Mirrorless Camera Recommendations – £1,000 Budget

Samwise.Gamgee

Samwise.Gamgee

Samwise.Gamgee

Associate
Joined
22 Jun 2015
Posts
198
Location
South of the north but north of the south.
Hi everyone,

I’m a new photographer looking to purchase my first mirrorless camera. My budget is around £1,000, I'm looking at used gear to get the most value.

Initially, I’ll be doing mostly general-purpose photography – family shots, travel, and nature – but I’d like to get into wildlife photography down the line, so good autofocus and lens options for that style are important.

What body + lens combination would you recommend at this price point?

I’ve been looking at the Sony Alpha A7 III and similar models, but I’d love to hear suggestions on the best setup for both now and as I grow into more specialised wildlife work.

Thanks
 
Shopping around for upgrades for my daughter at the moment with a similar price range, she's coming from a Canon DSLR so no carry over lenses, Sony A6400 with the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 is winning at the moment, can be had for under £1k grey market.
 
JRJ said:
Shopping around for upgrades for my daughter at the moment with a similar price range, she's coming from a Canon DSLR so no carry over lenses, Sony A6400 with the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 is winning at the moment, can be had for under £1k grey market.
Click to expand...

Sigma 18-50 probably a better fit imo. Hasn’t got OSS like the Tamron but its much more compact and just as sharp.
 
DD_Crash said:
Have a look at micro 4/3rds as the lens equivalents to full frame are a lot smaller and lighter. If possible go to a camera shop and get a feel for what you need.
Click to expand...
I have heard micro 4/3rds are good for wildlife photography due to the natural zoom, however they are not very beginner friendly. I have seen the Olympus model comes recommended quite highly on a few other forums. Most of my photography will be general purpose, with a view to get into wildlife down the line. Will a micro 4/3rds be as good as an equivalent ASPC camera for all purpose photography?
 
henry hoov3r said:
Used A6400 and a couple of decent lenses would be my recommendation. The A73 is great but full frame lenses aren’t cheap and they are big and heavy as well.
Click to expand...
The A6400 comes up in so many recommendation posts! The only thing that puts me off slightly is the ergonomics, as the grab handle is not very deep, and I have gorilla hands. However within my budget I think it may be the smarter choice, those FF lenses are not cheap.

Additionally I want to spend as much possible on the glass, do you have any thoughts on the Sony alpha range as to which one represents the best bang for the buck? E.G I have seen used A6000 go for as little as £225 on eBay and other sites.
 
JRJ said:
Shopping around for upgrades for my daughter at the moment with a similar price range, she's coming from a Canon DSLR so no carry over lenses, Sony A6400 with the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 is winning at the moment, can be had for under £1k grey market.
Click to expand...
Ngl, when I first started looking a few weeks ago I loved the look of a 5D Mark III with a pro lens. In fact about 10 years ago I would dream of having that camera body. It's so tempting to pick one up as you can get a combo for a steal now a days, and in the rights hands they still produce incredible images. However, everyone I have spoke to has advised for a beginner I'm best going down the mirrorless route as DSLR is just not worth it these days.
 
Samwise.Gamgee said:
I have heard micro 4/3rds are good for wildlife photography due to the natural zoom, however they are not very beginner friendly. I have seen the Olympus model comes recommended quite highly on a few other forums. Most of my photography will be general purpose, with a view to get into wildlife down the line. Will a micro 4/3rds be as good as an equivalent ASPC camera for all purpose photography?
Click to expand...
Like all modern cameras there are lots of menu options, however there are lots of youtube videos on setting up and using the camera. I used to have a Canon 80D crop sensor and my old Canon 24-105L lens weighed more than my Lumix G9 with an equivalent lens, a 12-60 Leica, actually the lens is equivalent to a 24-120.
 
Samwise.Gamgee said:
The A6400 comes up in so many recommendation posts! The only thing that puts me off slightly is the ergonomics, as the grab handle is not very deep, and I have gorilla hands. However within my budget I think it may be the smarter choice, those FF lenses are not cheap.

Additionally I want to spend as much possible on the glass, do you have any thoughts on the Sony alpha range as to which one represents the best bang for the buck? E.G I have seen used A6000 go for as little as £225 on eBay and other sites.
Click to expand...

I rate the A6000 i just sold mine on ebay. Ones going for £225 must be a bit rough i got just under £400 for mine but it was mint with only a 2k shutter count.


