Hello photographers and camera nerds: I'm considering a new camera and I've been out of the camera "scene" for a while, so I could use some advice. Our wedding and honeymoon are coming up soon, and I want to be able to take decent pictures on our honeymoon. Here's what I want/need: -something better than my Galaxy S5 Camera and my current Canon Elph 300HS --Honestly, the Galaxy S5 doesn't take bad pictures, but I know a dedicated camera can do much better. I've noticed that some of the main downfalls of the S5 are low light situations and white balance in bright light. -Current "need" is for photos of us and scenery on our honeymoon. -In the future, I would use the camera when I travel. -I could also potentially see myself taking photos at autox. -I'm a noob when it comes to photography and all the programmable settings. I'd like something that has a solid "Auto" mode, but also has programmable settings for me to learn and grow into. -Budget: ?? Ideally, under $500. I'm open to a DSLR, but I also have read a little bit about these new mirrorless cameras. Otherwise if I can get great photos out of a compact point and shoot, I'd consider that too. For example: I see that you can find the Nikon D3300 for about $400 (one lens), or $500 with two lenses. I also saw that Best Buy has a sale on the Nikon 70D for $1,000 (with 18-55mm lens). For my amateur skill level, would the 70D be a total waste, and would the D3300 be more than adequate? I'm definitely open to other brands and non-DSLR also...I'm just using this as an example. Thanks in advance!
These are the top things I would think about when making this decision: What are you going to use the photos for? If it's just for Facebook/digital then your phone is probably fine and will be much more convenient. If it's for digital and small prints then it would be worth it to step up to decent point and shoot. If you want large format wall hangers, then get a DSLR or mirrorless. How likely are you to carry it around and/or use it while out and about? It's not worth it to get a DSLR if it will end up sitting in your hotel room 90% of the time. For me personally I will usually end up with a point and shoot while on vacation. I own 4 DSLR's and many lenses, but I don't bring them around because it's just too much hassle (especially now with kids). A camera phone is probably fine if you just want to use the photos for Instagram/Facebook. But if you want to print, it is a noticeable step up in quality with a decent point and shoot. This is especially evident in low light (which you already mentioned). Here's a low light shot from my last vacation. I considered using just a camera phone on our last family trip but I did some side by side test shots around the house and the point and shoot still wins out by a noticeable margin. I have a Canon S120. I believe it was around $300-400 new, but it appears to be discontinued now. I'm not sure how your current point and shoot stacks up, but I think the S-series is probably a step up. For larger prints the point and shoot I have looks good to around 8x10 but is a bit lacking after that (compared to a DSLR). So, that's what I recommend for vacations, BUT a decent DSLR or mirrorless is well worth it in the long run (in my biased opinion). But it's only worth it if you're willing to learn about all the settings and editing that goes along with making a good photo. If you just plan to leave it on Auto and not do any editing, then it's mostly a waste of money and a good point and shoot will likely be fine. But when pushed (fast motion, even lower light, etc) then the DSLR can come out far ahead (when used properly). I'd also consider looking used if you're serious about getting a good camera. You can get a lot more for your money. $500-1000 on Craigslist could get you a pretty good (older) body and lens (as long as you don't get murdered).
I would not suggest buying a DSLR unless you plan on doing the following: 1. Investing money in lenses that are at least decent, because the "kit" lenses are cheap (hundreds to thousands of dollars) 2. Investing money in photo editing software (hundreds of dollars) 3. Investing a LOT of time in learning how to use the camera (hundreds of hours, I've educated several people at $25-30/hr just on the basics of Exposure - Aperture/Shutter/ISO) I see WAY too many people buy a DSLR and then leave it in a closet because they don't have the time to learn how to use it correctly and consequently aren't happy with the pictures that they get from it. A DSLR with a kit lens on Auto settings is a complete waste. You'll be just as happy (if not happier) with your pictures if you get a small point and shoot. If you don't believe me, rent a basic DSLR and a kit lens for 3 days and see what you can do with it. Including cameras, lenses, flashes, equipment/gear, software, memory cards, computer storage, etc., I probably have somewhere around $8k invested in photography since I started in 2006, and I definitely don't have all of the "best" gear. A $500 budget to take some "fun" pictures on a DSLR won't make you happy. Sorry for being a debbie downer, but I've seen this happen to way too many friends. Get a small Point&Shoot.
@xluben and @mike4king Thank you both for your input! Your comments are inline with what I was expecting. I do absolutely aspire to get into photography, take some classes, and learn the "basics of exposure", but I also realize that I currently have a lot of other hobbies, and that I barely have time for my existing hobbies. So therefore, you're right, I probably wouldn't use a DSLR to it's full potential. I've joked that I'm saving the photography hobby for a midlife crisis and/or retirement...I figure anyone at any age can take photos and get educated about photography, whereas I won't be too interested in jumping off cliffs with skis strapped to my feet at an older age Ben - I actually also did a little comparison shoot yesterday between my Canon Elph300HS and my Galaxy S5. Here are some comparisons: Canon Elph 300HS Galaxy S5 Canon: S5: Canon: S5: Canon: S5: Canon: S5: In general, I tend to prefer the Galaxy S5 photos, because the colors seem to "pop" more. Whether or not that is over exposed/enhanced (or whatever you call it), they seem to look better than the camera photos. The detail is noticeably better in the camera pics, but that is expected because the S5 is a 16 megapixel, and my camera is only a 12 megapixel. If I put my camera if "vivid" mode, I can get the colors to pop. Here is an example: Now, that color is obviously obnoxiously over enhanced....but perhaps I could adjust some of the camera settings in the regular shooting mode for more color "pop", but not too extreme? Any suggestions? Or is that where photoshop comes in? I'd rather not have to edit every single photo. Finally, looking at Canon's "point and shoot"...their G series look nice, but they are all still in the $500+ range. Still overkill for me? Their PowerShot Elph line are much cheaper, but I don't want to end up with something that is a tiny upgrade over what I currently have.
Jordan - I 100% prefer the camera phone shots over that point and shoot in every case (except the "Vivid" one). The point and shoot looks to be very soft and lacking contrast. It almost looks as if the lens is dirty, or just very poor quality. The camera phone shots are crisp and have good contrast. To some extent this is due to the in camera (or phone) processing. The cell phone shots definitely have a considerable amount of sharpening and auto contrast adjustment (may be too much if printed). You could probably get the point and shoot photos looking somewhat like the camera phone with some processing, but if you don't want to edit every photo then the camera phone will probably be preferable compared to that point and shoot. I greatly dislike the "Vivid" photo and I don't think it should ever be used for a shot with people in it. It might look OK if it's a landscape photo, but even then I would be very wary of it. If you are interested in learning more a G series would be a great place to start. It's bigger than a normal point and shoot but it can still fit in your pocket. The real benefit is that it has great controls. They are a step towards what you'd see in a DSLR. It's a great way to learn without spending a lot or doing too much fiddling with lenses. Or if you just want the best point and shoot and leave it in auto mode, it will work for that too. When my wife and I went to Europe I brought a G12 as my only camera. I was very happy with how the shots turned out and it was pretty convenient while traveling. The articulating screen is great for selfies. Haha. Now it's just been sitting around. I originally paid $600, but I'd be willing to let it go for much cheaper if you're interested. Here are some touristy photos from our trip as well as some current shots of the camera. More photos of the camera here: http://www.benjohnsonphotography.com/Other/Camera-Equipment/Canon-G12/n-Q9zLS/i-L98Xq6Q
Ben, two questions...The Eiffel Tower taken from a low angle (the one with the grass in the foreground), how do you get a shot of an attraction like this during the day without getting any people in the picture - Photoshop them out? Secondly, the last pic with the tilt-shift effect...does the G12 have that built in to it?
Just go for it... http://www.samys.com/p/Used-Digital...oduct-search&gclid=CKfev46x0MwCFQEdaQod20oD6w
The G12 does have tilt shift processing built in. I only used it for a couple shots from high up. For the Eiffel Tower shot I didn't Photoshop anyone out. We just moved further and further back, waited for the right time, and also shot from a very low angle behind a little berm. There were tons of people around, but as long as anyone wasn't really close to the camera I could hide them behind that little hill. This was from up closer: This was from the exact same spot as the shot with no people visible, but from a little higher up.
There's a trick to doing that http://toomanyadapters.com/how-to-remove-people-travel-photos-photoshop/
I totally agree on the "Vivid" photo and you are spot on about the contrast (that's the word I was looking for). I did actually try cleaning the lens on my point and shoot (it did have some dust on it) and I took a couple more comparison shots right after cleaning, but the difference was still the same. Thanks for the advice on the G series and providing the sample photos - they look great! I may actually consider your G12, however I sort of want something with more megapixels. I'm sure you'll go on to tell me that megapixels aren't everything, especially if I'm not blowing up the photos. But I wouldn't mind having the option to print and frame some 8x10 shots from our trip, so having more megapixels might be better.
I think that Point and Shoot you have may just be very low quality and/or outdated. 10MP will print at 300dpi (ie. best quality) up to 8x12. I have some of those vacation shots printed at 8x12 hanging in my house. You can even print up to 16x20 or so if you're willing to drop down to 200dpi (which will still look very good). It never hurts to have more MP though!
Ok, so I'm diving more into camera research. Work productivity....declining. Oops. What I'm gathering is that the image sensor is important (duh), and the larger the better. Also, when looking at the aperture, typically lower is better because you can capture more light and use a faster shutter speed. Looking at the Canon line (my current camera is a Canon, so I feel somewhat familiar), I'm leaning towards the G9x or the G7x. Both have a 1 inch CMOS sensor, and seem to have a fairly small size (I still need to check them out in person). It seems like the slight edge on the G7x is that the maximum aperture is f/1.8, whereas the G9x is f/2.0. I'm not sure that small of a difference is worth the size penalty to get the larger, and more expensive ($180 more), G7x. The G7x also does have a slightly larger zoom and multi-angle LCD. I need to see them both in person to get a size comparison. The Sony RX-100 ii also seems to be a popular choice. Although I used to be a huge Sony fanboy, I've shied away from their products. Perhaps I should consider it? Any other models in this arena that I should consider?
My friend has a sony camera not sure on the model I can ask but he very much enjoys it and is a semi novice on it like you are.
Also, I did some more testing with my Elph300 last night, and I think it does indeed do better than my S5 in low light. I experimented with some of the ISO, shutter, exposure settings, etc settings and it actually does a lot more than I thought! One quick question - the Canon (and S5) has an exposure scale in manual mode that allows you to adjust the exposure from -2 to +2, darker to lighter. Is that setting basically adjusting all of the different settings automatically (iso, shutter speed, f/) to darken or lighten the photo?
Those cameras both look like awesome options. I haven't looked into point and shoot's much lately, but that large sensor is going to be great for photo quality (compared to older point and shoot cameras). I don't think the aperture should make or break the decision. The zoom range and flip out LCD are both preference. I'd also consider the controls. The G7X is much more like the G12 (more dials, faster) and the G9X is more menu-based. The exposure compensation settings will have some sort of algorithm like you described, but it's hard to know what it will end up changing without playing around with it. It's likely programmed to try and keep all the settings in a "reasonable" range. Learning to manually control these settings will allow you to get better shots in the tougher conditions. In good light the "auto" setting will likely work fairly well.
I recently took the plunge into the full-frame DSLR pool and am a noob, so I will always defer to the pros on here, but in my opinion the major thing you want to consider when picking a camera is ease of use - if you hate using it you will be less inclined to use the camera and just pull out your phone. I would choose a camera with a view finder in addition to a display as it will make shooting outdoors much easier. Being an eyeglass wearer complicates this a little as I hate looking through a view finder with my glasses on, so you might want to check out how easy it is to see the complete image in the view finder if you wear glasses. I prefer physical dials and switches over using a menu to change commonly used settings (for this reason alone I almost popped for a Nikon Df, but didn't). Mirrorless systems seem to be all the rage, but for casual photo taking, changing and juggling lenses seems to be a real pain - I would opt for a bridge (sometimes called a superzoom) camera just for ease of use. We have had two Sonys, a compact and a bridge and they have been trouble free. Stick with Canon, Nikon, or Sony and you can't really go wrong. You can over think and research this topic to death, so just find one you are comfortable with at a price point you like and don't look back. Technology marches on and it will be obsolete soon anyway. Or you will drop it.
Thanks Ben. I am leaning towards the G7x, and the Sony RX line looks compelling too. There are tons of comparison reviews online and each has their advantages. I just need to decide what is important to me, along with the size factor. The S120 looks smaller and like it still has great capability. On the exposure setting - yea, it was neat to play with that setting, along with the individual settings. I even did some bracketing last night (look out, I'm using photography terms now!) and it was very insightful to see the photo differences and compare the settings the camera picked. Edit: it looks like the outer ring on the G7x is an automatic "exposure" setting dial, and it seems like a lot of other point and shoot cameras have that option. It looks like your G12 has that same setting ring too. Is that the case, or am I interpreting that wrong? I think I need to get into a store and check some of these out. Definitely agree on the bold comments! Doing all of this research makes me really want to learn more, take some classes, and even consider a mirrorless or DSLR...but I also have to be realistic in that I will be much more likely to actually bring and use a compact camera that fits in a pocket. These compact cameras with large sensors do seem to be a great starting tool for learning and adjusting settings to create great photos before taking the big plunge.
Set aside a few hours, go to a National Camera Exchange, and try shooting with each candidate until you pick the winner!
I also have a Canon S110. It is very similar to the S120. I find the image quality is similar to the G12 and it's much slimmer so I end up using it a lot more. The G12 has much better controls, but for vacation use I find I can make due with the menu style controls. The G7x or G9x has a much bigger sensor than the S120 or G12 and will do much better in low light. Yes, the exposure compensation can probably be configured to be set with the dial around the lens, but the G7x actually has a separate dial for this. This would be a good use for that dial on the G9x.
This brings me back to my Photography 1 and 2 classes eons ago. They wouldn't let you into class unless you had a SLR camera to learn the basics of exposure and light readings. BUT, that was because we had to learn how to develop film and all that fun stuff. I'm sure not everyone has access to a dark room and all the chemicals for developing and processing. DSLR's take all the fun out of photography! Getting dirty, taking a ton of pictures for that one good shot that's going to turn out, huffing in toxic chemicals, and not being able to photochop everything. Congrats on the wedding and have fun on the honeymoon! *I'm sure you know, but if you buy used, CAREFULLY make sure there are no scratches on either side of the lenses.
I finally made a decision. With the wealth of information on the internet, it's easy to over-research and start thinking you want something more than what you really need. I narrowed it down to the Canon G7x, G7x mark ii, G9x, and Sony RX100 iii. I ultimately chose the Canon G9x: Top reasons why: -Small size, should be easily pocketable -Same 1" image sensor as G7x and RX100 iii -Has manual controls. Although they will be not as easy to set (due to lack of dials) as the G7x or G9x, I doubt that I will frequently use manual settings away. This camera will be a nice intro for me to learn how to use the manual controls, and I also won't feel guilty using it in auto mode. -Only slightly less zoom than that G7x, and I rarely use zoom. -Price: only $400, with free accessory bundle (case, 32GB SD card, tripod, software, cleaning kit). If I were to get the G7x, I would have waited for the Mark II, which will be $700. So to me, that's a $300 savings. Compared to the RX100 iii, it's a $400 savings. I'll take that extra cash and get myself a GoPro for the trip Overall, I realized that I truly wanted a pocketable point and shoot, and that it would almost be a waste to spend $600+ on a point and shoot. Yes, the G7x and RX100 are great cameras, but they really are not that pocketable, and I also doubt that I will use the manual controls extensively. I'd rather get a mirrorless camera (solid mirrorless cameras can be had for around $500 for the body) in the future that will blow any point and shoot out of the water, especially when paired with a good lens. The camera should arrive next week, right before my annual fishing trip. Perfect time for me to experiment!
Good choice. I think that's what I would have gone with as well. Being able to easily pocket it is huge for me in a vacation camera. I'd look into trying to understand the basic settings and use a semi-auto mode like Av. As far as the GoPro, I'd look into some of the generic ones out there. I have a couple cheap ones and I'm really happy with them. Better quality than my outdated GoPro. They come with a pile of mounts. I have a couple of these: http://www.amazon.com/Lightdow-LD4000-Sports-Action-Camera/dp/B00X9Y2NFY/ They also have a WiFi version, but I don't feel I need that feature. http://www.amazon.com/Lightdow-LD6000-Sports-Action-Camera/dp/B00XC46RWG/
Thanks Ben, and thanks again for the help in choosing a camera. I found a good size comparison, and the G9x is actually less than 2mm thicker than the S120, and is 2mm narrower: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56617732 For the GoPro, I found refurbished Hero 3+ Silver's on ebay for $150, so I might go that route. I need wifi for connecting to my autox data logger, and I'm also not sure if a non gopro camera would work...I might look into that because the ones on Amazon are much cheaper.
I'm starting to read up on the photography basics, and there are millions of online resources that are hard to sift through. Does anyone have some good learning resources (either online or books) that you would recommend?
This one was my school book (MCAD), albeit mine was 7th edition, same authors, TONS of useful info. http://www.amazon.com/Photography-11th-Barbara-London/dp/0205933807
I've had a chance to test out my Canon G9x. Here are a few of my favorites: IMG_0222 by golfer_7_18, on Flickr The Milky Way Galaxy: IMG_0324 by golfer_7_18, on Flickr IMG_0372 by golfer_7_18, on Flickr IMG_0481 by golfer_7_18, on Flickr And more here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/23303587@N03/with/27410322736/ I still have much to learn, but it has been fun in the process!
I always thought that it was amazing what a camera can pick up and enhance beyond the human eye, as in that sky picture. Nice pics there!
