Post: #51

(03-06-2018 11:34 PM)kbell Wrote:  I'm not sure how I feel about cameras without EVF (electronic view finders). How do you shoot in sunny conditions? Its hard to see LCD screens at certain sun angles. I have't played around with polarized sunglasses though.

The LCD's are hard to see in bright sunlight, but as far as actually shooting the OVF found in DSLR are actually far easier to shoot in sunny conditions. It's not something that can be read in an internet post, you have to try both. The 'not seeing the exposure in real time' isn't an issue either beyond your first few weeks of shooting since the light meters in modern DSLR are so accurate and as long as the histogram is pretty much in the right place, if you're shooting RAW then you'll make any minor adjustments needed to the image in post.

I shoot for agencies and if I'm shooting in natural light I'll often just put my D750 into Aperture priority and trust the cameras matrix metering. At most the exposure usually need to be moved about half a stop in Lightroom since the metering in cameras is so good these days.

Post: #52

(03-07-2018 08:07 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Thanks. What is the delay mentioned that occurs in EVFs and is it really a hassle compared to OVF?

Btw, I sent you an PM.

The delay with EVFs is just down to the few fractions of a second it takes for the sensor to process and send the image to the display, and the refresh rate of the screen itself. Inevitably there's going to be some lag, but it's pretty miniscule.

Obviously, there's no such issue, such as it is, with optical viewfinders but, personally, I don't tend to shoot fast-moving subjects, or sports, or stuff like that, so it's never been a concern for me, and any lag is not really perceivable in everyday use. Certainly hasn't prevented me from shooting street, and events such as music gigs, where there is 'action', and timing can be critical.

Post: #53

(03-07-2018 08:07 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Thanks. What is the delay mentioned that occurs in EVFs and is it really a hassle compared to OVF?

This is an example of a detail that is irrelevant at a complete beginner's budget and experience level.

Whatever kit you end up choosing, you'll most likely feel like the grass is greener elsewhere or you'd like to experiment with other types of gear. Sony, Fuji and Olympus all offer great mirrorless options. Same for Canon and Nikon for DSLRs. If you want to do video (especially 4k), then you can start to cut out a few options. Stills only? Dozens of good options.

Whatever you choose, there will be aestethic differences but this is not a negative - it's an investment in training your eye and developing your particular style. You need to get your hands dirty before you can appreciate what look you're going for.

At this point, you should research whatever style of camera you think is attractive and would be excited to shoot with, and wether or not it fits into your budget.

For example, my first "semi-pro/pro" camera was a Canon 60D. It's an excellent piece of equipment, but when you assemble it with a lens, it's a huge brick to lug around and that made me always think twice when I wanted to go out and shoot. As a result, I didn't shoot as much I would have liked.

At your experience level, I would say just commit to buying something and starting out - from there you'll see how a thousand roads will open up. (Get used gear, it will depreciate less.)

Most importantly: get a camera that makes you excited to go shoot.

That inevitable tug of wanting to photograph more and more is what will make you develop your skill, eye, style - and get you to a point where minute details are actually relevant to what you are trying to achieve.

PS: I've read the post again and realize it may come off as abrasive but it's definitely not the intention - just trying to tell you something I wish someone had told me when I was starting out and losing my hair over making a "wrong" choice in equipment.

Post: #54

Ringo, it didn't sound abrasive at all, exact opposite, it is very like something a guy in the local computer shop said to me this afternoon.
To explain further, website of local computer shop has small selection of cameras, but pretty much all of these were discussed here, in this thread or in some way on dpreview. So I decided to go there and check the cameras in person. Someone also gave me that advice on previous page.

Here are cameras I looked at and my impressions:

Nikon D3400
Among the cheapest of the selection. It has lightweight body and plastic that feels a bit cheap, but sturdy. It comes with default kit lens 18-55. Guy in the shop recommended me this one to be my first camera.
He said that people tend to buy into medium budget cameras for their first one and if they are bored, they realize they have spent too much money. If they progress in their skills and decide to buy better camera, next upgrade offers not too much of an improvement since minority buys thousands of dollars camera as their next one. Most will buy just one class higher camera and that seems to be pretty much same as their previous camera, but just with some minor improvements.
His advice is to buy D3400 or Canon 1300D and hone my skills on it. When I outgrow it, invest into something much better that would be base of my future lens investments. He is an amateur and he uses Nikon.

Fuji X-A10
I really liked this one. Huxley is probably laughing now. It is a bit pricier than D3400, but it offers unique feel compared to DSLRs. Sturdy metal body, much heavier than D3400 and with XC kit lens. Despite being a simple box, it has good ergonomics. Guy in the store says it is a very good option, despite him and his friends not having experience with Fuji.

Canon EOS 1300D
Pretty much same deal as Nikon D3400. Physically I think it is a bit larger than Nikon and little heavier. Also it seems to be of better quality. This is a second option according to guy in the shop.

Nikon D5600
I saw on website D5300 and wanted to see it in person, since I read reviews that say it is a very good beginner camera. Unfortunately they have only its upgrade in the store which is a D5600. But being virtually the same in size I checked it out. Sturdy, good looking and distinctly different than D3400. I think the same thing is with D5300, they really can't be much different.

Canon EOS M100
Unfortunately not available in store, only online. Too bad.

Post: #55

(03-07-2018 02:16 PM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Ringo, it didn't sound abrasive at all, exact opposite, it is very like something a guy in the local computer shop said to me this afternoon.
To explain further, website of local computer shop has small selection of cameras, but pretty much all of these were discussed here, in this thread or in some way on dpreview. So I decided to go there and check the cameras in person. Someone also gave me that advice on previous page.

Here are cameras I looked at and my impressions:

Nikon D3400
Among the cheapest of the selection. It has lightweight body and plastic that feels a bit cheap, but sturdy. It comes with default kit lens 18-55. Guy in the shop recommended me this one to be my first camera.
He said that people tend to buy into medium budget cameras for their first one and if they are bored, they realize they have spent too much money. If they progress in their skills and decide to buy better camera, next upgrade offers not too much of an improvement since minority buys thousands of dollars camera as their next one. Most will buy just one class higher camera and that seems to be pretty much same as their previous camera, but just with some minor improvements.
His advice is to buy D3400 or Canon 1300D and hone my skills on it. When I outgrow it, invest into something much better that would be base of my future lens investments. He is an amateur and he uses Nikon.

Fuji X-A10
I really liked this one. Huxley is probably laughing now. It is a bit pricier than D3400, but it offers unique feel compared to DSLRs. Sturdy metal body, much heavier than D3400 and with XC kit lens. Despite being a simple box, it has good ergonomics. Guy in the store says it is a very good option, despite him and his friends not having experience with Fuji.

Canon EOS 1300D
Pretty much same deal as Nikon D3400. Physically I think it is a bit larger than Nikon and little heavier. Also it seems to be of better quality. This is a second option according to guy in the shop.

Nikon D5600
I saw on website D5300 and wanted to see it in person, since I read reviews that say it is a very good beginner camera. Unfortunately they have only its upgrade in the store which is a D5600. But being virtually the same in size I checked it out. Sturdy, good looking and distinctly different than D3400. I think the same thing is with D5300, they really can't be much different.

Canon EOS M100
Unfortunately not available in store, only online. Too bad.

If you are buying new, the Nikon D3400 is right on point. The only advantage from the D5600 is the flippy screen. The sensor in that 3400 is great and their two prime lenses (the 35 and the 50) are super cheap and they've got great quality.

In my opinion, if you decide to go for DSLR, go for that Nikon. For mirrorless buy a Fuji. (An Xpro1 used is also a very very good idea tho, and that camera will get you in love with photography)

Post: #56

I will probably buy D3400 because of advice guy in shop gave me and advice I heard here. For a good price I will get good beginner camera. I will probably not invest too much in it regarding lenses (one or two), because somewhere in future my second camera will be a real platform for investments. 50 lens is a portrait one, isn't it?

Anyone know good photography youtube channels worthy subscribing to?

