I used to be a dab hand with SLR cameras back in the 1970's! Now that I am retired, I have the time to do more walking and photography. I gave away my SLR kit to a budding young photographer that I used to know as I never had the time to use it. What recommendations do you "digital" folks have for an oldie to get back into the photography scene. I will probably buy used kit as it may just be a fad at this stage. I used to have a selection of lenses and would like to get to something similar but for use with a digital camera. Thanks in advance.
I'd suggest you take it slowly before investing in too many lenses. Go for something mirrorless as they tend to be smaller and lighter, perhaps with a good walkabout lens (say, 24-105mm or equivalent) to begin with.
Whatever you go for, though, I hope you get masses of pleasure from it.
Tend to agree with Tonys post above, but, just out of curiosity what SLR did you use before? If it was a Nikon their DSLR's are very similar to handle (Certainly like an old 801 or f90X) and I believe Canons have the same attributes. Also older DSLR's tend to be cheaper than the newer mirrorless offerings. Good luck whichever way you go! Cheers, John B4
I’d go for a mirrorless too.
Try an Olympus Em-10 Mk 2 or3 with a kit lens to get off to a good start. Very low cost but great images. I had a mk1 and after several years upgraded to a Sony A7iii but still miss the size of the Olympus, so much I’m in two minds about going back!
Fuji also have some nice cameras.
For Olympus I’d go for a 20mm Panasonic lens, and Olympus 45. The pro lenses are excellent but too much until you’ve made your mind up to stick with it
Edit- this is a great starter with a better camera and pro lens
https://www.wexphotovideo.com/olympu...-used-1746364/
Last edited by craig1912; 27th November 2020 at 19:04.
As others have said What brand SLR did you have - if Nikon you can pick up a cheap DSLR with similar form factor. Dxxxx are very cheap Dxxx are more expensive. Mirrored DSLR may be more familiar with their optical viewfinder
this would be an excellent start
For cropped sensor
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equip...s/sku-1084649/
for full frame (sensor same size as 35mm film)
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equip...0/sku-1069803/
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 27th November 2020 at 20:13.
Fuji mirrorless
There's a Canon 5D III in sales corner at the moment which would be a great camera to get your started.
I'll echo others and say that you should consider other digital options before plumping for a DSLR. However, if you have a specialisation in mind, eg macro, it may make a difference. What sort of photography are you mainly interested in?
i still shoot film with SLR’s, I went down the rabbit hole of film cameras as I was fascinated with them as a youngster, i bought one and it quickly snowballed.
Any way to answer the OPs question, my own favourite SLR is a Nikon F3 HP. I did not have a DSLR but at the beginning of lock down I bought a full frame low shutter count, Nikon D700 and after using a cheap 50mm I bought a used but lastest full frame 35mm f1.8.
Yes it is a old camera, but I watched everyone on you tube raving about it. Picked one up as a go everywhere all weathers camera, absolutely love it. Image Quality is amazing, almost like old film. It’s a blast.
I also own and shoot leica, it’s absolutely amazing but incredibly expensive rabbit hole.
The D700 is amazing, they are still available relatively cheap, so that’s my advice.
They are a lump though.
Go have a look on you tube the recent videos of people jumping on the D700.
Last edited by pastrana72; 27th November 2020 at 20:54.
Another for Olympus. I do live my 12-40 though. Hardly comes off.
I would recommend picking up a last gen full frame camera such as Nikon d700, canon 5d, or Sony a7 depending on your preferences. Which slr do you have ?
From what you posted it looks like you don't have any lenses now and just want to start doing photography again but with a digital camera as opposed to film?
It's a minefield with options and different people will suggest different systems. If you want to really enjoy photography again my advice would be to get something small and reasonably light so that it's not a chore to carry it around with you, whether it's a DSLR or mirrorless camera.
It really doesn't matter which system you get in the end - it's a personal choice and both are good. If the big camera stores reopen after lockdown you could visit one and spend some time trying different systems out to see which cameras you get on with ergonomically and also see how much they cost with lenses.
Originally Posted by tixntox
You should consider budgeting for some image processing software for your proposed camera ... but make sure that any software is compatible with your computer.
dunk
"Well they would say that ... wouldn't they!"
Have a look at Fuji’s cameras, look at XT10 great camera. As mentioned before go fo a good zoom lens.
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Some great suggestions thanks. I used to have a Leica with Zeiss lens ? 35mm film camera, with the slot in lenses. It will be mainly outdoor scenes with some wildlife (birds, seals etc). There's such a wide range that I may have to join a local group after this lot is over! Thanks again for the suggestions. Much appreciated.
Edited to fix "memory blank!"
Last edited by tixntox; 29th November 2020 at 14:25.
Others have suggested a mirrorless camera, I would suggest against it. I was an early adopter of the Sony mirrorless cameras and learnt a lot about photography with them. I have since switched to a Canon DLSR and enjoy it much better. Does it take better pictures? Probably not but the experience is much better, a bit like owning a decent mechanical watch over a fitbit.
I neither understand or agree with that analogy - in fact, I find myself feeling inexplicably strongly about it on the basis that it's a completely unjustifiable position. Can you clarify where you see such a marked difference, or indeed whether you actually understand the difference?
I find the experience of an optical viewfinder much more involving and enjoyable, not better at taking pictures. I feel the same about mechanical watches over digital, but they are not better at telling the time.
Early Sony models had their fair share of quirks and issues (like other mirrorless cameras at the time) but from the A7RII they addressed many of these and produced some excellent cameras, capable of not only going toe to toe with DSLRs in the one area they were always behind (sports, action) but making life very easy for anyone to use them. Being able to view the scene and exposure in real time (even in dark conditions) and real-time tracking eye auto-focus really do let the user just concentrate on the composition.
I don't get the animosity sometimes between DSLR and mirrorless users. I've used both and could easily pick up a DSLR now and use it again, and enjoy it.
I also shoot film and it's like me saying the experience of shooting film is much better (cue the analogy of film/mechanical to DSLR/fitbit).
I don’t disagree with any of that and loved my A7, just making the point that there is a difference. I wish that more lenses were cross system compatible (some are), if that was the case I would own 2 bodies and switch between the 2 systems depending on what I was shooting.
I had to choose one and went with the optical viewfinder and better sports AF system, I guess some high end mirrorless cameras may have improved AF systems now but not changing again.
I’d agree (having grown up with an optical viewfinder). A Sony a7iii or IV are a different beast to early Sony’s.
I think the AF systems on the latest mirrorless are unbeatable agree not everyone needs cutting edge.
Plenty of good advice above. If you are going to be out and about with the kit then weight will be an issue. In that respect mirrorless will probably be most suitable. I don't want to cast aspersions on your age and fitness but I know a number of long-term photographers who are now retired and nearly all of them have made the move from DSLR kit to mirrorless for the weight saving and it hasn't affected the quality of their images. You won't be restricted to smaller sensors either as mirrorless now range from 4/3 all the way up to full frame or even medium format although at those large sizes you won't see the weight saving.
It is a good idea to start with used gear because, if you decide that you don't like the system and change, you won't lose as much money. It is possible to try before you buy as there are companies who rent out equipment so it might be worth going down that route first.
I use the Olympus mirrorless system (micro 4/3s) and am more than happy with it. I do some landscape, more wildlife and a lot of macro and I love the fact that it is small and light (I can squeeze body, macro lens, 70-300mm and a small wide angle in to a 5l camera bag). The micro 4/3 system was jointly developed by Olympus and Panasonic and all lenses will work on all bodies so there is a huge range of gear to choose from and you aren't tied to one manufacturer. There is also a good range of third party lens manufacturers who also use the system. The Olympus bodies (not so sure about Panasonic) all benefit from in built image stabilization too so you can stick on legacy lenses and still benefit from the new technology (although not the auto focus). I have a few old OM lenses which work really well and only cost a few tens of pounds.
Whatever you choose I hope you enjoy getting back into the hobby. You'll find that although the technology has changed alot the theory is still the same.
I understand that, but to someone that has no real knowledge of cameras it’s a completely misleading and inappropriate analogy (hence my annoyance). Current mirrorless cameras are increasingly pushing the boundaries as functional tools and in many ways are more useable than DSLRs.
I think you will find the OP has plenty of knowledge of cameras
My original (first) SLR was a Praktica MTL3 (heavy Russian if memory serves me) and I had 3, screw in lenses (42mm ???). I can remember having to take quite some time in "setting up" the shot! Although I did have light meters, I seem to remember that it had an inbuilt light meter. You "half pressed" the shutter button and if the needle was between two points, you generally got it right! The Zeiss was a revelation. Much more useable and you definitely got what you paid for. Hey-ho. Memories! Thanks to all for the advice. More looking and learning.
Praktica were made in East Germany and a step up from the Russian Zeniths
The most important thing is to just go out and enjoy taking pictures, whether it's with an SLR, DSLR, Mirrorless or mobile phone at the end of the day the 'kit' is just a tool.
totally agree with this – I've got 1000's of ££'s worth of Nikon pro kit sitting upstairs which is an absolutely joy to use, but I also get a real kick out of taking a nice shot of my kids or where I am with my phone – it's the taking the pictures that's important.
Cameras are cool tho'
That's the size of it. Far too many people get wrapped up in equipment and software snobbery. Learning about light and getting out and about and using it is the important bit. Me? I'm still happy to carry the weight of my Canon DSLRs and whatever lens/es and tripod if required.
F.T.F.A.
Spot on.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote