Looking for advice on a camera for nature photography under $600.
I’m totally new to photography and want to get my first camera. I’ll mainly be using it for nature photography while hiking and traveling.
My only focus is on photos of the highest possible quality.
My budget is around $600, and I’ll also need essential accessories, but don't know what I'd need, like a lens?
Not open to refurbished, as I'm buying in Vietnam.
https://www.amazon.com/Rebel-EF18-55mm-75-300mm-Double-Zoom/dp/B0101RW3QK?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1
A lot of people started here with an entry level DSLR. A lot of hobbyists even stay with them. You will get advice from professionals on the internet who tell you what's best for them, but in the end it's what works for you. This is just a suggestion based on your parameters.
Would Canon EOS R50 be a much better choice or just marginally better?
I bought this, it works great. I've not used a super fancy camera so I can't compare but it beats an iPhone.
Here's some advice you can take to the bank. Don't fucking talk to me or you'll end up with a fucking R5II wondering what the fuck you did with your life.
That's the wild thing about photography advice on the internet. Someone asks about a hobbyist camera and they get told why they need a Hasselblad.
But were the photos beautiful at least?
I don't know. I have hundreds of thousands of undeveloped photos.
What kind of nature? The answers will be very different between "flowers" and "mountainous landscapes" and "birds".
Definitely not birds, there's barely any wildlife here (unless you count semi-wild cattle...).
Mostly just macro to be honest, and some portraits to boot (I know it's a different kind but I still need it).
Canon EOS R50 is on my radar as the strongest contender but I'm not sure as I'm a newbie here.
Get a good enough portrait lens and also an adapter to flip it around for cheap extreme macro pictures https://petapixel.com/2015/05/01/shooting-insect-macros-on-the-cheap-with-a-reversed-lens/
A Lumix G7 with 14-42 and 45-150 lenses lists for $650, and you could probably get it under $600 on greentoe.com. Or wait for a sale.
For that budget you're going to be looking at used gear.
Do you have any weight/size limits?
Will you be photographing nature predominantly during the day, or will you also be taking a lot of photos at night?
When you say nature, do you mean landscape/scenery and/or wildlife?
The answers to these questions will greatly help with giving you a good suggestion.
I bought my entry level Nikon D3500 like 4 years ago for $400 with a 35-70mm and a 75-300mm. They don't even make entry level cameras anymore. It's bullshit.
I had a D40 and D5300 before my current crop of gear. I totally agree with you on the complete lack of budget options these days.
The Fuji X-T50 and X-S20 are both over $1200 with a lens. Sony's ZV-E10 is $700 without a lens and you can get the A-6100 with a 16-50 and 55-210 for $1100.
If I was a kid in college looking for my first camera I might just pass on buying one right now :( Thankfully the used market hasn't lost its mind too much.
Seems like Canon EOS R50 is a possibility for me here. Is it a good option? With what lens?
No size or weight limits. Nocturnal adventures is what I'm interested in on top of regular photography so that's a consideration.
Landscapes, macro close-up, portraits of people. Nothing else really.
If you're on a budget, I would offer two suggestions:
I have no real feedback on the R50 one way or the other. I've never used the camera.
For nocturnal and people, you're probably going to want a "fast" lens. This is measured as a ratio of focal length to physical aperture diameter and is called a f-stop. The number is 1/x, so smaller numbers = bigger ratio.
Generally speaking, the fastest lenses are fixed focal length primes. Not zooms. For an everyday lens, a 35mm or 50mm is going to be a decent choice. On a crop sensor, divide these by 1.5 thanks to the crop factor. The actual focal length you land on will depend on how wide you want to get and how far from your subject you'll be able to get.
There are some "fastish" zooms available, but they aren't as fast/sharp as primes and are usually bigger/pricier.
As for macro, a cheap way of doing that is by adding something like a Raynox DCR-250 to your lens or using an extension tube. You can buy a dedicated macro lens, but IMO unless you're going to be doing a ton of macro or the lens happens to be a focal length you will use for non-macro work I would go the diopter/extension tube route.
Seat of pants suggestion? A Nikon D7x00 series camera. They have a built in focus motor, so you can use any Nikon F-moint autofocus lens. Combine that with a Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G or a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC HSM ART and you'll be off and running.
Pawn shop I go to for video games always has a handful of high end looking cameras once you figure out the type you need you can Def check around at pawn shops for deals
Can you please send me their phone number/location or name?
For that price point, if second-hand is not an option (which I guess is what you mean by "Not open to refurbished"), you are going to be challenged to get something "good". But...
First, do check to see if any high end smart phones can meet your needs - they probably won't have the "reach" to get distant birds, but will be far more convenient for travelling.
Next, you should probably be looking at crop-frame cameras - lighter, cheaper, and because of their nature, their lenses have a longer reach for their technical length. There are downsides (e.g. low-light capabilities), but a reasonable trade-off in your case.
If new, you'd likely be only offered mirror-less cameras (rather than DSLR) because that's the way the suppliers are going. Probably to your benefit (even if more power hungry), but second-hand DSLRs can be cheap, and some adore them.
I'm not sure what happens at your budget, but with a bigger budget a suitable lens is likely to be the same price as the camera body: so don't look at lenses as accessories, but as a significant part of the package.
If you are after birds, on a crop-frame camera, a good focal length would be 400mm, but you may have to settle for less (and even 200mm might be pleasing).
You are travelling, so likely don't want lots of separate lenses, so you might want a zoom lens to get a range of focal lengths in one item. That said, you might want something around the 35mm length for "tourist shots - two lenses also means if one gets damaged, you aren't carrying round entirely dead weight.
As to other accessories: proper lens cleaning kit, lens hood (more to protect the lens than to stop flare), and a camera bag suitable for the conditions. Spare memory cards, batteries, etc. Work out a way of getting pictures off your camera and somewhere safe while you travel, as another form of de-risking.
I imagine Vietnam as wet and warm - neither of these is great for cameras, and you may want to seek advice on that.
Get in as much practice with your camera as you can before you set off on your travels. Take photos comparable to what you hope to take later, but locally - garden birds, a local town park, whatever. You will likely still make mistakes for years to come, but many more in the first few weeks.
And most of all, take care but have fun!
Thanks! Thoughts on Canon EOS R50?
Can strong direct sunlight damage a camera or lenses somehow?
Ah, you're not after bird photos, so ignore my comments on lens lengths (even so, I'm sure there will be birds, and probably still interesting to see in detail - the UK has many small often-common brown birds, and most are really pretty plumage close up when you look - for that matter, I've even photos of crows that I think interesting).
You mention macro shots - do you mean of insects, flowers and the like? Good macro shots again tend to depend on the lens, and some lenses are much better than others. You're looking for maximum magnification in the specification, and you might be surprised how poor that seems even for an expensive lens. It might only be x0.5 and still be "good" (even if by some definitions that's not even "macro"). Even the top end Canon RF 100mm F2.8 is only x1.4! As a great bonus, macro lenses should also work as normal lens, usually really rather well.
I've not tried the R50, so can't comment - though these days I use higher end Canon cameras and like them. Other people dislike them, especially due to their policies on their best lens mounts that mean third parties like Sigma couldn't produce lenses for them.
While I really wouldn't try pointing a camera at the sun without heavy filters, it's probably not instant destruction, and through a mirror-less view finder it won't directly blind you (DSLR view-finders might!). A significant issue is that your lenses and camera bodies will likely have a fair proportion of black plastic that will heat up fast in the sun, and then transfer that warmth to where you really don't want it in a camera - especially during heavy use when the camera will be internally heating up as well.
I dont know about your market, and what is available so i will try and ask some more questions and offer suggestions on what i'd consider taking hiking and travelling.
Does it need to go underwater/ withstand severe weather ?
how will you charge it if your hiking, does it need to take AA batteries so you can get power just about anywhere ? some cameras only charge from mains power.
If i was going well off the beaten track for several months, i'd take my AA battery camera. Compared to all the others, this is the only thing it has going for it. It has a 36-360mm lens (in 35mm equivalent) which means it can a little bit of landscape work, and the zoom can go close in to capture some birds. It can take around 10 megapixel shots, which will be good for an A4 sized print, maybe an A3 sized print. its also around 250grams and can easily fit in a jacket pocket.
If i knew i was going to get super wet or wanted to get some underwater shots, there's my Tough camera. it was designed to go underwater. It has a 25-200mm lens (in 35mm equivalent) which goes wider than the AA camera but doesnt zoom in as much. Its also got some smarts and can take 3 shots in 'landscape' mode and stitch them together to make a panorama. (some image quality is lost, so i would also take 3 shots manually for a higher resolution post production stitch) It does give me a 12megapixel image (and capture RAW images which can help a little bit in post production). This one has a proprietary battery, but can be charged up by USB. This one also has optional external lenses that can be used to go a bit wider or zoom in a bit more.
If i wanted something compact and portable, id take my compact camera. It was designed to be a 'jack of all trades' and has a 28-300mm(35mm) lens. It can shoot 12megapixels and RAW. It fits in a jacket pocket too, but doesnt have any weather sealing. I might use it when its slightly raining, but not for long. It also can have external lenses attached, and ive only used it rarely. I would only take it if i knew id be taking photos of birds.
But if i wanted the best quality, id take my micro 4/3rds camera. This one needs separate lenses. If i wanted to pack light, id get the 12-100mm (24-200mm in 35mm equiv). This camera and body combination is weather sealed and if i could only go for one lens on a round the world trip, this is the one id take. If i could pack more, id consider the 7-14mm too, which lets me get shots about 90 degrees apart from the left to right side. This has all the bells and whistles, and i could make some fairly large prints off it, it normally takes around 20megapixel shots, but can take several shots and merge them into one 80megapixel shot if its on a tripod and nothing in the shot is moving.
I deliberately havent put in camera specifics as what i think is good and works well for me mightn't feel the same to you. If you really want, i can mention camera models, but i dont want them to be taken as go by camera 1, when camera A might be more what you want.
I'm almost ready to jump the fence and get Canon EOS R50 with its kit lens. Any thoughts on that?
I would do two things before committing, plan what lenses id want to add on to the ones you buy initially.
id also have a look at the manual, and lightly browse it front to back to see that everything kinda made sense. You dont have to read everything in fine detail, but downloading the manual should be free and it could help you realise any more important questions before the sale.
I wouldnt worry too much about shooting RAW and using manual mode first. Powering it up and using auto and maybe scene mode (sports, landscape, night shot?, macro?) should get you up and running fast.
@SurpriZe just checking that $600 is in USD?
This reddit thread might be useful for you
I'm in the price range of Canon EOS R50 and heavily considering it versus other similarly priced and new models. Any thoughts on that?