UPDATE: Bought One: ATTENTION: Camera Recommendations Needed

[Rockindad]

So I know there are a lot of great photographers on this forum and I am hoping for some help. I am in the market for a new camera, thinking DSLR at the moment but understand the mirrorless cameras have come a long way. For most of the last twenty years we used mostly compact point and shoot digitals, phones, and our latest was a bridge camera that was absloutely horrible and thankfully took a header to put it out of its misery- it was an accident, honestly . While I am new to quality digital photography, I used to be a film enthusiast (primarily nature landscapes) so I am not necessarily looking for a beginner camera, just a good "all around" camera with decent video capabilities. Will be used for nature landscapes, some macro and when we want an upgrade over our phones. Would like budget to be under $1200-$1400 for a camera body, all-purpose/shorter zoom lens and telephoto lens. Would consider stretching to $2000 if the upgrade was really worth it. Still have my bags, tripods and other gear so only looking for the camera and lenses. Thanks!

[rockjunquie]

Apr 25, 2021 19:48:35 GMT -5 Rockindad said:

So I know there are a lot of great photographers on this forum and I am hoping for some help. I am in the market for a new camera, thinking DSLR at the moment but understand the mirrorless cameras have come a long way. For most of the last twenty years we used mostly compact point and shoot digitals, phones, and our latest was a bridge camera that was absloutely horrible and thankfully took a header to put it out of its misery- it was an accident, honestly . While I am new to quality digital photography, I used to be a film enthusiast (primarily nature landscapes) so I am not necessarily looking for a beginner camera, just a good "all around" camera with decent video capabilities. Will be used for nature landscapes, some macro and when we want an upgrade over our phones. Would like budget to be under $1200-$1400 for a camera body, all-purpose/shorter zoom lens and telephoto lens. Would consider stretching to $2000 if the upgrade was really worth it. Still have my bags, tripods and other gear so only looking for the camera and lenses. Thanks!

You're sure to get answers all over the place.

I'm a Nikon fan for the lenses. I have a Nikon DSLR with a kit lens that I use for studio photography with my light tent. I am happy with it. I can't remember the model, but it is a few years old now.

I also have a midrange Canon PowerShot G12 that I like for everything else. I have been pleasantly surprised by it. I still don't like the ergonomics, though. The Nikon has better usability.

Both take good macro shots. I'm not a big camera person or even photography person. But, I do shoot manual on my Nikon and use auto everything on the Canon with good results. The Canon shoots dark, though.

That probably wasn't helpful.

[manofglass]

Check out YouTube videos on cameras
To find the one you want

[Brian]

I love a good camera gear discussion.

First of all, I would absolutely put mirrorless on the top of your list. There is a good reason why ever major camera maker is going that direction. I’ve been doing a lot of reading lately and the future looks bleak for the DSLR. Canon has recently announced that they were discontinuing more than 20 of their EF and EF-S lenses.

For nearly 10 years now, I have had two main cameras. After using Canon DSLRs for years, I dipped my toes into the mirrorless world and got an Olympus micro four thirds body and a bunch of lenses. The Oly takes great pictures, has in body image stabilization (IBIS), which few cameras had at the time, and importantly at the time I got it, it was small. My wife hated carrying around a heavy camera and the Oly was downright tiny compared to the DSLRs. It was also somewhat weather resistant and the focusing was incredibly fast compared to the Canons we had at the time (I forget the models of those but one was in the X0D line).

The Oly was great for what we wanted at the time, but it struggled in low light situations and there were some other things I missed about the Canon (besides the fact that I still had some nice Canon lenses), so I got a Canon 6D, which was their cheapest full frame camera at the time. That was a nice compliment to the Oly because it could do what the Oly couldn’t and the Oly was great when I didn’t want to carry around the heavy Canon.

Fast forward a few years and we got an Oly Tough TG-5, which has been amazing little thing that I can’t praise enough. It’s a small point and shoot that can go underwater, take amazing macro photos, and shoot high res videos if wanted. Lately, I’ve used that more than anything else because it is so easy to grab and shoot with. Having recently moved, most of the other camera gear is still packed away, but I don’t miss it all that much due to the ease of just shooting with the little Oly Tough. (If you look on the macro thread, all of the pictures I have posted there were taken with the Oly Tough. I have a ring flash for it, but that is packed away, so those pictures could probably be a lot better.)

