# Decent DSLR camera for a noob?



## KnightBrolaire (Oct 16, 2022)

I've been wanting to get into photography for ages, but always held off due to other hobbies taking the limelight. I've been traveling a lot more the last few years and the limitations of smartphone cameras become way more apparent when I'm trying to do certain tasks (basically anything besides close up macro shots). I missed a great shot of two eagles fighting over a salmon last year because all I had was my phone. 

So what's a decent option for someone like me? I see a lot of Canon Rebels floating around used locally, and some Nikons, but I have no idea what to look at tbh.


----------



## ramses (Oct 16, 2022)

A couple of comments so that you can calibrate the recommendations that (I hope) you will receive.

In no particular order:

- Canon, Nikon, etc. are all sunsetting their DSLR's and fully going into mirrorless.
- I strongly advice a full frame camera, if you really want to get into photography.
- Good glass is more important than the camera. Spend more time investigating lenses than cameras.
- Even though there won't be new DSLR cameras, I'm sure that there will be a good second hand market for DSLR cameras and lenses for a while. I use one nice DSLR lens with my mirrorless camera, with the help of an adapter.


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Oct 16, 2022)

I've been into DLSRs and photography for more than 10 years, although I'm still just a hobbyist. I know there's guys around here that know more. 

If you want my advice, the benefits you're looking for are things even an entry-level DLSR will provide. As for what to look for, that's a rabbit hole too deep to go down, but some things to consider from a beginner's perspective: 

1) Canon vs. Nikon vs. Sony, etc. It's a razor/razor blade model. The DLSR bodies are the cheap part, it's the lenses that are expensive. The lens mounts are also proprietary, meaning if you use a Canon camera you can't use Nikon glass. This doesn't much matter from a beginner's perspective since you're likely to sell whatever gear you've got when you're ready to upgrade 5 years down the line. So just pick a good entry-level camera from one of the major manufacturers with good reviews and be aware that you're stuck with that brand for a while. I've had good experience with the Nikon D3000 series (I think they're on 3500 now?)

2) Crop sensor vs. Full-frame. No need to go into details about this aside from mentioning that nearly all entry-level and enthusiast cameras will be crop sensor (a smaller image sensor) vs. the professional cameras that use a full 35mm equivalent. So, if you buy a crop sensor camera, you'll be investing in crop sensor lenses and so on. That isn't a bad thing, either. There's rather high end crop sensor cameras and lenses. 

3) DLSR vs. Mirrorless. Lots of choices here, but most mirrorless cameras (which are not true DSLRs) are still pretty high end because the tech is new. So a old DLSR is cheaper, still produces excellent images, and is easier to learn on. 

4) Lenses. As a beginner, just got for a general use kit lens (usually 18-55mm focal length) and a moderate telezoom (usually 80-200mm). Some cameras come with superzooms (like 35-300mm) but these can be hit and miss. As a rule of thumb, 18-55mm is the same "zoom level" as your eyesight when focusing on something near to you or far away. So 200mm is like 4-5x optical zoom. That's good enough for 90% of long distance stuff, anything needing 500mm+ is specialty (sports, bird, and race photographers all use huge telephotos). 

5) Software. Adobe Lightroom is the industry standard but there's alternatives. The reason why I mention it at all is that, even if you aren't looking to drastically style your photos, shooting a DSLR in manual using RAW format (as opposed to JPEG) will give you DRASTIC control over the photos. This is important for beginners since, if you suck at setting exposure, you can fix it in post in lightroom. Obviously some things you can't fix, like bad focus, blurry images, and so on. But a photo that's too dark or light? No problem. 

So that's some basic advice. 

If I were starting over again, I'd probably just buy a DLSR kit from Nikon like the 3500, try to get it on a decent discount and with an extra 80-200mm lens bundled with it. Leave the camera on auto for a while (but set it to RAW!!) and then try to work up your chops to get shooting on manual mode. Get lightroom or another photo editor to keep a library of your photos and to tweak them. 

When I was starting, you could get all that for under $500 new. Not sure how the prices are now but it doesn't need to cost an arm and a leg. 

If you have any other questions feel free to ask!


----------



## jaxadam (Oct 16, 2022)

A wealth of info and recommendations here. I like the Nikon 5X00 series with something like an 18-140 and a prime lens.



Recommended Cameras


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Oct 16, 2022)

jaxadam said:


> A wealth of info and recommendations here. I like the Nikon 5X00 series with something like an 18-140 and a prime lens.
> 
> 
> 
> Recommended Cameras



Just to clarify for @KnightBrolaire: 

- the Nikon 5000 series is the next step up from the 3000 series. They're good intermediate cameras, same with the 7000s.

- An 18-140mm zoom lens will cover more of the focal spectrum at the cost of weight and possibly image quality. It's a compromise "all-in-one" lens. 

- This is because zoom lenses have multiple pieces of glass inside to achieve the different focal lengths. The wider the focal spectrum, the more glass and thus weight and possible softness to your images from misalignment. Photographers can get a bit snobby about zooms but they beat having to pack 3+ lenses in your carry on whenever you travel, or having to swap lenses constantly when trying to photograph different subjects (buildings vs. people for instance).

- Primes are the opposites of zooms. For example, a 50mm prime is a lens that shoots at 50mm with no moving parts aside from focus and aperture. They are usually higher quality and give clearer images at the expense of convenience--is the opposite trade off of a zoom. If you want to make your subject larger, you have to physically walk closer to it. You have no control over subject framing without moving the camera. That's awesome for a camera set up on a tripod in a studio, not so great for walking around town and trying to take pictures of things that are various distances away from you. However, a prime 50mm can still be a good idea because that's basically the focal length of your vision and useful in a wide variety of contexts like portraiture or general scenic photography. Not something you'll need straight away as a beginner, though.


----------



## odibrom (Oct 16, 2022)

All good advice here. Allow me to add some other ideas and experiences (warning, long post ahead...).

Nikon have (had?) the auto-focus motor on the camera's body, Canon has it on the lenses. The pros of the Nikon system is that the bodies (full frame sensors) are compatible with all pre auto-focus lenses (mid 80s), although won't be able to auto-focus. The pros on the Canon system is that their auto-focus is one of the fastest in the market.

There are other brands with sensors way bigger than the 35mm reference, like Hasselblad but these are directed to professionals and photography studios.

When looking for used gear, ask and look at the following:

*Camera Body*
1 - shots count. This is importante because there are moving parts inside the camera, like the mirror and shutters (1st and 2nd curtains). As so these parts will wear with time. Shutter life is huge, like 100.000 shots or more.
2 - debris over the sensor. As the referred moving parts and as well as with the lens changing, it's often to find very small grains of dust and some times even hairs/eyelashes over the camera's sensor. cleaning these can eventually scratch the sensor, so take a compatible card, take a few shots against a white wall with the lens aperture fully closed and carefully check the captured image at full quality to loo for dust spots over the sensor or eventually the lens.
3 - check for all functions to be working in perfect order, RTFM of the camera's model first, ask questions on how to use the camera to the seller.
4 - check for mold.

*Lenses*
1 - check for scratches on both the front and back (inner) glasses
2 - check for mold
3 - test and use the focus ring and if it's a zoom lens, the focal distance ring as well. Be sensible to its smoothness / resistance. It should be easy, but not but slack.

*Important tips when using Digital (and some for film as well) SLR cameras*
1 - Get a *Skylight* (for beginners) or an *Polarizing* (for intermediate to advance photografers) filter ring for the lens (fish eye lenses excluded due to their front glass geometry). You must know the lens front glass diameter (in milimeters). ALWAYS use one of these. Any filter will reduce (filter) the light that enters the lens. These two work as protection and the second will help you to manage light reflections and highlights on surfaces like windows, shiny car paint or ponds...
2 - Always use the max quality possible file and shooting mode (RAW format). The post editing is like working the photo in a laboratory. Raw format allows to work on parameters like sharpness, darkness, color/gama correction and so on. It only can't edit the physical character of the photo, like the sensor's *ISO* and *exposure time* (camera's parameters), nor the *aperture*, *focus distance* or *focal distance* (lens parameters). Always use the highest capacity memory card for the camera. You can size down a picture (either in _pixels per pixels_ or in compression...) but you can't invent pixels that weren't saved when post editing the photo.
3 - Don't be afraid to take lots of shots. Before digital SLR cameras, I used to count the number of photos I had in the film because I carried a limited number of film with me. Digital SLR cameras have revolutionized this and each photo session I take about 200 to 300 photos against the 36 to 108 I did with full analogue cameras. My actual DSLR is a Canon EOS1D mark2 from late 2004 and its card slots only go up to 4GB each...
4 - Get an external hard drive to store only your photos. *Get a backup of said drive*... and a backup of said backup (? redundancy is key). Don't store your photos in online cloud/storage services only or ever.

