# Which DSLR should I purchase?



## ConfusedOne

For a year I have only been using a iPhone 5C as my camera for taking pictures and I would like to upgrade to a DSLR and to learn its features.
My budget is under $500 and the two cameras I have the most interest in is the Canon 700D and the Nikon D3300.
Any suggestions on which camera would make for a better first DSLR? Thanks in advance.


----------



## stadiou

Neither. 
Spend a little more and buy an Olympus OM-D mirrorless system. More compact, excellent imaging, superb image stabilisation and plenty of scope for expansion as Olympus has a huge system of lenses and accessories available.


----------



## ShaggyDog

Perhaps the first question to ask is what do you want to take photographs of and what sort of photography are you interested in doing? If you can think about that then you can get some advice on what sort of kit you may want to be looking at. Personally speaking, my feeling is that for starting off the actual camera isn't really so important, in that both Nikon and Canon will have a capable camera for you somewhere. But depending on what sort of photography you are interested in doing (ie wildlife with long lenses, street photography with a smaller more stealthy camera, just the occasional family snapshot, etc) that may have more of an influence on what camera to get. Some people may not like this answer, but possibly even a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera might serve your needs (ie M4/3). So let us know what you are wanting to do with it and we might be able to help you even better.


----------



## ConfusedOne

Thank you guys for the responses so far!
I am thinking of doing some photography that will involve pictures of my watch (obviously) as well as pictures of landscapes.
I can't think of anything else that I take pictures of other than these two so it might be categorized as "General Purpose".
I was also wondering if a DSLR would be suitable for video since I have been thinking of doing video reviews as well.


----------



## SeikoAutomatic_01

I can give you a few pointers about DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. First of all, neither Nikon or Canon DSLRs have image stabilisation(IS) in the camera. You have to buy lenses with it, but it's not a big deal since almost all of the newer lenses have it. I know Pentax and Sony have IS in the camera, and some of the mirrorless(can't remember which ones)do. If you plan on using older lenses, Nikon has had the same lens mount since 1959, but there are compatibility issues with older lenses. For the most part they'll mount, but with some camera/lens combos, you'll have limited features. With Canon, almost every lens and camera combo from 1987 will be fully compatible. But Canon changed the mount in 1987 so those wonderful old Canon FD manual lenses cannot be mounted. If you plan on using modern lenses only, I'd go Canon(and you're hearing this from a Nikon guy). Why? Because Canon seems to offer more lenses to choose from these days and many times the Canon version of a lens is less $$$ than the Nikon equivilant.


----------



## innivus

I'll offer an outside-the-box opinion: Pentax. Now, don't get me wrong, if you have a vast sum of money to spend on cameras, pick Canon or Nikon (or Sony's mirrorless, or Leica, etc). But I did a ton of research and with a limited budget, Pentax seems to offer the best bang for the buck under say, $600. One of the better kit lenses you can buy, a weather resistant body, and in-body stabilization, along with better low-light performance. Plus, if you get a bit antsy with lenses, you can always get an older lens to fit the mount. And if you do mostly landscape, the manual focus older lens will often deliver similar enough performance to an expensive modern lens, often for a fraction of the price and cost.

The one thing Canon and Nikon absolutely have over Pentax is focus speed; Pentax takes half a second, Canikons take .1 second. If you're not shooting sports/fast moving objects, doesn't matter.

Anyway, that's my two cents, and I'm a guy who's had them all.


----------



## up1911fan

I got my girlfriend a Cannon T5 Rebel for her birthday. It's within your budget. It takes really nice pictures.


----------



## mharris660

As a photographer I always recommend Nikon because the lenses are a little cheaper than Canon's lenses. In the end it's always about lenses. The bodies basically do the same thing. Now on to bodies. Always, and I mean always buy a body that has the focusing motor built in. If you buy a cheaper DSLR without the focusing motor you'll spend much more on the lenses with motors such as the AF-S series from Nikon. Your first lens should be one of the 50mm f1.8 lenses. Inexpensive, fast and very sharp. Both Nikon and Canon make a nice 50mm lens. The biggest question you should have later on is lenses. To sum up only buy a body with a built in focus motor, never buy the bodies that rely on a motor in the lens. Feel free to ask my any questions, I've been doing this for 40 years.


