Camera Help

[Robfowler]

Hello Everyone
Before I ask my question, I would like to let you know that, I am not a Pro Photographer. I am beginner daily household photographer. I and my wife, normally take day to day pictures / Videos of Kids, Family, Parties, Vacations, Parks, Outdoor and indoor. Till now we were using Point and Shot camera from Sony and Canon and they both gave us very good memories.
But now we are interested in something better than point and shot cameras. Like DSLRs or mirrorless camera. I like the small size of mirror less cameras but they are costly and we didn't like the way they are build to hold in hand.

Has anyone ever used Fat Lama? It's a renting platform and has some mirorless camera's on it, I thought it would be good to give it a test run before purchasing,

Let me know your thoughts,
Rob

[davidedric]

I can't help with fatlama, but they do refer to the Sony as a "Mirrorless dslr", which is a contradiction in terms!

Dave

[Manfred M]

Welcome to CiC Rob. Would you mind hitting the "My Profile" button at the top of this and add your name and where you are from to your profile?

First of all, virtually all of the members here are amateurs so you are in good company.

I have mixed feelings about renting in your situation as you are unlikely to be able to use a camera long enough to get to know it well enough to make a call on whether or not it suits your needs. The camera selection on the website is quite limited, so I don't think your plan is really going to pay significant dividends in figuring out your next step. The rentals found at higher end suppliers are unlikely to meet your needs either as they really target the professional market and the cameras and lenses they rent out are quite expensive (with daily rates to match).

Not all mirrorless cameras are created equal. Sony has some models that are not much different in size to DSLRs, while Olympus, Panasonic and Fujifilm have tended to go with fairly tiny bodies. Tiny size (and weight) can be a great advantage when trying to be unobtrusive when shooting (they are also quite quite as there is no "mirror slap" when shooting or when carrying the camera for a long time. I do have a small Panasonic mirrorless camera that I bought just because it is small and light, but it cost me about the same as an equivalent DSLR. I will agree, the small body size does have downsides as the camera designer has less physical space to work with, and this does result in some compromises.

I personally prefer using a large DSLR, but these are not inexpensive either and weight and size do come into play.

Based on your current skills and interests, any camera body will work for you. The real question for me would be is that necessarily the appropriate move for you at this point. The "superzoom" cameras fill a niche between what a point and shoot does and what mirrorless / DSLR cameras do for a considerably lower price.

[DanK]

Since you are a beginner, my advice is to get something that (1) feels comfortable in your hands, (2) offers easy and complete control over all camera settings, and (3) doesn't cost much. I'd consider buying a relatively inexpensive DSLR either used (from a reputable dealer with a guarantee) or a refurbished model. Once you have learned the basics and have enough experience to know what would be best for YOU (which none of us can judge), you can sell it at a minor loss and move on.

I did that myself when I switched to digital years ago. I bought an inexpensive Canon DSLR and sold it once I learned my way around.

The basic principles are the same regardless of whether you buy mirroless or DSLR. I would just avoid anything that requires that you plow through menus to change settings, since learning to use settings will be important.

[paintingwithlight]

Hello Robfowler,

Normally at this point someone on the forum will ask you to tell us about the photography that you currently do as well as the kind of photos that you'd like to take in the future. If you give us more information we can offer better advice.

Rather than offering general advice I am just going to throw out two camera as examples of what I might recommend based on your post. The recommendations are the Canon SL 1 (http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/rebel-sl1.htm) or the Nikon D3200 or D3300 (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3300.htm). My rationale for the recommendation is that these are both good, entry level DSLRs. They are comparable to very good mirrorless cameras but are a fraction of the cost and are compatible with a huge number of lenses (mirrorless cameras have fewer lens choices). Canon is coming out with the SL2 later this year so the SL1 may fall in price.

Michael

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Rob,

Welcome to the CiC forums from me.

Just a 'word to put you wise' regarding Ken Rockwell's site (that Michael linked to)...

I have not read the pages Michael has linked, but you need to be aware not to take everything Ken says at face value, especially if you start reading more of his site (as I did when I started out).

