Looking for help / insight regarding my first camera purchase?

[Manfred M]

Pentax looking interesting in this article: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/b...st-dslr-camera . Am probably going to just go for it. Not necessarily the Pentax but I love the thought of not being limited. Limited only by my ability and the steep learning curve for one of these cameras as well printing a-okay with me

Pentax is one camera I would stay away from right now. They have not updated their sensor in years and it (and Olympus) are currently the two camera manufacturers viewed as the ones to be the ones who are most likely to exit the camera business.

When I speak to one of the local camera store managers I've gotten to know quite well, I was told that Sony and Fuji are probably the most sought after cameras in town right now, with both Canon and Nikon close behind. When I speak with my Japanese friends, they tell me that in that country, Canon and Nikon are still on top, with Fuji and Sony behind them.

[DanK]

If you are still looking at a $1600 camera, I wonder if you are taking the advice here to heart.

At the risk of being redundant: I think you should stop worrying about megapixels. The Bergen shot I posted, which is on sale in a gallery as a 13 x 19 (A3 plus) print, was a crop from a 12 megapixel camera--probably a total of 8 or 9 megapixels in the final image. I have never used a camera with more than 22 MP, for images I have displayed up to A2.

Another reason not to buy an expensive camera yet is that if you are serious, you are going to need other stuff. A decent tripod and head can easily run $400-500, and you'll need a good CPL filter. And you will need software, and if you are going to print, you will need equipment to calibrate your monitor. etc., etc. Also, you will in the end buy into a system, not a specific camera. For that reason, I would agree with Manfred's implicit suggestion that you look most at Canon, Nikon, Fuji, and Sony, not necessarily in that order.

I'll put it this way: I spend time looking at the images produced by a large number of photographers. I rarely have any idea what camera they used.

Finally, brands differ considerably in terms of ergonomics, the logic of the menus, etc. Once you have some experience, you may have strong preferences based on this. That's all the more reason to buy something cheap to start, until you have some experience under your belt.

Yes, people have thought of ICM before:

[Manfred M]

To paraphrase Dan. A more expensive camera is not going to give you a better picture, regardless of what the camera reviewers and camera manufacturers are trying to tell you, especially if you are new to photography.

I got this image with a camera worth a lot less than what you are looking at paying, with a much smaller (and older; I bought it in 2013) sensor. The current model with lens is running for around 1/2 of what your are looking at paying (Panasonic GX9; $798 with 12 - 60mm lens at B&H in NYC). I shot this with the GX7





I produced a 17" x 22" / A2 print from it. The shot is hand-held and the train was moving towards me.

And no, the original straight-out-of-camera doesn't look like this. There are hours of post-processing work here to get the image up to what I wanted to print. At the printing stage, it took 3 or 4 test prints to fine tune the image to get the output I wanted.

[The Dutchman]

I apologize if it sounds like I'm not listening, I promise I am! I'll continue to refer to this thread as I'm going through the decision making process and jot down what I need. It's been a God send as I haven't heard back from a couple forums or an old friend who's a professional photographer yet. Pretty much flying blind until today. Thanks again, I really appreciate it. = Rich Hardy

[William W]

. . . I'll continue to refer to this thread as I'm going through the decision making process and jot down what I need. . .

Understood. No apology is necessary to me. Your response explains your thinking.

Every detail of what I think that you should do, is not necessarily every detail of what you think is relevant, for you to do.

WW

[Manfred M]

I apologize if it sounds like I'm not listening, I promise I am! I'll continue to refer to this thread as I'm going through the decision making process and jot down what I need. It's been a God send as I haven't heard back from a couple forums or an old friend who's a professional photographer yet. Pretty much flying blind until today. Thanks again, I really appreciate it. = Rich Hardy

You are being bombarded with information and you need to filter through it to figure out what is relevant to your decision making and what is not.

I went through a somewhat similar process when I bought my first DSLR; I read the reviews, analyzed the features (I was not even aware of the existence of CiC at the time). In the end, I had narrowed things down to two brands and to camera bodies; one by Canon and one by Nikon (Fuji and Sony were not even in the game at that time with cameras I was considering; although Panasonic and Olympus were).

I was not a Canon or Nikon shooter at the time, so I had no history with either brand. My final decision was based on ergonomics; one camera felt right in my hands and the layout of the controls worked for me and the other brand felt slippery and I was concerned that I would drop the camera too easily. The controls were not as intuitive either.

Whatever way you go, you need to be comfortable with the instrument, so handling one before buying is something I highly recommend. It may make the decision easier for you.

[davidedric]

Back to printing................

First, I am a lot lower down the photography food chain than the likes of Manfred. I do print, but not for galleries or for sale.

