Hi guys,

I'm just beginning to take interest on photography as a new hobby. I've been reading a lot (maybe way too much) and now my mind is clouded by the question of whether I should go with enthusiasts-level camera or just an entry-level one?

Thanks in advance for any responses. Btw please provide your justification on you suggestion, aight.

[UPDATE]09-01-2017
So I've got myself a used Canon EOS 70D with 24k SC at the cost of RM1400. Borrowed f5.6 18-55mm II IS non-STM lens from my uncle. Yongnuo 560 at RM250. Sandisk Ultra 16GB 80mb/s for RM29.50.

This post has been edited by techfreakguy: Jan 9 2017, 09:27 PM

entrly level dslr

If money is not an issue to you, straight go for full frame sensors.

If money is an issue to you, go for semi professional crop sensors. Personally entry level DSLR is too limited and you can't explore much.

Lens? the 50mm is always a good start. Prime lens forces you to find ways to frame your subjects, and I love that.

Does the transition from entry level to semi pro is too much to be handled?

My budget is limited to semi pro body only. That being said, I can't really afford to buy any extra lenses if I really wanted to buy semi-pro camera.

Been looking at a few number of used semi-pro cameras with low sc, but best way to know is by having it infront of me aight.

Recommend me any model please?

To be honest, the transitions from entry level to semi pro to full professional is not a day and night transition. What differs is mostly the features in it. Since you mentioned that you read a lot, that is enough for you to pick yourself up from things that you don't understand in a DSLR camera. What is important is that, as mentioned, the features that is in a entry, mid and pro cameras are different.

What's your budget? I'd recommend the 80D, 70D (or even 7DmkII if your budget allows). Since I am more of a Canon guy, I cannot shed some light on Nikon cameras. Other Nikon users will be able to help you.

Get the NIKON entry level.

Kit lens 18-55mm VRII.
Fixed lens 35mm/50mm 1.8G

And u r good to go...

lens first body later.. using a 35mm or 50mm prime on a entry level do produce better image quality as compared to semi pro body - assuming you are talking about D7200, 80D, A6300 range..

give us the camera model instead of saying "semi pro" not too sure with your definition of semi pro..

iphone7, samsung s7, huawei p9

My budget is around 3-4k.

I'll give it a thought. Thanks!

Those are exactly the models I have in my mind as semi pro body. Maybe entry level is enough for me with right lenses.

Thanks for replying everyone.

in this case few setup which you can go for..
1 - canon 700D/750D with yongnuo 35mm f2 and get a canon 50mm f1.8 2nd hand can find anywhere.
2 - Nikon D3/5 series with 35mm F1.8g
3 - Sony A6000 with 35mm F1.8 if budget tight sigma 30mm f2.8..

i personally used all 3 setup before and i love the sony most.. unlike the semi pro camera from canon and nikon.. their entry level autofocus points are pain in the ass.. too little.. Sony on the other hand are using different technology for this focusing system. do check it out.

Sounds great. Thanks for your thoughtful reply mate.

As you are just starting out, I wouldn't recommend getting prime lens as you'll find many constraints with it. Get a good general purpose lens.
(E.g. for Full Frame - 24-70mm F4 or 24-105 F4, for Crop - 15-85mm or 18-135mm)

With your budget I don't think you'll be able to get the 80D with lens, probably 70D or Nikon's counterpart with the lens 2nd hand. Unless you stretch your budget to 5k-ish.

LOL when people say Entry level DSLR can't explore much when in reality most people in this world don't even push 25% of a 10 year old Digital SLR like say the EOS 350D.

Anyway buy what you can afford.

Full frame sensor? LOL. Seriously many of the best images in this world aren't even taken with full frame sensors.

It's even worse when people say 50mm is a good start.

Seriously, all wrong man, all wrong. There's no rule that you need to go for full frame or full frame is best because it isen't.

The best sensor in the market now happens to be an ASP-C sensor.

As for lens, NO - DO NOT go 50mm. You need to identify what you wish to shoot first.

Better you go entry level and spend on accessories that you need rather than going to semi-pro or what not and stuck with just a limited gears.

Since you're starting out as a hobby, just get an entry level with 18-55 lens or whatever kit it comes with and explore first.