----------



## mharris660

I also use an OM-D for travel and DSLR's for work. Both are good systems but always factor in the cost of fast mirrorless lenses. They are very expensive.


stadiou said:


> Neither.
> Spend a little more and buy an Olympus OM-D mirrorless system. More compact, excellent imaging, superb image stabilisation and plenty of scope for expansion as Olympus has a huge system of lenses and accessories available.


----------



## blurred

I'm always a Sony fan for some reason..! I'd say start with any of the small mirrorless, they are great for video, lightweight and easy to use, can use pretty much any lens in the world because of the adapters, the more expensive ones now have IS in the body, I think you can't go wrong. An older rx100 migh be a great buy.


----------



## Rolex John

Keep in mind the DSLR body is just the tip of the iceburg...glass will cost you much more. I'm partial to Canon glass.


----------



## m j b

From what I've read and seen, you can't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon. For me, when I went to buy my first, I compared the two and for me it seemed that the Nikon D50 felt more substantial and better built than the Canon Rebel that was similar in price and features, so I went with Nikon.

As stated above, you really want to spend money on the lens, not the body. Most of the new DSLRs now have video, so that shouldn't be a concern. And me personally, I wouldn't worry about the image stabilization features... if you want to take a really good picture, then your camera will be on a tripod.

Don't be afraid to buy lenses used. Common sense and some research will teach you what lens(es) to buy and what to look out for. The reason I'm a fan of used is that you can buy it, and if you don't like it for whatever reason, you should be able to sell it for close to what you paid (less eBay fees and whatnot). The 50mm as mentioned earlier is a great choice for starting out. Macro photography is an entirely different thing.

Buy something, read about how to shoot, and then just shoot, shoot, shoot! Practice. If you're trying something new like playing with exposures, it may be helpful to write down what you are trying to accomplish before shooting, and then you can compare that to the result.


----------



## silvertonesx24

Keep in mind that a mirrorless system (or micro 4/3) will take a different kind of lens than traditional Single Lens Reflex. You can adapt almost any lens to a mirrorless camera due to the short flange distance and cheap readily available adapters but not the other way around


----------



## jmontoya21

Just about any dslr will do what your looking for. Like someone said it depends on what type of photography your looking to do. No camera can do it all regardless of price. Lenses are more important but not as important as what you do with the light available or you the one you create. I would personally recommend any of the nikon d7xxx used. If decide to look into Nikon, check uh angry photographer on YouTube you'll save tons of time picking the right lenses and avoiding junk. 

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gunnar_917

SeikoAutomatic_01 said:


> I can give you a few pointers about DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. First of all, neither Nikon or Canon DSLRs have image stabilisation(IS) in the camera. You have to buy lenses with it, but it's not a big deal since almost all of the newer lenses have it. I know Pentax and Sony have IS in the camera, and some of the mirrorless(can't remember which ones)do. If you plan on using older lenses, Nikon has had the same lens mount since 1959, but there are compatibility issues with older lenses. For the most part they'll mount, but with some camera/lens combos, you'll have limited features. With Canon, almost every lens and camera combo from 1987 will be fully compatible. But Canon changed the mount in 1987 so those wonderful old Canon FD manual lenses cannot be mounted. If you plan on using modern lenses only, I'd go Canon(and you're hearing this from a Nikon guy). Why? Because Canon seems to offer more lenses to choose from these days and many times the Canon version of a lens is less $$$ than the Nikon equivilant.


This is really good advice

just also factor in you can do watch photos with kit lenses but if you want to get up close and personal with the watches you'll end up wanting a macro lens.


----------



## ShaggyDog

Gunnar_917 said:


> This is really good advice
> 
> just also factor in you can do watch photos with kit lenses but if you want to get up close and personal with the watches you'll end up wanting a macro lens.


A close up filter can actually be a good inexpensive alternative to get started with. I use a Hoya close up filter on an inexpensive Nikkor 50 mm 1.8 and the results are pretty good when you stop down a little. Of course I'd prefer to have a Macro but for the price of that set up and it's versatility I have no complaints.


----------



## nhwoods

All the equipment is great and all will take great photographs, some easier then others. Once you buy one, you are pretty committed to that brand. The most important thing is, the person behind the camera.


----------



## nevada1995

You may want to consider a bridge camera. They are known for their incredible zooms, slr features, and video. Canon sx60, Nikon coolpix 5000 and many more.


----------



## ShaggyDog

nevada1995 said:


> You may want to consider a bridge camera. They are known for their incredible zooms, slr features, and video. Canon sx60, Nikon coolpix 5000 and many more.


Personally I wouldn't really recommend a bridge camera to anyone. They are very limited compared to a DSLR, often have very slow lens speeds and small sensors, don't hold their value at all, and there is no room to grow with the system. In some ways they are the worst of both worlds, they have the larger size of a small DSLR (when compared to mirrorless systems) and they have the limited, inflexible nature of a point and shoot.

I think you'd be better off buying an older entry level DSLR with a kit lens over a bridge camera, personally speaking I'd rather use my decade old Nikon D40 with it's unstabilised 18-55mm than a bridge camera.


----------



## innivus

All great advice, and it's tough to go wrong. But the two key factors are what you're looking to do and what the budget is. Start with those considerations, really.

Also, since you're probably trying to get a pretty solid deal, one thing to consider is going through a place like keh.com and pick up some used gear at a pretty nice discount (you can also check out the used sections of adorama and b&h). Most new cameras lose value almost immediately, whereas a four or five year old camera that takes great, great pics can be had for pretty cheap, saving you some money to put towards a nice lens. Plus they usually come with a warranty, or at least the opportunity to return it if you don't like it.


----------



## ConfusedOne

After several days of thinking I plan to make a decision soon.

I do not currently plan on purchasing a mirrorless camera for a few reasons.
The high price and lack of a viewfinder prevents me from wanting to own a mirrorless camera (The Olympus OM-DE M10 Mkii did peak my interest)

That leaves me back to the last two cameras I have narrowed down to: The Canon 700D and Nikon D3400.
Both cameras are $500 or under, similar specs with positives and negatives, and they are both decent for beginners.

I was able to try both out in a store and the Canon was easier to us and the Nikon was more comfortable which leads to a draw.
I plan to flip one of my favorite Morgan silver dollar coins in order to determine which camera I will own in the future.
Again thank you all for the help so far and I hope other beginners in this hobby will find this thread useful.


----------



## ShaggyDog

Ok, so it's now between a Nikon DSLR and a Canon DSLR, and in truth there's probably nothing in it between the cameras. Either one will be great and do what you want. 

So the next step is to decide what system you want to be tied in to, Nikon or Canon. I'd suggest now that you do a little research into the lenses and accessories such as flash that you might need. Looking at the lenses you might need (in the long term) which ones seem cheaper to buy? Do you have any friends or family that are either Canon or Nikon enthusiasts that may let you borrow lenses from that brand for example? Like I say, picking the camera now probably determines which brand you'll be with in the long run, not just with this DSLSR, but the one after it, and the one after that as well if you take to the hobby. Take your time to decide whether you want to be a Canon guy or a Nikon guy in the long run.


----------



## nevada1995

Between canon and Nikon for those two models, I would go with the Nikon. i personally like canon's lineup better over all but I think Nikon did a better job with the d3400.


----------



## nevada1995

ShaggyDog said:


> Personally I wouldn't really recommend a bridge camera to anyone. They are very limited compared to a DSLR, often have very slow lens speeds and small sensors, don't hold their value at all, and there is no room to grow with the system. In some ways they are the worst of both worlds, they have the larger size of a small DSLR (when compared to mirrorless systems) and they have the limited, inflexible nature of a point and shoot.
> 
> I think you'd be better off buying an older entry level DSLR with a kit lens over a bridge camera, personally speaking I'd rather use my decade old Nikon D40 with it's unstabilised 18-55mm than a bridge camera.


Bridge cameras have come a long way, lenses are faster than some of the slr kits lenses in many cases. they also offer an all in one value proposition, who needs additional lenses when you can go from 21mm to almost 1,400mm and higher in some cases. Several have raw files and offer a lot of creative features. I do agree that slr' sand mirrorless cameras offer more lens choices but in reality most people just use the kit lenses. Neither the canon or Nikon entry level cameras will hold value, maybe a good point if we are talking about higher end cameras. i would be fine w using a bridge camera, I had Leica, Hasselblad and all the other major camera makers. No doubt high end slr's are fantastic, fast prime lenses is best. But we are talking about entry level slr kits.


----------



## Arkotika

Canon has my vote (I'm a Canon and Fujifilm user), but as someone else said, Nikon/Canon are both fine. It's a Pepsi/Coca Cola type of choice, really. I did try the 700D a while back, it seems like a solid camera, not least for a beginner. The kit lens is decent, I think, but I'd really recommend an upgrade. I'm mostly a prime lens user (fixed focal length) and can definitely recommend investing in the cheap 50mm and/or an 85mm, especially if you want to make portraits


----------



## Gunnar_917

ShaggyDog said:


> Like I say, picking the camera now probably determines which brand you'll be with in the long run, not just with this DSLSR, but the one after it, and the one after that as well if you take to the hobby. Take your time to decide whether you want to be a Canon guy or a Nikon guy in the long run.


This is very true. Unless you really get into photography there's a strong chance the brand you buy know is tpwhat you'll stay with.

As above, you'll be find with either choice. I just looked up each camera and if anything I'd be leaning to the Nikon as it has a alightly larger sensor but really there's bigger all in it


----------



## ConfusedOne

I went ahead and made my decision and flipped the coin...
Heads for the Canon 700D and Tails for the Nikon D3400.

My decision would have been influenced from my family or friends, but they don't use DSLR cameras.
The Nikon specs and build quality all appear better than the Canon, but their lenses are more expensive than Canon.
The Canon interface was easier for me to use, their lenses are cheaper, and if someone else is using a DSLR it will likely be a Canon.

With all that being said I already flipped the coin and this is the result...









It was a lot of fun reading through your comments and I can't wait to test out all of the settings!
There is also an offer for this camera with two lenses for under $500 which will be useful for my first DSLR!
Thank you all for the help and I will likely be back for more help!


----------



## ShaggyDog

That's great that you've decided which camera you are going to get, I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun with it. Now all you need to do is start looking at which tripod to get


----------



## JesterIzDead

You hit the nail on the head regarding the interfaces. Canon has always been more user friendly while Nikon has been geared towards professionals. With Nikon, you really need to learn the fundamentals of photography. 

Not sure if it's still true, but Nikon always had higher quality optics. As has been noted, you pay for it, though. 

If you haven't already found a good guide, I HIGHLY recommend David Busch. He does guides, both field and full, for most models and really addresses the settings critical to good photography. Happy shooting!


----------



## KrisOK

I would HIGHLY recommend getting Stunning Digital Photography by Tony Northrup. It's been the best selling photography book on the planet for the last several years. He updates it regularly, and backs it up with MANY hours of tutorial videos. He also has a VERY active Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/VistaClues


----------



## conkmwc

It's been said elsewhere in the thread that it's all about the lenses. That's very true. And used camera bodies depreciate while lenses do not. I bought a used Canon 50D and could sell it for nearly what I paid. Save money on the body and spend it on lenses.


----------



## spencer17

Agreed, focus on the lenses now. My recommendation would be to buy good quality prime lenses, but suggest looking at used options. Try Adorama or B&H as they have many good options in the used range.


----------



## russianserg

Simple, compact and easy to use DSLR is a Sony NEX3N, A5000 and for a little bit more cash you get a serious upgrade with the A600.
You can go on ebay and find them for a decent price.

Hope this helps.


----------



## mgc

I have seen recommendations online for the Nikon d3300. I have my wife's hand me down d5100. Not the newest but takes nice pics if I do my part. My wife is a semi pro photographer so she has the full frame cameras


----------



## Brian Gaugler

Nikon DSLRs are insane ban for buck right now. Canon bodies are more expensive for some reason without offerring anything else. I would strongly strongly recommend the D3400. Graet body and tons of inexpensive good lenses to choose from, whereas in mirrorless your wallet is going to take a heavy beating for the same quality.


----------



## KJProX

Hi guys, just found this watch forum a few days ago. Getting into watch collecting.

Seeing this thread caught my eye, it looks like the original poster already bought a Canon DSLR around Christmas time but I'll play along and add my 2 cents. I was in a similar situation less than 2 yrs ago, wanting to get back into photography with DSLR and very limited budget. As a kid in the 60's my dad was a photographer so I grew up around Minolta film SLR's and know my around a camera for the most part.