There is no doubt that printing is an art, some say a black art, and you should view it as the final stage of post (after you've taken the shot) processing. So, whilst you will likely need a high end printer one day, there is a heck of a lot you can learn with much more modest kit. I would start with a smaller photo printer from either Canon or Epson and learn the basics there. If you take a picture that you really would like bigger, have it printed professionally (I'm not suggesting CostCo). I'm in the UK so can't advise where, but I'm sure someone here can. Then, also welcome to the world of papers and profiles.............

We haven't even started on post processing software, which generates even more discussion than camera brands. Let us know when you want to start on that.

Good luck, Dave

[escape]

I bought my first cammera a year ago. I watched videos on the different types of cameras. I determined what I wanted in the camera and how much to spend. Did some research and bought a camera. It took me a week or two. Love my camera.

[DanK]

If you are still looking at a $1600 camera, I wonder if you are taking the advice here to heart.

Sorry, in retrospect, this sounds snippy. Didn't mean it to be.

The bottom line, I think, is that the key thing is getting a camera that has a decent sensor, the ability to work in fully manual, shutter priority, and aperture priority modes, and the ability to shoot raw. Almost all current budget interchangeable lens cameras meet these criteria. It's very likely that you will want different gear when you gain more experience, so the choice now isn't critical. It starts to matter if you start accumulating lenses, especially expensive ones; at that point, it pays financially to think hard about what system is best for you.

Re printing: Dave and I seem like we are on the same page, but perhaps not quite. I have been printing for years and only bought a pigment-ink printer a couple of years ago, when I started to exhibit in places where this mattered and when I started putting prints up for sale. So I agree with Dave that you can start with a much cheaper printer. However, I would go far enough up the food chain that paper manufacturers offer ICC profiles for it because learning to print with a variety of papers is part of the process. In the case of Canon--all of my photo printing has been done on Canon printers, so I can't speak to other brands--this has in the past meant buying the cheapest of the dedicated photo printers, which is now the Pixma Pro 100. when I used a multifunction printer at the outset, no paper companies other than Canon offered profiles for it. It's easy enough to check. Go to the website of a large paper vendor, such as Red River Paper, and see whether they offer ICC profiles for the printer you are considering.

[billtils]

Whatever way you go, you need to be comfortable with the instrument, so handling one before buying is something I highly recommend. It may make the decision easier for you.

Very wise advice and something that is very often overlooked in this type of discussion. As an example, I have what by the latest standards (or fashion) is a large and heavy camera, but I have large hands and also find the weight helps as I take all my nature and wildlife shots hand-held (my son has a small, light, mirrorless Sony that is a super piece of kit but that I never feel comfortable using).

You've had lots of good advice already but I'd take care not to get in to a state of paralysis by analysis - ALL the main manufaturers make good cameras!

[davidedric]

Following Dan's latest comments, I certainly concur with the need to have paper/printer profiles, but there maybe a way to obtain them even if the paper vendor doesn't have pre-prepared profiles for your printer. I do have a Canon Pixma printer two or three years old.

Here in the UK I use Permajet papers, and they offer free profiling for any of their papers. Basically, they send you a file for colour printing which you then physically post back to them, and in return they email you a profile. (They also sell a sample pack of their papers so you can get them all profiled if you wish.)

I imagine someone will offer a similar service on the other side of the pond.

[The Dutchman]

Yes, Manfred kicked it off right. DanK and the rest of you layered in some great info on cameras as well as the relevance of MP, and what's needed for A3 and A2 prints. I'm taking notes and screenshots.

Basically need to lay out and budget for what's needed overall, and what's my timeline for that matter? Do I want to try making a print in 3 weeks or 3 months etc... I knew absolutely nothing so your help is greatly appreciated!

As per Manfred, what sells? Is it something I'm capable of producing? If so, would I still enjoy it or would I be compromising to get noticed? I just don't know yet so you've given me plenty to chew on to say the least!

[Round Tuit]

Yes, Manfred kicked it off right. DanK and the rest of you layered in some great info on cameras as well as the relevance of MP, and what's needed for A3 and A2 prints. I'm taking notes and screenshots.

Basically need to lay out and budget for what's needed overall, and what's my timeline for that matter? Do I want to try making a print in 3 weeks or 3 months etc... I knew absolutely nothing so your help is greatly appreciated!

As per Manfred, what sells? Is it something I'm capable of producing? If so, would I still enjoy it or would I be compromising to get noticed? I just don't know yet so you've given me plenty to chew on to say the least!

If you are looking at making a print that you could sell in a reputable gallery, 3 years is probably closer to how long it will take.

[Manfred M]

Basically need to lay out and budget for what's needed overall, and what's my timeline for that matter? Do I want to try making a print in 3 weeks or 3 months etc... I knew absolutely nothing so your help is greatly appreciated!

Before you can be a successful printer, you need to be a master retoucher and have the ability to unlock an image. The additional step between being a successful retoucher and printer is understanding the print materials you are using and the knowledge to pull that out of the paper and printer that you are using.

