Looking for a camera for beginner.

[Photographer213]

Hi so I am a beginner, and I want to buy a camera a good camera that would last with me for at least 5 years and I am willing to pay on the body alone $800 I don't mind if its from cannon or Nikon. I will be using the camera to take macro shots and wide panoramic time lapses. Also I want to get a really crisp and nice photo when I am doing the macro shots as well as when I am shooting the time lapses. I will be shooting in humid sometimes dry conditions and I will probably be shooting time lapses when the sun comes up and when the sun comes down. Thank you.

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

Any photographer worth their salt will tell you that the lens is more important than the body. If you want to shoot macro and panoramic then you'll need a macro and wide-angle lens. The kit lens simply won't cut it.

Have you tried any cameras for yourself? If not, do that first. Do you understand things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO? If not, read up on them. How a camera handles is far more important than its technical specification and the quality of the shot ALWAYS comes down to how skilled the photographer is.

 

[Photographer213]

Any photographer worth their salt will tell you that the lens is more important than the body. If you want to shoot macro and panoramic then you'll need a macro and wide-angle lens. The kit lens simply won't cut it.

Have you tried any cameras for yourself? If not, do that first. Do you understand things like aperture, shutter speed and ISO? If not, read up on them. How a camera handles is far more important than its technical specification and the quality of the shot ALWAYS comes down to how skilled the photographer is.

Well yes I have tried a camera before it was canon but I am not sure of the model. But it had a kit lens on it. And yeah I do understand things like aperture shutter speed and ISO.

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

OK, well, the camera body is really a matter of preference, so making a recommendation is difficult. As far as lenses go, the Tamron 90mm f2.8 (with or without VC) and the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AT-X Pro get my recommendation.

 

[Photographer213]

OK, well, the camera body is really a matter of preference, so making a recommendation is difficult. As far as lenses go, the Tamron 90mm f2.8 (with or without VC) and the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AT-X Pro get my recommendation.

But I got another recommendation saying I should get the tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 pro FX lens for Nikon. So which is better and what's the difference?

 

[bicycle_repair_man]

Whichever lens is better is for you to decide. It's not just about optics, it's about size and weight. I've not used the Tokina 16-28mm so I can't vouch for it.

Besides the obvious one of focal length, you can find out for yourself what the differences are. Ken Rockwell arguably has the largest collection of Nikon lens reviews.

Like I said, the quality of the picture is always down to the photographer, so asking which lens is better is impossible to answer. The best photographic gear in the world won't compensate for the photographer's lack of skill.

 

[GarryH_Geek]

If you want to try artistic aspects, not just technical quality, I recommend you to buy some Olympus or Fujufilm model, maybe with a fixed lens, and to remove it for no single minute of your life! Shoot all, try all, make no decisions about "which optics I must try when I will shoot so-and-so", repeat shooting and do as much experiments both with camera and Photoshop as you can!

Why these brands? Just for a smaller size for a little higher quality! These brands make cameras a bit more suitable for going everywhere. No other points! Therefore, if you want Canon 5D for a full-frame, and you will carry it around with ease, no problems!