Mrs Please likes taking photos and seems to have an eye for it.

Her compact died some time ago and she has a birthday coming up.

A digital SLR is fancied by My Darling Bride with the vague threat of doing some sort of course to take arty photos. Indoors and outdoors presumably.

What is a sensible, manageable digital SLR for a newbie, please and new or second hand? I suspect she’ll tire of the faff/bulk and go back to a compact, but hope to be proven wrong.

Many thanks

Paul

On the big name front there’s little to choose between the cameras, the best one is the one that feels best in her hands. Get to a camera shop with a budget in mind and fondle everything that falls into that budget.

Mirrorless. Olympus pen etc.

i would get a 2nd hand older nikon D90 and a decent 35mm or 50mm fast nikon lens. Make her concetrate on people and things. When she gets that, get some longer prime lenses or a zoom.

http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Secondhand-Search/?Order=Latest&View=Grid&SHMake=&SHModel=d90&SHType=&Location=&Results=12

I have a 50mm 1.4 lens like this and it really is fantastic.

http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Nikon-50mm-AF-S-f/1.4-G_117874.html

As above, spend money on lenses 🙂

Decide what she wants (or what you want to spend) and go shopping.

My criteria was:
Durable
Separate aperture and shutter control dials to make handling with gloves feasible and simplify taking shots quickly.
LCD on top to minimize the need for scrolling through menus to change settings (see above).

Sony I discounted as I didn’t like the EVF.
Canon/nikon, the cheapest cameras were just too plastic and to fulfill the other criteria meant buying the £££ models.

I bought a Pentax K-5 as it ticked all the boxes, and it’s weatherproof and it has a magnesium body/chasis, means it weighs 50% more than the cheaper plastic cameras, but it’ll take far more knocks.

In terms of image quality, the person taking the photograph will always be the limiting factor, so ignore the technical specs, pixles etc, and get one with the ergonomics, and menu system you can live with.

I’d say used D90 or equivalent from another manufacturer. Cheap as chips at the moment and there is not much it can’t do

I would buy a zoom Nikon 18 70 3.5-4.5 again cheap and excellent

Beyond that Lightroom so that she can shoot Raw and then maybe a tripod

Don’t buy a cheap Tripod

Mirrorless will weigh less and cost more

For once I agree with molgrips. Unless she is planning to take up photography professionally a DSLR is overkill IMO. Too bulky/heavy to take out all the time and she might well feel self-conscious using it in social situations.

Mirrorless Compact System Cameras are the perfect compromise for enthusiasts IMO.

The Sony’s with their Translucent Mirror (DSLT) have a slightly smaller form factor, whilst still retaining all the features of traditional DSLR’s. Worth considering for a lady’s hands. I get on fine with the EVF on my A55 and they have improved it on newer models. They have a quicker AF than DSLR’s too

Nikon 3200 and spend the rest on lenses

If you can’t bear that, Nikon 5300 for more bells and whistles, and spend the rest on lenses

bear in mind that the whole point of getting an slr is so that you can then spend thousands on lovely lenses.

don’t want to spend thousands on lovely lenses? don’t get an slr.

and even when you’ve bought a ‘perfect’ slr set up, you’ll still end up spending £400 on a compact of some description.

In my experience professionally spend on the lenses, and for the extra bit of reliability to help eliminate any hand shaking/vibration, I thoughly recommend Nikon VR lenses, they flatter even the most shaky hands!

The d90 is a good camera, light and shoots well in good light. Spend some money you save on the body on a lens. Something with better quality than the crappy kit lenses these cameras spend their lives stuck to the back of.

Haha, ahwiles, so true!

don’t want to spend thousands on lovely lenses? don’t get an slr.

and even when you’ve bought a ‘perfect’ slr set up, you’ll still end up spending £400 on a compact of some description.

There are lots of reasons to own a DSLR that don’t envolve lots of lenses. I’ve been shooting with a DSLR for 7 years through a solitary lens and no regrets.

I have cracked and bought a compact but that was only £100

What is the budget?

There is no benefit in a full size DSLR over a mirrorless design these days.

Many pros are also making the switch which says a lot (amusingly I was speaking to a wedding photographer recently and he said the only reason he still used a DSLR was because people didn’t believe he could take good photos with his mirrorless olympus EM-1 as it was too small! For his personal shooting he uses the mirrorless system).

Mirrorless have all the same features, image quality is to all intents and purposes identical but the bodies and lenses are smaller and lighter. Both things that make it easier to take with you and use more regularly. Due to the size of the lenses they are cheaper too for the equivalent level of optical quality.

Have a look at the EM-5/Pen or GX series m4/3 cameras from olympus/panasonic or XA/E series from Fuji. Small form factor, EVF and fantastic image quality.

If she is likely to get into niche photography like star trails then a DSLR would be better as the batteries last a bit longer.

ampthill – Member

There are lots of reasons to own a DSLR that don’t envolve lots of lenses…

i’m sure there are, but i’m buggered if i can come up with 1…

Blimey – thanks ladies and gents. Sounds like a trip out to the camera shop for herself then and then either DSLR or mirrorless on her command. I am off to rummage down the back of the sofa.

Thanks again.

Paul

Many pros are also making the switch which says a lot (amusingly I was speaking to a wedding photographer recently and he said the only reason he still used a DSLR was because people didn’t believe he could take good photos with his mirrorless olympus EM-1 as it was too small! For his personal shooting he uses the mirrorless system).

Hmm… I shoot weddings too and I get the point that people expect a big camera but I still don’t think there is a mirrorless camera that can compete with a full frame sensor DSLR for shooting in low light etc. The gap has narrowed a lot though.

It was a bad day when wedding photographers stopped using medium format film cameras.

It will be an even darker day when they switch from using full frame DSLRs to APS-C anything. In my opinion at least.

OP apart from that I would not disagree with anything else said here. A D90 would be a reasonable choice and low risk. A Compact System Camera, i.e. no mirror but I’d suggest it should at least have an EVF (it’s just not the same framing using the back screen), would also be a good choice.

I will offer some very left field but very worthy suggestions, just for fun:

Fuji X100s

Lovely camera, not cheap but will beat most other cameras for IQ at the price point and significantly above. It would be a really good camera to learn photography with, partly because it has a very nice hybrid optical/electronic view finder (it’s like a heads up display overlaid on the optical view) but mostly because it’s a fixed 35mm (50mm equivalent) lens. You learn to frame effectively and use your legs as a zoom which makes you think more about what you’re shooting.

Ricoh GR

You’d need to add an optical view finder but this is a fabulous camera. IQ will be almost as good as the Fuji (different) but it’s super fast and very discrete. Harder to learn to use effectively (it’s a big favourite with ‘street’ photographers because it’s so fast and discrete), but very rewarding when you get it right.

Pentax K-5 Mk11

Underrated and consequently cheap but very good DSLR.

Park Cameras and Wex Photographic are the best places to shop. You can get very good remote service (i.e. by phone) if you can’t get into their stores.

Jessops is like shopping in Halfords for bikes. You only go there if you know what you want and you want to buy it there and then.

Hmm… I shoot weddings too and I get the point that people expect a big camera but I still don’t think there is a mirrorless camera that can compete with a full frame sensor DSLR for shooting in low light etc. The gap has narrowed a lot though.

You make me feel reassured that there are still photographers who, you know, know how to take a decent picture.

Bit of a hijack sorry
I understand the Canon model numbers xD, xxD, xxxD, xxxxD and what they mean but could someone explain the Nikon model number order please?
Thanks

While I like a mirroless camera I’m not sure I agree with molgrips and grum and the others. There are a couple that can cope with moving targets these days but you also need a view finder which limits the choice. The lenses are expensive and used choice is limited compared to dslrs.

If you want to shoot moving stuff on a sensible budget then I don’t think you can beat a dslr. I don’t think brand matters much. Canon have old-tech sensors in their cheaper cameras, other than that telling the difference between brands gets very nerdy.

Hmm… I shoot weddings too and I get the point that people expect a big camera but I still don’t think there is a mirrorless camera that can compete with a full frame sensor DSLR for shooting in low light etc. The gap has narrowed a lot though.

The a7s is popular for that application. Off topic mind…

While I like a mirroless camera I’m not sure I agree with molgrips and grum

I think you DO agree with Grum. Not sure the lenses are always expensive though. It does depend on which brand you’re looking at.

Fuji lenses don’t tend to be cheap but they are very good. Sony’s can be found cheap. Not sure about Nikon or Canon CSC lenses.

The a7s is popular for that application. Off topic mind…

It’s also full frame so while still a CSC, it’s competing with the FF equivalents from Nikon and Canon.

I think you DO agree with Grum. Not sure the lenses are always expensive though. It does depend on which brand you’re looking at.

Ah yes, his first I agree with molgrips post fooled me.

I’ve owned olympus and sony neither offer good value lenses like you can get for dslrs. Just look at the price of the fast 50s (or similar). M43 is the worst culprit as you need faster lenses to compensate for the smaller sensor.

The worst part is the lack of used lenses. Dslrs have decades worth of lenses on the used market. Not so with mirrorless.

Having said that I rarely use a dslr now as I prefer mirrorless but I’m painfully aware how expensive an option it’s been.

It’s also full frame so while still a CSC, it’s competing with the FF equivalents from Nikon and Canon.

Err, Ok. There was me thinking that lack of mirror made a camera mirrorless, not have a small sensor… 😉

Just look at the price of the fast 50s

Hmm, I sort of get your point here (this is now less about advice to the OP and more ‘I should be still working but this is more interesting’ type conversation! :D)

You can get a 30mm Sigma e-mount lens for £140. It’s f2.8 so not blindingly fast but probably fast enough for starters. But yes, if you wanted something say f1.8 then for the Sony e-mount you’re up to £350, which is not cheap.

A keen amateur friend of mine (who’s been published a few times in artsy photography journals) has a number of cameras but you’ll routinely see him using his Rollei 35 loaded with Illford XP2 film.

His argument is that 35mm film is the new (original) full frame on a shoe string.

You can get a 30mm Sigma e-mount lens for £140. It’s f2.8 so not blindingly fast but probably fast enough for starters. But yes, if you wanted something say f1.8 then for the Sony e-mount you’re up to £350, which is not cheap.

The 50mm f1.8 goes for £180 so it’s not that bad, and it is stabilised, but you can’t get away from sony dslr 50mm f1.8s for £80-odd and the same with canon. £140 for the sigma 30mm f2.8 is ludicrously expensive in comparison. I bought both those lenses… Because they were ‘cheap’ 😆

The only thing mirrorless beats dslrs on is size.

All good points but I feel slightly disingenuous as I actually use a Sony RX1 as my daily shooter, thereby totally negating the need to worry about the cost of additional lenses (since the RX1 has a fixed lens).

I have an a7 which I’m using as a back for a yashica 45mm range finder lens as my main camera so I appreciate the approach.

You can have my Fuji X100 which is still for sale, as I’m looking to move over to the Fuji EX-2 instead.

I use an A7r mostly on a studio stand and tethered to a computer, the AF and viewfinder is crap compared to a d810 or a 5DIII/ H4D and wouldn’t dream of using the mirrorless as a walk around camera where AF accuracy/speed or a long time looking through a viewfinder were needed

geetee1972 – Member
It was a bad day when wedding photographers stopped using medium format film cameras.
I will offer some very left field but very worthy suggestions, just for fun:

Fuji X100s

Lovely camera, not cheap but will beat most other cameras for IQ at the price point and significantly above. It would be a really good camera to learn photography with, partly because it has a very nice hybrid optical/electronic view finder (it’s like a heads up display overlaid on the optical view) but mostly because it’s a fixed 35mm (50mm equivalent) lens. You learn to frame effectively and use your legs as a zoom which makes you think more about what you’re shooting.

It’s wider than that – 23mm/35mm equivalent, the perfect street shooting focal length. There was one here yesterday.
I was sorely tempted by it but I’m going to give my ’72 Olympus M-1 an airing, along with some very nice fast Zuikos and some Fuji Neopan. It’s been far too long since I used film.

The best camera is the one that is with you when you see the photo you want to take. This should really dictate what you go for.
If your wife is looking to take photos where transporting gear is not an issue then the DSLR route is probably a good one. If she’s wants to capture stuff that she’s seeing in day to day situations, then something that is always with her is a better bet and thus it’s more likely to be compact sized.
Once she’s worked out what she needs then in my view the next important issue (on the basis that most cameras at a price point are much the same) is what is the most intuitive to use.

I’ve recently gone through a similar process with my son who is into video. We were thinking of a DSLR (Nikon D3200) but we went for a Panasonic LX7 instead. It has a fast (f1.4) lens, gives excellent results, is easy to handle and pretty much fits in a coat pocket. The ability to manage the depth of field is more restricted than on the DSLR as is the control of the zoom and focusing. But I knew that for outdoor, action video to supplement his GoPro this would be far more practical.

I’d recommend taking a look at Ken Rockwell He’s a bit “marmite” but he makes some very good points, particularly that “the camera doesn’t matter”.

Rich.

To be honest I’ve in the process of binning all my Canon gears for a GH4 apart from low light I cannot fault this camera, I’m personally into more video stuff but I always find myself going for my GH4 rather than the 7D mark II these days so the Canon has to go and I’ve shot Canon for 20 years +

I just love the size and the lack of weight.

If I was going for a DSLR I’d go for the two main brands as you can pick up really good lens for both for not a lot on money.

Sure but the A7r only has contrast detection and is more intended for landscape and architecture work where autofocus speed is less of an issue.

Also, I wouldn’t dream of using a D800 or equivalent Canon as a walk-around camera either. You might as well stick a big sign on your head saying ‘PHOTOGRAPHER HERE’ plus my arms just aren’t strong enough.

I realise you might not have meant ‘walk around’ as in ‘street shooting’ but the point still stands. The D800 produces amazing results but it’s a monster to work with.

Just acquired the A7 and I’m pretty chuffed with the quality even with the kit lens, if you are used to mirrorless cameras then the EVF is fine, yes its a bit slower than the Oly/Panny MFT cameras for autofocus but for a full frame camera little larger than a OMD EM5 its impressive.

I use an A7r mostly on a studio stand and tethered to a computer, the AF and viewfinder is crap compared to a d810 or a 5DIII/ H4D and wouldn’t dream of using the mirrorless as a walk around camera where AF accuracy/speed or a long time looking through a viewfinder were needed

Funny things view finders. When I use my aging a900 I don’t marvel at its world class optical view finder, I get pissed off with the lack of exposure correction, no focus peaking and no magnified view. Equally when I use my a7 I miss the perfect clarity of the a900.

They both have major drawbacks.

Either of you looked through the EVF of the Fuji XT1?

It is pretty impressive.

I’ve just treated myself to my first Digital SLR, a Pentax K50 (VERY similar to a K5ii). Weatherproof body and lens (18-55mm) for only £360 brand new. Pentax are doing a £40 instant cashback deal at the moment.
I chose Pentax as I’ve got lenses from my old film SLRs which will fit. Most other manufacturers have changed their lens mounts moving to AF and then again to digital.
Sony and Olympus are good choices too.