[5soko]

Really wanting to get into the nice photo and video scene now, i thought it would be time after new years to grab some good hardware.

Whats a good camera to get started with around 1K price guys.
Also a good lens, i would be mostly doing car pics and people pics.

Also maybe some recommendations on a camera/lens combo to get the best use out of the camera.

[Semi-Poor]

I use a Sony NEX7 with various lenses but it comes in a "starter kit" with a 18-55mm zoom that you can go pretty far with. The 30mm macro is nice for closeups. The new mirror less cameras are all very good, DSLR's can be very big and heavy to lug around. Few examples taken with NEX7:

[druu]

I'm pretty sure you can get a full frame canon 6D for around 1500. Full Frame is a huge win. Great low light performance and great detail.

[5soko]

Originally Posted by Semi-Poor

I use a Sony NEX7 with various lenses but it comes in a "starter kit" with a 18-55mm zoom that you can go pretty far with. The 30mm macro is nice for closeups. The new mirror less cameras are all very good, DSLR's can be very big and heavy to lug around. Few examples taken with NEX7:

Looks great to be honest!

Originally Posted by druu

I'm pretty sure you can get a full frame canon 6D for around 1500. Full Frame is a huge win. Great low light performance and great detail.

That price include a good lens? Im honestly not even sure how to pick out a lens to get the best out of my photos.

thanks

[druu]

that price is body only, good lenses are a totally different animal.

Those NEX 7 shots are nice, but have post processing and or off camera lighting gear used to generate the photos.

Nothing will look that good coming out of the camera without a decent amount invested into glass and lighting as well. Regardless of camera brand.

The Fuji x-e1 and 18-55 kit lens (the kit lens is actually quite good, and definitely several notches above any normal starter lens), can be had for ~1200ish and is an excellent choice as well. The only reason i suggested this is because the lens on it is excellent, fast and covers a very, very useful range, it is a semi-pro quality lens actually.

[Semi-Poor]

Originally Posted by druu

that price is body only, good lenses are a totally different animal.

Those NEX 7 shots are nice, but have post processing and or off camera lighting gear used to generate the photos.

Nothing will look that good coming out of the camera without a decent amount invested into glass and lighting as well. Regardless of camera brand.

The Fuji x-e1 and 18-55 kit lens (the kit lens is actually quite good, and definitely several notches above any normal starter lens), can be had for ~1200ish and is an excellent choice as well. The only reason i suggested this is because the lens on it is excellent, fast and covers a very, very useful range, it is a semi-pro quality lens actually.

Agreed I recommended NEX7 with 18-55mm for same reasons. Shots shown have been processed using Aperture on a Mac and homemade lighting (flashlights and stuff) you can get results with practice and little bit of ingenuity. Learning is half the fun. Save some camera money and take a class. Enjoy.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by 5soko

That price include a good lens? Im honestly not even sure how to pick out a lens to get the best out of my photos.

thanks

As mentioned, a good lens is where it's at. Rule of thumb: A mediocre lens with a top end camera body will garner mediocre images. A top end lens with a mediocre camera body will gamer top end images. So, Lens > Camera.

For this reason i suggest you look into the canon line up for your first DSLR. Canon has one of the widest arrays of lens offerings available. The beauty of a SLR type camera is that while you grow into different camera bodies for various types of shooting, you're lenses remain in your collection. I would suggest getting an entry level DSLR body from Canon and choose the lens you want.

First as others have said, do some research, take a class, learn as much as you can prior to purchase. These items don't come cheap but can be sold used in excellent condition for decent money. If you buy top end lenses, you can usually sell them for upwards of 90% of what you paid for them several years later.

Good luck!

[5soko]

Originally Posted by druu

that price is body only, good lenses are a totally different animal.

Those NEX 7 shots are nice, but have post processing and or off camera lighting gear used to generate the photos.

Nothing will look that good coming out of the camera without a decent amount invested into glass and lighting as well. Regardless of camera brand.

The Fuji x-e1 and 18-55 kit lens (the kit lens is actually quite good, and definitely several notches above any normal starter lens), can be had for ~1200ish and is an excellent choice as well. The only reason i suggested this is because the lens on it is excellent, fast and covers a very, very useful range, it is a semi-pro quality lens actually.

Thank you! And good information.. I was browsing around and saw that lens are extremely expensive! For my price range it seems i wont be getting the quality i was looking for.

Originally Posted by Semi-Poor

Agreed I recommended NEX7 with 18-55mm for same reasons. Shots shown have been processed using Aperture on a Mac and homemade lighting (flashlights and stuff) you can get results with practice and little bit of ingenuity. Learning is half the fun. Save some camera money and take a class. Enjoy.

Thanks! I will def invest more time into it.

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

As mentioned, a good lens is where it's at. Rule of thumb: A mediocre lens with a top end camera body will garner mediocre images. A top end lens with a mediocre camera body will gamer top end images. So, Lens > Camera.

For this reason i suggest you look into the canon line up for your first DSLR. Canon has one of the widest arrays of lens offerings available. The beauty of a SLR type camera is that while you grow into different camera bodies for various types of shooting, you're lenses remain in your collection. I would suggest getting an entry level DSLR body from Canon and choose the lens you want.

First as others have said, do some research, take a class, learn as much as you can prior to purchase. These items don't come cheap but can be sold used in excellent condition for decent money. If you buy top end lenses, you can usually sell them for upwards of 90% of what you paid for them several years later.

Good luck!

Looking at canon, what do you think of the EOS 70D and or 7D, i assume i would still need a good lens and spend alot on that to get some good quality.

Im looking to get some video like this here:
This is a Canon 5D mkii with some kind of expensive lens.

Originally Posted by dian11

Sony NEX7 is a very good camera

I have been reading alot of reviews on it!

[druu]

Originally Posted by 5soko

Thank you! And good information.. I was browsing around and saw that lens are extremely expensive! For my price range it seems i wont be getting the quality i was looking for.




Thanks! I will def invest more time into it.



Looking at canon, what do you think of the EOS 70D and or 7D, i assume i would still need a good lens and spend alot on that to get some good quality.

Im looking to get some video like this here:
This is a Canon 5D mkii with some kind of expensive lens.

I have been reading alot of reviews on it!

honestly speaking, if you are looking to get very good video, you will likely need a significant investment in stablization gear and lighting (not to discourage you from buying a nice camera). But a decent camera body + nice glass + stabilization + lighting is easily a 3-5k initial investment.

The video there looked hand held with a zoom (possibly a 24-105L which is about 8-900 bucks, commonly kitted with a 5dii)

If you are looking for good car video, you will do much, much better with a go pro and a mount, given your price range.

A 7D is an excellent camera, and I use it as one of my backup bodies, at this point they are a good value. If money is an object though and you wanted to go canon, i would get an older rebel body (perhaps t3i), used if possible and put the rest toward a decent lens. The used market is excellent with canon gear, and lenses are at good prices when bought used, especially when you consider that most people take good care of their gear.

[5soko]

Originally Posted by druu

honestly speaking, if you are looking to get very good video, you will likely need a significant investment in stablization gear and lighting (not to discourage you from buying a nice camera). But a decent camera body + nice glass + stabilization + lighting is easily a 3-5k initial investment.

The video there looked hand held with a zoom (possibly a 24-105L which is about 8-900 bucks, commonly kitted with a 5dii)

If you are looking for good car video, you will do much, much better with a go pro and a mount, given your price range.

A 7D is an excellent camera, and I use it as one of my backup bodies, at this point they are a good value. If money is an object though and you wanted to go canon, i would get an older rebel body (perhaps t3i), used if possible and put the rest toward a decent lens. The used market is excellent with canon gear, and lenses are at good prices when bought used, especially when you consider that most people take good care of their gear.

Thanks! If i can get anywhere near that video i linked in quality, i would be happy for now.. If the 7D can do that, then that will be my purchase!
Or maybe get a new canon 60D or 70D and leave an etra 500-1000 for a good lens?

[KingOfJericho]

Take a look at the Nikon D7000. You can get the body for $680 at Abe's of Maine and you'll have plenty left over for lenses.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by druu

honestly speaking, if you are looking to get very good video, you will likely need a significant investment in stablization gear and lighting (not to discourage you from buying a nice camera). But a decent camera body + nice glass + stabilization + lighting is easily a 3-5k initial investment.

The video there looked hand held with a zoom (possibly a 24-105L which is about 8-900 bucks, commonly kitted with a 5dii)

If you are looking for good car video, you will do much, much better with a go pro and a mount, given your price range.

