I have had my eyes on nikon 3400 and cannon d6i bodies and older models. Budget is 400-500. Do i really need 24megapixel and 5 fps for fishing and ski shots?
Flame away.
Printable View
I have had my eyes on nikon 3400 and cannon d6i bodies and older models. Budget is 400-500. Do i really need 24megapixel and 5 fps for fishing and ski shots?
Flame away.
I don't think there's a much better deal than the Canon T6i right now, or potentially a used 70D. I used the 70D last year, and "downsized" to the T6i this year to save weight and space. They both produce great shots. Pair either one with the Canon 18-135mm STM and it's all you need, really.
The T6i can be found used for around $500-550'ish used with the lower-level 18-55mm STM lens. The T5i isn't a bad deal either, but I'd spend a little more for the T6i since it has a newer sensor and shoots a little faster, which you'll appreciate for skiing shots.
Here you go, with a 1-yr warranty directly from Canon: https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/c...it-refurbished
I'm not familiar with Canon DSLRs, but just noticed this on Slickdeals-
"Canon T6 DSLR w/ 18-55mm & 75-300mm Lenses + Pro-100 Printer $349 after $350 Rebate + Free S&H"
details on rebate/ code/ etc here:
https://slickdeals.net/f/9736148-can...e-free-s-h?v=1
prioritize better glass over a newer body for sure. kit lenses are great until you understand more about what you're trying to capture.
I have a 5d classic for sale if you are interested, pm me.
Thanks for the responses. I am going to try to gather enough dough to get a used solid body, hopefully a t6i or 33/3400.
One advantage of any of the cameras 24 megapixel is if you are planning on doing bigger enlargements- (poster sized).
I'm a big advocate of mirrorless cameras unless you're taking professional action shots. The quality is just as good these days and you'll appreciate the smaller size.
YMMV, but I'd never use a mirrorless camera for skiing action shots. Especially not a lower-level one for around $500.
Most modern DSLRs are going to do good work for you (I don't know a ton about mirrorless). I picked up cheap older Nikon (D3200), and the big thing I'd like to upgrade is low-light sensitivity without grain, even moreso than focus speed etc.
I have a Canon T2i with the 18-55 I'd sell for $215 shipped.
I have a D3200 (red color, so its faster) and a 50mm f1.8 I would be willing to part with for $250 + shipping. You'd have enough money to grab a cheap zoom of your choice.
No matter what you get, the 50mm 1.8 that fits your body will be the best $100-150 you can spend on a quick upgrade to the image quality.
OTOH, if the smaller size of a mirrorless is going to cause you to actually bring the camera with you skiing it's better than a DSLR. However, even a mirrorless is going to stretch the definition of a "pocketable" camera. Maybe with a pancake lens, but that's going to be far from ideal for skiing action.Quote:
Originally Posted by smmokan
Seconding the fast 50mm lens. Its the one I use most often by far.
I have the same setup as Leavenworth that I'd let got of at this point.
Pm sent to levenworth
Thanks for the info and advice. Looking at a 50 mm right now. Has anyone here used one of these?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...a0839936c5.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...21cdcacff4.jpg
My plan is to carry a waterproof holster inside my non- waterproof backpack while flats fishing.
Never used one, but they look pretty handy. Do they do anything that a regular dry bag doesn't (like extra padding, etc)?
The 50mm 1.8, aka "nifty fifty" has lots of fans. Just be aware there is a reason it is so cheap. It is made out of plastic, even a plastic mount, and it has a reputation of not being very reliable. They tend to explode without provocation. And the autofocus is not that great, especially in low light. But it is cheap, and pretty sharp.
The Ortlieb has padding. Not sure about the other one, it just looks like thick material. My 2 priorities are legit waterproofing and a slim fit into my 3 day pack. It will be bumping and grinding a bit with fly boxes, tools, bladder and other stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phildo_Baggins
50mm's on crop sensors aren't going to act like true nifty-fifty's... A 35mm on a crop sensor will approximate the nifty-fifty vibe much better.
But, I have nothing bad to say about 50mm's on crops.
Having said that, as a new DSLR user, the 50mm is going to take some getting used to. It's a fixed focal length meaning you'll need to zoom by moving your feet. You'll often want to shoot wider for landscapes and scenics. 50mm for fishing could be very useful and the wide aperture will give the small DOF many perceive as "professional."
But, shooting with primes will make you a better photographer if you are willing to stick with that fixed length.
What pushed me to a nicer, higher level camera was the inability for entry-level SLR's to focus all modern glass. I'm less familiar with Canon, but the d3xxx and d5xxx's don't have in-body autofocus motors. That seems fine when you are getting into the game; many lenses that are appealing often have their own autofocus motors in the lens. But when you start looking at 3rd party lenses, they sometimes won't autofocus with the budget SLR's. Something many around here, including me, like to use is the Tokina 11-16mm. That won't autofocus with the aforementioned lenses.
Great info. I will have a month plus to read up and get dialed in with the camera and whatever lenses i can get my hands on. It is coming back slowly, almost 20 years since a semester of photog class. Fwiw: the vast majority of what I will be shooting will be on the water with lots if light.
I bought a 35mm for my crop sensor nikon (d90) when we had a baby and it is on 95% of the time. The low light performance is great for indoor shots and a 50mm would be too long for most of the rooms in my house.
If anyone else needs an entry level dslr, I'd let my t2i go for $200 with extras....