Post: #57

(03-08-2018 02:22 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  I will probably buy D3400 because of advice guy in shop gave me and advice I heard here. For a good price I will get good beginner camera. I will probably not invest too much in it regarding lenses (one or two), because somewhere in future my second camera will be a real platform for investments. 50 lens is a portrait one, isn't it?

Anyone know good photography youtube channels worthy subscribing to?

https://www.youtube.com/user/jasonlanierpros
https://www.youtube.com/user/thatnikonguy/
https://www.youtube.com/user/JaredPolin
https://www.youtube.com/user/ira559/

Post: #58

You might want to sign up for a free account on a photo website like viewbug.

https://www.viewbug.com/contests/sensual...st/gallery

look at one of the photos you like, there are many contest to choose from, I prefer the nudes. Click on the photo and it will tell you the lens, iso, aperature and shutterspeed used. It'll help you learn.

You can also go to the search bar and search for cameras used, search for a very basic camera like the Nikon d60, which is like $60 camera to buy and you'll see all the photos taken with that camera and you'll also see the camera doesn't matter as much as you think. It's all about the lenses, lighting, and knowing what you're doing.

Deviant art is another good one
https://davidsamson.deviantart.com/gallery/
https://model-space.deviantart.com/

Post: #59

Tnx Linux, will check it out.

Post: #60

(03-08-2018 02:22 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  I will probably buy D3400 because of advice guy in shop gave me and advice I heard here. For a good price I will get good beginner camera. I will probably not invest too much in it regarding lenses (one or two), because somewhere in future my second camera will be a real platform for investments. 50 lens is a portrait one, isn't it?

That depends. More specifically, it depends on the size of the sensor in the camera. On full-frame, 35mm equivalent, 50mm is commonly called a 'standard' lens. Meaning it's generally considered to capture the sort of field-of-view that you see with your own eyes. It's a great 'do anything' focal length, and typically the first prime that one is advised to acquire.

Things change if the camera has an APS-C sensor - also known as a 'crop sensor'. This is smaller than 'full frame' so for, er... reasons, the field of view of a lens (or equivalent focal length), when mounted on an APS-C body will be different than when fitted to a full-frame.

Simple formula to work out the difference is to multiply the focal length by 1.5 [or, add half].

So, a 50mm lens on an APS-C camera will be roughly equivalent to a 75mm lens on full frame. Funnily enough, as a moderate telephoto, that does become a decent portrait lens. However, it may not be as wide as you might like for more general use.

Therefore, if you want a 'standard' lens for an APS-C [which is what my Fujis are] you'd get something like a 35mm lens. 35 multiplied by 1.5 is about 50mm. Incidentally, my favourite portrait lenses are the 56mm (about 84mm equiv.) and the 60mm (90mm equiv.).

Chances are, if you're buying an entry level camera, it'll be APS-C. Make sure you find out, though.

To get some idea of what APS-C focal lengths and fields of view look like, there's a useful gadget on Fuji's site which will show you what the same scene looks like shot with different lenses. Worth a play.

Quote:Anyone know good photography youtube channels worthy subscribing to?

My personal picks:

Matt Kloskowski. Cool guy, mainly shoots landscape, and has a good library of Lightroom tutorials.

Thomas Heaton. Landscape guy again. British. Shows you what you've got to do to get great Nature shots: get up in the dark, get out there before sunrise, be prepared to fail but have patience and persist. A major inspiration.

B&H Photo. American camera store, hosts really interesting guest speakers. Great back catalogue of long-form lectures on a wide variety of subjects. I especially remember watching some excellent content regarding composition.

The Art of Photography. I like this dude's style. Tutorials, tips, and philosophy of photography.

Jessica Kobeissi. Slightly goofy, but kind of a cool chick. [WB, btw. ] What's interesting about her is she shoots professionally using available light. Demonstrates that you can get great results with just a camera, and without complex lighting setups. Found her vids after searching for portrait retouching basics.

Those are some good places to start, imo.

Post: #61

(03-08-2018 02:48 AM)LINUX Wrote:  *photosites*

Similarly, check out 500px.

Typically a very high standard of work on display there.

Post: #62

Very cool. You can easily see the difference between various lenses. Is that camera on the site a APS-C? Because when I put 35 mm as a test, really looks like a human eye view.

Post: #63

(03-08-2018 04:50 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Very cool. You can easily see the difference between various lenses. Is that camera on the site a APS-C? Because when I put 35 mm as a test, really looks like a human eye view.

Yes.

Post: #64

(03-08-2018 02:22 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Anyone know good photography youtube channels worthy subscribing to?

Definitely check out this series by Jessica Kobeissi - Photographers shoot the same model:





You can learn a lot by seeing how they used the same location, wardrobe and model and got completely different results. Example of one the shoots:



Tyler Stalman - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6OICk-...f4sCN3DMnQ





Matt Day - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCopwCE5...if8IFkbUuw





Peter McKinnon - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DkFux...nTRWzwaiBA





Joe Allam - https://www.youtube.com/user/AllamJoe/featured (he kind of gets on my nerves but I do enjoy his street photography)

Post: #65

Tnx Ringo and all others who contributed, now this thread has a very large repository of good information that will serve even for future photographers who lurk around here or will come.

P.S.
20k$ for a camera?

Post: #66

(03-07-2018 05:53 PM)Volk Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 02:16 PM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Ringo, it didn't sound abrasive at all, exact opposite, it is very like something a guy in the local computer shop said to me this afternoon.
To explain further, website of local computer shop has small selection of cameras, but pretty much all of these were discussed here, in this thread or in some way on dpreview. So I decided to go there and check the cameras in person. Someone also gave me that advice on previous page.

Here are cameras I looked at and my impressions:

Nikon D3400
Among the cheapest of the selection. It has lightweight body and plastic that feels a bit cheap, but sturdy. It comes with default kit lens 18-55. Guy in the shop recommended me this one to be my first camera.
He said that people tend to buy into medium budget cameras for their first one and if they are bored, they realize they have spent too much money. If they progress in their skills and decide to buy better camera, next upgrade offers not too much of an improvement since minority buys thousands of dollars camera as their next one. Most will buy just one class higher camera and that seems to be pretty much same as their previous camera, but just with some minor improvements.
His advice is to buy D3400 or Canon 1300D and hone my skills on it. When I outgrow it, invest into something much better that would be base of my future lens investments. He is an amateur and he uses Nikon.

Fuji X-A10
I really liked this one. Huxley is probably laughing now. It is a bit pricier than D3400, but it offers unique feel compared to DSLRs. Sturdy metal body, much heavier than D3400 and with XC kit lens. Despite being a simple box, it has good ergonomics. Guy in the store says it is a very good option, despite him and his friends not having experience with Fuji.

Canon EOS 1300D
Pretty much same deal as Nikon D3400. Physically I think it is a bit larger than Nikon and little heavier. Also it seems to be of better quality. This is a second option according to guy in the shop.

Nikon D5600
I saw on website D5300 and wanted to see it in person, since I read reviews that say it is a very good beginner camera. Unfortunately they have only its upgrade in the store which is a D5600. But being virtually the same in size I checked it out. Sturdy, good looking and distinctly different than D3400. I think the same thing is with D5300, they really can't be much different.

Canon EOS M100
Unfortunately not available in store, only online. Too bad.

If you are buying new, the Nikon D3400 is right on point. The only advantage from the D5600 is the flippy screen. The sensor in that 3400 is great and their two prime lenses (the 35 and the 50) are super cheap and they've got great quality.

In my opinion, if you decide to go for DSLR, go for that Nikon. For mirrorless buy a Fuji. (An Xpro1 used is also a very very good idea tho, and that camera will get you in love with photography)

what about Canon 600D ? is it ok for a beginner?

Post: #67

Ok, so I now have options regarding buying new, unused camera, but additional option to consider is buying an used one. What would be suitable ones, following the up to 600$ budget and coming with kit lens? I heard some suggestions up to 600$ before but they were basically only regarding body.

Post: #68

(03-10-2018 03:10 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Ok, so I now have options regarding buying new, unused camera, but additional option to consider is buying an used one. What would be suitable ones, following the up to 600$ budget and coming with kit lens? I heard some suggestions up to 600$ before but they were basically only regarding body.

I originally ran with a Nikon D3000 that I bought new several years ago. I just started to get outgrow it last year after I had started shooting manual and picking my subjects a lot better.

I just recently picked up a used Nikon D7100 with a 35mm F1.8 lens and battery grip for $600 off eBay. It was a great purchase and I would recommend the camera for the shots I've taken so far. If you want photo samples shoot me a PM and I'll drop you a couple landscapes and portraits.

Post: #69

Wow, all that for just 600$? You really got a good bargain. PM sent.

Post: #70

SO I'm sending back the tz90. I ordered a tz100 which has a shorter zoom range, but 1" sensor (4 times the size of the tz90) and brighter lens. Should get better indoor pictures, and less blowouts in bright light. I will miss the selfie flip up screen though. That was fun, but all of my other camera don't have a selfie screen. I will just ask someone to take a picture or use a remote shoot.

Post: #71

[Just to pre-clarify, myself and OP have similar usernames - sorry OP, registered with first name that came to mind!]

Man, I read this thread, and I won't lie, I don't even know what mirrorless/EVF really refer to)) So, I'd say don't get too hung up on the gear. You can always change/upgrade.

I was introduced to photography by a true player who OWNED a photo studio just for gaming chicks)) him and most of the pro-photographers I met through hanging out there used Canon 5D's or 7D's, so I just bought the same, second hand (from someone I knew).

Helmut Newton used to do a lot of his work with a tourist camera (with a simple flash), and it worked out fine for him) You can do so much on photoshop too, so long as your set up is decent, you'll do fine.

Photography is a great, great hobby. I started photography pretty much just for game, but to be honest the game aspect is almost the side benefit for me now. It's a straight up flow activity, you get to spend hours with models in a non-date frame, you give them a whole load of value up front...win-win-win.

Gaming models, sure. I'd say they'll have your number from the get-go though, which is fine, but means;
(a) if she's into you, the whole photography angle is kinda a charade. But then, so is a date to some degree, and it's a WAY better path to the same end,
(b) It's gonna be harder to get the good ones to agree to a shoot, maybe.

Personally, I'd rather get decent and play off the DHV/social circle benefits.

Invest in some tutorials on creativelive too. Definitely worth it. I paid a pro fashion photographer for a few personal tutorials so I could have a photo session without looking like too much of a jerk, and took it from there.

Post: #72

First name that came to mind? Same here haha! I liked the show (note past tense used) and decided to go for it. Although I am not sure why I choose underscore between names!?

Apart from that, to comment your post. How long are you into photography? In my case I would never invest into expensive camera as a first one like you did. I simply don't have money for it and it would be pointless if I (God forbid) decide to abandon this hobby. How much did you pay for your camera and do you still use it?

So you started just for game but now you feel it is probably the side benefit? I liked to shoot film camera from my dad's so now I want to continue that with digital camera and using Game also as a side benefit.

Please, do tell how your friend gamed with a studio?

Post: #73

As someone who shoots agency models as part of my work I'd advise heavily against gaming them in this current climate. Sometimes things happen, but it's definitely more of a slow burn thing. I'd suggest always having a MUA present, too. It really depends on the type of model you're trying to game, though. If it's some wannabe 6/10 from modelmayhem, then things are a bit different.

Post: #74

(03-12-2018 03:14 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Apart from that, to comment your post. How long are you into photography? In my case I would never invest into expensive camera as a first one like you did. I simply don't have money for it and it would be pointless if I (God forbid) decide to abandon this hobby. How much did you pay for your camera and do you still use it?

I have only been into photography for a few years.

I started with a Canon 1D that my friend sold me for nothing, and then upgraded from there. You don't have to start with expensive equipment. As for the investment proving a waste if you don't use it, you can always sell it on.


Please, do tell how your friend gamed with a studio?

That guy was obsessed, and lived for game)) Daygamed for at least a few hours every day, showcasing portfolio on phone, invitation for shoot, invitation for wine...

Any excuse to get chicks through the door actually. He even got one of his female assistants to organise a hen party, then just showed up))

Post: #75

Interesting. I just noticed that you answered my question but you put them in my quote so they are not immediately noticeable.