Ken often makes sarcastic (aka inaccurate) statements and anyone that doesn't know their way around a camera can become mightily confused.

If you used to watch Top Gear (I guess you're UK based), consider him the Jeremy Clarkson of the camera world, some find them entertaining, but neither are people to quote from (nor necessarily believe 100%) regarding technicalities. That said, they can be useful and even factual at times, when you know what to expect!

I find both entertaining, but ...

HTH, Dave

[William W]

. . . Has anyone ever used Fat Lama?

I haven’t and I wouldn’t for the purposes that you outlined, even I resided in England. Too expensive, not enough range of product and not enough time for the money expended for you to evaluate: moreover it appears that they are a third party broker and not the lender - way too complicated.

If you don’t know which way to jump and are set upon buying a mirrorless or DSLRs CAMERA SYSTEM, then I concur with Dan’s advice – buy ‘inexpensive’ at first to get your feet wet.

Surely there will be some Bricks and Mortar Camera stores remaining in England: get out and ‘feel’ your way around. Check out repossession and loan stores for second hand gear and the second-hand gear in camera shops – anywhere that you can feel and use different cameras, even just a few shots.

HOWEVER . . .

. . . I and my wife, normally take day to day pictures / Videos of Kids, Family, Parties, Vacations, Parks, Outdoor and indoor. Till now we were using Point and Shot camera from Sony and Canon and they both gave us very good memories . . . But now we are interested in something better than point and shot cameras. Like DSLRs or mirrorless camera . . . Let me know your thoughts . . .

Caution!

You appear to have jumped a quantum step and the result could be an unfounded conclusion.

Please re-read Manfred's closing para.

Please explain why you think that a DSLR or Mirrorless camera will ‘better’ for your purposes and outputs, than a Point and Shoot (aka ‘bridge’) Camera.

Also take note of Dave's warning re any commentary authored by Ken Rockwell

WW

[Cogito]

Hi, Rob and welcome. Since we don't yet know where you live, is there a camera store anywhere near you? If yes, go in and play with the cameras. Someone will try to sell you something but ignore that and if possible find one you like the feel of. Then check a website such as DPReview to determine what they think... THEN search somewhere like Ebay for a used/'cheaper than new' item.... Good luck!

[Scott Stephen]

I'd avoid "superzooms". They typically have tiny sensors, to save money and to make their tiny megazoom lenses give you that absurd telephoto reach they boast.

Tiny sensors are worse for indoor shooting and image quality in general. Also, with exaggerated telephoto like that (effective f.o.v. over 1200mm!) you would be challenged to get truly good image quality. Just the heat waves rippling in the atmosphere become an image killer at those distances. Not to mention camera shake blur being magnified incredibly.
Strictly for novelty purposes, or maybe for private investigators looking for bad grainy pictures of something taken from a great distance.

A DSLR or mirrorless ILC with interchangeable lenses gives you the chance to buy large aperture lenses that will perform very much better in low light, and give you the ability to blur backgrounds, etc... and then to buy a different lens for long shots, or for macro, or whatever. Typically a specialist lens will give better image quality than a do-it-all lens.

If you do go with some more expensive variant on a point and shoot, do look at getting one with a comparatively large sensor and a large aperture (low max f/stop).

[Manfred M]

I'd avoid "superzooms". They typically have tiny sensors, to save money and to make their tiny megazoom lenses give you that absurd telephoto reach they boast.

In theory I might agree with you, but in practice I have definitely gotten some decent shots out of a superzoom (and a small sensor point & shoot). There are limitations to what one can do with them, but in reasonable conditions, one can get some great images.

Both of these shots were taken with a Panasonic FZ20 superzoom (many years ago).

[Tronhard]

Hi Rob: Welcome to the forum!

Well, as predicted SOMEONE has to ask you a couple of questions, so let it be me...

1. When you say you are branching out from point and shoot cameras to something a bit more ambitious, do you have anything specific in mind in terms of the kind of things you want to photograph?
2. What kind of format will your images take? By that I mean, to show on a screen only (like a tablet, laptop or TV), to make up to 8x10 prints, or are you after something bigger than that?

I would like to echo Manfred's comments about bridge cameras. The are relatively inexpensive, are small and portable (the best camera is the one you will carry), and produce some great images - given enough light I have taken images of herons that were 100m away with both a $560 bridge camera and a $5600 high end DSLR with pro lenses and when I asked people to choose what was which on a screen they were split about even. Bridge cameras don't involve a great investment and yet as a learning tool they have all the basics that a DSLR will have.

To demonstrate this, look at the following two images, NOT from the point of view of a skilled enthusiast photographer, but from someone who wants a nice picture of a bird.

This is from a Canon 7D MkII + Canon EF-L 100-400 Mk II + Canon Extender 1.4Mk III, total cost about $5600+tax


This is taken with a Canon Bridge Camera, the Powershot SX60HS, Cost $560+tax

My point is, value for money, what is the best solution for someone wanting to take their first steps in their photographic journey?

Still, in the meantime I look forward to your responses to the questions above.

[Black Pearl]

1. Do you have a budget in mind - always number one and always important before ANY suggestions?

2. To what degree is size/weight an issue - would carrying a dedicated camera bag be ok or are you still looking for a single solution?

3. What do you intend to do with your images - will they be viewed/shared electronically with occasional prints or were you thinking of larger prints for your walls?

4. Are you interested in the camera or the results - I ask as 'photographers' tend to get a little camera centric theres 'normal' people tend to look at the results?

[paintingwithlight]

It's a renting platform and has some mirorless camera's on it, I thought it would be good to give it a test run before purchasing,

In Canada one store that I prefer to shop is Costco - it has an excellent warranty and return policy. There is now one (or more?) Costco in the UK. I bought my first DSLR at Costco because of their comprehensive return and refund policy. I would not necessarily go to Costco looking for camera advice but if you want to buy a camera to try out I would recommend them.

Michael

[Tronhard]

I keep hearing in discussions (not necessarily in this forum! ), that people should buy one camera type or brand or another. The reason I prioritise the question of what the inputs and outputs are needed is because we are all shaped in our answers by our own preferences and our own shooting profile. When we are not seeing a specific need it is very easy to answer such questions from our own point of view. We need to get Rob to be more specific about what he wants to achieve and then we can work from there.

I would suggest that one thing that Rob could do is go to a good introductory course on photography and learn a bit about the science and art of taking images. I think going to a course where he can ask questions and hopefully see some different kinds of cameras, and ways of outputting images. It will have two benefits: he will be more able to define for himself and for us what he is trying to achieve, and he will engage with whatever he gets more effectively.

[inkista]

... I am beginner daily household photographer. I and my wife, normally take day to day pictures / Videos of Kids, Family, Parties, Vacations, Parks, Outdoor and indoor. Till now we were using Point and Shot camera from Sony and Canon and they both gave us very good memories.
But now we are interested in something better than point and shot cameras. ...

The camera is just the tool. It's still up to the photographer to get the shot. And some people can take amazing shots just using a smartphone camera. So, the camera may actually be less important than you think, depending upon how/why you think you want one. As others are suggesting, books/videos/classes/workshops may actually be more beneficial to getting you the shots you want, rather than your gear. I tend to recommend Bryan Peterson's Learning to See Creatively​ as a good starting point on composition.

My advice (which everyone on this board is probably sick of hearing) is that whatever camera you choose, if you want to learn photography seriously and get more control, try to get one with the following three features:

• Manual mode (usual part of the PSAM modes). This will give you explicit control over exposure settings, so you don't have to rely on the camera's automated systems. This way you can choose the tradeoffs you want, and the exposure you want.
• RAW capability. So you aren't losing data to JPEGs and have a safety net as a beginner for exposure/white balance errors.
• A Flash hotshoe. So you can learn off-camera lighting.

Like DSLRs or mirrorless camera. I like the small size of mirror less cameras but they are costly and we didn't like the way they are build to hold in hand.

Be aware that the cost of an interchangeable lens system camera is astronomically larger than that of a fixed-lens camera. It's not just the price of the body+kit lens you're looking at. It's also the price of a camera bag, multiple lenses, and possibly a tripod, flashes, etc. etc. It all adds up with surprising ease. While you can enter the world with a $500 kit, you're liable to end up spending 2-3x that amount on getting a full basic system. And then you have to cart it about with you if you want to use it. If you're used to a P&S, this may be more than you're willing to take on.

And these days, there are some pretty awesome P&S fixed-lens cameras to choose from at the higher-end of the range. I shoot with one (the Fuji X100T), that uses the same size sensor as a lot of dSLRs/mirrorless cameras. A 1"-format sensor camera can do some amazing things, and there's even the Panasonic FZ series of bridge cameras that use 1"-format sensor and have f/2.8-f/4 superzoom lenses.

As for renting, it might be better to go with a more reputable company, such as Calumet.

[paintingwithlight]

I and my wife, normally take day to day pictures / Videos of Kids, Family, Parties, Vacations, Parks, Outdoor and indoor. Till now we were using Point and Shot camera from Sony and Canon and they both gave us very good memories.
But now we are interested in something better than point and shot cameras. Like DSLRs or mirrorless camera. I like the small size of mirror less cameras but they are costly and we didn't like the way they are build to hold in hand.

Hi Rob,

I am not a professional photographer. I suspect that I was where you are at now about five years ago. I'd like to break down your areas of interest and tell you what factors I feel contributed most to my taking better images.

1. Take photography courses and join a club. It would probably benefit you more to do so before you buy a new camera but if you feel that you want a camera now, buy one and take a course within a few weeks;

2. Pictures of kids outdoor and in parks: they move fast, especially outdoors. Most cameras can shoot with fast shutter speeds, so that's not an issue. However, the number of frames per second (fps) was critical in my being able to get that one awesome photo of my kids and family at play outdoors - I'll shoot hundreds of frames of kids chasing each other to get that one perfect image. My P&S does not shoot too many fps and there is a lag between depressing the shutter button and the taking of the photo. Getting a DSLR helped me capture photos at a high frame rate. Classes and experience helps me to select the correct shutter speed for the effect that I am after;

3. Video: I don't do it. It takes up too much storage space;

4. Family, parties, kids indoors: The hugest improvements to those photos was learning to use a bounce flash and shooting with a flash on and off camera. Mirrorless and DSLRs pretty much all accept external flashes where the head can be oriented to bounce the light. Practice and courses taught me how to do this efficiently.

WRT camera size - mirrorless are smaller than DSLRs but if you add a telephoto lens to your mirrorless then the size difference becomes, to my mind, negligible.

Many posters have asked about your anticipated image viewing size - if you will only ever view the image on, say, a tablet then you do not need the higher resolution of a more expensive camera. Those posters are perfectly correct. Unfortunately that doesn't factor in possible changes to how you may want to render photos in the future. Right now you might be contented with viewing photos sent via email but perhaps in the future you might want to revisit those photos and make a large print. Personally I only save my photos in either RAW format or in the largest (least compressed) JPEG file that I can.

Michael

[Tronhard]

I think at this stage in our conversation with Rob (which has been distinctly one-sided so far with lots of comments but not much reaction!), we have no idea if he is familiar with the tech terms of RAW, different types of sensor, mirrorless technology etc. We just don't KNOW... We need some feedback from Rob for us to go further. I think we both agree that education is probably the best first step, then he and his wife will have a better idea of the possibilities.

With regards Michael's comment on possible future desire to go further, I think we should wait to see what Rob's intentions and budget are right.

Many posters have asked about your anticipated image viewing size - if you will only ever view the image on, say, a tablet then you do not need the higher resolution of a more expensive camera. Those posters are perfectly correct. Unfortunately that doesn't factor in possible changes to how you may want to render photos in the future. Right now you might be contented with viewing photos sent via email but perhaps in the future you might want to revisit those photos and make a large print. Personally I only save my photos in either RAW format or in the largest (least compressed) JPEG file that I can.

Michael