Camera suggestions

[Skyblue]

Hi,
At the end of January I will be taking a photography class and can't wait!! The last time I took photography was waaaay back in high school and in the darkroom - times have sure changed!

So I am hoping someone might have a suggestion for a good starter SLR digital camera. I am not wanting to "break the bank" but would like a good quality camera for my money.

I have been looking at the Camera Store website and elsewhere - not sure what to do.

Thank you - any thoughts, comments would be greatly appreciated.

[theantiquetiger]

Canon or Nikon? (or other?)

I am a Canon man. A nice starter camera is a T3i, great for the money. You could even go with a even something a little older and used, like a Ti1. You could find a nicely used one for less the $200.

[Skyblue]

Thank you...I will check it out.

[theantiquetiger]

The thing to know about DSLR's is the ISO (not the megapixals, like most people think). The cameras I listed above are about 12-15 mpix. Most of the top cameras are just in the low 20's, so 15 mpix is not that bad. Max ISO on the cameras above are 3200, making it difficult to shoot in low light with out a flash. My camera (Canon 60D) has an ISO of 6400. I can grab some low light shots, but not like the new cameras that have ISO's over 20K (up to 100K). These things can produce some amazing images without noise in low light due to the ISO.

The Canon 60D (body only) can be purchased new for under $600. The higher ISO cameras can get up in price quickly.

The higher ISO is not the only reason for the higher prices, there is new processors, etc. Just like the world of computers changes and improves by leaps and bounds day-to-day, so does the DSLR camera world.

[Barefoot]

Knowing what I know now, I think that with the development of mirrorless technology progressing as rapidly as it is, that someone just now stepping into photography with the intent to pursue it with a passion should really consider mirrorless.

[Marko]

Nikon D3200
or
Canon Rebel T5

Both cheap and fab!

I disagree w/BF about mirrorless UNLESS you rarely want to track anything that moves. The autofocus is just not there for moving subjects in my experience.

[Barefoot]

I disagree w/BF about mirrorless UNLESS you rarely want to track anything that moves. The autofocus is just not there for moving subjects in my experience.

I can understand your reservations regarding mirrorless. My point was that the learning curve to becoming a knowledgable and competent photographer is such that by the time a beginner reaches that level, mirrorless will be much more advanced. Perhaps even good enough to track squirrels.:)

I have not found anything that my a6000 won't do, yet.

[Barefoot]

One of Photography CA's sponsors has this to say about mirrorless vrs DSLR autofocus.

4 Mirrorless Cameras Battle the Nikon D4s in an AutoFocus Shootout (http://petapixel.com/2014/05/25/rundown-puts-5-mirrorless-cameras-autofocus-up-against-the-nikon-d4s/)

[Skyblue]

Thank you everyone for your info.
I think I'm leaning towards the Nikon D3200 and have found a good price.

[Marko]

Hey BF!

Gonna watch that video soon - but I tested the Fuji X-t1 they talk about, and I tested it for autofocus on fast moving subjects.

Autofocus-wise, on faster moving subjects, it will lose 100% of its battles against and D4S AND much cheaper DSLR cameras. That said, it's a decent camera overall.

Placed against the Nikon D3200 DSLR though, it's twice the price and the D3200 will do the majority of the things better.
In addition, Nikon D3200 is a superior learning tool (I've tested the 3200 and the pictograms through the menus are FAB for learning.)

Just my 2 cents though and thanks for that link BF, thecamerastore does useful tests!