Newbie requesting advice/links
Greetings,
I would like to begin in photography with some old digital cameras, but only at a very amateur level. I don't see myself becoming an expert photographer, just someone who takes pictures here and there.
Going into a new hobby always is a difficult thing. I feel rather overwhelmed by the whole affair. I simply don’t know what I need to pick up in order to start, how to operate a camera, what basic starting information I should read. Surely the learned photographers on this forum can dispense some advice, or send me some links to texts?
What camera is good for someone just starting out? I want something that is general-purpose—not so simple that I miss out on features, but not too complicated for a newbie to use—and I’d like to keep things cheap—under $200, though anything much cheaper than that (but still good) is a welcome recommendation. What equipment do I need in addition to a camera?
What software do I need? Are there any free and open-source alternatives to that software? I am primarily running Windows 10, but also have a laptop with Linux Mint installed.
Thank you for reading my post, and do pardon my ignorance.
Hello Dylan, and welcome!
There's a lot of great versatile cameras in that price range. Beyond the requirement of having more advanced features but remaining easy to learn, is there anything in particular you are wanting to photograph? For example, if you really mostly wanted it for wildlife or sporting events. Sometimes that can dictate your choice, especially your lens choice to fit your budget, and often the lens is going to matter more on the overall quality of the images than the camera.
Just generally my recommendations for a camera would be an early 1oish mp DSLR like a Nikon D200. They offer a lot for the money, and will allow you to spend the rest of your budget on a decent lens or two. If something like that sounds good, we can spit out more cameras like that you could search.
I like Darktable as a simple free RAW photo editor. There's also RawTherapee, but the interface feels less simple. For photoshop-like features there's Gimp that's free.
I'd agree with James though I would probably steer you towards a Pentax K-7. An often forgotten DSLR 14mp or so, however the real benefit is the K mount lenses which can be found for very cheap. Such as Pentax-F lenses the 24-50mm and the 35-105mm can be found for less than 50USD and are very good performers especially for day time landscape and cityscape shots. For primes (single focal lengths) you can't go wrong with either the Pentax DA 50mm F1.8 or the 35mm F2.4, for example if you wanted to take portraits the 50mm would be excellent.
Now if size/weight is an issue I would recommend you look at Panasonic LUMIX and Olympus micro four thirds cameras. Cameras like the Lumix G6 or GF6; or for Olympus the OMD EM10 or EM5 (both Mk I) represent great value also like Pentax you have access to a wide variety of lenses suitable for all budgets and styles. All the Lumix/Olympus cameras I mentioned are about 16MP and can be found within or close to your budget.
Pentax would be cheaper, the advantage of the Lumix and Olympus cameras are they are better for video (particularly the Lumix G6) and as mentioned size/weight.
I either own or have owned most of the gear I mention (the few I haven't I've tried/borrowed). I've shot most brands so feel free to ask questions.
Here's a K10D with the 2 kit lenses for less than $200 USD. You can't go wrong with this Pentax camera body. It has beautiful colors out of its CCD sensor.
Quote from SpruceBruce on February 26, 2024, 4:16 pmHere's a K10D with the 2 kit lenses for less than $200 USD. You can't go wrong with this Pentax camera body. It has beautiful colors out of its CCD sensor.
This post caused me to remember that my first camera wasn't actually my X-T3, but instead was a Pentax K10D that came with two random Sigma lenses.
Just looking at mpb.com, for camera's for $100 or less, it seems like you can't really go wrong, all of these DSLRs are going to be good for a beginner. My favorite is the Nikon d200, I liked that camera when I had it, plus Nikon F mount has a lot of (relatively) cheap, vintage manual lenses you could experiment with and it also has a CCD sensor. On top of that if you continue on and decide to buy a newer mirrorless camera, nikon f mount is widely supported with adapters.
As for the learning material. I would recommend finding youtube videos on your camera, or a similar camera that talks about "the exposure triangle", that's how I learned (that and going out and messing around). But obviously the ability to do that is limited by what videos are on youtube.
For free software like Lightroom, I like rawtherapee (https://www.rawtherapee.com/downloads/) which is available on both linux and windows. There is also GIMP (https://www.gimp.org/downloads/), which is like photoshop and also availible on linux and windows
PS. After reading more of the responses, I realized I just accidentally copied James' post almost exactly lol
Quote from James Warner on February 26, 2024, 1:37 pmHello Dylan, and welcome!
There's a lot of great versatile cameras in that price range. Beyond the requirement of having more advanced features but remaining easy to learn, is there anything in particular you are wanting to photograph? For example, if you really mostly wanted it for wildlife or sporting events. Sometimes that can dictate your choice, especially your lens choice to fit your budget, and often the lens is going to matter more on the overall quality of the images than the camera.
Just generally my recommendations for a camera would be an early 1oish mp DSLR like a Nikon D200. They offer a lot for the money, and will allow you to spend the rest of your budget on a decent lens or two. If something like that sounds good, we can spit out more cameras like that you could search.
I like Darktable as a simple free RAW photo editor. There's also RawTherapee, but the interface feels less simple. For photoshop-like features there's Gimp that's free.
James,
Thanks for the warm welcome, as well as the recommendations.
Here is what I would like to use the camera for: taking close-up pictures of objects to put on a personal website, such as my tobacco pipes which I admire the craftsmanship of; taking pictures of things for how-to books that will look decent, but have that 2000s digital look; taking pictures of friends if I ever bring a camera with me to see them; and taking pictures of interesting buildings or places in nature.
I would also like to thank everyone else for their replies. Let me respond to some of your points/questions.
@kcphotogeek Size or weight are not really an issue for me, though I of course do not want to lug around an absolute boulder of a camera.
@photography-cory As both you and James have recommended the D200, I will consider it more than the other cameras in this thread, though I will still look into those as well.
Can someone explain in brief the differences between Darktable, rawtherapee, and GIMP? Am I missing out on anything by choosing one over the others?
Quote from Dylan Catlett on February 26, 2024, 11:12 pmI would also like to thank everyone else for their replies. Let me respond to some of your points/questions.
@kcphotogeek Size or weight are not really an issue for me, though I of course do not want to lug around an absolute boulder of a camera.
@photography-cory As both you and James have recommended the D200, I will consider it more than the other cameras in this thread, though I will still look into those as well.
Can someone explain in brief the differences between Darktable, rawtherapee, and GIMP? Am I missing out on anything by choosing one over the others?
Darktable and Rawtherapee are both RAW editing software (although you can edit all kinds of image types) and they are mostly used to adjust exposure, contrast, saturation, adjust highlights & shadows, and so on.. Whereas GIMP is more like photoshop, it has brush tools, layer editing and filters. It can also do some of the things like exposure and saturation, but it doesn't work with RAW files. Photoshop is no longer really for photography, it's more for digital art, but has some useful features that RAW editors don't have when it comes to Photography. I use both Capture One (a paid RAW editor) and GIMP in combination. I mostly use GIMP to convert file types, resize images, adding borders and the occasional filter. Since everything is free, I would suggest just downloading them and edit some random photos and see what feels most intuitive to you.
Another piece of advice I'd like to give about your first camera is to not think of it as a permanent commitment. I would say that it's more of an orientation process. It's about figuring out what features you like and *how* you shoot so you can know for yourself what exactly you want out of a camera. I've been shooting for about 3 years and I've gone through 4 cameras I still don't 100% feel like I found my perfect one, but I feel a lot closer to a camera that fits me and my preferences.
Quote from Dylan Catlett on February 26, 2024, 11:12 pmI would also like to thank everyone else for their replies. Let me respond to some of your points/questions.
@kcphotogeek Size or weight are not really an issue for me, though I of course do not want to lug around an absolute boulder of a camera.
@photography-cory As both you and James have recommended the D200, I will consider it more than the other cameras in this thread, though I will still look into those as well.
Can someone explain in brief the differences between Darktable, rawtherapee, and GIMP? Am I missing out on anything by choosing one over the others?
My vote would be a D7000. Looks like you can get them under $200. On Ebay. I sold my D200 almost immediately when I got the D7000 because the image quality was so much better. (Pentax K5 had same Sony sensor)
Here are the sensor ratings. D7000 blows the doors off the D200 in every way.
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D200-versus-Nikon-D7000___203_680
It beat up on the 300 and 300s also, and not by a small margin.
D200 had great ergonomics, I liked better than the D7000 but it had a terrible small, clunky LCD. Awful. For this reason alone I would go with a D300 which is larger if you are dead set on that body style.
It was said that the autofocus performance on the D300S was superior to d7000. I never had any issues.
D7000 examples. I got the phone number off this haw's band from 30 feet away.
RTH#343 by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
High ISO performance (6400) only normal noise reduction used. this is how well the camera will perform in low light.
DSC_6863 by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
macro- pretty expensive lens.
You Got to Change Your Weevil Ways by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
Macro with a cheap (but great) lens plus a screw on diopter (super cheap)
Baby Woodfrog by Mark Kasick, on
Flickr
DSC_9713 by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
Summer Azure by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
Bullfrog by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
Like I said. I got by with the autofocus. This is with a. really nice lens. 
Green Darner in Flight by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
Green Heron by Mark Kasick, on Flickr