I had narrowed down my search to the entry level Nikon's and Canon equivalent also. Went to the local camera store (Same place my father had purchased those Minolta's years ago) pretty well set on buying the Nikon D3300. After talking with the sales person they threw a curveball at me and placed a Sony SLT-A58 Alpha series in front of me, I hadn't researched this at all! I listened to the info about it and ended up walking out with Sony.

Reasons why: The body is good and has a ton of features and so do the Nikon and Canon, but the image stabilization is built into the Sony body. Like others have said it's all about the glass (Lenses) and this was biggie in my decision. Because the Alpha series Sony's have the IS built in the lenses are lower cost and you can use any Minolta Maxxum film camera lens from the 80's on. These Minolta lenses are available used all over on the internet for low cost to outright dirt cheap. My current favorite lens I use most of the time is a Maxxum 28 -85mm w/Macro switch lens, it's all glass and metal so very well built and great quality. I paid $10.00 for it! Takes great photo's, better then the Sony kit lens. I've managed to accumulate an arsenal of good lenses for under $300 because of this feature and all the functionality of the camera and lenses work.

Just thought Id throw this one out there as another consideration.


----------



## Wovoka

I'd like to add a couple of rebellious pennies to this conversation, thank you...
Forget the DSLR! Instead, purchase a SUPERZOOM camera. They weigh half that of a DSLR body alone, and have all the bells and whistles you'd ever need. 
We travel a bunch doing wildlife photography. My wife inherited my Canon SX50HS (zooms out to 1200mm) when Canon announced the SX60HS (zooms to 1350mm).
You want pictures of your watch? This camera focuses so close, you must be careful about scratching the lens. 
Took a Canon DSLR to the South Pacific a number of years ago and missed a ton of opportunities, what with lens changes, etc. 
Back home, I sent it to a daughter-in-law to photograph their children. Bought my first SX50HS, took it on African safaris & marveled at the flexibility.
You'll have staunch nay-sayers claiming DSLR lens quality is far better than that of superzooms. Forget it. 
Today's lens technology would require microscopic examination to detect any difference. And cameras like ours have enhanced image stabilization for long shots.
They're all out there - Sony, Panasonic, Nikon, etc., likely just as good as our Canons - to be had in the neighborhood of $400-500.
Oh yeah - one caveat - don't go cheap-oh - get one with a VIEWFINDER - and screw on a UV filter. Modern lenses are already UV-protected but it'll protect your lens...
Happy photographing!


----------



## LeatherneckSD

Dslr is old tech. Get a micro 3/4ths. Its the only camera body tht will be current for long. Remember the best camera in the world is the one you have with you. Soon after you get a dslr and your 3-4 key lenses the novelty wears off and you find yourself saying "I dont want to carry that brick around today". The olm line looks fantastic and if i wasnt alreay $1500 in to lenses and body i'd have one. Also look for local shops that rent gear. It's well worth it to try before tou buy in the real world for around $100.


----------



## Csyoon25

I second all micro 4/3rds suggestions. 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## CayoHuesoVespa

Dslr is great if you plan to use it right and keep using it. These guys are right, If the novelty wears off, your gonna b sorry. Get either a higjer end point and shoot or a mirrorless (micro four thirds. ) I have a Canon 5d m3, 70d and a 7dm2. I have about 20 lenses, a pile of gear, mics, tripods, etc. I can make a full length movie but I take my Panasonic lumix point shoot with me daily for regular use... Its a great camera. Think about your use and go from there.


----------



## CayoHuesoVespa

Oh and a bit about all this banter about Canon vs Nikon. Its apples and apples. Ford and Chevy. All the same with dslr, just personal preference. Both take great professional photos and are used by people in every walk of life. Ones not better than the other. I prefer Canon, its just what I like...


----------



## Norm S

I'm trying to get into photography as well, picked up the Olympus E-M10 Mark ii as my first camera. reviewed as one of the best beginner cameras that have enough functions to grow with you as a photographer. its also small and compact like the other guys said so it'll definitely be easy to carry around daily. 

i do see what some of the guys have said about mirrorless lenses being pricey. since its still pretty new theres just not many lenses out there as opposed to the canon/nikon systems. Sony makes some fantastic stuff but man is it pricey and theres only so many options. the micro four thirds system is interesting though because it was developed joint with olympus and panasonic. you have the most lenses of any mirrorless system and the large amount of options reflects the price points. heck the first lens most people get is a 50mm prime. theres a panasonic 25mm (micro four thirds is doubled so its 50mm) with an aperture of f1.7 (thats pretty good and allows you to shoot photos really quickly) and during a panasonic rebate last year they went for $99. reviews on this lens is through the roof. panasonic also does a lot of joint work with leica so you have some great pro level and other upper ends lenses available too.


----------



## kissmywhat

All the modern cameras are really good, so it really comes down to personal preference. Do you prefer the ergonomics of a DSLR or mirrorless? Which system can you navigate through easily? How expensive are the lenses you're likely to want?

Personally I went with a Canon DSLR because I found it easiest to use and most capable with old M42 lenses from eBay. If I wasn't really happy with the Canon it probably would have been an Olympus OMD.


----------



## 69mach351

My wife bought me the Nikon D7100 not too long after the D7200 came out. She was able to get a better deal on it because of that and TBH, it is more camera than I will ever need. I have taken a few classes, but it is still way too advanced for me.


----------



## indigo22

stadiou said:


> Neither.
> Spend a little more and buy an Olympus OM-D mirrorless system. More compact, excellent imaging, superb image stabilisation and plenty of scope for expansion as Olympus has a huge system of lenses and accessories available.


yeap!
i have a OMD and it's amazing for the form factor


----------



## ConfusedOne

Hey guys! Just wanted to update this thread with more current thoughts.
When I made the decision to choose the Nikon D3400 as my main camera I ended up finding a good deal on a watch instead...

Since then I continued looking for a camera and saw a Sam's Club deal for the main camera including 2 lenses for $199!
I did not have the money at the time so I took a picture of the deal hoping that it would still be in place.
Came back about a week later and it was back to the normal price of $599 for the bundle.
When I reached out to an associate they said they could not honor it because it was a typo.

I know it is not Nikon's fault, but it definitely put me off buying a Nikon camera and it allowed me to do even more research.
Since then I did more research on the Sony A6000 and the Olympus OM-D E-M10 MKII because I think I would carry around a smaller camera more often.
Between the two I think it would have to be the Olympus due to the great selection of lenses, small size, and cheaper lenses.
I recently found one used for a pretty great price and I plan on saving up enough money to own it soon!


----------



## A MattR of Time

Nikon P900

This will get you going until you are at the level of needing a DSLR.

The built in OPTICAL zoom on this thing is phenomenal.

See the lion by the gate?


----------



## Southtown57

Any possibility to save up some more for a higher end DSLR? If not either Nikon or Canon will work. Just try to put some money into some good glass.


----------



## Tekniqs

general recommendations I read when I was trying to decide what camera to buy was to look at the lens system you want to buy in to. A lot of said to go with cheaper body so you can have money left over to buy a good lens/some good lenses to start with.


----------



## maysatanong

now i love sony mirrorless, high quality,and smaller


----------



## ConfusedOne

Final Update!!! I hope...
I was about to purchase the Olympus OM-D E-M10 MKII, but it sold out before I had the chance.
I waited a little while longer for a deal to take my interest, however the only deal I have seen is the Fujifilm XT1 for $800 (Over budget for me).
I checked the Olympus shop again and found the Olympus OM-D E-M10 for only $200 and I took the deal!
I waited one week for any notification and still nothing even though it said it would only take 2 business days.
I called them up to see the status of the order and they told me they did not have any in stock because it was refurbished.
They also said I would have to wait 1-2 more weeks for the camera to hopefully be in stock...I was not going to wait that long so I cancelled the order.

I do need to clarify that the Olympus Tech Support was helpful for the most part.
As of today I found a great deal via a reliable seller on eBay for a Sony a6000.
I went with this camera because it was $200 cheaper than the Olympus and it has better specifications than the Olympus as well!
It will suck not using a touch screen and paying more for lenses, but I will be able to better understand photography.


----------



## Sillygoose

Congrats on the camera purchase! Please share your photos once you get clickin'. =)

- Tappy Talkied


----------



## Nanook65

Honestly there is not one modern camera out there that is not capable of taking really nice pics in capable hands. I still have an ancient body (Canon 40D) and with it and some good glass I can take some amazing pics. There are more used Canon lenses out there than any other so that is something to consider. I personally started out with canon so I find their menu system easier but that is just me. I think if I were starting out I would get an old cheapie body and 1 really nice lens that was most appropriate for what I wanted to take pics of. For watches, the lens I use most is a 100mm 2.8 macro lense. I have heard others say a 50mm 2.8 macro is good as well, but I don't have experience with that


----------



## Nanook65

Here are some pics I just took today with my 40D Canon. It is a 10 yr old body. Everything today would run circles around this thing, but like I said..... In capable hands 
These are all straight out of the camera. No editing what so ever.


----------



## ConfusedOne

Final Update!

I finally found a great deal on a mirrorless camera and purchased it!
It was the Sony a6000 and I bought it for under $500.

During this time the Olympus OM-D E-M10 MKIII was released, however the only update was for video with 4K capability.
Sure it is technically better than the Sony in many ways, but the image sensor size and megapixels are still better on the Sony.
I hate how expensive the lenses for Sony are compared to Micro Four Thirds, but I will just have to deal with it.
I don't know how to use it effectively yet, but there are plenty of tutorials online to help me.
I am certain I won't need a new camera in the future for quite sometime either and again thank you all for the help you have given me!


----------



## wolfpack1995

Mirrorless cameras are great, Olympus om-d or Sony.


----------



## Toothbras

You spelled BLNR wrong


----------



## cundall23

ConfusedOne said:


> Final Update!
> 
> I finally found a great deal on a mirrorless camera and purchased it!
> It was the Sony a6000 and I bought it for under $500.


I bought the a6000 about a few months ago and am really happy with it. I stuck with the kit lenses until just this week just to get a feel for the camera. I still mostly use it in one of the full auto modes because I'm still learning the camera. I would recommend picking up David Busch's guide book for the Sony a6000. It was recently reprinted and is very helpful (it was ridiculously priced until the reprint).


----------



## KJProX

ConfusedOne said:


> Final Update!
> 
> I finally found a great deal on a mirrorless camera and purchased it!
> It was the Sony a6000 and I bought it for under $500.
> 
> During this time the Olympus OM-D E-M10 MKIII was released, however the only update was for video with 4K capability.
> Sure it is technically better than the Sony in many ways, but the image sensor size and megapixels are still better on the Sony.
> I hate how expensive the lenses for Sony are compared to Micro Four Thirds, but I will just have to deal with it.
> I don't know how to use it effectively yet, but there are plenty of tutorials online to help me.
> I am certain I won't need a new camera in the future for quite sometime either and again thank you all for the help you have given me!


Congrats on the purchase, good camera!

Biggest thing with any camera is use it, practice with it, lean it. Tons of Youtube and web sites out there on becoming better and what settings do what all for free.


----------



## 0seeker0

^^^^ This! Play with it and see what changing certain settings do when you take pictures, that’s how I learned my first dslr, along with youtube.


----------



## Nanook65

ConfusedOne said:


> ......
> I don't know how to use it effectively yet, but there are plenty of tutorials online to help me......


Join DPReview or FredMiranda (just 2 good ones) or another Photo geek website. Practice, use the search (fn) & ask questions. They will steer you in the right direction.


----------



## vintage_collectionneurs

After hitting the 40k shutter count on my old Fuji camera, I finally upgraded to a Sony A7Rii over the weekend. This is my first Sony camera and I am really impressed by Sony, the camera is both compact and full of amazing new features. I figured since I am moving onto a full frame I best pair it with decent lenses and moved to a set of Zeiss lenses. Whilst not cheap, it is definitely worth it in my opinion as the sharpness of the photos is just at a whole new level. And it really helps that there is a big community of Sony A7 users who share tips and videos online which makes my learning journey a lot easier too.



KJProX said:


> Congrats on the purchase, good camera!
> 
> Biggest thing with any camera is use it, practice with it, lean it. Tons of Youtube and web sites out there on becoming better and what settings do what all for free.


----------