On photography itself, master the concepts / interaction between the following variables when going for manual shooting:
*- Aperture* (lens) - it controls the amount of light that _passes through lens_ / _enters_ the camera and hits the sensor / film. Lower values mean that there's a bigger aperture, which means that there's more light entering the camera per time unit. Full open aperture and full closed aperture deliver drastically different photo effects. This manages the depth field.
*- Exposure or Shutter Speed* (body) - it's the amount of time the sensor / film is exposed to the light entering the camera, controlled by the shutters. Exposure alues are parts of second, so higher values means smaller exposure times. 1 = 1 second exposure, 2 = 1/2 second exposure, 100 means 1/100 seconds of exposure. The higher the value, the more frozen the photo will be. Values above 120 will be frozen in time, below 60 will surely get trails, but this depends on the photographer's hand steadiness.
*- ISO* (body) - it's the light sensibility of the sensor / film. The bigger the value, the bigger the sensibility, higher values are good to use at night, lower values to use during the day. Higher value ISO means the sensor/film won't need as much amount of light per time unit as lower value ISO. This interferes directly with the exposure and aperture chosen to take the shots. This manages the photo's "grain" (specially on analogue photography).

These 3 variables ARE the foundation of photography since its "creation" in 1832/4 (can't remember correctly, but it's about that time). These are the variables that dictate and manage a correctly lit/exposed photo. They interact with one-another like rhythm, pitch, tone and volume on a musical note.

Zooming basically means scaling up or down a part of an image, Zooming IN is like making a copy of an 10x10cm image scaled up to 20x20cm and then crop the result back to 10x10cm. However, since there are curved glass parts inside the lens, there are some other side effects as well like perspective deformation (specially on fish eye lenses), color aberration and a few other light effects that the sensor and software cannot control or modify.

Final notes:
1 - I like Canon, it's my _Ibanez brand_ for photography. I started with a full analogue SLR camera that had a lever to advance the film for the next photo, then to the EOS system SLR cameras and in 2004 I invested in my EOS1D mark2. I still use this camera for specific photos (mostly tele, and some macros) but it sometimes sits in the closet for more than one year without any use and I do my regular photos with my phone... all my guitars' photos where shot with my phone. Look for a light camera (and lens) to start with. Higher quality bodies are heavier and so are lens.
2 - The most important part of the investment is choosing the body, since although the lens mounting is brand proprietary, there are lens brands that make lenses for Canon or Nikon mounts. You won't find, however a Canon lens for a Nikon mount nor vice-versa - obviously. The sensor is also the brand's quality flag. Choose the body, then the lenses.
3 - I've tried a few Sony cameras. I did not like the image quality at all, even with supposed superior sensors (more pixel per pixel sensor) than my trusty ol' 1D mark2.
4 - Canon was the only brand (a few years back) to have a Zoom fish eye lens in the market... fish eye lenses are super cool, but super expensive as well...
5 - Actual DSLR cameras CAN do videos from full frame HDMI to 4x HDMI either at 30 to 60 (some more) frames per second, consider that as a choosing factor as well.


----------



## neurosis (Oct 24, 2022)

if you are trying to learn old school you could get really decent film cameras second hand for not a lot of money. If you are thinking of taking this on as a hobby but don't think of going professional anytime soon you can go mirrorless or even compact would be a great option depending on the model.

I was on a 5D and 7D for a long time, then sold all my glass and the bodies and jumped over to a Fuji xt20, which was too small for me but had all the other features I wanted at the time. So I kept the lens and moved to an XT3. That is what I have been using for a good while now and it's more than enough for me. I like the picture processing in camera and like having all my controls out of camera. I also like the touch screen for some secondary functions. But overall with a pancake lens this camera fits in a coat pocket and takes killer photos. A telephoto to shoot a scene as you described above for this system would be too expensive for my purpose though so I don't think that'd be an option.

My wife uses a Sony A6000. It's older now but it's a super capable camera and the multiple lens options available make it a really versatile system. It's not prohibitive and she's happy. I'd look into an A6400 for the better video capabilities. 

Go to a shop and try out the bodies for ergonomics though. And watch a good amount of videos to learn a little about the tech upfront. 

Seems you want to get into nature and landscape photo. So having a telephoto lens will come in handy. 

I shoot street, product and portrait so my needs are different. I also don't shoot as often as my wife, who uses the camera all the time.