My apologies for the long post, but I thought the background would be helpful for my next thoughts.

If I were to do it all over again, and I’m highly considering it, I would probably go with either a Canon or Sony mirrorless system. One of the things I like about the mirrorless systems are the smaller lenses and the better control you have over them. Many of the mirrorless cameras come with IBIS which I find invaluable because I rarely shoot with a tripod. (I would generally use a tripod for macro only, but lately, I do most things handheld because the results are still pretty good with the stabilization.)

Sony’s cameras have really pushed the big players to catch up, namely Canon and Nikon. They lead the way with the mirrorless cameras and their sensors are also great (and used in many of their competitors’ cameras, as well). They have a nice variety of lenses, but they give me the impression of being expensive. One thing I like about Sony is they offer a nice range of cameras to specific needs. When I bought the Oly micro four thirds, I had originally ordered a Sony but there was a many month delay and I needed the camera quicker (birth of first kid and all!).

I would probably go with a Canon mirrorless personally, but that is because I would be able to use my old EF lenses with an adaptor and be able to ease into the RF lenses whenever I needed something different. The newest Canon mirrorless models are getting great reviews, too. If I could, I would buy a Canon R6 (or R5 if I wanted to go crazy).

Micro four thirds is also an interesting format to look into. There are an incredible variety of lenses available because you aren’t locked into any one manufacturer, but you do want to pay attention to any incompatibilities of features when mixing brands on that format. Some lenses play better with certain bodies.

Depending on your needs, I would also take a hard look at the Oly Tough series. It is a seriously capable camera and if I were honest with myself, I could probably be content to use that as my only camera for a huge portion of anything I may need it for. Telephoto is one of its shortcomings, but they may even sell an accessory for that. I mentioned the ring flash above, but they sell a variety of other accessories, included lenses that can be screwed on the front of the camera to expand its capabilities.

For reviews, I always liked reading dpreview. They have nice reviews and the forum can be helpful, too. I always read through the complaint threads to see what people do not like about a particular camera, and to know what weak spots a camera may have. They aren’t cheap and it’s always good to know as much as possible before investing in any one system.

[pizzano]

Everybody has a favorite......you're an experienced photo shooter and have a good budget price point established..........so go with what you know and are familiar with (operating functions and menu's).... all of todays common brand name DSLR's are fantastic.....mirrorless is still a little new to the price range you have, so pay attention to the Megapixel count and cost of lens associated with their use. 

Consider these as starting points.....:

Lens flexibility, being able to use older lenses you have spent $$$ on in the past.
Frame and body construction, metal is more durable.
Megapixel count and low light operation function, the higher the number the better and more expensive.
SD card storage capacity, and external plug-in options, you'll be surprised how important this is when transferring and down loading images.
Battery life and cost associated with spare's, you'll want more than one as a back-up.
Size and weight of body& lens, this could be important when lugging around.
Manual and auto stability features, some have that feature in the camera, some have it as part of the lens construction.

As you will find, the better the lenses, the better the final product.......less hassles refining quality. All purpose lenses are nice to have for everyday stuff, but prime lenses provide the best quality and image size flexibility.

That's my take on this never ending debate........I use a Nikon for what it's worth....!


  

[Rockoonz]

I am soon to be on the market again, so I'll be watching this. Since I am not at all a photographer, I have always used basic point and shoot digitals, and I settled on Canon early on, because I liked the controls and availability of inexpensive cameras with a decent amount of optical zoom.
My current one is an old S5IS that requires a bit of extra effort to get good shots from due to age.
Whatever I get will probably end up living on a tripod pointed at a light tent. Or maybe there's an option of a Purpose made USB cam for pics of slabs and cabs? Looking for fantastic results with little to no effort on my part, perhaps I'm becoming a millennial...

[Rockindad]

Apr 25, 2021 20:06:21 GMT -5 rockjunquie said:

Apr 25, 2021 19:48:35 GMT -5 Rockindad said:

You're sure to get answers all over the place. 
Yep, figured as much, and that's okay. The more opinions/knowledge shared the better.

I'm a Nikon fan for the lenses. I have a Nikon DSLR with a kit lens that I use for studio photography with my light tent. I am happy with it. I can't remember the model, but it is a few years old now.

I also have a midrange Canon PowerShot G12 that I like for everything else. I have been pleasantly surprised by it. I still don't like the ergonomics, though. The Nikon has better usability.

Both take good macro shots. I'm not a big camera person or even photography person. But, I do shoot manual on my Nikon and use auto everything on the Canon with good results. The Canon shoots dark, though.

That probably wasn't helpful.
It was very helpful and appreciated.

[Rockindad]

Apr 26, 2021 9:01:03 GMT -5 Brian said:

I love a good camera gear discussion.

First of all, I would absolutely put mirrorless on the top of your list. There is a good reason why ever major camera maker is going that direction. I’ve been doing a lot of reading lately and the future looks bleak for the DSLR. Canon has recently announced that they were discontinuing more than 20 of their EF and EF-S lenses.

For nearly 10 years now, I have had two main cameras. After using Canon DSLRs for years, I dipped my toes into the mirrorless world and got an Olympus micro four thirds body and a bunch of lenses. The Oly takes great pictures, has in body image stabilization (IBIS), which few cameras had at the time, and importantly at the time I got it, it was small. My wife hated carrying around a heavy camera and the Oly was downright tiny compared to the DSLRs. It was also somewhat weather resistant and the focusing was incredibly fast compared to the Canons we had at the time (I forget the models of those but one was in the X0D line).

The Oly was great for what we wanted at the time, but it struggled in low light situations and there were some other things I missed about the Canon (besides the fact that I still had some nice Canon lenses), so I got a Canon 6D, which was their cheapest full frame camera at the time. That was a nice compliment to the Oly because it could do what the Oly couldn’t and the Oly was great when I didn’t want to carry around the heavy Canon.

Fast forward a few years and we got an Oly Tough TG-5, which has been amazing little thing that I can’t praise enough. It’s a small point and shoot that can go underwater, take amazing macro photos, and shoot high res videos if wanted. Lately, I’ve used that more than anything else because it is so easy to grab and shoot with. Having recently moved, most of the other camera gear is still packed away, but I don’t miss it all that much due to the ease of just shooting with the little Oly Tough. (If you look on the macro thread, all of the pictures I have posted there were taken with the Oly Tough. I have a ring flash for it, but that is packed away, so those pictures could probably be a lot better.)

My apologies for the long post, but I thought the background would be helpful for my next thoughts.
No apology necessary, this is exactly what I was hoping for!

If I were to do it all over again, and I’m highly considering it, I would probably go with either a Canon or Sony mirrorless system. One of the things I like about the mirrorless systems are the smaller lenses and the better control you have over them. Many of the mirrorless cameras come with IBIS which I find invaluable because I rarely shoot with a tripod. (I would generally use a tripod for macro only, but lately, I do most things handheld because the results are still pretty good with the stabilization.)
With my current thinking, and it may change, IBIS may be mandatory as over time my hands have become less steady. Way back when it was a rarity to break out a tripod or even brace myself.

Sony’s cameras have really pushed the big players to catch up, namely Canon and Nikon. They lead the way with the mirrorless cameras and their sensors are also great (and used in many of their competitors’ cameras, as well). They have a nice variety of lenses, but they give me the impression of being expensive. One thing I like about Sony is they offer a nice range of cameras to specific needs. When I bought the Oly micro four thirds, I had originally ordered a Sony but there was a many month delay and I needed the camera quicker (birth of first kid and all!).

I would probably go with a Canon mirrorless personally, but that is because I would be able to use my old EF lenses with an adaptor and be able to ease into the RF lenses whenever I needed something different. The newest Canon mirrorless models are getting great reviews, too. If I could, I would buy a Canon R6 (or R5 if I wanted to go crazy).
I primarily used Canon in the old days and still have a box of gear, may take inventory and research compatibility.

Micro four thirds is also an interesting format to look into. There are an incredible variety of lenses available because you aren’t locked into any one manufacturer, but you do want to pay attention to any incompatibilities of features when mixing brands on that format. Some lenses play better with certain bodies.

Depending on your needs, I would also take a hard look at the Oly Tough series. It is a seriously capable camera and if I were honest with myself, I could probably be content to use that as my only camera for a huge portion of anything I may need it for. Telephoto is one of its shortcomings, but they may even sell an accessory for that. I mentioned the ring flash above, but they sell a variety of other accessories, included lenses that can be screwed on the front of the camera to expand its capabilities.

For reviews, I always liked reading dpreview. They have nice reviews and the forum can be helpful, too. I always read through the complaint threads to see what people do not like about a particular camera, and to know what weak spots a camera may have. They aren’t cheap and it’s always good to know as much as possible before investing in any one system.
Looks like I'll be spending some time on that site, thanks for the tip.

Thanks for the awesome post Brian!

[Rockindad]

Apr 26, 2021 10:55:54 GMT -5 pizzano said:

Everybody has a favorite......you're an experienced photo shooter and have a good budget price point established..........so go with what you know and are familiar with (operating functions and menu's).... all of todays common brand name DSLR's are fantastic.....mirrorless is still a little new to the price range you have, so pay attention to the Megapixel count and cost of lens associated with their use. 

Consider these as starting points.....:

Lens flexibility, being able to use older lenses you have spent $$$ on in the past.
Frame and body construction, metal is more durable.
Megapixel count and low light operation function, the higher the number the better and more expensive.
SD card storage capacity, and external plug-in options, you'll be surprised how important this is when transferring and down loading images.
Battery life and cost associated with spare's, you'll want more than one as a back-up.
Size and weight of body& lens, this could be important when lugging around.
Manual and auto stability features, some have that feature in the camera, some have it as part of the lens construction.

As you will find, the better the lenses, the better the final product.......less hassles refining quality. All purpose lenses are nice to have for everyday stuff, but prime lenses provide the best quality and image size flexibility.

That's my take on this never ending debate........I use a Nikon for what it's worth....!


  

I will be printing off this thread to reference, thanks for the tips. The gear I have from my film days is Canon so that may come into play a bit if the lenses are compatible. 

[Brian]

Apr 26, 2021 16:45:58 GMT -5 Rockindad said:

Thanks for the awesome post Brian !

Good luck on the search, Al! 

Based on some of the things I have read, I believe Canon offers some good adaptors for using older lenses with their new mirrorless bodies. They even have adapters with drop-in polarizers or ND filters, as well as ones that add the control ring which provides additional functionality to existing lenses. That is one of the reasons why I probably wouldn't even consider anything else. Then again, you can pretty much get an adapter for any lens mounting system these days, so even that may not be a critical consideration. 

I agree that IBIS is pretty much a must. It is amazing technology and the newer bodies can even use stabilized lenses in combination with IBIS to further improve the overall stabilization.

Nowadays, cameras are so good that I am quite confident that I will never even come close to the limits of any camera available.

[Sabre52]

Since I'm old, I've been able to see the evolution of cameras over the sixty years I've been taking pics. I started with Rolliflexs, went to SLR film types, then to modern Canons big ones with fancy lenses and little auto ones. Then, in my advanced years, just last year I discovered just how great the modern bridge cameras are and sidelined all my others. Got a Nikon Coolpix B500 and have never looked back. Fits in my hand, light and super easy to use, great lens, fantastic macro feature. Can take handheld pics of tiny insects under a quarter inch in size in exquisite detail and has a fantastic telephoto. Top that off with special effects and many shooting modes and I will probably keep this one till I die. When I think of all the crap I used to haul around, heavy telephotos, tripods, macro lenses, etc etc, I can't believe I can do everything and much better with a camera that weighs maybe half a pound. Plus rechargeable batteries that give me better than 300 shots per charge. I can still remember buying 36 exposure film rolls that we quite expensive and then having to pay another big fee to have them developed. We are truly in the age of Camera heaven. FYI Nikon make several Coolpix bridge cameras and the more fancy ones like the B800, B1000 are really incredible but much larger. The main advantage is the more expensive models have a viewfinder instead of just a screen.

[Rockindad]

Apr 27, 2021 15:18:37 GMT -5 Sabre52 said:

Since I'm old, I've been able to see the evolution of cameras over the sixty years I've been taking pics. I started with Rolliflexs, went to SLR film types, then to modern Canons big ones with fancy lenses and little auto ones. Then, in my advanced years, just last year I discovered just how great the modern bridge cameras are and sidelined all my others. Got a Nikon Coolpix B500 and have never looked back. Fits in my hand, light and super easy to use, great lens, fantastic macro feature. Can take handheld pics of tiny insects under a quarter inch in size in exquisite detail and has a fantastic telephoto. Top that off with special effects and many shooting modes and I will probably keep this one till I die. When I think of all the crap I used to haul around, heavy telephotos, tripods, macro lenses, etc etc, I can't believe I can do everything and much better with a camera that weighs maybe half a pound. Plus rechargeable batteries that give me better than 300 shots per charge. I can still remember buying 36 exposure film rolls that we quite expensive and then having to pay another big fee to have them developed. We are truly in the age of Camera heaven. FYI Nikon make several Coolpix bridge cameras and the more fancy ones like the B800, B1000 are really incredible but much larger. The main advantage is the more expensive models have a viewfinder instead of just a screen.

Back when I was really into photography we visited many of the National Parks and hiked many miles with a camera backpack and another gear bag on my back, it was like carrying someone the whole time. While a great workout, not looking to do that anymore....and boy the processing, that used to put a huge dent in the bank account. There were a few trips where I couldn't take all of the film in until I was back working for a couple of weeks because it cost so much .

[rockpickerforever]

Apr 27, 2021 18:08:01 GMT -5 Rockindad said:

Apr 27, 2021 15:18:37 GMT -5 Sabre52 said:

Since I'm old, I've been able to see the evolution of cameras over the sixty years I've been taking pics. I started with Rolliflexs, went to SLR film types, then to modern Canons big ones with fancy lenses and little auto ones. Then, in my advanced years, just last year I discovered just how great the modern bridge cameras are and sidelined all my others. Got a Nikon Coolpix B500 and have never looked back. Fits in my hand, light and super easy to use, great lens, fantastic macro feature. Can take handheld pics of tiny insects under a quarter inch in size in exquisite detail and has a fantastic telephoto. Top that off with special effects and many shooting modes and I will probably keep this one till I die. When I think of all the crap I used to haul around, heavy telephotos, tripods, macro lenses, etc etc, I can't believe I can do everything and much better with a camera that weighs maybe half a pound. Plus rechargeable batteries that give me better than 300 shots per charge. I can still remember buying 36 exposure film rolls that we quite expensive and then having to pay another big fee to have them developed. We are truly in the age of Camera heaven. FYI Nikon make several Coolpix bridge cameras and the more fancy ones like the B800, B1000 are really incredible but much larger. The main advantage is the more expensive models have a viewfinder instead of just a screen.

Back when I was really into photography we visited many of the National Parks and hiked many miles with a camera backpack and another gear bag on my back, it was like carrying someone the whole time. While a great workout, not looking to do that anymore....and boy the processing, that used to put a huge dent in the bank account. There were a few trips where I couldn't take all of the film in until I was back working for a couple of weeks because it cost so much .

Al, I been there, done that.  Know the expense of those 36 exposure rolls of film,  as well as the cost to develop them. Then there's the photo albums you need to buy to put all those photos into. And a place to store them, lol.

We did the National Parks, too, me lugging around the husband's 35mm Vivitar.  Auto  nothing, you had to set everything manually.  I can't count the number of times I hauled that thing everywhere, without taking a single shot. It did take some nice photos, though, until it got old and decrepit from too many trips to the desert and eating sand.

[Rockoonz]

Now I remember why I still have the ancient camera.
It takes standard AA batteries, so I never have to deal with not being able to charge batteries.
Are there any cameras left like that?

[Rockindad]

Apr 28, 2021 0:18:37 GMT -5 Rockoonz said:

Now I remember why I still have the ancient camera.
It takes standard AA batteries, so I never have to deal with not being able to charge batteries.
Are there any cameras left like that?

I don’t think I have come across a new DSLR model that does, although I think there are still some point and shoots that utilize traditional batteries. I have handled a DSLR (I believe Nikon) that had a grip attachment that snapped into the camera body that held AA’s, it was pretty bulky.

[Rockindad]

Apr 27, 2021 18:53:39 GMT -5 rockpickerforever said:

Apr 27, 2021 18:08:01 GMT -5 Rockindad said:

Back when I was really into photography we visited many of the National Parks and hiked many miles with a camera backpack and another gear bag on my back, it was like carrying someone the whole time. While a great workout, not looking to do that anymore....and boy the processing, that used to put a huge dent in the bank account. There were a few trips where I couldn't take all of the film in until I was back working for a couple of weeks because it cost so much .

Al, I been there, done that.  Know the expense of those 36 exposure rolls of film,  as well as the cost to develop them. Then there's the photo albums you need to buy to put all those photos into. And a place to store them, lol.

We did the National Parks, too, me lugging around the husband's 35mm Vivitar.  Auto  nothing, you had to set everything manually.  I can't count the number of times I hauled that thing everywhere, without taking a single shot. It did take some nice photos, though, until it got old and decrepit from too many trips to the desert and eating sand.

Don’t know how I could forget about all of the photo albums! Unfortunately sometimes those scenic places have environments unfriendly to sensitive electronics, wore out a pretty nice Canon that was pretty “crunchy” at the end.

[Sabre52]

My Nikon Coolpix B500 came with four AA rechargables but I carry a couple of sets of Energizer Ultimate Lithiums to use when those are being recharged. Those are good for at least 400 shots or so. Amazing that I can shoot for days with no film and not extra stuff to carry except a few batteries. And the shooting modes available are awesome. I like taking pics of old buildings and farmsteads and have even figured out how to do old western type sepia effects. This new camera tech is amazing! Here's an example.roeder house (2) by lonerider652000, on Flickr

[pizzano]

Apr 28, 2021 0:18:37 GMT -5 Rockoonz said:

Now I remember why I still have the ancient camera.
It takes standard AA batteries, so I never have to deal with not being able to charge batteries.
Are there any cameras left like that?

I wouldn't say the CoolPix B500 is ancient (came out in 2016). It's still manufactured new and available for under $300.00......the newer versions have a single rechargeable battery pack.
My first digital camera was an Olympus C-740 Camedia manufactured in 2003. It was considered a state of the art, for it's price range (around $500.00) in it's day and was only a 3.2MP. Had the ability to add lenses and filters. Not bad for a zoom point & shoot.........I still own it and it works fine. It was my go to for many years even though I also owned much better film cameras like the Nikon N series......cost and hassle of film development changed my shooting habits.

Even though there are quite a few more advanced digital P & S cameras available today in the $300.00 to $400.00 range, that Nikon is still considered a very good to excellent entry level digital because of it's lens quality, durability, 16MP and variable on-the-fly shooting modes (it has more than almost all of it's competitors) and ease of use..........I would have considered something new of that caliber when I purchased the re-furbed D7000 had it not been for the collection of lenses I have and wanted to put to use again......there's no shame in sticking with quality and great service life (even if it's considered entry level low tech), especially if you've mastered it's use and are getting the most out of it's and your abilities......and they ain't broken......lol

More often than not, the newer, more advanced, more complicated technical equipment gets, even though cost and ease of use (so they say comparatively) comes down.........the greater the learning curve gets and comfort level drops. I've come to experience this especially with cameras and computers......and it's not because we are old and lack the ability to re-train our habits and minds........although they like us to believe that.........lol  

[Sabre52]

Guess I should have been more clear in my response. I was not saying the Coolpix B500 was ancient. I was responding to Rockoontz's statement about his old camera taking AA batteries which makes it easy to power. The B500 though fairly new and often still available, still uses those AA bateries which is why I bought it instead of the later models with the "power pack only" that requires recharging feature. Can't recharge a dang battery pack while in the field shooting.

[Rockoonz]

Apr 29, 2021 13:52:03 GMT -5 Sabre52 said:

Guess I should have been more clear in my response. I was not saying the Coolpix B500 was ancient. I was responding to Rockoontz's statement about his old camera taking AA batteries which makes it easy to power. The B500 though fairly new and often still available, still uses those AA bateries which is why I bought it instead of the later models with the "power pack only" that requires recharging feature. Can't recharge a dang battery pack while in the field shooting.

My Canon came out about 10 years before that, but I say ancient because it's developing issues. The internal battery that saves the date is gone, and the lens appears to over-travel when returning from zoomed, making blurred pics if I don't slightly zoom it.

I agree about the idea of charging when travelling, the only time the phone isn't good enough anyway. The option to just drop in some batteries is a deal breaker for me.