Becoming a successful printer, in my view, will take a number of years.

As per Manfred, what sells? Is it something I'm capable of producing? If so, would I still enjoy it or would I be compromising to get noticed? I just don't know yet so you've given me plenty to chew on to say the least!

What sells depends on the market you are in. The level of workmanship to sell at a flea market or a craft fair is totally different than to have your work shown in a fine art gallery. The markets vary and gallery owners will want to sell what their clientele wish to buy. If you are trying to get into the higher end galleries you have to look at what they are showing. They tend to specialize; some show current styles (some of the progressive ones have a lot of "post-photographic" genre art), some tend to be more focused on nature, others concentrate on the human form, etc. You can find galleries that handle just about any type of image.

The most successful local photographer I know sells in the range of 30 - 60 prints a year; a print selling for $5000 apiece. She only gets a fraction of the money as she is represented by an agency who have to be paid and of course the gallery owners also take a substantial cut.

Whitney primarily works with a view camera, that she makes her own glass plates for and then contact prints the final product. This is her website: https://www.whitneylewissmith.com/

I suspect you are not planning to compete with her style...

I know several other photographers who are well known in the local arts community; their styles vary. One deals with highly manipulated, unique abstract work, another deals with interesting but more mundane subjects, the third pretty well deals exclusively with mountains, glaciers and icebergs (although he also shoots the animals he finds in these environs). All of them have worked for years to develop their reputations and all have formal training (college level) in photography.

As I mentioned before, to get into this aspect of photography, one has to be known in the fine art community and is producing work that sells. No gallery is interested in carrying an artist whose work does not turn over.

All of these people have been doing fine art photography for at least 5 years, some for a lot longer than that. Three do their own prints and the fourth uses a third party fine art printer.

[rpcrowe]

A camera and lens or lenses choice depends mostly on how much you are able to spend on the system... It is counterproductive to look at very expensive camera/lens systems if you do not have the finances to afford the system. It doesn't matter if it is the best system for you - if you cannot afford it, you need to think of asnother alternative,

Since you are aiming at gallery quality prints, IMO, you might best consider a full frame camera, rather than a crop sensor camera.

I agree that, even if you can afford it, buying a top line camera/lens system night not be the very best plan for starters. OTOH, I think that the best idea might be to consider a high resolution camera/lens system that you can build upon.

If I were beginning in photography and aiming towards your needs, I would look into getting a full frame camera that is one or two models old... I would also look into getting one or two prime lenses, rather than an entry level kit lens.

Often, you can find a used camera in great shape with a couple of lenses for a fairly low price.

I am not necessarily recommending thi9s specific camera/lens setup but, am simply offering it up as a type of choice you may find in used cameras on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-Alpha-...MAAOSwANle2wNc

The Sony A7ii is still a viable choice in used full frame cameras while IMO the 50mm and 28mm lenses would be a good starter kit... The major difference between the A7ii and the latest A7iii is the AF capability with the A7iii having a better AF system. A bigger battery plus dual card slots is another difference but, neither would impact a camera's capability to capture landscapes.

I am not really all that familiar with Nikon cameras but, if you would want to consider a Canon system. the 5D Mark iii or 6D Mark ii might be a good choice.

In reality, the several generations old Canon 5D Mark ii body is still a viable choice while the 6D Classic is not that bad at all either. Package an older body with a normal and wide angle lens and you could be decently set up at a very low price.

Which ever camera and lens system that you decide on, a decent tripod and an editing system would be necessarily. Tripods are another field in which you can often find bargains on the used market while Photoshop CC subscription service at about ten U.S. Dollars a month is the standaard of the industry...

Another thought is, "are you capable of shooting, processing and printing images which would be salable?" You would be in competition with many photographers who have years of experience. However, that doesn't necessarily make them more capable but, it is something to consider...

[DanK]

the 5D Mark iii or 6D Mark ii might be a good choice.

I know of a 5D III in excellent condition, shutter count < 14,000, that will be for sale in a week or two. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

but the real reason I posted is to respond to the selling prints question. I agree with Manfred--it depends entirely on the market. Selling photos that decorators might want or that people would like as souvenirs are both very different from selling fine art prints. One friend of mine who sells a modest number of prints each year does what I would consider artistic photography, mostly of trees, but he told me that a fair share of his sales are nonetheless photos customers want in part as mementos.

If you want to sell artistic photos (and I mean this more broadly than the narrower "fine art" rubric), I agree with Manfred: in all likelihood, it will take years. I've been printing for years, and this year, I had (before COVID) my most successful year by a long shot: a gallery took over a dozen of my prints, I placed one print in a museum (a temporary exhibit), and I placed a few others in another, lower-level juried exhibit. As of May 15, my total sales amounted to....drum roll, please.....$0. Now, without COVID, it might not have been zero, but I think it would have still been a very small number.

When I was working on my first book, my editor--who was truly a wonderful editor--said to me one day when we were discussing how much work it was, "There are two reasons to write a book: love and money. Yours had better be love." She was right. I'd say precisely the same about photography. Yes, you may end up a rock star, one of the lucky ones who sells a lot. However, I wouldn't set myself up by expecting it.

[Manfred M]

Yes, you may end up a rock star, one of the lucky ones who sells a lot. However, I wouldn't set myself up by expecting it.

One of my photography teachers / mentors knows the iconic Canadian landscape photographer, Edward Burtynsky, reasonably well. https://www.edwardburtynsky.com/

He has told me that if you walk into Burtynsky's studio and want one of his prints, you'll have to bring along a cheque book or a credit card with a sky-high credit limit and be willing to drop $60K or so for a print. They will run off a print for you using their chromogenic printer (note - not an archival process; life expectancy under good conditions is around 40 years).

There are a few photographers like him around, but they are the exception, not the rule.


Let me direct you to the websites of the other fine art photographers that I mentioned:

https://www.dyannewilson.com


https://mynds-i.com/


https://www.jalamont.ca/#1

[The Dutchman]

Manfred, you certainly approach this as a might imagine a German would! When I hear Manfred mention full-frame, and DanK Mark IV (rpcrowe)... I'm still considering those even though I know you don't want me to! But also trying to weigh the cost of a tripod, computer, software, printing etc. Think I may be alright on computer and software.

I'm a Val Kilmer fan. In 1997's The Saint one of his impersonations was of an artist, Thomas. In the years since Val has lost his voice and become an artist. I wonder if that's who he always was? My last experience with art was sketching Gorbachev in the 80s when he was on the cover of Time, I may have been in 3rd grade. I could be wrong, but I feel like my true self may be bubbling to the service (giving my subconscious an outlet for the first time in years).

This is one list of cameras I've bookmarked: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/b...st-dslr-camera . Manfred got me to examine fine art. Y'all know all of this but I'll attach these articles anyway as I found them very interesting: https://fstoppers.com/business/how-m...comment-thread , https://pdnonline.com/features/fine-...ints-a-primer/ , https://petapixel.com/2017/01/20/tur...hoto-business/ .

I ran a chauffeur service in Sun Valley, Idaho for roughly 10 years so I have an idea of how to market (and, of course, a lot to learn). WEll, back down the rabbit hole after reading up on fine art, materials used, etc. Thanks again! @t_rexpics on Instagram - Rich Hardy

[DanK]

To be clear, I wasn't recommending against full frame. Other than suggesting that you stick with the big 4 brands, I wasn't recommending any particular camera at all. I was suggesting that you not spend a lot until you know more.

Bill suggested buying something used. Cameras tend to depreciate quickly after the next model is released. For example, I'll be lucky to get 1/3 of what I paid for my 5D Mark III, even though it is in mint condition and has very few shutter actuations. The release of the Mark IV drove the price down.

You can buy used without playing roulette on eBay. There are reputable vendors that sell used equipment: KEH, Adorama, and B&H are three I know about, and I have heard that MPB Camera is also good, although I can't vouch for them personally. You'll pay more than you would on eBay--they have to make money somehow--but they inspect the merchandise and rate its condition. KEH is very conservative in rating quality.

Will full frame matter? Probably not much at first, unless you shoot in low light or print very large. But if you think that's what you want, this would be a way to get something without breaking the bank. However, even this will cost more than a lower-end APS-C camera. You can get a refurbished APS-C with a kit lens and a full-year guarantee for less than a used Mark III body alone, if it's in good shape.

[The Dutchman]

Thanks Manfred, I'll look over their websites more in a sec. It sounds like there's plenty of demand for smaller prints? I've always imagined demand for very large prints, but I don't know anything. It's probably because I've only been in painting galleries. Nice man was kind enough to reply to me, but he's shutting down his photography gallery nearby after a great many years and becoming a private dealer.

Okay, I can see myself enjoying post-processing in more detail but I find printing to be intimidating. It seems like the days of buying a personal printer that lasts for more than 5 minutes are over (I know you're talking about something entirely different) but yes, I'd be inclined to see if there's a fine-art printer who'd be worth having a relationship with. It also sounds like fine art photographers are printing on metal, etc. these days? Something more exotic than canvas.

I've gone through everything but cameras so far today, but I'm still between the Fujifilm XT-3 and the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV now (it's old right, so it's okay?). It sounds like there is plenty of demand for smaller prints, and that a drop from 30 to 26MP is far from a deal breaker, especially for someone insane who's just starting out? I'm @ 4424 Prescott in Dallas if you want to send a friend over to slap me around w/ a rubber chicken for not listening!