Panasonic makes some smaller Lumix models that are cool. If I went compact and wanted good video capabilities I'd probably get one of their cameras. A GX series with a zoom lens.

Once you've reviewed a bunch of options go on camera decision to compare models and come back and ask us if you need personal opinion or get overwhelmed with the specs.

As said above it all comes down to the glass you buy. Then, I look for ergonomics and control. I personally don't like the Sony layout but my wife and friends all shoot Sony. 

You're opening a potential can of GAS. Beware


----------



## CanserDYI (Oct 25, 2022)

I was a photography major in high school and College.













....film photography......





Yeah. I wish I didn't do that. So cool...but god I wish I learned digital.


----------



## odibrom (Oct 25, 2022)

CanserDYI said:


> I was a photography major in high school and College.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's a just a step from one to the other and you'll have it all...


----------



## DoctorStoner (Oct 25, 2022)

Short-ish version from a fellow hobbyist. 

I bought a Canon Rebel XSi about 10 years ago and a Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 lens (which is a huge step up from the kit lens) and have never felt the need to upgrade any more than that. I do car shows and nature photography mostly and 90% of my shots are on that combo.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/camaroeric1/

There are a few other lenses in the collection like a 75-400mm that I barely use, but two I definitely enjoy on occasion are my Lensbaby Composer for some fun weirdly focused shots and the typical 50mm f/1.8 prime which takes beautiful medium distance photos.


----------



## DoctorStoner (Oct 25, 2022)

I was way off with the lens brand... Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC EX Macro. Had to double check. It's a good lens. The glass is great but the AF is a little funky sometimes.


----------



## soliloquy (Oct 25, 2022)

I second the recommendations above. 
Go full frame 
Go mirrorless 
Focus on glass options more than the camera. 

Not sure who said this, but: "date the body, but marry the glass". Basically stating that the camera bodies will constantly keep upgrading and changing. Yet a good lens is what you want to hold onto. Look at photography that interests you, and see what lenses they are using. 

If you are not sure what differentiates a zoom vs prime lens, or if one is 'better' than the other, take it as a weekend project. Friday night: use your cell phone camera and frame things that interest you by zooming/cropping in and out of the subject, till you're happy. Saturday: use your cell phone camera to frame things, WITHOUT zooming/cropping in. Essentially use your feet to zoom in/out. This also applies on your phone to do 'wide' 'tele' and 'normal' view. 

Where zoom lenses provided versatility, and convenience of not having to change lenses frequently; prime lenses help you isolate your subject more, and potentially help you be more creative. My understanding is that where zooms help capture a moment, a prime helps make ANYTHING into THE moment. 

Whichever route you go with, I would recommend avoiding the default kit lenses, which are usually 18-55 or 24-70 f/3.5-5.6. what these numbers mean is, at their widest, they will shoot at f/3.5 but at their longest (is 55mm and 70mm, respectfully), they shoot at 5.6. Meaning, if you nailed in the shutter speed at the widest, but zoom in, the shutter speed will have to reduce to compensate for perfect exposure. It will make learning more challenging (not impossible). 

Mind you, my opinions are coming from a portrait photographer, primarily. Lots of genres exist, such as: landscape, street, fashion, weddings, portraits, documentary, macro, fine art, still life etc ....

In terms of cameras, I would highly recommend Sony. It does have pros and cons, so I'll try having them accordingly.
Sony pro: 
TONS of users, this easier to find used for less
TONS of 3rd party support for lenses and parts. Good way to look at this is: you buy a 1950's vintage Gibson to keep it stock. Don't like the nut? The tuners? The pickups? Tough. You stick with it. Where as, you buy a 'lesser' brand and change EVERYTHING to suit you better. Though some third party options do exist for Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Olympus.etc, they don't have as many when compared to Sony. Can't afford Sony glass? No worries, you will have plenty of options to pick from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang/Rokinon, and TONS of other companies. 

Cons for Sony:
Though capable, the Sony a7, a7r, a7ii and a7rii had a lot of random issues. Issues like: low battery life; random bricking, random.overheating, focus issues, buttons stop working, files getting corrupt, etc...those cameras can be had for pretty decent price. Where possible, I'd HIGHLY recommend going for anything Sony from 3rd generation onwards. 
Another con for Sony is their menu system is annoying. But since you'll be learning photography, you'll pick it up soon. I think the challenge most photographers face when switching to Sony is they are used to the language of Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax, Olympus, etc. Once you understand the menu, it becomes easy. 


Where possible, YouTube it! YouTube reviews. Look up tutorials and such and learn as much as you possibly can. You don't need classes, but just study what the light is doing in any given situation (even if you're not photographing it). Understand where the light is coming from, and what the shadows are doing.


----------



## odibrom (Oct 26, 2022)

soliloquy said:


> (...)
> 
> In terms of cameras, I would highly recommend Sony. It does have pros and cons, so I'll try having them accordingly.
> Sony pro:
> ...



I do not agree with this. With Canon, Nikon and some of the other brands being in the market for way more time than Sony, there are way more options for "add ons", accessories, lens and what not for these brands, specially for Canon and Nikon which are the market learders. I'd go with one of these 2 brands for the body. For the glass, one can then go with Sigma, Tamron and so many other after market brands.

Other than that, yeah, one can keep the lens if one stays true to a mount type, meaning loyalty to a body's brand. This is where Nikon surpassed Canon by keeping the same lens mount system when introducing their auto-focus. Canon, however, got it to work faster, specially in the "ultrasonic" lens models. This doesn't mean that Sigma and Tamron and other brands won't have great lenses for either Nikon or Canon...

I see Sony as a novelty brand, they have the marketing to back it up, the technology, but in my opinion, aren't there just yet.

Lens are good to keep (my main lens was bought in 1998), but it's the sensor that _freezes_ the moment and in this matter I think that Canon and Nikon are still on top over all other brands (maybe even Hasselblad?), either in the full frame as in the not full frame sensor range.


----------



## soliloquy (Oct 26, 2022)

odibrom said:


> I do not agree with this. With Canon, Nikon and some of the other brands being in the market for way more time than Sony, there are way more options for "add ons", accessories, lens and what not for these brands, specially for Canon and Nikon which are the market learders. I'd go with one of these 2 brands for the body. For the glass, one can then go with Sigma, Tamron and so many other after market brands.
> 
> Other than that, yeah, one can keep the lens if one stays true to a mount type, meaning loyalty to a body's brand. This is where Nikon surpassed Canon by keeping the same lens mount system when introducing their auto-focus. Canon, however, got it to work faster, specially in the "ultrasonic" lens models. This doesn't mean that Sigma and Tamron and other brands won't have great lenses for either Nikon or Canon...
> 
> ...




That would be applicable to go with Canon or Nikon, if DSLRs were the route the OP is going with. In the mirrorless world, canon and Nikon's old lenses aren't compatible, unless you get an adapter. Adapters are okay, but more susceptible to issues. 

Where in the mirrorless world, Sony didn't prevent other companies to provide options, which Canon did, and third party don't care much about Nikon mirrorless right now. 

As someone who has tried both Sony lenses and third party lenses, I can say that the sigma 85mm f1.4 DG dn is a far better lens than the Sony 85mm f1.4 gm lens. Likewise, the 35mm f1.2 sigma is a whole lot better (though giant). The samyang 135mm is super light weight and sharp/reliable, though the Sony 135 is equally superb. 

Even more creative lenses like Lensbaby, ttartisan, 7artistan, etc are offering more options for the Sony mount than canon or Nikon.


----------



## Lemonbaby (Oct 26, 2022)

KnightBrolaire said:


> I've been traveling a lot more the last few years and the limitations of smartphone cameras become way more apparent when I'm trying to do certain tasks (basically anything besides close up macro shots). I missed a great shot of two eagles fighting over a salmon last year because all I had was my phone.


I love my micro four thirds for hiking. Currently using a Panasonic GX9 with Pana/Leica 8-18mm & Panasonic 100-300 tele. Covers a lot of ground with tele equivalent to 600mm full frame, weighs ~1.3kg in total and takes very little space in the backpack. I see no need to go full frame at all.


----------



## soliloquy (Oct 26, 2022)

odibrom said:


> I do not agree with this. With Canon, Nikon and some of the other brands being in the market for way more time than Sony, there are way more options for "add ons", accessories, lens and what not for these brands, specially for Canon and Nikon which are the market learders. I'd go with one of these 2 brands for the body. For the glass, one can then go with Sigma, Tamron and so many other after market brands.
> 
> Other than that, yeah, one can keep the lens if one stays true to a mount type, meaning loyalty to a body's brand. This is where Nikon surpassed Canon by keeping the same lens mount system when introducing their auto-focus. Canon, however, got it to work faster, specially in the "ultrasonic" lens models. This doesn't mean that Sigma and Tamron and other brands won't have great lenses for either Nikon or Canon...
> 
> ...



I also wanted to add that I wont call Sony as a novelty brand. 
Having used the following brands:
Pentax: kx, k5, k3, k3ii, k1, k1ii
Canon: 5DmIII, 5Dmiv
Nikon: D850
Sony: A7rII, A7rIII, A7III

for various shoots (portraits, weddings, travel, low light, landscape, events, macro, still life, street, fashion, etc), i can confidently say that I get more keepers via Sony than any other brand out there. Its technology, computer system, and just overall AI is far a head of its coemption. As such, if a 'good' camera is considered by how many keepers you get, then i'd say that Sony is doing something right. 

in terms of lenses, the 35mm f1.4 gm, and 50mm f1.2 gm lenses are quiet something else, when compared to their counterparts via Canon/Pentax/Nikon. Size, Speed, Accuracy, Sharpness, Weight, all are done significantly better on Sony than the other brands. 

Also keep in mind, where Nikon and Canon are relatively slow to release new cameras, Sony, in that timeline, release several others, each with significant improvements over their previous offerings. Where sony did struggle in the past with their earlier models, they have learned a lot, and now are doing great with their gear. Anything past their 3rd generation of bodies is now, not only doing what DSLRs were supposed to do, but they are doing it far better too. 

now, sure, usability, and field work maybe different. For example, though i do consider Pentax to be far behind in what they offer, that is the brand that i travel with the most, and its my usual go-to for most things as its an absolute joy to use (for me). I also enjoy its roughed build quality that isn't found in other brands. I can swim with their cameras, if need be, and i know they will be just fine. Sony...not so much. 

as such, I wont consider Sony as a novelty. Maybe a bit utilitarian? They aren't exactly as much fun (for me) to use, when compared to other brands, but if i can manipulate the files more, and get more consistent results, that are repeatable and reliable, i would go with that over other brands.


----------



## odibrom (Oct 26, 2022)

By "novelty" I meant in the SLR photo scene. They've been around for a long time with camcorders and did pretty well, but Canon and Nikon have been around for way longer in the SLR camera business.

I haven't been following much this "game" lately so you may be right, however, Canon does have mirrorless cameras with in the EOS system, the "R" series if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## soliloquy (Oct 26, 2022)

odibrom said:


> By "novelty" I meant in the SLR photo scene. They've been around for a long time with camcorders and did pretty well, but Canon and Nikon have been around for way longer in the SLR camera business.
> 
> I haven't been following much this "game" lately so you may be right, however, Canon does have mirrorless cameras with in the EOS system, the "R" series if I'm not mistaken.


That they do, though Canon is new to the mirrorless world, and they still dont have an exact comparison to what Sony is offering, in terms of the A7rIII, a7IV, a7RIV, Alpha 1, and maybe video? I dont speak video and cameras, so whatever Sony is doing with their S line, its all alien to me. 

Between the two, i will say that Canon does offer a better user interface. Their language, menu and all is easy for ANY ONE picking it up. Sony, on the other hand doesn't make it easy for people to pick it up. A noob, on the other hand, it wont make much difference. everything, initially, will be difficult, but sooner or later the noob will learn and master it (newbie gains?). 

i think Canon may eventually catch up to sony, but they do have a ways to go before hand. They waited too long to enter the mirrorless world, and as such, Sony seems to be dominating that. Sure, Fuji is pretty popular, but i feel Fuji is catering more to a niche market. Olympus...supposedly still exists? Covid took them under, but i think they are still kicking around? Panasonic, i think is doing more video related stuff. Hasselblad is a bit too expensive and niche for most people to buy into it. Leica, same thing. Pentax had 1 mirrorless WAY before sony, or anyone else, but they quicky dissolved that. Nikon is kind of sluggish in getting into mirrorless, though supposedly they are catching up fast?


----------



## sakeido (Oct 28, 2022)

I was in the same boat as OP and ended up getting a Fujifilm XT-3. Full frame cameras and these enormous zoom lenses for a newbie is a bizarre recommendation. Something cheaper, smaller, lighter, and easier to handle is the way to go.. otherwise the camera ends up staying home and you end up shooting on your smartphone anyway. Good lens retain a lot of their value, buy used, and you can expect to get basically all of your money back out of your camera system if/when you do decide to go full frame

imo most guys just want to point the camera at something, take a shot, and be done with it. Fujifilm images are the best, straight out of camera. Basically no need to edit with the film emulation but you can always shoot RAW+JPG if you want to mess around with that.


----------

