a professional camera as one with interchangable lenses, so your Panasonic Lumixes still wouldn't be allowed (whereas a genuinely professional grade TLR would be).

 

I've had a play with a Sony NEX and I wasn't taken with it. Too much in the way of gimmickry and idiot modes, and the flash looked as underpowered as it did easily breakable.

 

Something else to consider is that DSLRs are no more difficult to use than bridge cameras and CSCs. The controls of both are designed to mimick a DSLR, so if you can use one, you can use the other. Autofocus, autoexposure, auto-white balance, auto ISO, etc... Anything you don't want to do yourself, the camera will take care of, and often more accurately as they hold the manufacturers flagship technology.

[Philo_Vance]

Thanks! Still torn between an SLR and a CSC for the sake of size/convenience to carry it about.

[Surf Digby]

Go down to Jessops and have a play about with them. They'll probably try and push you in favour of the DSLR as they're now the official UK dealers of Tamron lenses, which they don't make for CSCs, but stay strong.

 

Small DSLRs like a D3100 have a nicely snug body, but the lenses are generally more bulky than those on a CSC. I snuck one into the Nottingham Ice Arena though in my inside pocket.

[Philo_Vance]

Mate of mine runs a jessops a couple of towns over so will trek over and see him. Cheers again for the advice, it's been a long time since I've bought a camera so am utterly clueless.

[TotalDebacle]

This is probably the best place to ask.

 

DSLR cameras .. say I'm looking at the Canon EOS 1100D or Nikon 3100 .. what's the zoom like with the standard lens? I'm unfamiliar.

 

I'm used to optical zooms so I'm assuming a standard lens on a DSLR isn't going to be as good? But I can get different lenses?

 

Or I assume the alternative is take big photos and crop?

[chokeout]

This is probably the best place to ask.

 

DSLR cameras .. say I'm looking at the Canon EOS 1100D or Nikon 3100 .. what's the zoom like with the standard lens? I'm unfamiliar.

 

I'm used to optical zooms so I'm assuming a standard lens on a DSLR isn't going to be as good? But I can get different lenses?

 

Or I assume the alternative is take big photos and crop?

 

I think both cameras have a cropped image but as a rough guide an 18-55 kit lens will give you about a 1.5 x zoom

[Surf Digby]

Standard lens or kit lens? A "standard lens" usually refers to a fixed focal length of approximately 50mm, so doesn't zoom at all.

 

The kit lens (ie: the lens that comes bundled with the camera) is a midrange zoom, usually 18-55mm (approximately a 3x zoom. 18 x 3 = 54. Close enough). These are optical zooms (DSLRs rarely - if ever - include digital zoom) and the quality will outperform a bridge camera on all but the duffest of lenses.

 

The image quality of a DLSR over a bridge or compact camera will allow a much greater degree of cropping.

 

The "cropped image" that Chokeout refers to means that the sensor is smaller than a frame of 35mm film, so when comparing a lenses angle of view, you have to take into consideration a crop factor of 1.5 for Nikon, Sony or Pentax, and 1.6 for Canon. Thus an 18-55mm lens gives roughly the same view as a 28-80mm lens on a full frame film camera. This has nothing to do with cropping an image, and is something you can happily ignore for a while.

 

All DSLRs by major brands have more lenses available than you'll ever need.

[TotalDebacle]

Thanks guys.

 

I see a lot of lenses around but not sure what the differences are. I assume some are wider (panoramic) while others closer?

 

I'm completely thick when it comes to this stuff though I am starting to read up on it

[Surf Digby]

Lenses have two main things to be concerned about. Focal length, and aperture.

 

Focal length isn't just about how far away you can take a picture from, it also effects the angle that you can see. If you stand in a shallow tunnel and look out, you can still see quite a bit to the left and right of you, whereas if you stand in a deep tunnel, the view from outside the mouth will be a lot more restricted. Varying lengths of lenses are used to focus how tight you focus on something. See the crudely drawn diagram below:

 

 

The top represents a wide angle lens (or the kit lens at 18mm). It gives a sweeping view of your surroundings, so is good for landscapes and holiday shots where you want the environment in the shot as well.

 

The bottom is a telephoto lens (or the kit lens at 55mm, although I've drawn it a bit long). It's a much tighter framing with a flatter perspective, so is more suited to portraits or anything where you want to emphasise a single element.

 

The wider a lens goes, the more to the left and right it will see. Once you get beyond 10mm or so, the view is so wide, and so exaggerated, you get the fish-eye effect as you get a 180 degree view.