DAA
Well-Known Member
- Location
- West Bountiful, UT
So... I'm thinking about getting a DSLR.
I did some film photography with decent manual equipment 20+ years ago, but have never used anything but point and shoot digitals. Absolutely zero experience with a DSLR. And so, I'm just starting to try and learn something about them, so I can have some idea what to look for if I decide to buy one.
It looks to me, like one of the first things I need to decide, is whether I want/need a "full frame" DSLR or not?
Intended uses... Some landscape photography, some wildlife photography and of course general travel/family/portrait stuff. Output mostly on screen or online, will print a few 8x10's on occasion.
Budget... Keeping in mind that I'll be buying used equipment and can wait for a good deal on what I want. Looking to spend maybe $700 on the camera body? I haven't priced anything yet, for all I know my budget has already made this decision for me?
I think I have a grasp on the cropping effect and some of the techical advantages/disadvantages such as larger pixel size and reduced noise etc. But, in the real world? I've no clue!
Seems full frame might be a big advantage in wide angle landscape work? And also in low light wildlife/action shots? Or, is it really not THAT much of a difference, in the real world?
Likewise, seems like the small sensor body might have a distince advantage in telephoto shots, stretching a smaller lighter lens?
What about lens selection? Anything to think about between the two formats here?
Size and weight of the body... Realize, I've not even handled any of these things yet. But, size and weight are fairly important considerations for me. The larger and heavier the camera, the less likely it is to actually get used in many circumstances for me. Is there a real size/weight penalty with a full frame body vs. a cropped sensor body?
Any and all opinions and comments welcomed!
- DAA
I did some film photography with decent manual equipment 20+ years ago, but have never used anything but point and shoot digitals. Absolutely zero experience with a DSLR. And so, I'm just starting to try and learn something about them, so I can have some idea what to look for if I decide to buy one.
It looks to me, like one of the first things I need to decide, is whether I want/need a "full frame" DSLR or not?
Intended uses... Some landscape photography, some wildlife photography and of course general travel/family/portrait stuff. Output mostly on screen or online, will print a few 8x10's on occasion.
Budget... Keeping in mind that I'll be buying used equipment and can wait for a good deal on what I want. Looking to spend maybe $700 on the camera body? I haven't priced anything yet, for all I know my budget has already made this decision for me?
I think I have a grasp on the cropping effect and some of the techical advantages/disadvantages such as larger pixel size and reduced noise etc. But, in the real world? I've no clue!
Seems full frame might be a big advantage in wide angle landscape work? And also in low light wildlife/action shots? Or, is it really not THAT much of a difference, in the real world?
Likewise, seems like the small sensor body might have a distince advantage in telephoto shots, stretching a smaller lighter lens?
What about lens selection? Anything to think about between the two formats here?
Size and weight of the body... Realize, I've not even handled any of these things yet. But, size and weight are fairly important considerations for me. The larger and heavier the camera, the less likely it is to actually get used in many circumstances for me. Is there a real size/weight penalty with a full frame body vs. a cropped sensor body?
Any and all opinions and comments welcomed!
- DAA