Buying a new camara

[Roy5tone]

Hi

Iam looking for some advice just got back into Railways after 25 years and am more into Photography so could anyone recommend a good camara and lenses

Thanks

 

[AM9]

Hi

Iam looking for some advice just got back into Railways after 25 years and am more into Photography so could anyone recommend a good camara and lenses

Thanks

No indication of budget or style (compact system camera or SLR) but you won't go far wrong with a Canon, Nikon or Sony for a set-up with separate lenses. I have Canon, but there's nothing wrong with the other two and the differences are very subtle.
Things that you need to consider are:

do you need full frame (a 36 x 24mm sensor)?
would you need an articulated LCD screen (better for shooting low and high level shots, including video)
just how much hardware would you be prepared to carry (SLRs can be heavy, CSCs less so but good quality lenses are usually heavy anyway)​

We need more information to guide you.

 

[Roy5tone]

Thanks or the reply the budget is £150 to £200 not too bothered about weight as I often have my car with me. Think ill need some sort of zoom lens as often subjects are at distance. Not too bothered about video but would like fast burst option. at the moment iam taking wifes compact Lumix 16MP 8x which is ok for close up but for distance I am using a pair of binoculars which are 20x70 which I originally bought for astronomy (obviously not for photos) lol

 

[341o2]

I'd recommend going to, or at least phoning a branch of London camera Exchange

http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/

and discussing your requirements with them With your budget, a prosumer body such as the Canon 55od (I have one as a backup) or the Nikon equivalent possibly. The lens is as important as the camera body. And think long term, because once you have opted for one manufacturer and want to change, you'll have to sell all your gear and start again

If you visit a branch of LCE you will have the opportunity to discuss your requirements and try out any camera you are interested in

six month's warranty on all second hand goods as well

 

[AM9]

Thanks or the reply the budget is £150 to £200 not too bothered about weight as I often have my car with me. Think ill need some sort of zoom lens as often subjects are at distance. Not too bothered about video but would like fast burst option. at the moment iam taking wifes compact Lumix 16MP 8x which is ok for close up but for distance I am using a pair of binoculars which are 20x70 which I originally bought for astronomy (obviously not for photos) lol

The weight comment also applied to handling the camera as well. A lens and camera can be 1-3Kg which may be a bit tiring to handle.

Long zoom lenses for larger sensors can be expensive and inevitably have compromises at the limits of their zoom range.

Rapid firing of cameras also requires well engineered mechanics and fast processing. Entry-level models can manage about 4 frames per second (fps) but an 8fps model could cost 2-3 times that.

 

[Temple Meads]

Are you happy with the quality of the images from your wife's camera, or are there areas other than zoom length you wish to improve on?

 

[Roy5tone]

Iam quite happy with the quality of the pictures on my wifes camera. But on the distance shots it loses quality. I think that 4fps would be quite enough for me. As to the weight and carrying it around the binoculars iam using weigh about 2Kg.Would anyone recommend this Nikon D3200 24.2 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm Single Lens Kit ?

 

[341o2]

the write speed to card can also make a big difference. I use Lexar pros which are very fast, you don't want to be missing shots waiting for the previous batch to write to card

 

[krus_aragon]

Would anyone recommend this Nikon D3200 24.2 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm Single Lens Kit ?

I bought a comparable D5100 when I mozied from film to digital. For my purposes (family photos, amateur studio, various stuff) it does very nicely as a first DSLR.

The 18-55 lenses are very good for ther price, but it's not much of a telephoto zoom. You may want to consider what adding the peice of a 55-200 zoom lens will do to your budget.

I came from a non-autofocus (Pentax ME) and found modern DSLRs to be a lot heavier and bulkier, to the extent that I'm sometimes discouraged from taking it out with me.

If you don't need the benefits of an interchangable lens camera, you should seriously consider a Bridge or Superzoom camera. They're lighter, have a wider zoom range than a DSLR' stock lens, and give photos that rival or beat top-end professional DSLRs of 5-10 years ago. My mother in law got a Canon Powershot SX410 (IIRC) for slightly ober £100. It trounces my camera for its zoom range (40x vs 3x), and in anything other low light can produce very comparable results. What it lacks is manual control over shutter speed, aperture, etc. Is a portrait/sports/night mode dial good enough for you?

I will try to collect my thoughts a little further this evening, when I have a proper keyboard to hand. Feel free to throw any questions

 

[AM9]

Iam quite happy with the quality of the pictures on my wifes camera. But on the distance shots it loses quality.

The reason for that is not only the limitations of the lens but also because most compact cameras only have a limited optical zoom and when that reaches its limit, the elecronics starts to reduce the number of pixels which means that the image deteriorates rapidly. With consumer markets, the emphasis is to get a high zoom number on the spec. sheet, irrespective of the picture quality.

Would anyone recommend this Nikon D3200 24.2 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm Single Lens Kit ?

Yes that is a perfectly good camera, but the zoom is only about x3. That might not bee too much of an issue as with a 24Mp sensor, you can crop the image to expand the view of interest. This can be done selectively using software which is much better than on-the-fly firmware in the camera.

 

[Temple Meads]

You could look at bridge cameras such as the Panasonic Lumix FZ72, which currently has a great cashback offer going: http://www.jessops.com/online.store...MC-FZ72 Digital Bridge Camera-89244/Show.html

The downsides compared to DSLR's (like the Nikon D3200) would be increased grain in low light images, and probably poorer focus on moving subjects - on the flip side the FZ72 has the long zoom you want without needeing to buy (and change) an additional lens. Also it will probably have familiar menus to your wife's Lumix.

 

[ac6000cw]

You could look at bridge cameras such as the Panasonic Lumix FZ72, which currently has a great cashback offer going: http://www.jessops.com/online.store...MC-FZ72 Digital Bridge Camera-89244/Show.html

The downsides compared to DSLR's (like the Nikon D3200) would be increased grain in low light images, and probably poorer focus on moving subjects - on the flip side the FZ72 has the long zoom you want without needeing to buy (and change) an additional lens. Also it will probably have familiar menus to your wife's Lumix.

...or the (bit more expensive) FZ200 - http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Panasonic/Panasonic-Compact-Cameras/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-FZ200 - which has a £30 cashback at the moment and a v.good constant F2.8 aperture x24 zoom lens. Review - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ200/

I agree with some others here that a good super-zoom/bridge camera will probably get you more of what you want on a limited budget.

 

[tramdan]

Last year I bought a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000EB for amateur assorted transport photography, and while that is out of the price bracket you mentioned, I can say most certainly that a Bridge camera would not be a bad choice at all.

There are a good few ones a little further down the range than mine, inside your budget, that will produce excellent photographs with a great deal of ease and convenience.

You would find one to be very flexible for a variety of situations, and the best thing is that you can fine tune the settings, or on most models, the auto mode works very well indeed.

 

[thejuggler]

If you are looking at a dSLR there are thousands of loved second hand bargains to be had. A serious piece of kit which 3-5 years ago would have been £1-2000 will now be a few hundred, go a little older and you can pick up bodies for little more than £100, Nikon d200 or Canon equivalent.

These will be very well built with metal bodies so can stand some abuse and will have water seals so they don't mind the odd rain shower.

 

[Bevan Price]

With your sort of budget, you are possibly limited to 2nd hand cameras. I suggest only buying one that you can see - and try a couple of test shots before parting with your money. Shutter mechanisms do not last forever, so it is best to check that it gives correct exposures.

Canon, Nikon, etc. all make good cameras. If you can eventually afford a DSLR, I suggest that a single long range zoom (18 to 250 or 300 mm) may be a better option than two separate lenses (e.g. 18-55 and 55-250 mm). Unless you intend to make A3 or A4 size prints, one of the Sigma range of zoom lenses should be satisfactory optical quality. Frequent lens changes increase the chance of letting dust into the camera, and onto the sensor - and this can be difficult (expensive) to remove completely.

I have no personal experience of "bridge" cameras, but I understand that some give good quality photographs.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I have no personal experience of "bridge" cameras, but I understand that some give good quality photographs.

My wife and daughter both have Fuji Finepix cameras ( one an 8200, the other an 8500 - the only difference between them is the former has slightly less optical zoom than the latter ) which give excellent photos and can cope with a good range of lighting conditions.

The main drawback is that they run on 4 x AA batteries instead of a proper camera power pack type battery. If you're going to be doing high volumes of pictures, you won't want to be using AAs...

 

[Temple Meads]

I suggest that a single long range zoom (18 to 250 or 300 mm) may be a better option than two separate lenses (e.g. 18-55 and 55-250 mm).

From example images I've seen, the sharpness and distortion with these 'superzoom' lenses is not as good as that from the two separate lenses - if you don't want the inconvenience of carrying and changing lenses, you may as well go with a quality bridge camera at a cheaper price.

Bridge cameras won't generally have greater image quality than compact models, but they do allow the longer zoom and better handlng, and to be honest, in good light most compact cameras are decent these days, unless you're an obsessive.

 

[455driver]

From example images I've seen, the sharpness and distortion with these 'superzoom' lenses is not as good as that from the two separate lenses - if you don't want the inconvenience of carrying and changing lenses, you may as well go with a quality bridge camera at a cheaper price.

Bridge cameras won't generally have greater image quality than compact models, but they do allow the longer zoom and better handlng, and to be honest, in good light most compact cameras are decent these days, unless you're an obsessive.

How many superzoom/bridge cameras have you seen/used/compared?
10?
50?
100?
Or maybe just one or 2?

There are good and bad just as with everything else, my boy has a finepix (S2950 I think) with a 30x zoom lens and on a picture taken hand held at maximum zoom I can clearly read the writing on a poster once I zoom in a bit on the screen, it is better than by canon 600D with a 55-250 lens because I lose so much as I have to crop the picture a lot (I tried ).
Obviously comparing the two when used within the limits of my Canon and its lenses the Canon is better, but the Finepix isn't as far away as the difference in price would suggest.

Bridge cameras are normally built down to a price so will obviously be inferior at the extremes (poor light etc) but for 'normal' pictures they give perfectly acceptable results, you pays your money and makes your choice.

I am looking for a pocket camera to carry around and am swayed towards the Canon (obviously from a long time Canon user ) SX710

 

[Temple Meads]

How many superzoom/bridge cameras have you seen/used/compared?
10?
50?
100?
Or maybe just one or 2?

There are good and bad just as with everything else, my boy has a finepix (S2950 I think) with a 30x zoom lens and on a picture taken hand held at maximum zoom I can clearly read the writing on a poster once I zoom in a bit on the screen, it is better than by canon 600D with a 55-250 lens because I lose so much as I have to crop the picture a lot (I tried ).
Obviously comparing the two when used within the limits of my Canon and its lenses the Canon is better, but the Finepix isn't as far away as the difference in price would suggest.

Bridge cameras are normally built down to a price so will obviously be inferior at the extremes (poor light etc) but for 'normal' pictures they give perfectly acceptable results, you pays your money and makes your choice.

I am looking for a pocket camera to carry around and am swayed towards the Canon (obviously from a long time Canon user ) SX710

I've only used a few bridge cameras - but I have done far too much trawling of the camera review websites to look at their sample pictures, as you said, in most cases the bridge camera results aren't as good as a DSLR in terms of image noise at the higher ISO's and also a few issues with focus/sharpness at the long end of the zoom on some models, or if the subject moves..

BUT, as you've found out these are small differences, which coupled with the price gap and convenience mean for a lot of people a compact or bridge is a better option - personally I like the build quality and performance of my SLR, so I wouldn't particularly want to go back to a bridge, but the cost of an equivalent zoom lens for the SLR compared to a whole bridge camera would be astronomical.

PS: I was after a compact at the end of last year and looked at the SX710, probably a good camera, but for me the low light capability didn't seem enough so I went for a Panasonic LF-1 at a similar price, better in low light but only a 7X zoom there... It's all about working out what features and abilities you want, bet you won't find all of them unless you have a limitless budget - you pays your money and makes your choice!

 

[krus_aragon]

Sorry it took me a little longer than planned to get back to you.
I (and others) may be able to help you if you could say how closely these statements match your opinions on your photography (yes/no/maybe):


The ability to zoom in on distant objects is important to me.

My camera needs to be able to take several pictures a second at top speed.

I may buy other accessories for my camera over the coming years.

I like to be have full control over everything the camera is doing.

I've got to have the very best kit possible.

My camera will often be used at night/evenings.

I prefer to have something light and compact to carry.

JPEGs aren't enough. I want to be able to use raw sensor data to create my picture.

I want my camera to deal with all the complicated stuff for me: I just want to aim it and press the trigger.

I need my camera to be built like a tank, because it's going to get bashed about.

A second-hand bargain could be just the thing for me.

I'm not just buying this camera for railway photography. I'll also be using it for...

 

[Roy5tone]

Thanks for all the advice.as I don't do any evening or night time shoots (personal reasons) iam looking at bridge cameras as they seem to do all I want without having to change lenses etc and weight problems at the moment iam looking at this DMC-FZ72EB-K 16.1 Megapixel Digital Camera with 20mm Ultra Wide Angle Lens and 60x Ultra Zoom. Could you please give your opinions cheers Roy

 

[341o2]

the main issue with these superzooms is that to achieve these massive focal lengths is by a high crop ratio. A typical canon or Nikon aps-c (prosumer) camera will have a factor of about 1.6, typically superzooms have a factor of 6+. so make sure your subject fills the frame.

When the Fuji hs50 (which I own) was announced, it caused a stir in the wildlife community - to get 1000mm focal length handheld, however there were cases of "camera rage" where someone thought you could capture a bird as a small distant blob, then enlarge and crop the image to a photo of stunning detail

There is no perfect camera, one of the best pieces of advice is RTFM (read the flippin' manual) Any camera will have limitations, to get the best out of it, you really have to know the settings and appreciate its limitations

Nothing more sadder than someone who thinks that ownership of the latest most expensive camera makes him a good photographer

 

[Swanny200]

I'm a Sony user, and there are not many of us about, I started off with an A200 which can be found pretty cheap now and are decent DSLR's, am now on the A77 mirrorless DSLR which is a beast when used right but well out of the budget you have, for the price you have if you want 2nd hand then look on Ebay for some decent used ones.

The reason I love Sony over the rest is that I can use minolta lenses (minolta in their time made some of the best lenses in the business) most of my lenses are from the late 80's early 90's and need no adaptor (AFAIK Nikon and Canon need adapters to use older lenses), my most expensive lens I bought on Ebay was £110, the Sony made equivalent brand new (and plastic instead of metal lens body) is well over £600.

 

[341o2]

I'm a Sony user, and there are not many of us about, I started off with an A200 which can be found pretty cheap now and are decent DSLR's, am now on the A77 mirrorless DSLR which is a beast when used right but well out of the budget you have, for the price you have if you want 2nd hand then look on Ebay for some decent used ones.

The reason I love Sony over the rest is that I can use minolta lenses (minolta in their time made some of the best lenses in the business) most of my lenses are from the late 80's early 90's and need no adaptor (AFAIK Nikon and Canon need adapters to use older lenses), my most expensive lens I bought on Ebay was £110, the Sony made equivalent brand new (and plastic instead of metal lens body) is well over £600.

Interesting. does the use of Minolta lenses with a Sony body retain autofocus and exposure, I have several old 35mm lenses which are mounted on my 550d by adapters, but you're then back in the good old days of film where you had to do all the work such as focussing and exposure manually

 

[ComUtoR]

I was in the same boat as you a few months back. I wanted a superzoom without the hassle or technical know how of a DSLR. So I went with a bridge camera.

I physically went out and tried the cameras as I have had issues in the past with cameras and spending £200 shouldn't be taken lightly. I also read about a million reviews on numerous websites to get a good overview.

I sat myself down and listed the things I really wanted from the camera and the superzooms were great but when I looked at them their only selling point seemed to be the mega zoom. The best advice I received about Zoom is always to go with the Optical zoom rather than Digital zoom. I think the best advice I can give since getting a camera with a semi decent zoom is to buy a tripod. Taking pictures at that length means the slightest twitch and the photo can be ruined.

I'm not a photographer by any stretch and wanted something decent but still point and shoot. As 341o2 states the photographer skill is more important than kit. When I start playing with my settings it always goes wrong. (I'm learning)

The FZ72 is a nice camera by all accounts but I have heard that the FZ200 is about to be replaced so the 200's will drop in price.

I don't know how to remove the exif data or I'd post a few from my Bridge Camera

 

[ac6000cw]

Thanks for all the advice.as I don't do any evening or night time shoots (personal reasons) iam looking at bridge cameras as they seem to do all I want without having to change lenses etc and weight problems at the moment iam looking at this DMC-FZ72EB-K 16.1 Megapixel Digital Camera with 20mm Ultra Wide Angle Lens and 60x Ultra Zoom. Could you please give your opinions cheers Roy

No personal experience with the FZ72 (I own the FZ100, which was a predecessor) but here is a review - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ70_FZ72/

In this price range, all bridge cameras use small area image sensors (basically the same as you get in 'compact' cameras of that price range) so not so good in low light but are fine in daylight. Panasonic's image stabilisation is generally very good (and you need it with a 600mm zoom...)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The FZ72 is a nice camera by all accounts but I have heard that the FZ200 is about to be replaced so the 200's will drop in price.

