Quantcast

Photography moankies!

KenW449

Thanos did nothing wrong
Jun 13, 2017
2,469
268
Floating down the whiskey river...
I am looking to get a DSLR camera in the future. I am looking at either a Canon T7i or 77D. I know the 77D is better but the T7i has 2 UI, one for noobs like me that explain everything as you go, or the standard. That's more appealing to me than anything the slightly better functions. Any experience to pass down? It will just be for hobby, nothing serious so i don't feel like i need something like an 80D.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
27,307
2,122
What glass are you going to use? If the answer is "the kit lens" then drop the idea altogether.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
27,307
2,122
Gotcha,

Im open to suggestions. Wide angle, telephoto, and whatever lens for general pictures. My budget will be under 1k.
The body is just the start. Good lenses in the Canon world:

24-70/2.8L or 24-105/4L IS
50/1.2L, 1.4, or 1.8
85/1.8
135/2L
70-200/2.8L (skip the /4 for long lenses)

...

I recommend you look at the Sony mirrorless options if you're starting anew.
 

HardtailHack

used an iron once
Jan 20, 2009
2,358
243
I have grown up in a Canon family but I am a bit retarded and find their shit to mid level cameras infuriating to use. My memory sucks and I have trouble remembering and navigating their menu systems and on the low end stuff you have to menu dive for very commonly used functions.

I did a bunch of research and ended up with a Pentax KP, I haven't had to open the manual and I struggle to fault the camera. You can run lenses from when Jesus was a lad too as the mount has stayed the same so you can buy some cheap old manual lenses and work out what focal lengths you need.

I will say that a Canon or Nikon at the same price point is most certainly better than mine in outright picture quality but with either of them I would have missed a lot more shots. With the Pentax I just have to spin a dial or thumb wheel to get my mode/settings right rather than hit the quick menu and stuff around. Also the apeture/shutter priority mode is tits, camera spends 3/4 of it's time in that mode.
 

Mo(n)arch

Turbo Monkey
Dec 27, 2010
4,203
1,127
Italy/south Tyrol
I‘d say skip DSLRs. Mirrorless is actually the future and Sony is really strong in that department.
Sigma and Tamron are building E-mount lenses right now so you don‘t have to stick just with the Sony offerings.
What‘s your budget?
 

KenW449

Thanos did nothing wrong
Jun 13, 2017
2,469
268
Floating down the whiskey river...
I‘d say skip DSLRs. Mirrorless is actually the future and Sony is really strong in that department.
Sigma and Tamron are building E-mount lenses right now so you don‘t have to stick just with the Sony offerings.
What‘s your budget?
Just under 1k. The thing i dont like about mirrorless is how they feel in my hands. They are a bit small.

I have trouble remembering and navigating their menu systems and on the low end stuff you have to menu dive for very commonly used functions.
Thats why i was looking at the T7I. It still has the menu, but it has a noob menu and touchscreen to help learn what things do.
 

Serial Midget

Al Bundy
Jun 25, 2002
12,737
1,427
Fort of Rio Grande
As a counterpoint, mirrorless cameras are not the future - they are the here and now of digital imaging, there is nothing revolutionary or new about the technologly, remember the Canon Powershot? Mirrorless.

What I would be more concerned about is sensor size, for professional work I prefer a full frame sensor versus a crop frame sensor, I am not aware of any mirrorless or DSLR under 1K that has a full frame sensor. In that sense neither is superior to the other as a camera body but the DSLR still has more options available to suit the needs of individual users while mirrorless is more like a one size fits most with limited options.
 

Serial Midget

Al Bundy
Jun 25, 2002
12,737
1,427
Fort of Rio Grande
I wont be using it for professional anything. Just something better than a phone.
Then, in my opinion, there is no need to spend anywhere near 1K, my knock about camera is a Nikon D3400 similar to this bundle but with 2 batteries. Its lightweight, versatile and easy to use, it has a mirror which is helpful when using the viewfinder instead of the lcd display for motion shots, takes a million pictures with one battery charge, I found it offers a lot of value for the modest price. I bought mine at Sams Club for $750 but they are less expensive now.

My good camera is a Canon EOS MK11 which has a larger sensor (although not full frame) and 64pt auto focus points, I am a fan of canon lenses so this works good for me, if you don't have access to Canon lenses its not a good choice. My camera body alone was in the $1500.00 range and the package only included a battery and charger, lenses sold separately.

If you can talk yourself into $1,400.00 I suggest a Nikon D750 bundle... try to find last year's model for a better deal.
 

HardtailHack

used an iron once
Jan 20, 2009
2,358
243
Thats why i was looking at the T7I. It still has the menu, but it has a noob menu and touchscreen to help learn what things do.
Yeah easy to use menus are nice but not having to go to the menus is better, I like dials and most cheap cameras omit one or two compared to pro level stuff. If I was going mirrorless the only camera I like the look of is the OM-D E-M5 Mark II a friend has the Mk1 and it is really easy to use, takes nice shots and the Olympus lenses feel very nice in use. I bought a Fuji after reading all the bro stoke on the internet and I absolutely hated it so it lives in the car as a just in case I have a crash camera.

Pentax KP DSLR with a 40mm, Fuji shitburger with a 18mm, and an old Ricoh GR compact which is 18mm and was a nice little camera but it became my drunken shenanigans cam so the sensor is covered in pocket lint. Apologies for the crap pic.
Cameras.jpg



Also, there is nothing wrong with zoom lenses when you are learning( a lot of pros seem to use them too), you miss less shots, save a bunch of money and get less rubbish on your sensor as you change lenses less often. People always like to suggest that they are shit much like audio buffs chiming in and saying that anything without valves is shit, normal people want convenient stuff and there is nothing wrong with that.

Shot on the Pentax with a cheap Sigma tele at 400mm(600 equiv), I know it's not a great shot but I was happy with it as it was handheld at 1/160th and 2500ISO.
Top Fuel.jpg
 
Last edited:

KenW449

Thanos did nothing wrong
Jun 13, 2017
2,469
268
Floating down the whiskey river...
I have decided on the Canon 80D as its weather sealed and i can grow into it. There are times where I'm out on a boat for work and need the camera to not get FUBARed on the first time out. I'd go Nikon but the D7200 doesn't have an articulating screen that i want. Not hugely concerned about low light difference, or mono vs stereo recording as i can get an external mic. The 7500 isn't really backwards compatible with old glass so it would be really expensive to get new stuff for it. Plus no UHS-II type support for 4k SD cards even though it can record in 4k.
 

Mo(n)arch

Turbo Monkey
Dec 27, 2010
4,203
1,127
Italy/south Tyrol
Low light situations are the one area where DSLRs significantly outperform mirrorless but, if you are not enlarging or selling prints, it probably doesn't matter. Good shot anyhow.
Actually it has more to do with sensor size and quality then the actual system (mirror or mirrorless). The only exception are the Sonys with half transparent mirrors. They actually loose some low light performance due to the loss of light in the camera. They notoriously performed worse in low light then their Canon and Nikon rivals.
Their mirrorless systems are completely different animal though.

In general the bigger and better the sensor, the better the low light performance.
But yeah, unless you are selling big prints of low light sports shots it probably won't matter.
 

binary visions

The voice of reason
Jun 13, 2002
21,668
418
NC
Anyone ever use the previous model of these? I don't want because i looks gimmicky.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pictar-pro-dslr-your-smartphone#/
I just can't imagine any good reason for this device.

The entire purpose of a phone camera is that it's portable and you always have it with you. A phone's camera is a poor substitute for a larger device, but it's a great compromise to always have a camera in your pocket.

So you're going to take the poor imaging capabilities of that tiny sensor and lens but... attach a large, bulky grip to it so that it doesn't fit in your pocket as well? So your phone's camera is now just as mediocre as it used to be, but it's now less portable? Why?

Just buy a small pocket camera, or a micro 4/3 camera.
 

KenW449

Thanos did nothing wrong
Jun 13, 2017
2,469
268
Floating down the whiskey river...
So you're going to take the poor imaging capabilities of that tiny sensor and lens but... attach a large, bulky grip to it so that it doesn't fit in your pocket as well? So your phone's camera is now just as mediocre as it used to be, but it's now less portable? Why?
What i was thinking. Seems pointless. I guess those that rave about it, have money to throw away at such things. I do, however, like the cameras on my phone. They take great pictures for what they are. Still going to get a "real" camera though.