Looking at SLR's

[azcouesandelk]

Starting to look at some digital SLR's and wanting some input on what make and models everybody is using along with pros and cons. I don't have an exact budget in mind, but am willing to spend the extra cash to get what will work best.

[257wby]

I started using a Canon T5i this last year, and the wife has a Canon SL1, which she likes because it is a slightly smaller body. We have had great luck with our Canons, and they are pretty simple to use. Good luck on your search.

[azcouesandelk]

  On 4/19/2017 at 3:47 AM, 257wby said:

I started using a Canon T5i this last year, and the wife has a Canon SL1, which she likes because it is a slightly smaller body. We have had great luck with our Canons, and they are pretty simple to use. Good luck on your search.

Have you ever done any digiscoping with the slr before?

[Red Sparky]

The cost of DSLR's is in the lenses. I bought my daughter a Nikon D3300 for her photography class. She likes it and it takes good pictures and video. Haven't used it to digiscope anything. Basically I think all the cameras have good bodies so find one that is comfortable and then look at the lenses for it.

[Red Rabbit]

Christian, I am assuming you would want to use this for wildlife a lot in addition to family and landscape. I would suggest the Nikon D7200 I think it has the best crop sensor, which is made by Sony. It is a 24MP aps-c sensor. Nikon just announced the D7500, but there are some pluses and minuses with it over the 7200. You can save some coin by buying a refurbished D7200 for under $800 through B&H or Adorama (I am contemplating doing this). The refurbished have a 90 day warranty through Nikon. For lenses, I would get the Nikon 18-140mm and the Tamron 150-600mm G2. Reports are that the Tamron is a little sharper on the long end than the Sigma Contemporary 150-600. Both B&H and Adorama offer the D7200 with 18-140mm as a kit for about $1300 which saves about $300 over the new prices individually.

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=nikon%20d7200&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1277357-REG/tamron_sp_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_di.html

 

If you have the big coin, you could get the Nikon D500 and Nikon 600mm, or the Canon version ;-) I think Canon's best crop sensor body now is the 7D Mark II

[azcouesandelk]

Any opinions on the Nikon D5300? I don't know if I would be ready for a camera like the D7200. Looking for something more on the beginner level to learn everything before I jump in with both feet.

[Chris]

I started with Nikon SLR about 10 years ago. I'm glad to leave that mess. PITA

 

Just PhoneSkope with phone, and HD Mino

[AzDiamondHeat]

My wife also has the d3300 and really likes it. For a non full frame it does really well. Smaller and light weight and takes good pictures indoor and out. Struggles a LITTLE with low light due to crop frame, but barely noticeable. Also has the Tamron 150-600 (as Rabbit mentioned above) and uses it for wildlife. Overall a great setup for an entry-mid dslr. Doesn't break the budget and won't be a tragedy if banged around a bit.

 

If you need more speed or better low light, go with a full frame. Unless you are "pro", you will be hard pressed to see the difference in the pictures though.

[dmoto]

I guess I would ask, what's your objective? Pro quality photos? High end photos but also sacrificing weight? I would agree that a high end full-frame DSLR is nice, however it might be best to really make the large spend in lenses. More specifically, purchase the lowest aperture lens you can afford (eg, Nikon 70-200 f2.8). I've had all sorts of Nikon DSLRs and I love them all.

 

But, more recently....I was turned onto Mirrorless DSLRs. I was very skeptical at first. But ended up finding a smoking deal on B&H for a Samsung NX3000 with a 20-50 lens and a 50-200 lens in a combo kit. I liked the idea of it because it was much smaller to travel with, still took 1080P video, great reviews and also synced up to my phone, tablet, etc in order to sync photos/videos wireless (over wi-fi). Ended up getting that and I took it on a few vacations (including in some shady areas in Miami, Rio and Buenos Aires) along with countless fishing and hunting trips. Needless to say, I much prefer if I'm traveling just due to the amount of weight and bulk I can save over any of my full size DSLR's, but still having the ability to take very high quality photos. If you want some examples of photos, let me know and I can send you some Google Photos links.

 

Granted there are options for Mirrorless DSLRs other than Samsung. Sony, Olympus and Nikon have really stepped up their Mirrorless game.

[azcouesandelk]

Overall I'm looking for a camera that I am able to take higher quality pictures any situation, digiscope and video if needed. I have ran several point and shoot cameras and my phone for digiscoping and many other purposes am never happy with the overall picture quality.

[AZ Southpaw]

  On 4/20/2017 at 2:37 AM, azcouesandelk said:

Overall I'm looking for a camera that I am able to take higher quality pictures any situation, digiscope and video if needed. I have ran several point and shoot cameras and my phone for digiscoping and many other purposes am never happy with the overall picture quality.

 

Not to over-simplify things, but with today's DSLRs, they will all take fantastic pictures as long as you do your part. The lens is more important, but for the average person taking pictures in good light, even the average 'kit" lens will take great pics. And the old cliche is true - it's not what's in front of your camera that creates a great shot, it's what directly behind it. When it comes to the camera body, more money does typically get you a better sensor, but you're really paying for features too.

 

I shoot a Nikon D750 and D610. My main gig is portrait photography, but I enjoy every type of photography including wildlife. I even won a spot in the AZ G&F wildlife calendar a few years back. Not trying to brag, but making a point. A Nikon D3000 would have gotten the same shot as the D610 I used and at a fraction of the price. I have a 70-200 2.8 lens that costs a bunch and would have been fabulous in this situation, but when I was trying to sneak up on a small heard of elk and one of the critters walked up to within 30 yards of me and bed down in decent light, my 70-300 at 1/3 the price got the shot. But, when it comes to camera settings like changing shutter speed, aperture and ISO etc., you might have to go into menus to make some changes with a lesser model camera. With my cameras, I spin wheels without even looking and I'm there, and in a matter of a second or two. When I'm getting paid to shoot an event or a portrait session, that's what I need. Or, if I'm shooting for fun and a deer in the shadows suddenly busts out into the open sunlight, I'm making those changes right now and firing away. Plus, my full frame bodies are a little better in low-light, which I often need for events or at twilight when the animals start to move around.

 

In a nutshell, I'll give you the advice a pro gave me many moons ago. Based on the kind of images you want to capture - figure out what features you want, then figure out how many you can afford. Once you have a list of those cameras, you have to go to a shop and put those bodies in your hands. The one that feels best - that's the one! When it comes to lenses - well, that's a whole other conversation all together!!

[metau]

The money is in the lenses, which is where it should be. I personally have a D7100, great body for a crop censor, but I am sure you would find plenty of reasons to go with the D3300 or D5300 that have already been mentioned. Also, don't be afraid to snag up a great deal on a manual lens. My go to lens for wildlife is a Tamron Adaptall 400mm f/4. I'm also a huge fan of prime lenses. Also, don't be afraid to use a full frame lens on a crop-sensor body.