Take it from me - back in 2010 I got my professional qualification by using images taken with entry level camera. https://www.goldfries.com/photography/my-jo...ciation-mpa-uk/

Yes, I was using EOS 350D / 500D / 550D - and yes, those are cameras more than half a decade old by now and I was able to create professional grade images that pass the critique of 5 renown industry professionals.

Entry level cameras today are WAY better than semi-pro camers back then (EOS 40D / 50D) and do you think entry level cameras are limited?

If don't believe also can check out my profile
https://www.dreamstime.com/goldfries_portfolio_pg1
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/goldfries

All taken with APS-C sensor camera, some taken by phones (even smaller than APS-C sensor).

None of the images are taken with full-frame sensor because I only have full frame camera around 2014 and haven't submitted any pics to stock photo.

Those images you see in that 2 links were taken with Canon EOS 350D / 500D / 550D / 60D, with some phone models.

And after reading all this - do you still want to worry about Entry level cameras?

^ the above.

70D / 80D are excellent models, I won't go 7D2 though, unless you want super duper AF + weather seal and what not.

I sold off my 60D for about RM 1.5k. Exchange rate not good these days so if you want to cut cost, can source for used mint condition 60D / 70D. They'll be great.

As for Nikon side, there's the D7200 but it doesn't have the flip LCD as that on 60D / 70D / 80D.

In the end which brand you go for is entirely up to you, best you go to shops and feel those camera body in your hand and try out their interface see what you like.

I was on Canon, now on Nikon. I also used Sony for a little bit, and scattered experience for Fuji, Sigma and whatever else - buy what you feel comfortable with.

As of now DO NOT aim for any prime lenses yet because you don't seem to know what you like to shoot so go with 18-55. Explore, later see you want to go wide, or to tele, or go macro.

For people like me, 70-200 is rarely used so that's why I sold of my Canon 70-200 F4L as it's under-utilized and even on Nikon now I haven't go any 70-200 because I don't use that range.

For my work it's all ultra wide (Sigma 12-24 II), standard range (Nikon 24-120) and prime lenses for product shoots (Tamron 90mm macro, Nikon 40mm DX Micro for video as it works like 60mm). Know what you need / want, buy accordingly - don't buy because people tell you XXmm is good and all.

I like 50mm doesn't mean it works for you. You like 100mm doesn't mean it works for me.

Get yourself a entry level DSLR first. To be honest any camera will be capable enough as long as it has decent M, Av/A, Tv/S modes that allows your inputs for the controls.

Agreed that you should not prioritize on getting a prime lens first. High chance is that you will be frustrated that you can't zoom ( 99% of my friends who handled my camera with a prime lens couldn't understand why they cant zoom ). Not to mention the frequent needs to change lenses will be extremely troublesome for someone new.

Wow, so much to digest! Thanks for the insights and explanation. Will update soon on which camera I will buy. Thanks! Really appreciate it guys!

Probably in Malaysia people only look down on Entry level cameras.

You see across the globes so many people produce amazing work with entry level cameras with no complaints.

Also this "FULL FRAME" target is a joke,

I've outdone plenty of full-frame users for ages and so have many. Having full frame doesn't make your pictures any much better.

Noise control advantage is getting lesser by the year.

If sensor size is an issue then might as well go medium format / large format. There's the Pentax, PhaseOne and Hasselblads for your consideration.

Anyway here's a video for you to digest further, my thought is exactly like what he said.

goldfries Walao yourself all using prime but you discourage ppl from using it. I'll say if i have the money i'll go for the prime as well with the any entry level camera and DITCH the kit. I'll rather learn how to walk and get the shot that to rely on Zooming in and out. Once you are too used to zoom the moment you get a camera with a prime.. you will feel the cacat-ness.

i started off in 2010 with m4/3 EPL3 on a kit lens on my next change to 100D with 40mm f2.8.. i never turned back. It's prime all the way.. If i change a camera i need to make sure there's the lens i want. when i notice the 40mm is not my cup of tea.. i tune it down to 22mm f2.8. later i to GX1 with Oly 25mm F1.7/8 that was ideal! all my travels ill bring that only one lens.. fast forward a year + gatal tried nikon.. but then too bulky even with the 35mm F1.8.. Now Back to mirrorless with Sony A6000 + 35mm, 50mm and of course the KIT which is always in my pouch.. i couldn't be bother to bring it along anywhere i go. lol

---
I used the following equipment
Camera Body : Canon EOS 350D, 500D and 550D
Lenses : Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 85mm f/1.8 and EF-S 18-55 IS f/3.5-5.6
Flash : Canon 580EX II and 430EX II

Wah dude you don't simply twist my words leh.