Sony Alpha a6400 Mirrorless Digital Camera (Body Only)

£519.00 - 12 Months Warranty - 14 Days Money Back - 100% Brand New - Free Shipping - Import Tax Included
www.e-infin.com www.e-infin.com
 
Last edited:
Samwise.Gamgee said:
Would the Sigma 18-50 be any good for wildlife photography? or is it mostly a general purpose lens.
Click to expand...
Id say general purpose but it depends on the shots that you are wanting to take and what the wildlife is, also what your expectations of the outcome are. Have a look at the pictures threads on here, then ask the poster what gear they used for specific shots.

Generally you will need a lot of reach for wildlife...I have the 300mm F4 and 150-400 Olympus lenses and still hanker for more reach.

Matt
 
Mine is micro 43rds so no it would not work for sony - not that i know much about the system - maybe look for a sigma 100-400 but one word of caution will always be that you need more reach its just one of those things with wildlife.

Matt
 
On sensor sizes, crop factors, and reach - if you had a Sony A7IV (33MP sensor) with a 300mm lens and applied an APS-C crop it in post, the "reach" would be the same as the APS-C and the pixel resolution would still be around 22MP. Its not a great reason in isolation to buy a crop sensor camera because with the larger sensor of high enough resolution, you have all the "crop" factors available to you anyway.

"The performance density" of the crop sensor is often higher, but thats only really a big advantage if the lens can resolve enough detail to take advantage of it - thats really the realm of very expensive telephoto primes and those will be very big in any system.

"Reach" being used to compare different focal lengths on different crop factor systems can also be misleading because aperture is often ignored. Aperture is the ratio of the focal length to the diameter of the aperture, therefore if the focal length changes and the aperture ratio remains the same, the aperture diameter must also change. You'll often see people say "300mm on APS-C is the same as 450mm on full frame" or "300mm on m43 is the same as 600mm on full frame" (OM System even use this half truth in marketing material!), and then use that to compare a 300mm F2.8 to 450mm F2.8 and a 600mm F2.8, pointing out that the shorter lenses are smaller, without taking into account the diferences in aperture size. A true equivalent of an m43 camera with a 300mm f2.8 lens vs full frame would be a 600mm f5.6 resulting in the same 107mm aperture diameter.

When you compare the lenses in a truly "equivalent" manner, the size difference is significantly reduced.
 
SonicSW20 said:
On sensor sizes, crop factors, and reach - if you had a Sony A7IV (33MP sensor) with a 300mm lens and applied an APS-C crop it in post, the "reach" would be the same as the APS-C and the pixel resolution would still be around 22MP. Its not a great reason in isolation to buy a crop sensor camera because with the larger sensor of high enough resolution, you have all the "crop" factors available to you anyway.

"The performance density" of the crop sensor is often higher, but thats only really a big advantage if the lens can resolve enough detail to take advantage of it - thats really the realm of very expensive telephoto primes and those will be very big in any system.

"Reach" being used to compare different focal lengths on different crop factor systems can also be misleading because aperture is often ignored. Aperture is the ratio of the focal length to the diameter of the aperture, therefore if the focal length changes and the aperture ratio remains the same, the aperture diameter must also change. You'll often see people say "300mm on APS-C is the same as 450mm on full frame" or "300mm on m43 is the same as 600mm on full frame" (OM System even use this half truth in marketing material!), and then use that to compare a 300mm F2.8 to 450mm F2.8 and a 600mm F2.8, pointing out that the shorter lenses are smaller, without taking into account the diferences in aperture size. A true equivalent of an m43 camera with a 300mm f2.8 lens vs full frame would be a 600mm f5.6 resulting in the same 107mm aperture diameter.

When you compare the lenses in a truly "equivalent" manner, the size difference is significantly reduced.
Click to expand...
Took me a couple of reads and ChatGPT to get to understand this, but I think in essence what you're saying is:

  • Crop sensors don’t magically magnify lenses — they just record a smaller portion of the image circle, which is the same effect as cropping a high-resolution full-frame shot.
  • The “advantage” comes from pixel density, but you only benefit if the lens can resolve enough detail.
  • When comparing across formats, you have to account for aperture equivalence — otherwise you overstate how small/light crop-system telephotos really are.
  • For many people, a high-res full-frame + cropping in post is functionally the same as using a crop sensor for “reach,” unless they specifically need the higher pixel density for very sharp long-lens work.

My key takeaway is I can't really go to wrong with either platform as a beginner!

I think based on the feedback I have thus far, ASPC will be my chosen route, with some nice glass to follow.

Anyone have a cheap used Sony Alpha they are wanting to part with? :D
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JRJ
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom