CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

Menelaus · Nov 7, 2017

Thraktor said:
If your main reason for switching is 4K video, I'd look at an A7RII, with a Sigma MC-11 adapter. You get 4K video, you don't have to give up the full-frame sensor, you can keep using all your L glass (the MC-11 works pretty well with Canon lenses), and Sony's native glass is getting better and better (not necessarily cheaper and cheaper, but comparable in price to Canon L lenses anyway).

You're likely to find some good deals on it in the next couple of months if you want to buy new, otherwise there will be lots of folks selling them second hand, like Zefah in this very thread.

Main reasons would be increased portability, lighter glass for hiking, possibly increased weather sealing vs the 6D, and 4K video, in that order.

I'm aware of the caveats of moving from full frame to mirrorless, as I did that before, going from 5D classic to Oly m4/3. Where Fuji interests me are the 50-140mm and 10-24mm. The 50-140mm in particular is one of the first mirrorless lenses that I've seen consistent DSLR-caliber quality from. I don't think I have interest in retaining my Canon glass if I move to a new ecosystem.

I found Oly lacking in a few key areas...most notably their focus tracking in continuous focus modes. It simply can't keep up with a kid running around or a moving subject. The X-T2 reviews I've seen all laud the AF and continuous AF, which I'm sure would be a net gain over the 6D which is more suited to landscapes.

Spoopy · Nov 7, 2017

Menelaus said:
Which Canon body did you come from?

Two 5D Mark iii's and a 7D

ruggiex · Nov 7, 2017

Spoopy said:
Saw this interesting Kickstarter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/project...ail&utm_term=0_290736cfd4-ae28bb26ee-35231441

A good concept, especially the interchangeable mounts, but the price seems a bit high, especially when great SLR's are out there for less.

Kind of neat if I was more into film.

lasthope106 · Nov 7, 2017

Sec0nd said:
Do you guys ever buy gear on Ebay?

I've been looking at some gear that I can't possibly buy in a store or locally (old anamorphic projection lenses) and I've never bought anything using Ebay. I've got a local Ebay variant which I've only used for items for low costs or if they are expensive I'd drive to pick it up. So I'm kind of scared of buying anything on Ebay that is semi expensive. Is there a way to guarantee a safe purchase? Is there a way to get your money back if you got scammed? What are some general Ebay 'strategies' when buying more expensive items?

I have bought plenty of stuff from ebay. Just make sure to ask lots of questions i.e. history of the equipment, where it was purchased, if it is the USA version (if you are from the US), more pictures, etc. And don't be afraid to give a lower offer, sometimes buyers do accept. If it is from a retailer ebay page like Best Buy, that can be a steal if you get a 10% off ebay discount.

Spoopy · Nov 7, 2017

My God:

https://www.diyphotography.net/light-500w-500-led-looks-like/

Screengrab from the video:

ghostemoji · Nov 7, 2017

Spoopy said:
Saw this interesting Kickstarter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/project...ail&utm_term=0_290736cfd4-ae28bb26ee-35231441

A good concept, especially the interchangeable mounts, but the price seems a bit high, especially when great SLR's are out there for less.

It's a neat idea that I'd drop the money on if I had it available. I'd like it just for the novelty.

Thraktor · Nov 7, 2017

Menelaus said:
Main reasons would be increased portability, lighter glass for hiking, possibly increased weather sealing vs the 6D, and 4K video, in that order.

I'm aware of the caveats of moving from full frame to mirrorless, as I did that before, going from 5D classic to Oly m4/3. Where Fuji interests me are the 50-140mm and 10-24mm. The 50-140mm in particular is one of the first mirrorless lenses that I've seen consistent DSLR-caliber quality from. I don't think I have interest in retaining my Canon glass if I move to a new ecosystem.

I found Oly lacking in a few key areas...most notably their focus tracking in continuous focus modes. It simply can't keep up with a kid running around or a moving subject. The X-T2 reviews I've seen all laud the AF and continuous AF, which I'm sure would be a net gain over the 6D which is more suited to landscapes.

Yeah, if you're looking for portability then an A7RII with adapted Canon glass isn't really going to give you that. Not much smaller than the 6D in all. Ironically Canon's dual-pixel AF seems really good for focus-tracking in video, but they just don't seem to be focusing on that in their DSLRs any more.

FoxSpirit · Nov 7, 2017

Well then, got the Fuji X-E2 + 18-55mm/2.8-4.0 kit. Now for some protection and the fun can begin. First test are good though the 2.8 isn't the widest. In return I have OIS. I'll probably get the highly regarded 18mm/1.4 prime later. That's it. If my intentions reach any higher I'll save for a Sony with IBIS, full frame sensor plus great video capabilities (the x-e2 video is really terrible) and resell the kit. Unless Fuji comes out with a likewise mirrorless, then I'd of course gladly stay.

Spoopy · Nov 7, 2017

FoxSpirit said:
Well then, got the Fuji X-E2 + 18-55mm/2.8-4.0 kit. Now for some protection and the fun can begin. First test are good though the 2.8 isn't the widest. In return I have OIS. I'll probably get the highly regarded 18mm/1.4 prime later. That's it. If my intentions reach any higher I'll save for a Sony with IBIS, full frame sensor plus great video capabilities (the x-e2 video is really terrible) and resell the kit. Unless Fuji comes out with a likewise mirrorless, then I'd of course gladly stay.

do you mean the 18mm f/2 or 16mm f/1.4

FoxSpirit · Nov 7, 2017

Spoopy said:
do you mean the 18mm f/2 or 16mm f/1.4

Ah sorry, meat the 23mm F1.4 . Razor sharp even fully open. Heard nothing but the highest praise. But damn, costs as much as the kit cost -.-

Spoopy · Nov 7, 2017

FoxSpirit said:
Ah sorry, meat the 23mm F1.4 . Razor sharp even fully open. Heard nothing but the highest praise. But damn, costs as much as the kit cost -.-

yeah, primes can be expensive. especially fast ones.

ruggiex · Nov 7, 2017

FoxSpirit said:
the x-e2 video is really terrible

lol, I remember one time I decided to try the video while traveiling, I couldn't figure out how to turn it on until I read the manual after getting home.

Reckoner · Nov 7, 2017

ruggiex said:
lol, I remember one time I decided to try the video while traveiling, I couldn't figure out how to turn it on until I read the manual after getting home.

That really says it all

Astral Lovelace · Nov 7, 2017

FoxSpirit said:
Ah sorry, meat the 23mm F1.4 . Razor sharp even fully open. Heard nothing but the highest praise. But damn, costs as much as the kit cost -.-

Primes will always kick the pants off of a kit tho

I say get the kit. I say this as a person who does not own any kits or zooms.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 7, 2017

Anybody trying to buy Fuji glass really should just take a peak at my flickr profile. I have used...enough Fuji lenses to stick with the ecosystem and this is coming from someone that also shoots full frame. Also junk the kit zoom...it ain't great. If you're not doing portraits where image quality counts then fine use it, but I really can't attach that thing onto my camera for a photo shoot.

formasymphonic · Nov 8, 2017

I would really kill for Sony to step up and make an equivalent to Fuji's 16mm 1.4. Many of Fuji's lenses have always been fantastic, but that's one that's always stood out to me that I wished Sony would have taken a look at and said "man we should really do one of these as well".

A shame they just don't seem to care about APSC in the same way — I'll keep an eye out for this new Sigma 16mm and see how it goes, but I'd really prefer a first party model for compatibility with focus modes, AF speed, etc etc etc.

Menelaus · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
Anybody trying to buy Fuji glass really should just take a peak at my flickr profile. I have used...enough Fuji lenses to stick with the ecosystem and this is coming from someone that also shoots full frame. Also junk the kit zoom...it ain't great. If you're not doing portraits where image quality counts then fine use it, but I really can't attach that thing onto my camera for a photo shoot.

Got a link?

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

formasymphonic said:
I would really kill for Sony to step up and make an equivalent to Fuji's 16mm 1.4. Many of Fuji's lenses have always been fantastic, but that's one that's always stood out to me that I wished Sony would have taken a look at and said "man we should really do one of these as well".

A shame they just don't seem to care about APSC in the same way — I'll keep an eye out for this new Sigma 16mm and see how it goes, but I'd really prefer a first party model for compatibility with focus modes, AF speed, etc etc etc.

I might really be interested in that lens soon. I'm finding that I'm starting to shoot more wider portraits these days.

Menelaus said:
Got a link?

https://www.flickr.com/gp/133435165@N05/44RS66

A lot of the stuff in there recently is Fuji.

Menelaus · Nov 8, 2017

I see you've got the 50-140mm, some lovely results with it. I take it you'd recommend it?

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

Menelaus said:
I see you've got the 50-140mm, some lovely results with it. I take it you'd recommend it?

Get that just because it's versatile and has OIS, it's got actually very good bokeh despite some youtubers bitching about it. I'd also recommend the 90F2, it's great if you're an outdoor portrait person. In a park? Perfection. In a studio? You're fucked. The 90 has better bokeh than the 56 from what I've seen. My next lens might...might be the 16 1.4 or 56 1.2 but I'm not exactly sure yet...then again the Nikon F2 135 DC is calling me and I want an ultra wide zoom so it's becoming a toss up at this point.

These two pics here sold me on the 50-140:

DSCF3559 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

DSCF2553 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
This one sold me on the 90F2:

DSCF0884 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

Also if you do portraits and want a zoom get the 16-55. I don't like the 18-55 kit lens for portraits at all.

formasymphonic · Nov 8, 2017

Also, does anyone have any tips on shooting fireworks displays? On a whim, I tried to shoot a few that were taking place near me but they all came out like trash.

Is the only answer to be at the site itself?

Anyone who has successfully captured som great fireworks pics, please shar your knowledge / kit used / samples / PP info. I want all yo secrets.

FoxSpirit · Nov 8, 2017

Hmmm, can you maybe say something about your raw editing? Your colours are superb.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

FoxSpirit said:
Hmmm, can you maybe say something about your raw editing? Your colours are superb.

If this is directed at me. I had to start learning how to tweak color temp and tints when I first got my Fuji because it does really good with skin tones...after you tweak the white balance. I think the Fuji sensor leans more towards the warm side so I cool it down a bit and also adjust the tint. After that it's pretty much contrast, clarity, vibrance and saturation tweaks.

It might have been around the timing of this picture where I started noticing how "weird" my skin tones were getting.

DSCF4717 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
You know like after the honeymoon period of new gear and you start actually digging into how you want something to look. Only thing is experimentation is about fucking up and learning from it. I was doing my white balance experiments on my D810 as well and people were becoming too bloody yellow.

DSC_3269 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

DSC_3079 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

DSCF5482 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
I also think with this shoot here I started experimenting more on color temp and tinting to see how it plays with the colors as well to see if it could convey a bit of a mood or accentuate the background. It got...weird:
Hyper green to accentuate the grass:

DSC_5276 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
More natural for the model:

DSC_5309 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
I think I try these days to not lean too far into either too yellow or too blue or green, but at the same time alter the color temp and tint enough to change the colors to something that isn't 1:1 natural, but at the same time makes them believable if that makes sense. I want them to pop, but at the same time not make the subject look alien.
For example I love how the orange in this shot just fucking glows:

DSC_2476 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
I love how this one has a hint of steely cold blue in it:

DSCF0819 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
There's a lot of stuff from this shoot that's a green and brown explosion:

DSCF4361 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

DSCF4284 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Hopefully this doesn't come off as a rant with a too many pics. Pretty much I fuck around and experiment a lot. I try to learn and not repeat too many mistakes while color adjusting, while at the same time making them a bit bombastic.

ruggiex · Nov 8, 2017

formasymphonic said:
Also, does anyone have any tips on shooting fireworks displays? On a whim, I tried to shoot a few that were taking place near me but they all came out like trash.

