Want to buy a camera, any recommendations

[racoloish]

I want a camera that can take excellent photograph to moving or not moving fish. I have Africans cichlids and they are always moving. I will be willing to pay 300 or less. So a good camera in this price. Will appreciate the help.

[Drew's_Fish_99]

Definitely talk to Cygnus about that. A few others may know too, but Cygnus did a thread call Chronicle on how to photograph fish or something like that and seem to really know what he was talking about. I can link for you of you'd like once I get to my laptop.

[racoloish]

OK will be waiting

[genocidex]

http://www.aquaticcommunity.com/aquariumforum/showthread.php?t=116675&highlight=Chronicle

thats the link drew was talking about

[MCHRKiller]

You could get a used Nikon D60 for that price, had one for a few years and really liked it. You may also could score a used D90 on ebay for arond 300 if you were patient.

[Drew's_Fish_99]

Thanks Genocidex! Wouldn't be at my laptop until tonight unfortunately.

[racoloish]

Is the sony a100 a good one compared to nikon d60 or d90?

[racoloish]

Or the nikon d5200

[MCHRKiller]

Any Nikon DSLR will not leave you satisfied. The older D40-D60 were entry level models just as the now D3000series. The D5000 series is a step up and is the next version of the D90 so it is going to give you very accurate results. I am currently using a D7000 which is an absolutely amazing camera....if you can swing its price tag it is definitely worth it.

[Richard Peche]

What you need to look at is the noise ability of the camera, the lenses available, the colour reproduction of the sensor and the general feel of the camera.

I personally use Sony DSLRs and have been very pleased with the colour reproduction. However, the older generation, such as the a100 are not great when it comes to the noise side of life. In fact, I don't push mine past ISO 400 because it starts to really struggle. The colour is however, very good, with lovely warm tones to the images.

The Nikons are good cameras with better noise control but slightly worse colours. I have not been impressed with the entry-level Nikons as the build quality appears to be poor compared to my Sony.

Canons have more blue tones to the images but have incredible noise control.

In terms of what runs around on the Ebay world, Sony has the biggest second-hand lens market as most of the autofocus Minolta and Konica Minolta lenses will work 100% with the new Sony DSLRs. (a-mount series). This also means that you can pick up some very good lenses for quite low prices. A website called Dyxum has a full list of every lens that will work with modern Sonys. I own about 20 lenses total and maybe 4 are new Sony lenses.

[Richard Peche]

Should have posted this originally...

The final point I wanted to mention is that you should not underestimate the entry level DSLRs. I have found that they can perform perfectly well once you have become more familiar with the gear. If you have seen any of the fish images that I have posted on this forum you may be surprised to know that I use a Sony A230 (an outdated entry level DSLR) with its stock standard 18-55mm kit lens.

[Skizzo]

I currently use and recommend a sony rx100 mkii. It captures pictures just as good as any prosumer dslr in a compact size. I rarely lug around my Nikon D90 with a 24-70 lens. It was just too bulky and heavy when trying to take pictures of my little boys (ages 3 and 4) as well as carrying it around when taking trips to Disneyland, Seaworld, etc...

Here is a picture taken with my sony rx100:
35411

[Aeonflame]

Pentax shooter here. Image quality/price is the best value you can get. Also, there are a lot of excellent vintage lenses that can be acquired very inexpensively.

[talldutchie]

I currently use and recommend a sony rx100 mkii. It captures pictures just as good as any prosumer dslr in a compact size. I rarely lug around my Nikon D90 with a 24-70 lens. It was just too bulky and heavy when trying to take pictures of my little boys (ages 3 and 4) as well as carrying it around when taking trips to Disneyland, Seaworld, etc...



That's an interesting option if you can actually stand an electronic viewfinder. I know I can't and many DSLR shooters I know also hate the things.
Additionally... is size and weight an issue for aquarium photography?


Pentax shooter here. Image quality/price is the best value you can get. Also, there are a lot of excellent vintage lenses that can be acquired very inexpensively.

To me pentax feels a bit like olympus. Lovely kit but for how much longer are they going to be in the DSLR market? Of course that's only a concern if the ability to buy and especially sell used equipment is relevant to you.

When it comes to old lens compatibility it's definitely Pentax and Nikon that are way above the rest. Oldest I ever used with my Nikon was a 135mm f2.8 of about 1970.

Problem for anyone buying a camera right now is that there's a load of good ones on the market. On DSLR there's no bad cameras left, on the smaller interchangeable lens stuff the current generation is very capable indeed and there's bargains to be had in the 2013 models. In the compact camera market it's still difficult. Despite the pressure of the camera phone there are still plenty of mediocre models being pumped out.

[Richard Peche]

When it comes to old lens compatibility it's definitely Pentax and Nikon that are way above the rest. Oldest I ever used with my Nikon was a 135mm f2.8 of about 1970


Have to disagree with you here Talldutchie. Have a look at the Sony A-mount...all autofocus lenses which were compatible with the Minolta and Konica Minolta A-mount will fit and work perfectly.

Additionally adapters can be purchased now-a-days that mean the whole range of manual focus lenses become available. Witness the fact that I still use a Rokkor 50mm F1.2 or a Vivitar 135mm F2.8 when I am looking to do portraits.

Ever looked at the Nex series? Again an electronic viewfinder but the range of lenses is almost unlimited as many many companies now make adapters. Some of those adapters mean that an autofocus lens will autofocus. Not to mention the fact that being a mirrorless design the lenses are physically smaller to produce the same magnification

[Richard Peche]

At the moment the database on Dyxum lists 402 A-mount compatible lenses. Starting with lenses in 1985.

With reviews on almost every single one.

End of the day though each system is better in some small way over the others. Just have to choose the attributes you want I guess.:-)

[talldutchie]

Have to disagree with you here Talldutchie. Have a look at the Sony A-mount...all autofocus lenses which were compatible with the Minolta and Konica Minolta A-mount will fit and work perfectly.

Any Nikon will take all lenses since 1976. Simpler ones like the venerable D40 will take anything ever made in F-mount. This includes a ton of manual focus lenses.



Additionally adapters can be purchased now-a-days that mean the whole range of manual focus lenses become available. Witness the fact that I still use a Rokkor 50mm F1.2 or a Vivitar 135mm F2.8 when I am looking to do portraits.
And I don''t need an adapter, just an Ai mount lens :wink


Ever looked at the Nex series? Again an electronic viewfinder but the range of lenses is almost unlimited as many many companies now make adapters. Some of those adapters mean that an autofocus lens will autofocus. Not to mention the fact that being a mirrorless design the lenses are physically smaller to produce the same magnification

Looked at those briefly. Tiny camera with that annoying lack of a viewfinder and a control layout that's baffling. Combined with the fact that even a 16-85 is already heavy enough to unbalance the combo and I've decided it's not a camera for me.

[Richard Peche]

Interesting. No issues with exposure readings etc on the very old lenses?

I agree with that view on the Nex. I think it is a love or hate system. Give me my old Konica Minolta 7D and it's buttons anyday or a confusing digital menu.

Out of interest, did you know that Sony supplies Nikon with sensors? Or used to at least.

[talldutchie]

Interesting. No issues with exposure readings etc on the very old lenses?Well, you need an enthousiast amateur body like the D300 or better to get a working meter. Otherwise it's just trial and error or a handheld meter.



I agree with that view on the Nex. I think it is a love or hate system. Give me my old Konica Minolta 7D and it's buttons anyday or a confusing digital menu.

Out of interest, did you know that Sony supplies Nikon with sensors? Or used to at least.


Sensor wise there's nothing wrong with the NEX series, or most of Sony's DSLR cameras. It's just the ergonomics don't work for me.

Yes, Nikon buys some sensors from Sony but they also still design some sensors and have another factory make them

[Richard Peche]

Well, you need an enthousiast amateur body like the D300 or better to get a working meter. Otherwise it's just trial and error or a handheld meter

That is kinda of what I was getting at. I know any of the Sony bodies, from the cheapest to the flagship, will work with any of those lenses with full metering etc.

The only thing some of them won't do is TTL (for flash work). But that was much newer technology that requires extra pins to transfer the information to the camera. So that is to be expected with any of the much older lenses.

With regards to ergonomics, it is the same story for me with the Nikon and Cannon bodies. I just don't find them comfortable to work with. Very much a personal preference.