Gear nonsense

36 megapixel D800 announced. That's a lot of pixels.

Could someone give me a little help? What would be the benefits between a Nikon D3400 and a Canon EOS Rebel T6 or a Canon EOS Rebel SL1? I've been reading reviews and I don't understanding photography language, like APS-C or ISO? This is gift related. I wondering if it's worth it to spend a few hundred dollars more or is $399 Rebel T6 a solid choice?

I should clarify I'm wanting a entry level DSLR but get the most for the money with optimal photos in low lighting and photos of movement, children playing etc.

The more reviews and comments on those reviews I read, the more confused I'm become.

Reviews are telling me the Canon T6i is the better camera, but Nikon commenters on these reviews make me doubts everything. Nikon people seem to think Canon is just a brand with outdated cameras with smaller bodies and just wifi for cool features?

hi lo did you go to DP review?

ISO is a fundamental part of photography -- it describes how sensitive the sensor in the camera is. it is a range usually from 100 to X, where X, in practical terms, tops out at around 6400. "ISO" as a concept is standard across all makes and models of camera.

APS-c refers to the sensor size relative to the classic 35mm film frame.

My usual advice that i give people when they ask about cameras is that they generally have equal features across price points. that is to say, a nikon and a canon and a pentax and a sony are equal at $500.00, 1000.00 and 6000.00, etc.

At higher levels I like the canon optics better, and I find the canon sits better in my hand, but at the lower levels this may not mean anything to you.

I would forget about the SL1 that's 3 year old technology.

a quick poke around suggests that the nikon might be a better option. if you have a choice I would suggest taking the person shopping rather than buy it for them -- what feels good to you might not for them. if the hope is that they use the damn thing (like for a kid or teen or somesuch) then having something that they are REALLY excited about is a secret bonus.

the best camera is the one you carry around with you

Thanks! That sounds like a good idea!

I should clarify I'm wanting a entry level DSLR but get the most for the money with optimal photos in low lighting and photos of movement, children playing etc.

tbh if low lighting is a big factor then investing in a decent wide-aperture prime lens is probably at least as important as which body you pick

I think both canikon make cheapish 35mm/1.8 lenses right?

yeah, and canon have the really cheap 50mm f/1.8 which is great for the price (but will end up being an 80mm equivalent on a crop body which might be a bit restricting)

I've come around to not recommending the 50mm/1.8 even though it's $80 - 80mm ends up being too restricting unless you're only interested in making portraits

to be honest - maybe the best option here is an iphone 7 plus with portrait mode enabled

The pancake Canon primes are pretty good - not much more expensive than the thrifty fifty, but a bit slower (40/2.8, 24/2.8 - the latter only goes on APS-C cameras, but that's fine in this case).

I wish I understood what you guys are talking about. Before this week I knew nothing about DSLR cameras. From what I've read the Canon EOC Rebel t6i improved many of the shortcomings that the Rebel T6 had, also it is wifi enabled!
but will end up being an 80mm equivalent on a crop body which might be a bit restricting & not recommending the 50mm/1.8 even though it's $80 - 80mm ends up being too restricting unless you're only interested in making portraits
Could you guys elaborate on this? Thanks again everyone!

Canon EOS Rebel T6i I meant.

here's a reasonable explanation of the full-frame vs crop sensor issue: https://www.slrlounge.com/workshop/crop-vs-full-frame-cameras/

tbh it probably wasn't worth mentioning that at all - i should have stuck to saying that if you value low-light shooting a decent fast prime lens is a really good investment

With regard to lenses:

"Fast" = has a large maximum aperture (a *low* minimum f-stop number), so it gathers more light, so the shutter speed can be kept reasonably fast (1/60sec, say) in poor light, freezing action and reducing the chance of camera shake spoiling the pic
"Prime" = a fixed focal length, doesn't zoom; primes pretty much always offer better image quality for your buck, and you don't get close to the "speed" (minimum f-stop) of a prime with a zoom unless you're spending crazy $$$

For example, 40mm f/2.8 prime, about $120 (weighs 130g); 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom, about $1700 (and weighs 800g). Obviously, you can do a lot more with the latter, and it's not a fair comparison as the latter is a pro-grade lens, but you get the idea. Keeping a large max aperture over the whole of a zoom's range means a lot of glass.

That video really helped me understand a few basics I had no idea about!

I decided to give my wife the Canon Rebel T6s and she's very happy. I almost went with the 80D but then reminded myself that she has never used a camera like this before. Now I need to buy her a camera bag!

Hurrah, Merry Xmas!

My daughters are about to discover Santa favours pancake primes... (they got a pair of 10yo DSLRs last Xmas)

santa otm

New Nikons announced today - Z6 and Z7. Both mirrorless, both with an all-new mount. Quite pricey: £2600 for the Z6 with the kit.

Specs seem roughly in the same place as the Sony's, but XQD cards only and no eye AF. Z6 is low-light focused, Z7 is MP-packed.

Lens line up is quite light, but they're promising a f0.95 Noct next year, which is pretty exciting (and worth the lens mount change; they couldn't get that fast on an AF lens with the narrow F mount).

*looks at canon hq; sees shutters beating against broken windows in the idle breeze; turns and looks at very, very expensive canon lens set*

Supposedly a Canon FF mirrorless announcement next week. EF mount is the rumour. That might be the first time they've truly snookered Nikon in a decade.

https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r-full-specifications/

thinkface

Looks kinda nice. But the EF mount rumour was false... RF/EF adaptor doesn't look too chunky and I imagine anyone hiring out this thing would throw one in the box. Which is the only way I'll get to play with one. Hope it's better than the EOS-M bodies which don't focus well at all with regular EF lenses.

I only just bought a 2014-vintage Fuji mirrorless (for half the price of Nikon's Z-mount 50mm), which is great fun with old Canon FD primes, so I'm happy to stay several years behind the bleedin' edge.

Ooh, Canon EOS R takes the same battery as my 6D? That's a big saving right there. ;)

I pulled the trigger on a full frame after a year of aps-c. A Sony A7. Only shot about two rolls so far. The extra detail is nice but it feels equal to the aps-c in terms of capturing light and color. I don’t like the weight and size of the thing despite it being mirrorless.

The only reason I'd get a full frame is if I needed to shoot by candlelight, or have eyelash thin depth of field. One loses an f-stop worth of these with APS-C, and two with μ43.

When I double up at events (two bodies: 6D, 70D) I always wince at little when I'm having to push the APS-C body up beyond ISO3200. It just can't really hack it up there the way the FF body can - I know I'll have much less latitude with the RAW in post without getting into the realm of plasticky noise reduction. I'm sure the 70D isn't state of the art wrt high-ISO for crop sensors in 2019 (Canon generally isn't), mind, and it's still pretty good.

Another shoot, another discovery that my F stop was on 16 the entire time. F

Sold all my canon stuff and went a9ii. Limited use over the last few days but it’s pretty amazing. I got tired of waiting for canon to come out w something as obviously good as the A7 line and decided to go all in.

...I didn’t think I’d be as amused with the idea of an optional asp-c crop function but here I am trotting around at 150mm

After shooting for three years with APS C I finally bought a full frame, a Sony a7 ii. Taking it out today to break it in a bit

(With some cheap 35 mm / 2.8 glass)

There I was upthread speculating about the EOS R four years ago. Now I've got one.

I had to sell a lot of stuff to fund it (and it's a used body, but in perfect nick). The drawer full of gear I acquired 7-8 years ago when I thought I really might make a go of photography as a side-line was getting me down; also felt a twinge in the shoulder every time I thought about the big, heavy zooms. So, after a false-start (shipping everything to one place only for half the stuff to fail their inspection), I dragged a bag of stuff into town and traded up (or sideways).

So now it's just the EOS R, plus a couple of super-lightweight lenses (16/2.8, 50/1.8), and my old EF-mount macro and portrait primes. It's been pretty great so far. Just need to get out and do more things.

Here's a little sequence showing off the face-/eye-tracking (local arts festival, pop-punk kids)...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52377666270_975901cf05_b.jpg

50/1.8???

That sequence was the 135 ;)