It already has been effectively replaced by the FZ330 (at nearly twice the price). So yes, you might be able to pick up an FZ200 for less if you keep an eye on the prices over the next few months. They also sometimes appear on the Panasonic outlet Ebay shop as refurbished units - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Panasonic...ptical-Zoom-/201497406014?hash=item2eea2e6a3e (but with the current cashback promotion this isn't much of a saving over a new one)

 

[Swanny200]

Interesting. does the use of Minolta lenses with a Sony body retain autofocus and exposure, I have several old 35mm lenses which are mounted on my 550d by adapters, but you're then back in the good old days of film where you had to do all the work such as focussing and exposure manually

Yes, the minolta af lenses produced from 1985 until Sony bought them out does, the MD lenses however do not.

I used to buy camera bundles i.e Minolta dynax camera kits with bundled lenses on Ebay for about £20-£30 and had a friend who ran a photography group use the cameras and lenses I didn't have need for, in total apart from both my camera bodies costing about £2000 my lens spend has been around £550 and when you look at their sony equivalents I am looking at around £2,800 worth of lenses for £550

I must admit since a lot of people cottoned on to it, prices of dynax's have gone up and some people have sold the lenses separate, but there are still decent cheap ones if you look hard enough.

The other thing you have to consider is that because the bodies (unless you want to buy the full frame A900/A99) are cropped sensor, your lenses are 1.5x focal length multiplied.

 

[krus_aragon]

Thanks for all the advice.as I don't do any evening or night time shoots (personal reasons) iam looking at bridge cameras as they seem to do all I want without having to change lenses etc and weight problems at the moment iam looking at this DMC-FZ72EB-K 16.1 Megapixel Digital Camera with 20mm Ultra Wide Angle Lens and 60x Ultra Zoom. Could you please give your opinions cheers Roy

Form what you've said, a Bridge camera (or perhaps a pocket "superzoom") will suit you better than a DSLR.

I'll leave it to others with more related experience to advise you on particular bridge cameras, but I'd echo the advice of going to a proper store where you can try a few cameras out: you might find you really dislike how one company arranges its controls, but get on fine with another company's design. I found I didn't like where Canon put their aperture/shutter dial on their consumer DSLRs, so I bought a Nikon instead.

 

[ComUtoR]

Totally agree with going to try it out first.

I really wanted a Sony but I hated it. I just couldn't get the feel of it and I took horrible photos in store. Nice camera but just not for me.

Fuji I have experience with and generally have been happy but they always felt clunky in my hands.

The Nikon/Cannon debate always came up when I was being advised and there wasn't much between them. Ergonomically they felt similar and both looked great.

I went Cannon as it just hit every need and felt natural in my hands. I got a great deal in John Lewis. Its not a superzoom but playing with the settings I can get it up to x187 zoom.

The pros will hammer you with stats and the technical details but unless your comfortable you wont be happy.

If anyone knows how to send attachments via PM I have a couple of zoom shots Roy5tone may be interested in.

 

[Swanny200]

Totally agree with going to try it out first.

I really wanted a Sony but I hated it. I just couldn't get the feel of it and I took horrible photos in store. Nice camera but just not for me.

Fuji I have experience with and generally have been happy but they always felt clunky in my hands.

The Nikon/Cannon debate always came up when I was being advised and there wasn't much between them. Ergonomically they felt similar and both looked great.

I went Cannon as it just hit every need and felt natural in my hands. I got a great deal in John Lewis. Its not a superzoom but playing with the settings I can get it up to x187 zoom.

The pros will hammer you with stats and the technical details but unless your comfortable you wont be happy.

If anyone knows how to send attachments via PM I have a couple of zoom shots Roy5tone may be interested in.

I must admit, most of my friends are pro photographers and when I said I was looking to start myself the whole Nikon vs Canon argument reared it's ugly head, I'm sure had the debate been happening in a room instead of online, fists would have been thrown I shut them all up by going Sony.

I have used Fuji bridge stuff too and after using proper DSLRs for a few years now they are too lightweight for me but still decent in their own rights.