good camera for the aspiring photographer?

[rozzi]

I have some serious problems, im not the biggest camera buff, ive tried doing alot of research.

The things I do know is, I dont need any $1,000 and up camera, im not professional, my main audience is traveling, taking pictures of local bands (low light and quick shutter because they might be running around and its dark)

scenery, just your overall well rounded camera. My price range I was looking at was around max of 600ish. So nothing extremely fancy, of course if their is something a little above and its a landslide better, than of course I will go for it.

I was looking at the Sony Nex-3/5 series, price is right at it, but curious on the camera itsself, since it seems to be pretty new.

[dclove]

I use the Nikon D3000 10.2 MP I bought a referb for $400 I think it was and I am happy with it. I am like you I am in no way a professional nor do I plan to make a living on photography so I went a little cheaper

[EOSThree]

The Nex, the Olympus PEN, and the Panasonic GF-1 all fit into pretty much the same category. They are large sensored, compact, electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens cameras. I have a GF-1 and I like it a lot. It's pretty small and has the image quality of a full size DSLR, a nice combination.

I don't know much about pricing, but I think this type of camera goes for a bit more than your $600 budget. I know the Panasonic goes for around $850 for the kit. The Nex is a bit cheaper than that with one lens. Unfortunately because it is so new, there is little information about the Nex. I certainly looks good on paper though.

If you are looking for something that is a little bit more than a compact type camera and would like the creativity and quality of an interchangeable lens camera then this type of camera is a good choice. But like I said above, I think you'll be saving your pennies for a bit longer, especially if you want more than one lens.

[rozzi]

well they have a nex 3 with the 18-55mm lens bundled in for 599$. I just want a good camera with great crisp sharp pictures, dont care about video all too much. But needs to be quick. responsive and well adapted to many situations.

[rozzi]

oh also, i wonder what the requirements of a camera is to do something like this?

all i know is something about exposure settings?

http://gizmodo.com/5586131/batman-on-fire

[EOSThree]

That requires a shutter speed long enough to trace the outline. Most if not all SLR cameras can do this. Some compacts may be able to.

[Anbesol]

"Low light and quick shutter' is exclusively a capacity of lens, not the camera. The ISO may seem like the big difference here, but an f/1.8 maximum aperture will do a lot more for low light/quick shutter than ISO 3200 over 800/1600 does. In any event, a kit lens included under $1000 is far from ideal for this specific puirpose, the cheapest option at your disposal for this purpose is the 50mm f/1.8 at ~$110. Its available on every camera mount. Look for anything in the range of f/1.4 to f/2, as fast of lens as they get. (well, the f/1.2 and faster are ridiculously pricey)

The Sony NEX is a series I am extremely excited for, however - for the purpose of 'low light quick shutter', you will have a much wider lens selection available on standard DSLRs. For the time being, the availability of fast lens on these compact EVIL cameras is scarce (Olympus/Sony). If I'm up to date, then f/2.8 is the fastest lens available for any small EVIL camera. The Sony NEX series DOES have an AF Alpha mount adapter, which opens up the selection a ton, but you'll lose AF ability, and once you add a full size lens plus adapter, you really aren't that much smaller than a DSLR anyway.

[rozzi]

is the nex 3 capable of doing this?
the shutter speed and features seem to be up to it.

and well the reason im so drawn to this camera is for the size, style and simplicity. Id love to have some very high end 1000$ camera but for 599.99$ with a 18-55mm lens it seems about right. I just want to make sure its a good investment and can do the things im interested in.

[Anbesol]

Most cameras have a shutter speed capable of up to either 1/4000th or 1/8000th of a second. However, a *fast lens* will make more use of available light, and allow a faster shutter speed than a slower lens. So, what I am saying is that it is in the lens, not the camera, that dictates shutter speed.

For example, lets say, f/5.6 at ISO 800 allows a shutter speed of 1/320th of a second, this is how much light there is regardless of how fancy the camera is, $4 disposable or $8k DSLR, the exposure value remains the same (given the same f-stop). Open that lens up to f/2.8, and you can shoot the same scene at 1/1250th, and further, 1/2500th at f/2. So, the difference in this example between a standard f/5.6 and an f/2 is 1/320th to 1/2500th. This has absolutely nothing to do with the camera body, and everything to do with the lens. The only thing the camera can do to help you with shutter speed abilities is offer higher ISO and better image grain at those ISOs, but the ISO wont make nearly as much difference as the lens F-stop does.

And yes, the NEX 3 is capable of doing that batman thing, as EOS3 pointed out, it could be done on a point and shoot too, with manual controls. The NEX and olympus micro 4/3rds systems both do not offer anything faster than f/2.8. If you want the best ability to make use of low/light fast shutter, you'll be inhibiting yourself with either of these compact systems.

[rozzi]

ok, that was actually really informative. Well what drew me in was the size, because i wouldnt have a problem carrying around that camera, but carrying around a full size slr might be a little to much.

So i was looking it as; with a full size slr, better pics but not as many due to not carrying around all the time.

more compact, not as high quality, but more use out of it.

are their any other good slr's in the 600ish price range that offer higher quality for what im looking at than the nex3?

[rozzi]

also how do these 2 stand up to the nex?

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-+...&skuId=9311755

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Canon+-+...&skuId=9301819

[EOSThree]

They'll both be bigger than the Nex, they'll weigh more, but overall they'll be a little more responsive in almost every way. The Nikon has a lens included in the package, the Canon does not, at least in the links you've provided.

You have to decide if absolute performance is what you want, then an SLR of some type is the way to go. For convenience, a point and shoot is definitely the way to go. Somewhere in between are the EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens) cameras, they offer close to DSLR performance and IQ in a smaller package. Their biggest failing IMO is action photography, it's not that they're not that fast, it's that the viewfinder blacks out during the shot and you may lose tracking of your subject.

It's hard for me to say which direction to go, I am not you. If it were me, I'd have both(I do, I have 2 pro level Canon bodies right now and several thousand dollars worth of lenses, but I also have a Panasonic GF-1 with 3 lenses to take along with me anywhere). If I were you I'd get the Canon T1i and the kit lens to start with, then I'd add to the kit if I felt that I needed to.

Best Buy isn't the best place to look for photo gear, B&H is tops online, with Adorama, Beach and others close behind, they'll usually have the best "honest" price on equipment. If I were to take the plunge in any direction, I'd purchase from B&H, but that's just me. Be careful where you choose to buy, there are a lot of scammers out there. This site has pretty good reviews of retailers, and resellerratings.com is also a good place to check before a purchase.

[JamesV]

You got some great advise from EOSThree and Anbesol on where to purchase and for your other questions. One thing to also do is go to as many places that have the cameras you are looking at to see how you like to fit in your hands. One might feel better then another and while your there you might see something else that you like and didn't even think about. You have to take fit into consideration, an awkward camera in your hands will most likely be sitting at home.

James

[Anbesol]

Image quality isn't inherently better with a DSLR. In fact, they put the same APS sized imaging sensors in the NEX cameras as they do every DSLR under $2k. The only image quality advantage you have with DSLR is with either A) full frame (which cost $2k-$8k), or B) superior lens. The latter difference becomes less and less as Sony will release more and better lens' over time. Using the kit lens on those cameras you listed, and the kit lens on the Sony NEX - you would not notice a difference in image quality between the two.

The only quantifiable performance difference with a standard (APS) DSLR and an NEX is the autofocus speed and accuracy. The AF performance difference shouldn't be overlooked though - it is a significant sacrifice, especially in low light - where auto-focus accuracy and speed are even more crucial.

I also would advise against Best Buy, if you use them, use them only for the camera body or kit, any accessories and extra lens I would definitely get elsewhere.

I am extremely excited to get my hands on the NEX series. I will eventually have both NEX and my current Alpha line, I also expect that I'll carry around the NEX a lot more and use it more often in casual shooting. But, it will not replace my DSLR.

Keep us up to date on what you decide. If you stick around, this place is an excellent community of photographers and an excellent resource of information, help, and ideas. I've stuck around here for a while and I have always found a lot of help and creative inspiration here.

[rozzi]

yeah this forum has been extremely useful. And i know im asking alot of questions, just spending 600-700$ is a lot to spend and I want to make sure im getting the best bang for my buck. I was hoping to fall in love with the NEX, but from looking at it, it seems it may not be the best option, i just really loved it for the size.

Im honestly, just looking around not sure, many have recommended the t1i and a few of the canons, but havent heard much mention of the sonys?

i know I can get a great camera for around my price, but size is a factor for me. but still looking on lol

like was looking at the t2i and that looks amazing, seems to very high end with alot of great features. but JUUUST above my spending limit. id do 700. but seems to be pretty high

[rozzi]

ok everyone once again im posting way to much hopefully not annoying anyone lol.

but I think i found my camera, looking HIGHLY at the canon t1i. (would love the t2i), but a little high on the price. So gonna goto a few local stores to take a look at the camera in person and take it for a spin and see what I think.

[HelenOster]

......B&H is tops online, with Adorama, Beach and others close behind, they'll usually have the best "honest" price on equipment.

Thank you for the Adorama mention, although as we are committed to improving every part of our service to Adorama customers, we'd love to know - what could we be doing better so we'd more often be your retailer of choice?

You can email me directly: HelenO@adorama.com

Thanks in advance!

[Anbesol]

Rozzi - Canon and Nikon are the popular kids in school, means nothing except that they are more common. Sony makes excellent DSLRs, they inherited the Minolta line - of which I use for my own personal system. I've plenty of experience with all 3 major brands, and can honestly say that it makes no difference in your photography which one you pick, give them all equal footing to earn your favor, check out the niche differences and see which one is suited most to your specific use. Anyone who says 'X brand is the best' is a fool. There will be minor feature differences, slight differences in menu and interface, etc. Big picture, all are very equal.

Some similar Sony DSLR's worth a mention are the A3XX and A5XX (00/50). The 5 series stands head and shoulders above the 3 series in high ISO image grain due to newer process and CMOS vs CCD sensor. One unique feature they have that others dont is a specially designed live-view mode that interacts much quicker with autofocus. On the flipside, they lack a video mode which some of their competition has.

Also - offering assistance is something we here all enjoy doing. You are certainly not being annoying.

[Anbesol]

*edit - scratch this post, no sense derailing the thread. Helen - I sent you a private message in response to your question.