Want to get back into photography again

Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
45,777
Location
Co Durham
Been through a lot of issues in recent years but in a place again now where I want to get back into photography in a big way again.

Used to have a minolta film SLR with about 8 lenses including primes,portrait, macro, mirror etc but sold them all and just went with several bridge cameras since.

But feeling the itch to go proper again.

But i am out of the loop and a bit lost.

Not sure whether i should go DSLR or 4/3 (or is it 3/4?) or full frame system?

So basically, in a short summary what are the pros and cons of each?

And which models should I be looking at please?

Budget up to £1000 with one decent lens if there is an absolute must have camera. If not, id ideally like to get a system with a wide angle zoom, a prime and long range zoom for that money (maybe optimistic and just a wide angle zoom and prime and the rest of the lenses will wait till later)

Im quite prepared to buy 2nd hand so factor that in with my price range please.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Hi :)

Have you used a FF or cropped camera before? I only ask as I wondered if you had a preference on either.

I'm not one for commenting on the 4/3 but you could get the following fairly easily:

Prime - 50mm f/1.4 - £200

Wide Angle - Something like a Tokina 11-15 f/2.8 (£200) or a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 (£350-400) or if you wanted to save a little extra, the Sigma 11-16mm f/2.8 (£220) is a superb lens for the money - Prices are roughly new so eBay would be cheaper as would Talk Photography

Zoom - I would highly recommend the Canon 70-200 f/4L if you're looking at a Canon body. It's a superb lens, pin sharp and produces some stunning results.

As for the body, 550D, 60D, 70D, 7D, 6D all of which would be better sought 2nd hand.

I can't comment for Nikon but the above are units I've used and been impressed with.
 
Seriously not one reply? :(

This thread has become seriously quiet for some reason.

Hadn't been in here myself much for some time, and getting feedback in here can be a bit like pulling teeth.

Perhaps try the DP review forums.

As for offering advice, well, I'm not in the best position. I neglected photography for a bit but am now trying to make the time again. And currently experimenting with FF myself.
 
Thanks for the advice guys. FF now that I have looked is well out of my price range!

So its either 4/3 or SLR.

I must say after reading up I'm quite liking the size of the 4/3 system compared to lugging around a full SLR kit.

I know when i had my film SLR it got quite heavy lugging around all that kit, weighed several kilos.
 
I would say for DSLR Nikon & Canon are the top dogs with Sony hot on the heels of the big 2 established players.

Fujifilm do make some very stylist retro looking DSLR's and I am very tempted to get one myself !

Have a look for a used DSLR body as there seems to be more available than the 4/3 bodies.

I own both a DLSR and mirror less SONY NEX 5R which can have inter changeable lens.

So check out some camera shops for used equipment is a good option to get a decent body at a reasonable price.
 
Another vote for having a read of the Micros Four Thirds forum on DPReview.com.

Pros:

- Smaller and lighter that APS-C and FF
- Wide range of lenses and body styles from Panasonic and Olympus which are interchangeable
- Continuous live preview
- Image stabilisation as standard (in body for Olympus, in lens for Panasonic (with a couple of exceptions)
- MetaBones et al allowing use of legacy lenses

Cons:

- Can't match FF low light performance as their large objective lenses let more light in
- AF Tracking (for motorsports etc) isn't yet as good as top end FF
- Smaller bodies = smaller batteries
 
I've had canon **D's for most of my photography life, but i got fed up of lugging a big kit around with me, especially for holidays etc, so i switched to a compact system camera, first the Canon EOS M, which was a terrific little camera, only spoilt by lack of dedicated lenses, and a EVF (view finder). Sure, you could get the EOS adapter so you could use any EF lens - which, if you're prepared to carry big lenses around is fine, but to me, defeats the point of the EOS-M.

I sold my EOS-M and after researching, switched to the Olympus M43 system, i bought the Olympus OM-D E-M10 with the 14-42 ez power zoom and the 45m F/1.8 prime. I have since added a 9-18 UWA and a cheap 40-150 for some reach, the only thing i would add and change now is the 40-150 to the 75-300 to get the equivelent of 600mm reach, and i'd add the 60mm macro. I have my whole kit in a bag no more than 20cm square (The one you get with the olympus pen 40-150 lens kit. It's no trouble to carry around, but the only downside is battery life so you will need spares. I can't comment on the compatibles yet as i'm waiting for delivery of mine.

You could probably get a m43 kit like mine for around your budget now, and there's scope to upgrade to pro grade lenses too. I just don't feel the need to though.
 
I think ive got it pinned down to 4/3 for sure and i'm liking the olympus ones over the panasonic as the IS is in the camera, not the lens.

Now its a question of which model?

I can get good deals on the old EM10 and 5 models but there are newer versions out with better autofocus????

Tempted by the new EM10 II with dual lens kit for around £700 and pick up a nice prime with the other £300 as a starter. Will add other lens later.
 
How important is shooting video to you? This is the one area where Panasonic has a clear supremacy over Olympus.

I haven't used them, but the Olympus fans on DPR seem to rate the new versions of the EM5 and EM10 as significant improvements over the older versions.

Their new f2.8 Pro lenses are supposed to excellent.
 
Be careful with your lenses. There are two different systems, there's the older 4/3rds, which is a different fitting to the newer micro 4/3rds or µ4/3.

The older EM-10 is still a very capable camera, but the newer model does have a better AF apparently. If i was in your position, i'd go for the newer one though. £300 will still get you a good prime, or if you go 2nd hand you might even get a couple of lenses, the 45mm goes for about £130/£140 used.


Also, if you haven't looked already, consider the Sony A7, different system again, but great choice of lenses and the A7 is a cracking piece of kit, especially at high ISO's.
 
Last edited:
Be careful with your lenses. There are two different systems, there's the older 4/3rds, which is a different fitting to the newer micro 4/3rds or µ4/3.

The older EM-10 is still a very capable camera, but the newer model does have a better AF apparently. If i was in your position, i'd go for the newer one though. £300 will still get you a good prime, or if you go 2nd hand you might even get a couple of lenses, the 45mm goes for about £130/£140 used.


Also, if you haven't looked already, consider the Sony A7, different system again, but great choice of lenses and the A7 is a cracking piece of kit, especially at high ISO's.

Damn i hate it when things look compatible and they arent :(

Its the AF which is swaying me to the newer models to be fair. I suspect thats where I will go.

I did consider the Sony range and have looked at them but the choice of lens don;t seem to be as good as the olympus/panasonic (plus sigma) range plus the ability to use old skool lenses with manual focus.

Plus isnt the A7 a full frame camera? Wont that mean big heavy lenses again? I dont want to go back to how I was lugging around a great big camera bag which weighed several kilos.

EDIT: Just looked at the lens cost for the A7. Even the basic typical short zoom is almost £500! :O
 
Last edited:
How important is shooting video to you? This is the one area where Panasonic has a clear supremacy over Olympus.

I haven't used them, but the Olympus fans on DPR seem to rate the new versions of the EM5 and EM10 as significant improvements over the older versions.

Their new f2.8 Pro lenses are supposed to excellent.

Video isnt that important. If i need to, i have a 4k capable camera to record 4k video (although it means taking two cameras with me). And to be far i take a lot more still shots over video anyway. Living in a area with poor broadband so even the smallest/shortest 4k video takes me a day to upload to my youtube channel, it just doesnt seem worth the hassle anymore.
 
Video isnt that important. If i need to, i have a 4k capable camera to record 4k video (although it means taking two cameras with me). And to be far i take a lot more still shots over video anyway. Living in a area with poor broadband so even the smallest/shortest 4k video takes me a day to upload to my youtube channel, it just doesnt seem worth the hassle anymore.

Then Olympus would be the way to go.

Let us know what you end up buying!
 
I think the M43 system is utterly fantastic for a smaller, lighter setup. It is the only mirrorless system with a complete lens line up, and apart from the Nikon 1 is the only system that truly offers smaller and lighter lenses, due to the smaller sensor but also lots of design work in the lenses.

All the cameras are very mature, Panasonic and Olympus have been doing this for longer than any one else, and it is their main photographic focus unlike the half hearted attempts by Canon and Nikon, and the 'try everything under the sun and see what sticks' approach form Sony.


Having Panasonic and Olympus together makes the system so much more complete than anything else outside Nikon and Canon DSLR. The system is also open so 3rd parties like Sigma give the m43 mount more love, and offer native focus capabilities (sony does the same).


I prefer the Olympus cameras, more focused on photographers, and the sensor IS is a nice addition.



I find m43 the perfect compliment to a FF DSLR. Other mirorrless system with an APS-C sensor don't give you any/enough benefit in lens size.
 

Yeah ive read both review on that site. Apart from weatherproofing, 1.5 fps and the 40Mb 8 shot still pic I cant spot any other difference for the extra £300?

And the om10 you can use the rear screen as a touchscreen to adjust point of focus and it has a built in flash so handier (plus is smaller and weighs less and has a better battery life)?

So im just wondering if I was missing something that the DM5 offers that I'd later regret?

To my mind there is very little between them now and the 10 beats the 5 in some things and vica versa. If they were the same price it would be very difficult, but really its looks mad to buy the 5 unless you have money to burn?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom