Best Camera for Beginner?

Oh, one more thing about lens kits...

 

For cameras that support interchangeable lenses, the kit lens that the manufacturer provides with the camera will very much be designed to a budget, but is usually the target of an awful lot of development effort - because every non-expert review will test the camera with that lens. You can improve it with a lot more money, but don't dismiss it out of hand. For example, the latest 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR which have historically been a Nikon kit are very good for the money. To be honest, the latest 70-300mm being used in kits is apparently very good too - but it would be better to spend a little more money on the VR version, both to handle less than ideal light and so you can see where you're pointing it (VR stops the view bobbing around so much). It's easy to spend more money for a little more capability (particularly on zoom range) and end up with something that's actually worse optically. There's usually something more important to buy than "a better version" of the kit lens - indeed, a 24-70 f/2.8 (the "pro version" of the 18-55, but on a bigger camera) was one of the last things I bought.

"are you considering a film camera?"

 

- The budget's only $1000. The OP might be expecting to take more than 5 or 6 pictures a day.

 

There's also a stipulation of: 'Still looking for the best quality possible.'

 

 

Thats interesting.... 15 pictures from a professional top quality 645 costing a mere $250 that once sold new for $3000 seems like a real deal. Also a great way to start a new hobby on a shoestring budget. Imagine what you can buy in a film camera for $1000.. and that budget can also include enough equipment to process his own film? Id say that's more than he wished for nad should be someting to consider.

 

I also see the OP hasn't been around to elaborate on his feeling towards one or another.

 

as always, just a suggestion, not an argument.

 

 

 

Also bear in mind that the experience of staff in camera stores (and especially department stores selling cameras) varies widely and is often limited!

 

I find if you ask them if they have a ‘faster’ lens, that tells you all you need to know

I find if you ask them if they have a ‘faster’ lens, that tells you all you need to know

Tell us more please.

Tell us more please.

If the clerk knows what an f number is and how it impacts an image (DoF, exposure, usage), then there's a fair chance he/she might know something else useful, particularly for the beginner.

If the clerk knows what an f number is and how it impacts an image (DoF, exposure, usage), then there's a fair chance he/she might know something else useful, particularly for the beginner.

Yeh, exactly. You can’t expect kids with Saturday jobs to have the knowledge of someone who’s seen 40 years of camera retail experience (although many have more than their fair share of digital knowledge), but you can get an idea if they have grasped the fundamentals with this kind of question.

If the clerk knows what an f number is and how it impacts an image (DoF, exposure, usage), then there's a fair chance he/she might know something else useful, particularly for the beginner.

On the contrary I think most of them know about fast vs slow lenses but not much about photography.

The D3400 with 18-55 kit lens would be the best option while starting out. Since you're a beginner, you have a lot to learn about exposure, techniques and strategies. The D3400 in my opinion would be the best one to learn ins and outs of photography. It even has a Menu mode that'll help you take pictures according to the environment. Start taking online tutorials and courses and shift to manual mode as soon as possible.

The D3400 with 18-55 kit lens would be the best option while starting out. Since you're a beginner, you have a lot to learn about exposure, techniques and strategies. The D3400 in my opinion would be the best one to learn ins and outs of photography. It even has a Menu mode that'll help you take pictures according to the environment. Start taking online tutorials and courses and shift to manual mode as soon as possible.

 

It may be the best camera for the OP but it could be a bad one as well. If I were a beginner and bought the D3400 I wouldn't be happy.

If I were a beginner and bought the D3400 I wouldn't be happy.

I'm not sure why. It shows up in multiple reviews as a highly recommended starting place for someone who wants to learn photography with a highly flexible, expandable, and interactive platform. I'm sure there are other viable options, but I believe the D3100/3200/3300/3400 is one very good place to start without making an inordinate dollar investment.

I'm not sure why. It shows up in multiple reviews as a highly recommended starting place for someone who wants to learn photography with a highly flexible, expandable, and interactive platform. I'm sure there are other viable options, but I believe the D3100/3200/3300/3400 is one very good place to start without making an inordinate dollar investment.

 

Only the OP can know but for me it would be a bad camera to start. It has only 1 wheel and make it's difficult to use in manual mode. It has scenes modes which only confuse the matter rather than help.

Only the OP can know but for me it would be a bad camera to start. It has only 1 wheel and make it's difficult to use in manual mode. It has scenes modes which only confuse the matter rather than help.

 

At least in Nikon land, two dials carries quite a premium. The menus aren't that irritating. And lots of relatively high-end cameras have scene modes - you can learn to ignore them. I'd be more concerned about buying a camera without the "creative" SPAM modes. So I don't object to the D3400 as a suggestion, but I do think it's only one option, and the OP has to make that choice personally.

At least in Nikon land, two dials carries quite a premium. The menus aren't that irritating. And lots of relatively high-end cameras have scene modes - you can learn to ignore them. I'd be more concerned about buying a camera without the "creative" SPAM modes. So I don't object to the D3400 as a suggestion, but I do think it's only one option, and the OP has to make that choice personally.

Like i said earlier that the best course would be for the OP to learn about cameras then decide for himself. I don't think anyone of us can really recommend what's best for the OP. I know because in my experience if I took any of the recommendation given to me when I were buying my first camera I wouldn't be happy.

the best course would be for the OP to learn about cameras then decide for himself.

From a practical standpoint this is very difficult to do without some hands-on experience. That's why it's important for a beginner to get something that is not an extraordinary expense, but will allow him/her to explore as many aspects of photography as possible with the lowest entry cost threshold. For me, I learned on my dad's old Nikkormat EL (circa 1969), and he paid for the film. A beginner in the DSLR age can get a very flexible and capable system in D3XXX, discover 80-90% of photographic skills and techniques, and then make a very informed decision on spending a lot more money to pursue a discovered passion or specialty. Book learning will only take one so far, and hands-on learning is needed to really move forward.

The lens is the most important part of any camera.

 

This laughable saw may have made sense back in film days when all the body had to do was hold the film flat.

 

In today's cameras the sensor, autofocus, and many other "body and lens functions" are at least as important as the lens itself.

 

Fortunately, the basic, entry-level dSLRs of today are all more than good enough, and even the inexpensive kit lenses are amazingly good.

It's true that as film containers, interchangeable lens film cameras has little effect in image quality. Even then, the lens was never the sole factor, and film emulsions did advance over time. That advance was slow compared with the first couple of decades of digital sensor development, so the old "a good lens is always a good lens and an investment" claim is less convincing now - otherwise we wouldn't see so many revisions of the 70-200. Sensor advances do seem too be slowing as the technology matured, though.

 

But a bad lens is still a bad lens!

When I'm asked about a DSLR I tell people to get an "entry level" camera and work their way up as they figure out what they want to shoot. Might not even have an interest in photography a month from now. Don't go crazy. Get a camera, even if it's only a low-end point and shoot, and start taking pictures.

 

Besides, it's more financially desirable to use entry level stuff to learn how to take care of the camera and equipment. YMMV.

@HoofArted makes a good point.

Since the OP didn't care to reply, I'll add my 2ct: Look at dpreview.com's camera round ups try your hands on something you might like. Maybe figure out into which brand you are interested in general and dip your toes for cheap on the used market. Don't get me wrong; $1K are a lot of money and able to buy a quite decent camera. But everything they'll get will be a compromise too and not necessarily the one suiting you "best"...

My current recommendation, fired blind from the hip, would be something Microforthirds, maybe a Panasonic? <-As a new camera. They are lighter than DSLRs and ultra convenient to carry.

On the used shoestring budged market I recommend elderly Pentax kits like a K10D with 2 zooms and a bag etc. about $200 to get your feeet wet while making up your mind on what to spend the big $$s.

 

I honestly know little about the current $1000 DSLR crop. The Canon vs Nikon debate can only be settled by figuring out which lenses are easier to borrow for you or by picking the one you like more (hands on, trying to use their menus!) for me it was "Canon" but that was one guy in a different market segment and different point in time... - Only spend that much on Pentax if you are sure(!) to be not interested in people in motion. (Yes, I own Pentax and know that shortcomming).

Fuji and Sony offer something too. - You'll most likely end wanting to spend more on their later and greater offerings once you get it. - If DSLRs are an option at all for you, they are more likely to remain "your camera" for a while. They did feel bearable, long before mirrorless reached that point.

all good recomendations above.

 

BUT if you really want to see and feel whats available and within the budget... go to B&H! They have everything out on display to play with. If you cant go to B&H, any good photo shop like B&H is the place to try out your new shoes.

For a general camera/lens combo that will make great photographs I'd get a Nikon 3400 (about $500 with a kit lens) and Nikon's stellar 35mm DX prime ($166 brand new). You'll have a very usable camera and you will have started collecting lenses with one of the best primes out there for the money. You'll still have cash left for memory cards and other stuff. But as everyone else said, there are a zillion cameras out there. Most of them are pretty good.

all good recomendations above.

 

BUT if you really want to see and feel whats available and within the budget... go to B&H! They have everything out on display to play with. If you cant go to B&H, any good photo shop like B&H is the place to try out your new shoes.

 

If only one lives near such a store.

To be fair, I don't live all that close to a decent camera store - and when I've visited them, I've found that Nikon, at least, no longer seem to be encouraging them to show off a wide range.

 

But I can vouch for visiting distant camera stores on holiday and business trips (always popular with my wife and colleagues) if there's nothing close. And even local electronics and department stores tend to have the budget models in stock so you can handle them, if you don't want anything exotic.

I am in the Dallas, TX area and to see a high end camera I would have to go to Competivie Camera which carries almost as much as B&H (minus the electronic, audio, computer stuff at B&H) but the owner isn't very nice so I would be hesitate to visit them just for a look around. Besides although they carry a lot of stuff they don't display much.

Thanks for the warning, BeBu!

In the old days, the first camera was just a donation from a parent or relative and was ... basic at best. Preferably you wanted one with a decent lens which gave you enough creative control (shutter speeds, aperture and today ISO) to actually learn how the hardware worked. Even with your budget, you might want to get something cheap at first that meets these guidelines because camera choice tends to be really personal and you don't want to spend your whole budget on a camera that doesn't suit you.

 

It also depends on the use you want to put it to. Classes have requirements, different types of photographies tend to have them too. You may not know what you really like yet. You might look at B&H Photo and KEH for their used cameras. They are both very reliable. Or you might even have a relative who can loan you something till you KNOW what you really want.