A 7D is an excellent camera, and I use it as one of my backup bodies, at this point they are a good value. If money is an object though and you wanted to go canon, i would get an older rebel body (perhaps t3i), used if possible and put the rest toward a decent lens. The used market is excellent with canon gear, and lenses are at good prices when bought used, especially when you consider that most people take good care of their gear.

I agree.

The t3i won't hold you back for quite some time. A sound investment bought used or new. Pair that with a 24-105L and you'll be golden for quite some time. Maybe pick up a 10-22 lens as well. Got two great lenses, good camera body, all for about $1700 new.

[druu]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

I agree.

The t3i won't hold you back for quite some time. A sound investment bought used or new. Pair that with a 24-105L and you'll be golden for quite some time. Maybe pick up a 10-22 lens as well. Got two great lenses, good camera body, all for about $1700 new.

in addition, if you have no plans to go full frame, a 17-55 f/2.8 IS pairs excellently to a rebel body and allows an extra full stop of light. for about 900 new (i see the at b&h/adorama for under 700 used).

[Litos]

Originally Posted by Semi-Poor

I use a Sony NEX7 with various lenses but it comes in a "starter kit" with a 18-55mm zoom that you can go pretty far with. The 30mm macro is nice for closeups. The new mirror less cameras are all very good, DSLR's can be very big and heavy to lug around. Few examples taken with NEX7:

you cannot and will not get those pictures straight out of the camera with the nex7 - it's impossible and requires quite a bit of post processing.






i think the best Full Frame cameras within your budget right now are used Nikon D700's and the Canon 5dMKII's.

either one would be amazing at @ 1,000-$1400.

if you want to shoot with a well above average camera, but not a stellar camera, you can always go with the Nikon D7000 or Canon 7d.

read a few reviews comparing the three to figure out which one fits you better.

if you go D7000 or 7d, you won't have to bother spending $1500-$2300 on lenses that only work with Full Frame cameras like the D700/D800/5d MKII and 5d MKIII...

here's a perfectly good camera with lens for a great price: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...amera_Kit.html

[danniexi]

Originally Posted by Litos

if you go D7000 or 7d, you won't have to bother spending $1500-$2300 on lenses that only work with Full Frame cameras like the D700/D800/5d MKII and 5d MKIII...

actually, the opposite is true.

I'm not 100% sure about Nikon (I'm a canon user) but there really is no such thing as a lens that only work on full frame cameras. All canon lenses, including the EF-S, EF, and L lenses WILL work with all cropped sensor cameras (7D, 70/60D, TXi). The EF-S lenses will NOT work on full frame cameras (1Dx, 5D, 6D). For Nikon, FX lenses will work on their cropped sensor counter parts as well.

If you one is going to get serious with photography, it'll be a good idea to invest in an L lens if budget allows. However, the user needs to be wary about the cropped sensor and the magnification it'll induce when using those lenses. For example, a 35mm focal length will be magnified 1.6x, therefore being an equivalent to 56mm on a full frame. Always research and be sure what of what lens you need and why. Grabbing a full-frame compatible lens now might be a good idea when you eventually decide to make the jump to a full frame camera.

[Litos]

Originally Posted by danniexi

actually, the opposite is true.

I'm not 100% sure about Nikon (I'm a canon user) but there really is no such thing as a lens that only work on full frame cameras. All canon lenses, including the EF-S, EF, and L lenses WILL work with all cropped sensor cameras (7D, 70/60D, TXi). The EF-S lenses will NOT work on full frame cameras (1Dx, 5D, 6D). For Nikon, FX lenses will work on their cropped sensor counter parts as well.

If you one is going to get serious with photography, it'll be a good idea to invest in an L lens if budget allows. However, the user needs to be wary about the cropped sensor and the magnification it'll induce when using those lenses. For example, a 35mm focal length will be magnified 1.6x, therefore being an equivalent to 56mm on a full frame. Always research and be sure what of what lens you need and why. Grabbing a full-frame compatible lens now might be a good idea when you eventually decide to make the jump to a full frame camera.

that's what I meant.

they work, but the pictures come out all jacked up......

no one shoots non FF lenses on a FF camera, because you just don't....

can you get images from them ?? yes, but they are terrible and borderline junk...

[danniexi]

Originally Posted by Litos

that's what I meant.

they work, but the pictures come out all jacked up......

no one shoots non FF lenses on a FF camera, because you just don't....

can you get images from them ?? yes, but they are terrible and borderline junk...

for the most part, i would partially agree. most kit lenses that come with the crop sensor camera (again, referring to canon lenses here) are pretty much junk and something I would pretty much disregard.

However, there are a few EF-S lenses that are particularly good; some that are probably better than L lenses. these include:

EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS
EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5
EF 50mm f/1.4
EF 60mm f/2.8 Macro
EF-S 85mm f/1.8

All of these lenses are super sharp and provide excellent image quality. But again, if you are planning to go full frame in the distant future, these lenses will not be compatible (except for the 50mm and 85mm obviously).

To the OP:

Anyways, long story short, if you want a capable camera that does both photo AND video well, I'd look into the 70D. It has a new AF system does extremely well for live view, but more importantly, speedy video focusing/tracking. I'd hold off on the 7D ONLY because there should be a new model coming out soon (due for an upgrade) and will be out of budget.

In terms of lenses, you can start off with a zoom. The above 17-55 f/2.8 IS will be more than enough to help you get started. For video, IS (image stabilization) will pretty much be a necessity. Other lenses to consider are the 24-105 f/4 L IS or the 24-70 f/4 L IS. For emphasis in photography, I'd consider prime lenses (one length, no zoom). They are smaller, lighter, and usually provide sharper/better image quality. Consider the 35MM, and work your way up to longer focal lengths.

Another advice I would give is to consider third party lens makers (lenses not made by your camera manufacturer). These days, Sigma especially, have been producing excellent lenses that are sometimes better than the original manufacturer counter parts.

[Litos]

Originally Posted by danniexi

for the most part, i would partially agree.

I'm talking about Nikon.

you put a DX lens on a FF camera and the image will be cropped.

not only will it be cropped, but it opens up some vignetting and aberration....

AND, most importantly, the cropped section of the image will now be dropped to 5mpx as opposed to the D800's 36 or the D700's 12...

all your beautiful FF resolution has now been neutered....

that last 2 parts is what I consider junk, because the last thing you want from a FF camera is for it to shoot like an entry level hipster camera due to the fact that you tried shooting a DX lens on it.....

[M3Captain]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...27&srtclk=sort

[M3Captain]

B&H always has great used equipment...

Originally Posted by M3Captain

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...27&srtclk=sort

[paradoxical3]

Evaluate what you really want from a setup. I had a full-blown SLR setup with Canon L glass and when I sat down and compared the output from a Sony RX100 Mk II vs my T2i with a 24-70L on it (about a $2000 camera/glass combo) the Sony won in every way and it fit in my pocket. It's a point and shoot camera that can shoot ISO 3200 F1.8 clean. Absolutely ridiculous and I've captured shots with it that I never would have gotten with my full SLR setup because I wouldn't have it with me. And if you are okay shooting JPG (I usually don't), you can use multi-frame noise reduction which lets you capture virtually noiseless images up to ISO 6400.

Is it a replacement for a full-frame camera? No. Is it a complete SLR replacement? No, it doesn't excel at telephoto or macro shots. Is it good enough where professionals in the photo AND video industry use it for studio shots and as a B camera for professional video shoots? Yup.

I have a 12x40 HANDHELD panorama I shot with it in nightime conditions and people think it was shot with a big money setup.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...%20%284%29.jpg (This is actually barely processed, it was blue hour. Adjusted the levels a bit and added some smoothing.)

The video from the Sony will require at LEAST a 3k investment from a SLR to be as good. The optical stabilization is incredible and you will need a big-money, bulky stabilizer setup on a SLR to equal it. Take a look at the video comparison around the web, here's a good example starting a bit over 2 minutes. Keep in mind that's with the old RX100 and the new one is about 1/2 stop better.

To me, for what you want to do get a RX100 Mk ii. Learn to use it to the fullest capabilities of it and then get a 5D MK III. Between those two you have a complete setup. The RX100 just makes any SLR less than a top of the line full-frame seem pointless to me unless you're going to be doing super-wide or telephoto shooting.

[paradoxical3]

Here's a RX100 mkii car shot. Handheld, 1/30 ISO 800. No noise reduction applied.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18682/DSC00015.jpg