People who buy way to much camera

I was not sure where to put this, so please move it to the appropiate place if need be. I will start by saying that i am by no means a pro photog. and i have boat loads to learn. I also don't want this to come off as being kind of snobish. My first DLSR over a year ago was a D3000 and then i traded it in for the D5100 because i wanted a broader ISO range, HD video (tired of carrying two cameras around with me), higher megapixels, scene selection/other bells & whistles and the swing out screen was nice to. At this point in time, this is enough camera for me for quite some time.

When i bought my D3000, i could have easly purchased something 3-4 times as expensive, but i did not. The reason i did not was because i had never really used an SLR camera before and secondly, for someone wanting to get more serious about photography, the D3000 was an excellent place to start without having all the other bells an whistles distracting me and leaving me scratching my head. Lets get the fundamentals down first! Therefore, i kind of irkes me when i hear someone buying their first DLSR and it is something like a D7000 or some Pro Nikon model - or Canon for that matter.

I can't help but think that these beginners are getting in over their heads and will not use the full potential of the camera for a very long time. That is my personal opinion. What do you think? Should a beginner jump right up to the pro models and skip the entry level products?

Personally I think you should get the best gear you can get...with an emphasis on the best lenses...

I believe you should get the camera you can afford. Get a camera that will challenge you to push yourself. I sort of agree with what you are saying but it is not always a good thing to do. Cameras cost money and you can not always get your money out of it when you want to upgrade. The D3000 is a nice camera but the D5100 would have probably been as good a starter camera and in the long run you would have probably saved money. Now would I suggest a D4 for a beginner just because you could afford it? No. No beginner with zero experience should decide that he wants to be a Pro and drops everything and spend thousands of dollars to pursue that dream. We all start off slow and the few of us that show promise go on to earn a living at it. I started off with a 110 and graduated to a 35. Went from there to a Medium format. My strong point was always in the photofinishing area so I went form being a TV engineer to managing over 100 photo labs. Ended up owning two labs/camera stores of my own. One hour labs died a slow death so I am glad I sold out before the started that.
Bottom line is that you buy the best camera you can within reason that is a couple of steps more than you can handle now. Gives you a chance to grow and decide it you have what it take to go further.

My reasons for getting the D3100 were simple.

I figured if I didn't know what the advanced features of the D7000 were, I didn't need them.

At the time of purchase the D3100 delivered the best bang for the buck and left plenty of money for accessories.

Will buying the most expensive camera make a noobie a better photographer? Probably Not.

Will buying the most expensive camera make a noobie a more confused photographer. Much more likely.

D5100Shooter said:

I can't help but think that these beginners are getting in over their heads and will not use the full potential of the camera for a very long time. That is my personal opinion. What do you think? Should a beginner jump right up to the pro models and skip the entry level products?

Click to expand...

More often than not, it's women. They crop up on Facebook daily with their brand spanking new [insert entry-level DSLR here] and a few Photoshop actions, and suddenly she's a pro photographer. The angle is undoubtedly tilted to the side, and the image is some washed-out retro carbon copy of every other female fauxtographer on Facebook. And the masses cheer. She's a creative genius, booking new sessions left and right. Throw in a baby in some hand-weaved hammock out in a field, and good grief, it's time to quit the day job. It sounds ridiculous, because it's true. Even more so, because every one of you knows someone like this.

Point being, once again, it's not about the camera. It doesn't matter if you have a D3 or a D3000, it only matters what you are able to do with it.

Buy what you want/need can aford I wouldn't advice any body to get anything less then a D90/D7000 because of the internal auto focus motor...

There are a fair few older type AF lens to be had that will do a great job on the D7000 that wont auto focus on the D5100

Apart from the AF motor I don't think there is a lot of difference between the D5100 and D7000

Browncoat said:

More often than not, it's women. They crop up on Facebook daily with their brand spanking new [insert entry-level DSLR here] and a few Photoshop actions, and suddenly she's a pro photographer. The angle is undoubtedly tilted to the side, and the image is some washed-out retro carbon copy of every other female fauxtographer on Facebook. And the masses cheer. She's a creative genius, booking new sessions left and right. Throw in a baby in some hand-weaved hammock out in a field, and good grief, it's time to quit the day job. It sounds ridiculous, because it's true. Even more so, because every one of you knows someone like this.

Point being, once again, it's not about the camera. It doesn't matter if you have a D3 or a D3000, it only matters what you are able to do with it.

Click to expand...

And men don't do this..Sorry have another look...

Browncoat said:

More often than not, it's women. They crop up on Facebook daily with their brand spanking new [insert entry-level DSLR here] and a few Photoshop actions, and suddenly she's a pro photographer. The angle is undoubtedly tilted to the side, and the image is some washed-out retro carbon copy of every other female fauxtographer on Facebook. And the masses cheer. She's a creative genius, booking new sessions left and right. Throw in a baby in some hand-weaved hammock out in a field, and good grief, it's time to quit the day job. It sounds ridiculous, because it's true. Even more so, because every one of you knows someone like this.

Point being, once again, it's not about the camera. It doesn't matter if you have a D3 or a D3000, it only matters what you are able to do with it.

Click to expand...

That would be me. I am guilty of over-cooking my photos almost as much as you over-cooked this description. Some differences: Retired, not looking to make money, realize I know next to nothing about photography but I am having so much fun and it fits right in with 'at my age, I can do what I want'. I post them everywhere because I was never able to take photos that I loved before. I LIKE it when people LIKE my photos but if they don't......there is this neat block feature on Facebook.

More specifically, I'm talking about stuff like this.

Browncoat said:

More specifically, I'm talking about stuff like this.

Click to expand...

More often than not, it's women. They crop up on Facebook daily with their brand spanking new [insert entry-level DSLR here] and a few Photoshop actions, and suddenly she's a pro photographer

To me it looked as if you were talking about women...

And as I said before men don't do that type of stuff..

Browncoat said:

More specifically, I'm talking about stuff like this.

Click to expand...

Now I know where to refer people who tell me my camera takes great pictures and ask me to shoot for them

I think if you are serious, you should get a camera slightly above your abilities so you can learn and grow into it. As far as DSLR's I started out with the D3100, upgraded to the D5100 and now wish I had jumped into the D7000 from the D3100.

cnyram said:

I think if you are serious, you should get a camera slightly above your abilities so you can learn and grow into it. As far as DSLR's I started out with the D3100, upgraded to the D5100 and now wish I had jumped into the D7000 from the D3100.

Click to expand...

This is not a bad advice since this is what I ended up doing before when I bought my first DSLR.

Between the Nikon D200, D80 and D40: I bought the D80 as my first camera. I good compromise for a beginner IMO.

When it was time to upgrade, the selections where D3, D700 and D300s. I chose the D700 and it was the best camera that I have tried and still does a great job for stills.

They are just tools. Choosing the right lens and flash will make a big difference too.

It doesn't really matter what other people get. It's their money and they make the decision.

If a person has plenty of money, why question if he or she buys a BMW or Mercedez Benz? Do we tell them that they should start with a used compact car just because they have very little experience in driving? Just my thoughts.

gqtuazon said:

If a person has plenty of money, why question if he or she buys a BMW or Mercedez Benz? Do we tell them that they should start with a used compact car just because they have very little experience in driving? Just my thoughts.

Click to expand...

Lol, Yes, because their compact car will fit better under my F150

I look at some of the great photos posted to this forum taken with say a 3100 (you know you are) and wonder why mine taken with a 5100 are not half as good.
It must be a bad lens or a faulty camera. "Yeah Right" It's easy to blame the tool when things don't work out right. I remember years ago a New Zealand paper sent it's top photographers out with, use once throw away cardboard cameras to see what they could do, the next day there was some amazing photos printed. It's not the tools you have but how you use them that counts.

If the person understands what the "view finder" is for and does not try and take all their shots in "Live View", then they may be ready to move up the ladder.

Recently I was complimented by a friend about some of my pictures and was asked which camera I would recommend him to get. When I started talking about getting a camera with a view finder instead of a point and shoot and his eyes glazed over, I knew that it would be better to turn the conversation to all the great point and shoot cameras available.

KWJams said:

If the person understands what the "view finder" is for and does not try and take all their shots in "Live View", then they may be ready to move up the ladder.

Recently I was complimented by a friend about some of my pictures and was asked which camera I would recommend him to get. When I started talking about getting a camera with a view finder instead of a point and shoot and his eyes glazed over, I knew that it would be better to turn the conversation to all the great point and shoot cameras available.

Click to expand...

This was one of the reasons I got back into photography with a DSLR, it became almost impossible to get a P&S with a viewfinder. Not having a viewfinder felt like a car without a steering wheel!

This is a very touchy subject since ultimately we really have no right to judge whatever someone decides to do with their hard earned cash. It's also worth noting that more expensive cameras add features that are useful to all levels of users, such as a focusing motor in the body and better viewfinders.

Anyway, I consider myself an amateur who knows enough to get in trouble . My first digital camera was a Canon Powershot S55 which I always used in auto mode. I tried manual a few times but its viewfinder was worthless so that didn't work out. When it died, I got another point and shoot, the Canon S95. No viewfinder, but its fairly big LCD was pretty nice. I played with manual mode enough to learn about ISO, aperture size, and shutter speed and managed to take some shots that I thought worked out better in manual, but manually focusing on the screen was tricky and I soon felt restricted by it, so I started researching DSLR's.

I was not sure if I would settle for the D5100 or the D7000 (I discarded Canons at the time since I considered their DSLR's in my budget range to be somewhat lacking), so I dug deeper and deeper until I found the features that swayed me completely towards the D7000: more rugged body, 100% view in the viewfinder, diopter correction as far as -3 (I need -2.25 so that gives me slight breathing room), and a motor for lenses that lack their focusing motor (I figured this would save me a few bucks down the line). That it holds two memory cards at a time is the icing on the cake!

So maybe the 3100 or the 5100 may have been more aligned with my skills at the time, but the D7000 allowed me to comfortably use the viewfinder without glasses, to grab a killer 100mm macro lens that lacks a focusing motor (the Tokina 100mm f2.8 Pro-D), and to just focus on enjoying this learning journey that is photography at the level that I chose to start with. Maybe I'll be able to jump to FX format in the future (the reason why I chose the Tokina lens over the Nikkor 85mm as the Tokina works on either format), but in the meantime, I must say the D7000 is one amazing teacher...

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2

I didn't mean for my post to sound snobby, but point and shoot cameras with the LCD screen have dumbed down photography IMHO.
Even the old cheap 35mm film camera that were popular before digital cameras had a view finder and a person had to see the picture as it was framed before they snapped the shutter and that took a bit of knowledge and skill.

I bought a D200 as my first Nikon DSLR it's a very advanced camera for me to be honest but it had 1390 clicks, was second hand in a good camera shop and 2/3rd's of the price of a new 3100 which I also looked at. Yes the 3100 would have been instantly easier to use and maybe easier to get that satisfying feeling when you take a good picture. But I figured for the money I'd just get the D200 and learn more about it. In thd long run I'll not need to change the camera probably ever so maybe one day I'll master it. The set up is so important too because some of my photos to be honest were as good as my (sorry) Canon ixus 5mp point and shoot but the D200 is a semi pro camera and now I've set it up I'm getting better pics.

I suppose everyone buys what they wish. Some people have a lot of money to spend on photo gear and if they are beginners then they maybe don't need to spend it but it's their decision. They are prob wasting money but that's their decision.

The old saying is true.

It's the photographer that makes the photo not the camera.


Gav

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk