Well I just moved up to DSLR from normal point and shoot. Wanna get this to have some fun, as a hobby when Im stressed. I like playing with gadgets.
Initially was looking at cheap ones, from 1300d to 700d. But I was told Nikon d5600 is a steal with the free 70-300mm lens. At 3.4k, I was told can sell the lens off at even 1.5k. Is d5600 a bit too much for amateur like me

learn about ISO, Shutter speed, and Apppppature,

try to alway shoot at the lowest ISO, or 800 max if u can't avoid.
thing is if iso is low then pictures are darker (Under exposed)
but if ISO is high, then picture will look grainy (like shot with a Shoe)

shutter speed,

Faster = less light (Under exposed), can shot fast movie objects, annnnnnd will reduce motion blur.
normally theres a unspoken of shooting at a shutter speed equal or higher then the Focal length (MM)
EG. using 50mm lens, shoot at 50mm or higher... otherwise get a tripod and use timer for super sharp images.

now appppature, is not a manual setting that u can freely turn around like ISO and shutter speed,
apppppppature is fixed based on the lens, with the lowest number (biggest, fastest, maximum) eg. F2.5
now.... stay with me,

F2.5 is the largest appppature, shooting at that appature will give u alot of light (Over exposed pictures)
and a shallower depth of field, (meaning, eg. only 3 feet will be in focus, but the 1 feet in the middle of 3 feet is the sharpest, everything infront or behind that point will be BO!key-ed).

so u can shoot at F4 or F8 for a larger area of focus,
think of it like this more focus (multiple subject)
F2.5 or bigger (Singular subject)

also the higher the F number the less light in.... so (under exposed)

with all that being said, i have a feeling u already know this, then it would be a waste of time, because i just a had the thought of.... hey!, what if he already knows....

ISO Shutter Speed and appppppature, balance these 3 things and you'll get the best photos the camera can shoot,
also not to mention u should learn to use lightroom atleast, and shoot in RAW format, u will really see the difference, and feel that what u spend on the camera and lens worth every single sen, Including GST (sacarstic joke )

or u can just shoot in Auto mode, and it'll be just like your point and shoot...

haha..just knew all these few months back, still playing around. actually I learnt all these on youtube haha. but ya Im amateur still, not sure its a good buy or not D5600. The 70-300 lens probably Ill only use once in a year only kan
and wow, did you just type teh whole thing out. thats impressive

This post has been edited by kkk8787: Mar 13 2017, 03:41 PM

nikon is going to ditch the low spec dslr soon. perhaps d3000 series.

d5000 series is good for normal casual photography.
70-300 is good lens for spots/birds/etc at good light condition.
*not recommended at lowlight situation as you need to bumb some ISO. Is not recommended to use more than 800/1000 for DX/Crop dslr. anyhow, noise is just some art. Some photo the noise is good but almost all noise is not so good.

d56 comes with integrated wifi/nfc so should be good.
my friend use it shooting the stars at night.

if you want something fast in settings/configuration, better take d71/d72.
but nikon malaysia only will give you 50mm 1.8D which is around 350-450 ec.

--

edit:

I think 70-300 3.5-5.6 sometimes not so usefull but if you are going out at the park. this is very usefull lenss even the bokeh is not good as lens with f2.8. but the sharp is good.

so, what kind of dslr are you using now?

This post has been edited by Fzeo: Mar 13 2017, 03:47 PM

so in a way D5600 seems like a better deal still at 3.4k.

type the whole thing... damn, later i post then read back alot of grammer mistakes...

up to you la bro, the ISO appature and shutter speed thingy is a push pull method thingy, and theres always around it.
i only use a Lumix GF2 mirroless camera, with a kit lens of 14-42, and a vintage lens 50mm f2.5,
to avoid blur i use tripod during low light, and if bright day, shoot in burst, surely out of 3 photos 1 should come out sharp.

very few people can tell the difference la, i'm shooting at ISO 100 all the time, alot of color and detail is in the picture, were else someone else may be using a 3k camera with a 2k lens, and shoot at 800ISO,
he'll lose some information in the picture, esp when later want to edit in photoshop or lightroom.

i'm no pro la, but i like using things that people say 'this one no good la', and bringing it up to the stand.

kinda like how patrick won the race with a rock.........

anyways, i got the GF2 for 300 bucks, then the vintage lens for 200 bucks.
so i'm only standing at 500 bucks.
i've been snapping photos in RAW since 2014 with a Lumia 1520 and 930,
so i got the hand of iso and shutter speed with a fixed appature, playing with lenses are a really good fun.
but back to your question,
70 to 300, unless ur an animal lover, and do have a tripod. then go for it.

otherwise, it's really hard to imagine 70 to 300 shots at first... have to get used to,
i'd say something like a 25-80 would be a great (Street, party, selfie, portrait, landscape and abit of zoom)
lens, also with the amount of things it can shoot, it'll be good for starters.

3.4k = d56 + 1k 70-300
so the price of d56 is around 2.4k

so, it is worth.

is depend on your photography type.

if you think 70-300 will be very usefull to you, then take d56.. else go with 71/72/73..


if I am u, who just about to go play around with dslr..

i just buy d71/72 kitlens + 50mm

then get 35mm

just focus on portrait and landscape.


--
edit:

if you like birds, theater performance, stage perfomance, then go with d56 + 70-300
also for taking portrait at outdoor

This post has been edited by Fzeo: Mar 13 2017, 04:02 PM

Congrats on your final choice! looks like Nikon still had that promo running.

Btw, don't let the common misconception that only wide-angles are good for landscapes.
70-300 is quite a popular lens for landscape shots as well. When done right they can look even more amazing than wide-angle compositions.

didn't mean to offend the pro camera race..

for a creative person who has been snapping for decades he can even snap a portrait with a 400....
but TS just starting, plus 400 lenses are expensive as hell!.

yup. 70-300 is very good lens. looking to get one but not for now.

lol not a pro and not offended la.
the best lens is always the lens you have with you at that moment

i remember you. The one who told me the d5600 is a greaat buy haha. But that time i was looking at sub 2k. Btw are u in anyway related to kldslr. Because he said the same thing, that the d5600 is a steal

i'll drink to that!.

but d71 roughly same price as d56. But comes with 50 only. Isnt at 70-300 coupled with kitlens more versatile than a 50mm only.

I am wedding photographer and I also travel or walk around to shoot for fun
I have 70-200vr2F2.8, a very good lens, but I can say, with this focal range...really seldom use...
Roughly I can say, this lens, contribute less than 5% of my trip photo...
Really dun think is a good idea to get the 70-300 by paying so much additional
(Unless you want to get it and sell it directly)

If really want a lens that able to cover most of the scenario during travel, 18-135 (around this focal will do) is the best

If want nice bokeh, quality photo, need get fix aperture lens such as 24-70F2.8, 16-35F4...etc, but I think this is too much for you at this moment, too expensive

Another option of nice bokeh and quality is get prime lens, but you need to get the prime that with motor (D5XXX series cannot drive prime that without motor)

By seeing your usage (fun and hobby), get D5600 with kits lens(around 18-135) meet your needs
But, kit lens usually cant produce outstanding nice bokeh photo
(you might been inspire by some photo online that tot of getting any DSLR then can produce that kind of photo, I am one of the victim last time...)

Ofcourse, you can buy other brand such as Canon, but if possible, stick with Nikon or Canon, easier for you to sell it off when you quite photography next time(If)

Have you ever think of get Mirrorless? Mirrorless such as Sony A6000 is having DSLR sensor as well, smaller body, and light. From what I see from the pass Thaipusam at Batu cave, many user change to use mirrorless already.

haha it IS a steal! I only wished they had a similar deal for Full Frames
Usually they only give free cheapo 50mm lenses that costs below RM500 whenever there is a promo >_>


Nope, not related to them though I bought stuffs from them before

mirrorless. Well surprisngly i tried and these dslr seem to fit my hand nicer. 100d canon smaller right, i hold ini have difficulty grabbing it i dunno how to explain. So in a way i find holding a dslr easier than small mirroeless.
I wonder if i put 70-300mm on sales as new set the moment i got it, how much i can get

How come some say 70-300 can be used for potrait

Basically any lens can be use for whatever purposes. How good it'll look will depend on the user at the end of the day

I used to think the same way back in 2012 when I first handle a mirrorless (olympus epl5), it was a loan from a good friend. I still remember my first outing with it was at malacca jonker walk. Very compact and didnt attract much attraction, but in my heart, I was missing the bigger grip of dslr and feel mirrorless was more like a toy...However things changed once I've started to get my hands on the Nikon D7000. Perfectly fit into my hand, but.......so freaking big and heavy....so hard to fit into my bag. And when it did, it made my bag bulged so big. As for now, I ended up getting another mirrorless, Sony a6000. I can go compact with the 1650 kit or big with my 18105 zoom for more reach. If I want to have a better grip, I can always add on a battery grip. The flexibility is there. Just my 002 cents, hope this help.

P/s: I am not saying u will, but I have many friends who are owning dslr leaving them at home most of the time collecting dust on their shelf or in their drybox. When I ask them why, they will always give me the same answer. Too big to bring around, easier to take photos with their handphones.

This post has been edited by Loseeker: Mar 13 2017, 07:08 PM

ya I understand..hmm

but from what I see. example D5600 is smaller than canon. just maybe bigger than mirrorless. But the problem is once you put on lenses for both, the size difference is not that significant anymore. correct me if Im wrong

As I've mentioned above, yes, when I go for longer reach lens (ex 18-105) the size advantage of mirrorless is reduced. But I don't always have to go for that set up. For my casual use (75% of the time), I like to just carry my camera with the kit lens + Raynox DCR 250 (macro lens) for flowers and bugs that came across my path. Below is the size comparison, it is just a reference. If your heart is leaning toward dslr, by all mean. After all, it's your money.



This is nikon D5600 without kit lens vs Sony a6000 with kit lens



While the nikon model presented in this pic is not D5600, but it was the predecessor of D5600, which should give u a good estimate of D5600 with kit vs Sony a6000 with kit.


This post has been edited by Loseeker: Mar 13 2017, 11:35 PM

advicr taken. I'm surprised the kitlens for a6000 is so small.

Well....there is one big dslr advantage over mirrorless and that is battery stand by time. Imagine u walking down the street and you see a moment that only last few second. Turn off live view and dslr can last like forever even when it is on and you can instantneously take the moment shot without waiting for it to boot up. And you can take hundreds of shots without needing to charge for many days. It is one thing that i find mirrorless is lacking when wanting to take street shots and what even phone camera cannot do.

Bottom line, it really depends on preference whether you prioritise weight of a mirrorless or reliability of a dslr. I for one choose weight lol despite what i just said.

I don't know about you (kkk8787), but I always carry a bag something similar (actually a bit smaller than) to the picture shown below. With this kind of bag, I can put in my phone, tablet and my beloved a6000 with kit lens + flash (nissin i40) without much buldging at all. But I agreed completely with Daddy0 that the battery is way superior in dslr compared to mirrorless. But then again, I see no benefits at all for longer battery life if the size and weight of the dslr deter you from bringing the dslr out from your house.

p/s: I am fortunate to have good friend who was willing to lend me his D7000 for few months for me to try out. I guess, if I didn't had the chances to play with dslr first, I would end up buying a dslr but same with most of my friends, leaving it at home collecting dust most of the time after the initial excitement wore off.



This post has been edited by Loseeker: Mar 14 2017, 01:33 PM

+1 for this

U have to be very sure u can live with the bulkiness of a conventional DSLR
PnS to DSLR is a very big jump in terms of size

If you plan to bring your camera with you almost/everyday wherever you go then it could be quite troublesome to bring a DSLR. I'd get a RX100mk3-5 for that

However for me, I usually only bring out my DSLR when travelling or if there is something specific I want to shoot.

In the end, it's up to each person's intended usage.

DSLR always fit better with hand, but it also more bulky
If do street photography, when you holding a DSLR (no matter how small it is), it will attract people look it you and feel not so comfortable
However, with compact/mirrorless/phone, most of the time, people may just ignore of what you are doing

I carry a powerbank with my A6000, then I can shoot for whole day and no worry of low batt

Talking about 70-300, with D5600, crop factor of 1.5, that focal range, I really seldom will use with this focal

Imagine, I go travel with friends, when I want to help them shoot photo (travel photo), 70-200, I need to stand very far, so that can snap people with landscape together

When friend just next to me, I cant shoot her/him, too near....I need to walk far....

Yes, some scene see from far is nice, then can snap with 70-200, but, it only contribute about max 5% of my whole trip photos

70-300 is not a high demand lens, most probably u can see people selling online e.g. RM1500, but this is just a price, doesnt mean got people want to buy

What you may can do is, u can PM KLDSLR of ask him how much he can offer to take your lens (70-300)

My advice is, just get a camera that meet your needs will do. So, you must know what you want to shoot first....

Mirrorless is indeed convenient I think. But hmm...somehow reminds me of point and shoot. The quality is way above point and shoot right. Basically what u get on dslr u will get on mirrorless right.

That depends how u shoot. Without lens knowledge and knowing camera capability you might as well get an iphone that may get you a better shot. Just dont settle with auto only.

If mirrorless which will u all go for. I saw canon m5 and sony a6500 price both also way beyond even d5600

yupe I'm learning

A6000. This is still the best ML camera out there.

Both A6300 and A6500 is stupidly overpriced here... and not many new upgrades over the a6000 also. With their pricetag rather get a full frame or semi pro DSLR body.

if i can sell the 70-300 lens at even 1k for new, u think any taker. That will lower my cam price to 2.4k or lower.thats the price of an old 700d canon. Kan. And i still have the kit lens.

a6300 comes with 4k, magnesium alloy body, and more buttons while a6500 is like a6300 but with additional IBIS and Touchscreen. Iso performance on both are also better than a6000 in that if you lift the shadow area in a high iso shot, it definitely is cleaner. Eye af works in afc mode on a6300 and a6500 but doesn't in a6000 and other little quirks.

But if just taking photos, they are overpriced indeed. Money saved go buy better lens.

If we leave everything else out of the equation and just focus on the camera sensor, mirrorless can be better than dslr. It really depend on which model. Both dslr has entry level, mid range and high ends. It boils down to your budgets. But one thing for sure, for Sony a6000, it will be better than most (if not all )dslr at it's price point.

a6000 vs d5600?

a6000 seems ok priced still. but some told me the lens selection might be a problem later on?

Do you really need 4k? Even full HD recording now is sufficient. I've personally used the a6000 in low light conditions many times and perform very good already. I was amazed with the sensor's performance. Low light with high ISO also not much noise and no blur (refer unedited attachment)

Sony lens also not exactly cheap. You're stuck with what ever Sony gives you. Even 3rd party manufacturer's don't offer lot of E-mount lenses. Compared to the arsenal of lens available for Nikon and Canon. You're paying a premium for a crop body mirrorless camera.

[attachmentid=8593206]
F4
1/60
ISO 2500

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Sid...6000___1139_942

dpreview discussion
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59094272

Im slowly growing into the idea of portability now. D5600 seems nice to play with. But I do not know half a year , 1 year down the road will I still hold in and bring it everywhere. It just seems like a bit overkill to bring it everywhere right.
Seems A6000 is a good choice to start with since its cheap? Its not really new, will it be a bit out within few years time?
Some friends recommended me canon mirrorless. she is using M3, so naturally asked me to look at M5, M5 seems overpriced for me. M3 seems similarly priced to A6000
She said canon u can even use canon DSLR lenses on it. dunno how true

This post has been edited by kkk8787: Mar 14 2017, 09:28 PM

If you worried about limited lens selection of Sony mirrorless, then canon mirrorless has even fewer lens. Native EF-M lenses are less than 20 if I'm not mistaken. As for Sony side, there are more than 40 (Full Frame + Apsc) E mount lenses just based on what shashinki is offering. Unless you're professional, seriously, how many lenses you will buy for a hobby ? Most of my friends got 18-55 and 55-200 and that's it. And after few months, they let their camera and lenses sit in their home to collect dust.

