Help: First step into photography, specifically landscapes?

[craptakular]

Ive been thinking I needf a hobby to get me out of the house and active.

I studied Geology and always liked the natural outdoors as a youngster. Alas that was many moons ago.

I've been thinking about taking up landscape photography, but am now confused by mirrorless vs DSLR and cropped vs full lens.

I was looking at either the Sony Mirrorless A6000 or Nikon D3300/Canon 1300D.

Where do I even start, its easy to quickly end up looking at £1,200 full frame cameras.

Is it best to learn how find suitable locations, and how to take a picture on my old point and click before spunking ££££££ and not having a clue how to use it? Let alone finding and framing the perfect location to photo?

Isn't the location, time of day, weather and light more important than camera gear at this stage?

Any advice welcome, as you can see I don't have a clue where to even start.

 

[Columbo]

Photography's biggest limitation is 100% the human element.

Camera's, lenses, filters etc are a mute point if the Photographer doesn't have an eye or the will to go and actually use the stuff properly. Personally I wouldn't go and drop a large wedge on on gear as it sounds as if it's something you would like to get into but aren't actually 100% sure whether it will grab you.

Firstly I'd try looking at the advanced compact market, specifically cameras with a 1" sensor. They offer near DSLR like image quality with the added bonus that you can buy a camera that fits in your pocket. They have full / semi manual, as well as full auto modes and pretty much cater for everyone in terms of ability. The Sony RX100 (Mk1) is a good place to start.

Secondly I wouldn't worry about 'perfect photographic' locations or time of day too much, just visit places you think are interesting to you and not to your camera. Then start to document what you are seeing through the means of your lens. It's much easier to spend time with a scene or subject when its interesting to you personally over forcing yourself to go there for only photography purposes. Spend time with the same subject using different settings, don't just stand there, get on your knees, on your belly or lift the camera above your head for different perspectives, realise that not everything of interest has to be plum in the middle of the photo..

Thirdly buy Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson, out of all the gear I've bought the £10 I spent on that book was the best in terms of bang for buck I've spent.

 

[neodude]

As above. But if landscapes are your thing, buy a good tripod.

 

[MookJong]

As other have said the whole face of DSLR is changing with the rise or really impressive mirrorless options.

If you want all the large kit then go for it but the most fun I have with photography now comes out of my smaller Fuji devices. Also I know you have put a focus on landscapes, but depending on where you live that might not be something you can do often. With a camera that fits in a jacket pocket you can practice your hobby all the time. Then when you do go out to a special location you know exactly how the camera works.

Good tripod is a must after that any half decent camera will get you good results if you know what you are doing!

I wont lie though the location does help. This was taken handheld with a fixed 35mm lens, all wrong for landscapes but I like it.

 

[D.P.]

Landscape photography is relatively cheap and gear choices straightforward compared to sport and wildlife etc.

You will be stopped the lenses down to a smaller aperture which without going in to details means that for basically every lens on the market now will be plenty good enough. similarly you don't need big expense fast f/1.4 prime or lenses with wicked fast auto-focus. Since you can use a tripod you don;t need any kind of image stabilization. Overall, this means a lot of older lenses will work well.

Also, since you are on a tripod you can shoot at the Base ISO of the camera, so you don't need sensors that have very low noise at high ISOs sensitivities.That again can mean older cameras work well. What is useful for landscapes is camera with higher dynamic range at base ISO, so Sony, Pentax, Nikon cameras do very well.


For landscapes, none of the drawbacks of mirror-less cameras have an impact so you can consider these.



My Recommendation is soemthign like a second hand Nikon D7000 with the kit lens or preferably the original 16-85mm. The 16-85mm opens up a lot of doors. I did a lot of landscape work with that lens. 16mm is perfect on a crop sensor, as is 85mm. The D7000 has a very good dynamic range and these cameras go for peanuts on ebay.

Down the road you can then look to add some lenses. Many beginners are drawn to ultra wide angle 10-20mm type lenses for landscapes. However, these lenses are extremely hard to use and require expert com computational skills. Moreover, the super wide angle effect only works under some very specific conditions. If you are thinking a long the lines of "I can fit more in, or I can capture this vast panoramic vista in a single photo", you are doomed to get boring photos of blue sky and grass with a tiny strip of interest. I actually suggest the opposite and get a telephoto lens for landscapes, make for some much more interesting opportunities and is much easier to us.