Is the only answer to be at the site itself?

Anyone who has successfully captured som great fireworks pics, please shar your knowledge / kit used / samples / PP info. I want all yo secrets.

Other than scouting out a good location, having a tripod, it's all about trying to predict the rhythm. Because if it's busy, even half second exposure may blow out the image already. If it's not, you may need 2-3 seconds for an interesting photo. Some people also composite multiple images after fact to get a more exciting image. Some people just set it up at fixed interval and let it run. I personally don't do that. I try to follow the rhythm of the display (you can tell more easily if there's music going alone with the firework) or just pay attention to the sound of firework firing and modify shutter speed on the fly.

formasymphonic · Nov 8, 2017

ruggiex said:
Other than scouting out a good location, having a tripod, it's all about trying to predict the rhythm. Because if it's busy, even half second exposure may blow out the image already. If it's not, you may need 2-3 seconds for an interesting photo. Some people also composite multiple images after fact to get a more exciting image. Some people just set it up at fixed interval and let it run. I personally don't do that. I try to follow the rhythm of the display (you can tell more easily if there's music going alone with the firework) or just pay attention to the sound of firework firing and modify shutter speed on the fly.

have you had more luck with longer shutter times or wider arpertures? I dig around on flicker and I tend to see longer shutters giving some good results but I always feel like if you mess that up you could go a good few seconds at a time when you are missing a set of displays, y'know?

ruggiex · Nov 8, 2017

formasymphonic said:
have you had more luck with longer shutter times or wider arpertures? I dig around on flicker and I tend to see longer shutters giving some good results but I always feel like if you mess that up you could go a good few seconds at a time when you are missing a set of displays, y'know?

Without ND filter, .5-2 second tend to give me the right results. Longer exposure shots are probably done with ND filter in order to capture more drama in a single image (or alternatively, composite multiple images). The longer the exposure the better you need to predict or know the show itself.

formasymphonic · Nov 8, 2017

ruggiex said:
Without ND filter, .5-2 second tend to give me the right results. Longer exposure shots are probably done with ND filter in order to capture more drama in a single image (or alternatively, composite multiple images). The longer the exposure the better you need to predict or know the show itself.

Yeh 0.5-2 seconds was roughly what I was seeing a lot of, will be a while before I see anymore fireworks here and can try it out (New Years?), but thanks for the advice.

Astral Lovelace · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
Get that just because it's versatile and has OIS, it's got actually very good bokeh despite some youtubers bitching about it. I'd also recommend the 90F2, it's great if you're an outdoor portrait person. In a park? Perfection. In a studio? You're fucked. The 90 has better bokeh than the 56 from what I've seen. My next lens might...might be the 16 1.4 or 56 1.2 but I'm not exactly sure yet...then again the Nikon F2 135 DC is calling me and I want an ultra wide zoom so it's becoming a toss up at this point.

This part of the post comes with the following disclaimer: All YouTubers will all unanimously bitch about all bokeh from all lenses except that one specific lens they like, unless it's Kai in which case all bokeh is supremely BOKEH

opticalmace · Nov 8, 2017

Ordered the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC for my Sony A6000. Can't wait to get it. :D

Also, the Panasonic G9 announced today looks quite nice.... I'm more interested in whatever the follow-up is to the G85, though.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

Astral/H3X said:
This part of the post comes with the following disclaimer: All YouTubers will all unanimously bitch about all bokeh from all lenses except that one specific lens they like, unless it's Kai in which case all bokeh is supremely BOKEH

From what I recall most of the time Kai prefers first party bokeh unless what the Nikon or Canon lens produces is rubbish.

Astral Lovelace · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
From what I recall most of the time Kai prefers first party bokeh unless what the Nikon or Canon lens produces is rubbish.

I've never really heard him say anything really "negative" about a prime lens's bokeh -- he may not have super positive things but he pretty much goes "Yup it's got a lot of bokeh, and I lurv bokeh"

Protip I lurv boke

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

Astral/H3X said:
I've never really heard him say anything really "negative" about a prime lens's bokeh -- he may not have super positive things but he pretty much goes "Yup it's got a lot of bokeh, and I lurv bokeh"

Protip I lurv boke

From what I remember he's not a huge fan of the FX Nikon 35 1.8. There's probably a few more.

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

Best Buy is going to have a Sony a6000 bundle with 16-55mm and 55-210mm lenses, a bag, and a 32gb card for $700 (it's currently on sale for that price today as well). This would be my first "higher grade" camera. Is this likely to have any significantly better sales soon or do you guys think this is a good price?

Thanks in advance!

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Best Buy is going to have a Sony a6000 bundle with 16-55mm and 55-210mm lenses, a bag, and a 32gb card for $700 (it's currently on sale for that price today as well). This would be my first "higher grade" camera. Is this likely to have any significantly better sales soon or do you guys think this is a good price?

Thanks in advance!

The two included lenses are pretty much junk tier lenses any way. The A6000 is supposed to be good, but I've never really liked the ergonomics of the things too much. I can tolerate the A7 series, but it's your money. What specifically are you looking to photograph?

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
The two included lenses are pretty much junk tier lenses any way. The A6000 is supposed to be good, but I've never really liked the ergonomics of the things too much. I can tolerate the A7 series, but it's your money. What specifically are you looking to photograph?

Honestly, stuff around Walt Disney World to start with and animals at zoos for the time being. I'm planning to go to Paris next year and for what might be a once in a lifetime trip for me, l don't want to depend on my iPhones camera. Looking for something that handles low light situations pretty well with a decent shutter speed. I realize that for my current purposes I might be spending more than l need but I'm always of the opinion to spend more up front for quality, within reason.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Honestly, stuff around Walt Disney World to start with and animals at zoos for the time being. I'm planning to go to Paris next year and for what might be a once in a lifetime trip for me, l don't want to depend on my iPhones camera. Looking for something that handles low light situations pretty well with a decent shutter speed. I realize that for my current purposes I might be spending more than l need but I'm always of the opinion to spend more up front for quality, within reason.

Then start looking at the sony lenses on offer. I'd honestly get something like a used/refurbished D7200, but if you want mirrorless and A6000 is fine enough. Anything low light means F1.8-2.8 and you don't have those on the kit zooms not to mention the picture quality might be a bit on the fuzzy side. Also how much research did you really do here? Did you open up a best buy circular and see a sale or did you actually put some time into researching your options. This is 2017. There's a ton of camera options and it doesn't just stop at "Imma buy a Sony."

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
Then start looking at the sony lenses on offer. I'd honestly get something like a used/refurbished D7200, but if you want mirrorless and A6000 is fine enough. Anything low light means F1.8-2.8 and you don't have those on the kit zooms not to mention the picture quality might be a bit on the fuzzy side. Also how much research did you really do here? Did you open up a best buy circular and see a sale or did you actually put some time into researching your options. This is 2017. There's a ton of camera options and it doesn't just stop at "Imma buy a Sony."

Yes, l did actually do some research and the a6000 was recommended by a lot of beginner/hobbyist types. I'm actually not a big Sony fan in general but as it had good reviews, l was beginning to look into it. l am sorry to have offended your sensibilities.

Spoopy · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Yes, l did actually do some research and the a6000 was recommended by a lot of beginner/hobbyist types. I'm actually not a big Sony fan in general but as it had good reviews, l was beginning to look into it. l am sorry to have offended your sensibilities.

What's your budget?

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

Spoopy said:
What's your budget?

Honestly, $700 or so was about it. I'm in no way a professional and l don't have any aspirations to do anything more than photos for personal use so at this point I'm not expecting to have an arsenal of lenses, but if still like the freedom to upgrade a bit if l do pursue the hobby in depth in the future.

Pretty much a body and a couple of decent lenses somewhere around $700. I realize that people hardcore into photography would be willing to spend more on higher grade equipment but I'm coming from an iPhone 7 and a 2004 Canon Powershot.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Yes, l did actually do some research and the a6000 was recommended by a lot of beginner/hobbyist types. I'm actually not a big Sony fan in general but as it had good reviews, l was beginning to look into it. l am sorry to have offended your sensibilities.

Don't worry about it. I just consider Sony apsc not worth getting into because they use it mostly as a way to lead the buyer into transitioning into full frame because they don't put much time/money/research into crop sensor lenses. I mostly recommend Fuji stuff personally, but people always say that it's too expensive, but I honestly think you get what you pay for because the Fuji's are actually very damn good cameras that aren't impossible to learn and require less menu diving. You can't even get a 2.8 17-55 on the Sony if I'm not mistaken. I just checked and there's a 2.8 16-50 in A-mount, which is borderline a dead mount system. You'd need an A mount to E mount adapter for it.

Spoopy · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Honestly, $700 or so was about it. I'm in no way a professional and l don't have any aspirations to do anything more than photos for personal use so at this point I'm not expecting to have an arsenal of lenses, but if still like the freedom to upgrade a bit if l do pursue the hobby in depth in the future.

Pretty much a body and a couple of decent lenses somewhere around $700. I realize that people hardcore into photography would be willing to spend more on higher grade equipment but I'm coming from an iPhone 7 and a 2004 Canon Powershot.

No worries, there's always something for any budget or aspirations.

Would you be up for buying used?

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

Spoopy said:
No worries, there's always something for any budget or aspirations.

Would you be up for buying used?

I guess the answer to that would be yes depending on where it's coming from. My OCD with electronics would make me wary but if someone deep In the hobby who cares about their stuff had a good camera at a good price, I'd consider it.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
Honestly, $700 or so was about it. I'm in no way a professional and l don't have any aspirations to do anything more than photos for personal use so at this point I'm not expecting to have an arsenal of lenses, but if still like the freedom to upgrade a bit if l do pursue the hobby in depth in the future.

Pretty much a body and a couple of decent lenses somewhere around $700. I realize that people hardcore into photography would be willing to spend more on higher grade equipment but I'm coming from an iPhone 7 and a 2004 Canon Powershot.

You should be able to afford a Fuji XT1 and a kit lens combo on Ebay I think.

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
Don't worry about it. I just consider Sony apsc not worth getting into because they use it mostly as a way to lead the buyer into transitioning into full frame because they don't put much time/money/research into crop sensor lenses. I mostly recommend Fuji stuff personally, but people always say that it's too expensive, but I honestly think you get what you pay for because the Fuji's are actually very damn good cameras that aren't impossible to learn and require less menu diving. You can't even get a 2.8 17-55 on the Sony if I'm not mistaken. I just checked and there's a 2.8 16-50 in A-mount, which is borderline a dead mount system. You'd need an A mount to E mount adapter for it.

To give you an idea of how much of a beginner l am, the mount system is all Greek to me. I've just barely got an understanding on the difference/importance of lens sizes. The last time l considered a DSLR was 2005 when Canon seemed to be king of consumer level stuff but they seem to have fallen out of favor. I'd be OK with spending more on a higher tier but since I'm very much a beginner, l don't want to go overboard, if that makes sense.

Spoopy · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
I guess the answer to that would be yes depending on where it's coming from. My OCD with electronics would make me wary but if someone deep In the hobby who cares about their stuff had a good camera at a good price, I'd consider it.

I think that deal you originally mentioned is a good choice for you. No need to worry about used gear. And it covers the most important focal lengths which is key for you as you describe wanting to be able to photograph multiple things.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
To give you an idea of how much of a beginner l am, the mount system is all Greek to me. I've just barely got an understanding on the difference/importance of lens sizes. The last time l considered a DSLR was 2005 when Canon seemed to be king of consumer level stuff but they seem to have fallen out of favor. I'd be OK with spending more on a higher tier but since I'm very much a beginner, l don't want to go overboard, if that makes sense.

I got started on a bridge camera, pretty much a point and shoot with a lot of zoom and quickly got rid of that for a really good camera with some room to grow. If I just bought the really good camera I would've saved myself about $250 so sometimes spending a little bit more is in a way a way to save money, but it's up to you. Photography is definitely a hobby where you get back what you put into it. If you're just going to be using out of camera jpegs than it kind of doesn't matter what you get. If you're going to be editing raw files and crafting the image then it kind of determines where you go. You can also do that with an A6000, though I will admit Fuji files actually reteach you how to edit a little bit.

BrianCK · Nov 8, 2017

JadedWriter said:
I got started on a bridge camera, pretty much a point and shoot with a lot of zoom and quickly got rid of that for a really good camera with some room to grow. If I just bought the really good camera I would've saved myself about $250 so sometimes spending a little bit more is in a way a way to save money, but it's up to you. Photography is definitely a hobby where you get back what you put into it. If you're just going to be using out of camera jpegs than it kind of doesn't matter what you get. If you're going to be editing raw files and crafting the image then it kind of determines where you go. You can also do that with an A6000, though I will admit Fuji files actually reteach you how to edit a little bit.

l can definitely understand where oh are coming from and in most cases I'd fully be on board. I'm just thinking that spending a few hundred more to take pictures of skeletons on Pirates of the Caribbean might be a waste right now and by the time I'm good enough and have progressed to the level where I'd need a better kit, the technology would have improved as well. Keep in mind that l don't know how much change there is on a yearly basis so that concern might be a little foolish. In any case, l definitely appreciate all the suggestions I've been getting. That's why l asked on here - l knew an enthusiast forum would balk at something as low as an a6000 and the wide variety of people and use cases on the old forum was great for helping me build my PC a few years ago.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

BrianCK said:
l can definitely understand where oh are coming from and in most cases I'd fully be on board. I'm just thinking that spending a few hundred more to take pictures of skeletons on Pirates of the Caribbean might be a waste right now and by the time I'm good enough and have progressed to the level where I'd need a better kit, the technology would have improved as well. Keep in mind that l don't know how much change there is on a yearly basis so that concern might be a little foolish. In any case, l definitely appreciate all the suggestions I've been getting. That's why l asked on here - l knew an enthusiast forum would balk at something as low as an a6000 and the wide variety of people and use cases on the old forum was great for helping me build my PC a few years ago.

Regarding the change on tech, it's definitely plateaued a little bit on the dslr front. I use a D600, which I think is a 2012 camera and a D810, which is from 2014 and they're still really fucking good image quality wise, shit even the D3 from 2009 can still get the job done. Regarding mirrorless cameras there's more of a noticeable upward trend in my opinion. The A6000 is still good, though I'm not sure how up to scratch the AF is from a modern stand point. Granted I shoot models, corporate headshots and overall street and random bullshit so I do like to have very versatile equipment to keep up with everything. Just make sure you get yourself a good 1.8 prime and you should be okay. The kit lens is pretty much just a glorified lens cap in my opinion. Unless you're doing nothing but flash work and have it stopped down to 5.6 constantly you'll find yourself limited with what and when you can shoot.

Deleted member 1635 · Nov 8, 2017

I think you are selling kit lenses short a bit. If you're shooting in daylight, you'll be fine for the most part. Yes, look into getting a 1.8 Prime sooner than later, but kit zooms can have their place, especially for the price sensitive beginner. Shoot with them a bunch and start getting a feel for what focal lengths you like. That can inform which prime you buy later on.

Jaded Photographer · Nov 8, 2017

Zefah said:
I think you are selling kit lenses short a bit. If you're shooting in daylight, you'll be fine for the most part. Yes, look into getting a 1.8 Prime sooner than later, but kit zooms can have their place, especially for the price sensitive beginner. Shoot with them a bunch and start getting a feel for what focal lengths you like. That can inform which prime you buy later on.

I'm essentially an all hours shooter so yes I sell kits lenses short for a reason. Not to mention that if I can't walk into an indoor event and get shit done with it then I want nothing to do with it.

CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

User requested account closure