If you going to get a a6000/6300/6500, coupled it with a 18-105 (very useful range) and a 35mm f1.8 (for low light/night shooting without flash) you will have most of your bases covered. As for 70-300 that came with the d5600, as many has mentioned, it's too long for general walk around. That range is good to shoot birds/wildlife though.

It is true that Canon mirrorless can adapter their dslr lenses, but Sony mirrorless can do the same, even more selection. But let face the fact, adapting lenses only works if you have many dslr lenses to begin with. So, Canon mirrorless work best (the way I see it) for video blogger who are happy with the kit lens and wanting the dual CMOS AF. Or for those who already owned many canon dslr lenses but wanted to adapt them to a smaller body. If you don't already have many canon dslr lenses, buying a M3/M5 so that u can adapt the dslr lenses really defeat the purpose of having a portable camera the way I see. it. On top of that, I'm sure many will agree with me that no adapted lenses will work better than the native. Again, just my 0.02 cents.

This post has been edited by Loseeker: Mar 15 2017, 12:16 AM

Sony mirrorless with the kit lens and 55-210mm is a very good combo already. Even the kit lens can achieve a bit of wide-angle FOV. Unless you lazy to swtich between lens there's a 18-200m available. But that sniper alone cost more than the camera

In terms of lens, Sony's lens ain't exactly cheap. Plus with the limited option choice makes it another disadvantage. Its like they don't want you to buy their lens

http://www.sony.com.my/electronics/lenses/...ramount=e-mount
(APS-C only has 15 lens according to Sony's site. FF gets you the 38 variety)

This post has been edited by sp6068: Mar 15 2017, 12:37 AM

I agreed. And they are quite affordable.

True, many sony lens are not cheap. But there are good and affordable one. I find that there are always cheaper alternative. Example

UWA
Sony E 10-18 can be replaced by Samyang 12mm F2.0

Standard zoom
Sony Zeiss 16-70 can be replaced by Sony PZ 18-105

Standard prime
Sony E 35mm f1.8 or Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC DN ( both are very affordable)

short telephoto/ portrait lens
Sony E 50mm f1.8. (cheapest among all the lenses mentioned here not including kit lens)

While many don't like the idea of using FF lenses on apsc, I see it as the vista to upgrade to the FF in the future. So, I always welcome the idea of using FF lenses on apsc camera.

Lastly, if we compare sony lenses price to Fuji lenses, you won't feel sony lenses are so expensive anymore. Apart from the samyang 12mm f2.0 that I've mentioned above which also offered in fuji x mount, I'm don't think I can find fuji offer something at a similar price point for I paid for sony. The closest match to my 18105 is the fuji FX18-135mm. While it has longer reach, but it's not fixed aperture. And the price is RM4k, enough to tapao my a6000 with the 18105g with few hundred ringgit change.

This post has been edited by Loseeker: Mar 15 2017, 01:06 AM

Ah do read my post carefully and to whom i responded to. I giving reason why a6300 and a6500 are overpriced. Not why u need 4k. And there really is high iso problem (around 3200 above) which produces ugly red hue/banding/noise (not sure what u called it) when u uplift the shadow in pp.

And you are not stuck with sony natives only lah. Native lens are indeed limited on sony but because e mount has shorter length you can actually adapt far more lenses from Canon, Nikon and even oldie lenses via adapter.

Doesnt really matter. In fact some pros even recommend D5300 over D5600 cause its cheaper and some dont notice the image quality drop.