You read my post, I didn't discourage people from using prime.

I'm saying to use the basic kit lens and find out the preference first before getting the lens of choice, be it prime or zoom.

I have prime lenses for the purpose I need, and that's the way to go with camera. Buy the prime lens that you want, not the one that people think that you want.

You are not him, you can't just shove a 50mm to him just because you like.

Exactly. That's why they can go zoom first and see the range they like. Primes can come in later.

I'm not a Prime vs Zoom person, it doesn't make sense. I love both primes and zoom.

My favorite Canon primes are 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8, not forgetting the 100mm f2.8 macro. Affordable and superb image quality. I won 3 out of 4 of them before. Now I'm left with a 50mm f1.8 because too cheap and no takers.

For my work I use zoom for events, zoom for wide shots too because between 12 to 24mm - a single lens does the job, need not bring 3 primes (or heck, 3 bodies with 3 primes)

For product shoot or portraits, primes are great for the IQ, need not worry about barrel distortion and the length doesn't change.

In the end zoom or prime, both serve their purpose and both are great. Just a matter of preference.

haha prime is the way to go. Well for me i know ppl still love their 20-70. 70-200 but for someone who travels 3 - 5 time a year ive really learnt alot by move your body to focus.. even for kits.. i doubt you will have time to "let me try 35mm", "ok now let me try 50mm", what about "22mm"?

I have a principal of learn with what you have.. until a certain point you know there's something you need then get it lo.. Anyway for someone who have the budget why not the extra lens right? someone with rm4k in hand you don't expend them to go shop for something that cost @ rm2k and be happy with it.

That's not the pleasure of spending money. LOL

Sorry edited my post for more stuff.



leg zoom is not the same as zooming with a 70-200. The perspective changes, you can't always leg zoom.



Yeah that's why that 18-55 kit is good. Learn with what they have.

I started with 18-55 anyway, no big deal. I eventually tried out 50mm and other lens when I have the opportunity.



When someone with limited budget, asking them to get an additional lens that may or may not suit their preference is just a huge gamble. Don't waste people's money la.

Meh. Either zoom or prime, both are equally ok. Just go with whatever you are comfortable with within budget. I go for prime primarily cause its cheaper and fast. If don't like the prime's constraint, just save enough and get a good zoom cause it ain't cheap, or just stick with kit if you cannot tell the difference. Good Photography does not necessary means it has to be sharp if you plan for photos with story behind.

To TS, camera choice will depend on your shooting style. Even smartphone camera is good enough, if you only plan to upload your life story to instagram. For high autofocus hit rate on formula 1 car or sports, fast APSC like D500. If you like those creamy bokeh in portrait shots, FF camera. If you r into street shots and travelling light, m43 will do just fine. If you want to look hip to impress your girlfriend, Fuji (sony a6XXX is ugly).

.

This post has been edited by techfreakguy: Dec 31 2016, 06:21 PM

eh most expensive lenses are prime lor.

btw kit lens term - there are really good kit lenses too.

@kidmad
@goldfries
@DaddyO

Thank you so much for the additional insights!

I guees I'll start with entry-level camera with kits, figuring out the best lense to be used by experimenting with the provided kits.

My desire to take photography as a hobby is driven by the fact I enjoy looking at pictures like @goldfries took and a bit of natures as well. Hopefully step by step I'll get there soon. Thanks again everyone.

This one.

If your photos aren't good, upgrading to better body and better lens just means you'll have a better gear to take higher quality garbage.

I do interior photography, product photography and figurine photography too.

Photography is fun, just go out and have a blast.

...............I'm talking about standard prime lens, not primes like Zeiss and comparing to zooms with similar f stops like f2.8.

What's standard primes?

To some people their standard primes are Canon L, Nikon gold ring, Zeiss and whatever those I can't even think of.

Oh not forgetting those 400mm primes and so on.

Just buy a Leica M with 2 lenses. 35mm Summilux n 24mm Summilux. No more problems. Hehehe

Dude..... If you are dont know what Im talking about it, then why you giving advice for beginners. Who tells beginner to start of with Canon L or Zeiss? I'm talking about the cheap standard 50mm lens or 30mm which can cost less than RM1k or RM2k depending on brand or second hand use.

Unless you think TS so noob that he straight jump to L or Zeiss lens without comparing price simply basing his choice on wild recommendation.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Dec 31 2016, 07:27 PM

Can't help myself from chiming in
For portrait I use Nikon FF with 58mm + 70-200,
Lanscape , Nikon + 14-24
Jalan2/personal gathering/event, Sony A7s

Now in process shifting to Sony ...

Both prime & zoom are great.

This post has been edited by OOtaii: Dec 31 2016, 07:55 PM

I know what you talking about aaaaahhhh, I was just responding to this part.

When you say prime without being specific, I add on lor say that primes are the ones that cost more. What to do, you don't put more details later people 'prime is always cheaper' so I chip in lor.

Where got such thing as 'standard' prime wan la? Your standard is not other people's standard what.

Furthermore normally when people stay 'standard' when it comes to lens it refers to a certain focal length. https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/standard-lenses

You are the first person that get confused by the word "standard" for whatever reason. Sure there are many ways to interpret "standard" but most people I talk too immediately think of 30-50mm focal length without resorting to too much specifics on how to correctly use the word "standard".

It's like "photoshoping" is not a verb, but people gets its meaning even if you technically misuse the word.

PS: I didn't say primes is always cheaper. I said "I go for prime primarily cause its cheaper and fast." There is a difference. Lastly, not going for anymore debate on this as I hate deviating from topics.



This post has been edited by DaddyO: Dec 31 2016, 09:21 PM

Don't get worked-up by details others pointing out.

EDITED : Actually the confusion came about after you bright in the name Zeiss, long story but nmind. Anyway, won't be explaining here. My apologies to you.

Like goldfries said, there are actually many instances where you can't leg zoom. Especially landscape when travelling.
Primes have their advantages, but they can never replace zooms when it comes to landscape shots.

You might want to consider mirrorless too. You might feel the burden of DSLR when you want to travel or walk for a long time. Sony a5100 (less lens choices and $$), Olympus E-PL7, or Panasonic GF7. The noise is more prominent on the m43 system (Olympus & Panasonic), but the cheap and small big aperture lens will bring it back. The m43 lenses are very cheap compared to APS-C lenses.

Image quality wise, it is identical with the same sensor size DSLRs. Think them as DSLR without mirror, that's where they got their name. The downside is short battery life.

This post has been edited by kingkingyyk: Dec 31 2016, 10:06 PM

Instead of going DSLR la, nowadays got nice nice cameras like Sony RX10 (donno which mark la) with 24-600 lens! Damn attractive.

There's also the RX100 or something compact with 24-70 f2.8 lens and flip mirror and what not. Really worth consideration too.

Mark III. The do-it-all camera, but doesn't have ND filter for video recording with big aperture under big sun. OK for photo as the shutter speed can reach extremely fast.

RX100 is also do-it-all, but doesn't have the choice of using wider or telephoto lens in future.

This post has been edited by kingkingyyk: Dec 31 2016, 10:27 PM

RX100 lacks hotshoe mount if I'm not mistake but that's just losing out on certain areas of photography. Still works fine for others, or alternatively can do flash-photography with tripod and long exposure while manually triggering flash.

Only the second generation has it. The third generation onward has the flash moved to hotshoe and EVF occupied the flash. The flash is bounce-able to ceiling so it is quite fun to use, but the white balance has to be manual to prevent AWB sets it to too warm.

Ouhhh I was happy a while then I go search ..........

28-100mm (equiv), f/1.8-4.9 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* lens

I want the wider aperture on the newer range.

Then you need to get G5X already. (Apparently it is no longer pocketable)

Keep it coming guys. I'm just gonna read it and try to digest as much as I can. This is getting better.

Your options are :
DSLR
- Rugged
- Bulky
- Doesn't that have many fancy features in mirrorless
- Lens choices are extremely versatile
- Doesn't have many models for decent video. (80D has very good AF, but lacks 4K and Log profile, 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II has 4K but the codec makes the video size unmanageable)
- Very good battery life, single charge can get you easily 1K shots.

Mirrorless
- Light but retains the sensor size in DSLRs (except Nikon 1 & Pentax Q)
- Lens choices are not as many as DSLRs, but you can buy adapter and mount DSLR lenses on it (it will become bulky anyway)
- Autofocus is faster than those really entry level DSLRs, like 1300D. Comes with focus peaking too, to aid manual focus.
- Bad battery life, only lasts ~300 shots
- Some models are video-oriented, some use it for full time professional work
- Nice screen (than entry level DSLRs)
- No mirror so you can't see what the lens reflect aka OVF. Mid or high end models come with electronic viewfinder to replace it. Basically it is a small screen that is same with what is displayed on the screen. Well, it has it's advantages and disadvantages.

High End Compact
- Very light and some are pocketable
- Lens are generally better than the kit lens in DSLRs and mirrorless
- Mostly has smaller sensor (1") so the noise performance won't be as good as the big sensor found in DSLRs and mirrorless, however the big aperture lens allow it to operates at lower ISO, hence the noise can be maintained similar to DSLRs / mirrorless with kit lens.
- Some models has very good video, that rivals DSRLS/mirrorless.
- No OVF, but some come with EVF, just like mirrorless.
- The package is extremely complete that some of the features only can be found on the extra accessories on DSLRs/mirrorless, like bounce flash and ND-filter.
- Less distraction to the subject being captured (laymen think ahh, it is just a cheap camera)
- Lacks future upgrade-ability on lens

Clear enough? It is about making tradeoff. I have an entry DSLR with me, but due to the bulkiness and troubles to bring it out, compact becomes my usual tool. So the DSLR will only be used to capture something that my compact cannot capture.

This post has been edited by kingkingyyk: Jan 1 2017, 12:09 AM

You just go ahead and explore around see what you like to shoot and what's your preference in outing.

When I started with photography, I also use 18-55, then later I bought a 70-300. Go out sure bring those 2 lenses. Later I got tired of it and went 18-200. YAY awesome convenience.

After that I went UWA (Sigma 10-20) for wide shots and fell in love with it.

Later on my setup was 10-22 + 15-85 + 70-200 + 50mm f1.4 + 100mm macro and sold off both my Sigma 18-200 and 10-20.

I'm no longer using the above setup but it's similar. Nikon D750 now with 12-24 for wide, 24-120 for my standard zoom. No 70-200 yet as I rarely use and Nikon 70-200 are costly. No 50mm now but instead a 40mm dx micro + 90mm macro.

Focal length change a lot but still get the job done.

Nice post but there are exceptions, like Canon EOS 1000D with 40mm STM is smaller than Mirrorless with Zeiss zoom lens.

Mirrorless models often cost quite a fair bit, for example Sony and Fuji cameras can really cost a lot. Say Fuji X-Pro 2, crazy price.

Fuji lenses are...

55-250 IS wasn't out that time?

55-250 is 2008 I think.

I bought my 70-300 Tammy sucky lens in 2007. Cheap but sucky at 300mm. CA like silly, image also so soft. So bad until now 10 years ago liao I still remember.

Just a FYI, mirrorless isn't that light either if you take account to the weight/size of good lenses plus the extra batteries unless you go for prime lenses only.

The "magical" prime lenses for Mirrorless aren't small and light either. Zeiss glasses man, damage to pocket and neck.

Personally speaking it should have been lighter and compact as envisioned by the mirrorless companies in the early days. But somehow alone the way they forgot that and gone full blown pro to sell expensive heavy lens.

Well mirrorless being "lighter and compact" is still there, however it's confined to entry level models.

I love the setup like say an Sony A6000 series with pancake lens. Things change when you go higher end like the A7 series with a great pair of glass to go with it.

I once considered Fuji too, then I saw the FUJINON XF10-24mm F4 R OIS lens - man, that defeats the purpose of being Mirrorless as well.

I bought myself nikon D5500 + nikon 18-140mm kit lens last year.. handgrip quite big, touchscreen, lightest dslr in the market, smaller body...for me the only downside is the viewfinder is quite small..

And if you happen to try D5500 n u like it, why don u wait for D5600, I read they even put proper timelapse in D5600..

Like kentang emas said, u dun need high end camera to get the best picture, all u need to do is to learn how to use ur camera to get the best out of it..besides, if u happen to watch thecamerastoretv channel in utube, their best camera for 2016 is D500 which is crop sensor..

Lighter and Compact must go for Panasonic GM series and slab in 20mm F1.7 fuh.. you can even slot it into your pocket for that setup.. I really wanted to get that setup but im not making a living out of photography.. Spending too much in photography in a year will make me penniless.... hahahaha

100D is the lightest anyway. 407g vs 420g (CIPA standard)

goldfrieskingkingyykDaddyOkidmad



Lens - EF-S 18-55MM IS II
f4.6
1/250
ISO 200 (iinm)

Your opinion guys?

Not interesting.

Keep trying.

Get more inspiration from photography sites like Flickr, 500px and the likes. Expand your imagination beyond just lifting the camera up to your eye and pressing the shutter button for no particular reason. Give your image a story, or rather, let your image tell a story to the viewer. What's it about, why it's shot, what happened around as well, how is the light, are there emotions.

But most importantly, keep shooting. Your 1st 10,000 shots are likely gonna be rubbish (not my words).

Find a better bunga..Your subject make sure is the bunga haha not to include so much of the leave.. bookeh also needs a proper background... Don't face it randomly on the road.. try taking one facing the sky or lush greenery behind..

hello to all sifu , need advice on which camera is good for traveling ? tq

Budget?

5k

Panasonic LX100

thx

If you need flexible screen, go for RX100 IV.

Remember to get extra batteries too. Such compact camera usually runs out in ~300 shots.

alright will do dat too ..

tq once again

If you're not going to use the 4k function, the rx100m3 is a better choice. Battery wise, use powerbank to charge is more than enough. Buying extra batteries only if you want the extra convenience.

That is the only flower I got at the moment. Haha. Thanks.

Just google "flower picture" n lot of sample u can refer

Will do mate..thanks.

Don't tell me you buy camera because you want to shoot flower in the first place?

I'm sure you have many thoughts in mind on what to shoot before buying.

Don't rush to upload pic, go out spend some time figure out what to shoot and how to shoot. Take time to explore composition and all.

Not exactly. Just trying out and getting some responses..hahaha..

Yeah I did have many thoughts on what to shoot.

In my effort to do so..thanks mate..

One thing about photography - respect people's time.

If you don't put effort to your photo, or not even put some thought in the process - please don't ask people to critique. You won't improve and you're wasting people's time.

People are here to help so the least anyone with a new camera can do is put effort in the shots taken before asking for critique, not simply go out fire away suka hati then ask for opinion.

Nikon 50mm 1.8G

Take note of the distractions like the 2 lines on the left and that dark area on upper right corner.

I didn't see it as a distractions.

well, it's sure nice to remove it in post process...

Definitely better than mine..hahaha..

Wah I never thought of it. How do you usually define distractions? Sorry too many questions..

Things within the frame that draws your attention away from the subject, or things in the frame that hurts the overall aesthetic value of the image.

hello fellow sifus, newbie here. want to get some humble opinion on this photo. thank you in advance

Good try.

Now here's the problem

1. You are not photographing your subject at its best angle
2. Subject occupying very little part of the frame, this is not wrong but when it occupies so little, all other areas become distractions.

I put it simple - it's like a movie, which one is the hero, which one(s) are the supporting actor / actress, and which ones are just not part of the story?

You need to frame it such that hero gets the most attention, supporting get less, non-supporting become not apparent.

For this plant, shoot from top and it looks best. You get to see the purple petals lead to the yellow center, then use the green leaves on the water as background.

A decent shot. Not wow but decent.

+1 agree