I prefer DSLR when there is special event because you got wide choices for accessories and lens. Rather than picking up D5600 + 70-300 better go with D7200 used + prime lens like 35mm 1.8 or 24mm 1.4. You will be blown away by its result if you like bokeh and portraits. For everyday point and shoot, smartphone is enough. (using oneplus 3T and it works good with street photography but not great. Good enough)

I couldn't agreed more, with events, I will pick up a dslr over a mirrorless anytime everyday given the choice. But then again, unless we do photography as a profession (eg, wedding photographer), is it really worth the investment we put into our dslr just to take it out on ocassional events and weddings among friends, relative and acquaintances? Well, I supposed that's an answer each of us have to answer for ourselves.

hahah that reminds me that in showcases/events, when there's a group of photographers taking photos of the models

1) Guy with Handphone
2) Guy with P&S
3) Guy with Mirrorless
4) Guy with DSLR
5) Guy with Mirrorless + Flash + Battery Grip
6) Guy with DSLR, Battery Grip + Flash

Guess who the models will always look at first to pose

the most handsome one ?

well it seems like kldslr offer 800 for the 70-300 trade in as too many of their customer trade in.

decent...cos they will then sell it around rm1.1k.
if u want to sell it also, then ur gonna be competing with those 'many customers'...see in the end maybe u sell rm900-1k and will take time.

but i will just keep the 70-300VR and use it cos its still a good lens.

how u know they offer 800. Whats the actual price actually for this. 3.4 if minus 800 means the cam is around 2.6k.

i pmed thr fb page

I'm guy #1. But for serious photos la (like Comic Fiesta or Computex) I will be guy #4, add flash if need.

Last year at AFA SG i got lazy, so I use smartphone.

This one.

When I was on Canon system, I have the 70-200 F4L. I bought the cheapest, and even though being probably the best lens I have it was so rarely used. So rare until it was the first few lens to go.

Now on Nikon system, still no 70-200 and don't even have a need for it. May buy it in the near future 'just in case' need for work but even for my work, rarely do I need anything more than 120mm.

Last night when I shoot for a dance performance show, I met a guy that using D5100+ 18-55
He is just a beginner and ask be of what setting to use

Of course, when I try to explain the aperture, shutter and ISO to him, by using his camera
I find out, when my aperture is F5.6, 55mm, I already push the ISO to 3200, but I still cannot get shutter that faster than 1/100
The photo come out still dim and of course, when slow shutter, photo turn to be not that sharp due to hand shake

By looking at this, getting a 70-300 that with dynamic aperture, I can say it not much useful during dim light environment (if not shoot with tripod)
My personal opinion, dun get the package that come with this 70-300 (then you sell it)
Just get what you need will do

If really plan to get D5600, I would suggest just get the body + kit lens (such as 18-55, 18-120) and not more than that, or with some prime lens also another good idea

When travel, I use D750+35mm and also I will bring along my a6000
my a6000 mainly is for video purpose, and some place as market or shops
Because these places if u bring out your DSLR, people will be shy or run away or trying to avoid you
But, if you using phone or mirrorless, people can accept.

The response and handy feel of DSLR is something that Mirrorless cant reach at this moment

So, you have to think back your self what you need, then only can spend wisely

That 70-300 probably is now a bundle because tak laku no one want and now want to get rid of it.

I also think it's wiser to go with just the standard zoom range kit.

For me, UWA and macro lens, even standard primes (35mm, 50mm) serves more purpose than a 70-x00 range telephoto zoom.

better go for d3400 then? Sensor same most lf it same only lack a articulating screen and wifi to name a few. How u guys take selfie for fun if ur screen is fixed haha

selfie = phone.

well d3400 n 5600 same sensor mostly same specs but one is 1.4k more expensive than another.
One free flash another lens.
Wonder where the extra 1.4k comes from

........dude do take time to read the specs rather than just think about price or watch youtube video which already done tons of comparison. Here's a hint: One has a touchscreen, the other don't.

And no, they are not even that close in specs.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Mar 18 2017, 04:41 PM

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/...tTabs-TechSpecs
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/...tTabs-TechSpecs

D5600 has mirror lock
D5600 has larger screen
D5600 has swivel screen
D5600 has touch screen
D5600 has more shutter modes
D5600 has more scene modes
D5600 has more Active D-Lighting options
D5600 has more AF points (39 vs 11)

That, among many other things.