- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
New Camera for Outdoor activities: Paging RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 7/15/13 at 11:23 am
Posted on 7/15/13 at 11:23 am
Was cruising the Outdoor Scenery thread and decided its time to get my act together and buy something decent to get some better pictures in the woods, marsh, and mountains. My rule for the longest time was to get the best camera I could that would also fit in my pocket.
I've done a little bit of homework and it sounds like there are a few features that I need to consider. But my buddies who know something about this stuff say to buy a decent DSLR camera with 12 MP, but with a high shutter speed (given the fact I'd like to be able to shoot ducks in flight), but to put equal, if not more, consideration into the lense.
Looking to spend 2K or less, but am also not above looking at second hand or last year's gear.
What says the OB? Roger, you seem to have the photographic world by the balls. What do you think? Looking for something that can get decent close up pics while mainly bird hunting, but maybe in the deer stand too.
I've done a little bit of homework and it sounds like there are a few features that I need to consider. But my buddies who know something about this stuff say to buy a decent DSLR camera with 12 MP, but with a high shutter speed (given the fact I'd like to be able to shoot ducks in flight), but to put equal, if not more, consideration into the lense.
Looking to spend 2K or less, but am also not above looking at second hand or last year's gear.
What says the OB? Roger, you seem to have the photographic world by the balls. What do you think? Looking for something that can get decent close up pics while mainly bird hunting, but maybe in the deer stand too.
2
Posted on 7/15/13 at 11:27 am to TheGreat318
Posted on 7/15/13 at 11:41 am to TheGreat318
do you plan on leaving it on the Auto setting or actually using different shutter speeds, aperture, white balance, etc...settings?
If you are going to truly use a DSLR's setting take a look at the pentax, I believe they use the sony sensor and are weather sealed. supposed to be the go camera for journalist in extreme conditions. not a huge lens selection though.
if weather sealing is not a priority, Nikon, sony, canon. choose your battles on where you want to spend the money. lenses, accessories, camera, etc..
If you are going to truly use a DSLR's setting take a look at the pentax, I believe they use the sony sensor and are weather sealed. supposed to be the go camera for journalist in extreme conditions. not a huge lens selection though.
if weather sealing is not a priority, Nikon, sony, canon. choose your battles on where you want to spend the money. lenses, accessories, camera, etc..
This post was edited on 7/15/13 at 11:42 am
Posted on 7/15/13 at 11:46 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
do you plan on leaving it on the Auto setting or actually using different shutter speeds, aperture, white balance, etc...settings?
I guess I am not exactly sure. I would think that I would use different shutter speeds for shooting teal over the decoys than I would for whitetails chewing on corn.
As for white balance, I don't frequent North Baton Rouge, so I think all set on the whites.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 12:11 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
if weather sealing is not a priority, Nikon, sony, canon. choose your battles on where you want to spend the money. lenses, accessories, camera, etc..
I've got an older Pentax K-x. My next camera will be the Pentax K-5II or Pentax K-30. K-30 is around $600 for the body only, and you can get it with an 18-135 mm lens for about $800 AND it's weather sealed. Plus, it comes in many different colors if you prefer blue or red to black.
K-5II is a a step above entry level. Pentax cameras are about as good as you can get for the price, and I highly advise anyone to read several reviews though before purchasing.
If someone does want weather sealing, I'd look into the K-30 or K-5II
Posted on 7/15/13 at 12:28 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I'm gathering that weather sealing is pretty important?
Posted on 7/15/13 at 12:36 pm to TheGreat318
quote:
I'm gathering that weather sealing is pretty important?
if you plan on using it in wet or dusty outdoor environment on a regular basis, it is. Some of the higher end cameras not named pentax have models that are somewhat sealed as well.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 12:47 pm to TheGreat318
quote:
I'm gathering that weather sealing is pretty important?
For me it is. Hell, I live in a rainforest and it can get to around zero degrees. Weather sealing really is a plus.
Any DLSR will take good pictures. Just depends on the features you want for the price. I'd look into Pentax if you want weather sealing and low light performance.
I took this yesterday, and haven't done any post processing.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 12:49 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
if you plan on using it in wet or dusty outdoor environment on a regular basis, it is. Some of the higher end cameras not named pentax have models that are somewhat sealed as well.
Nikon has a good lineup, but they cost a lot more than the K-30. Just comes down to what you want to spend and the feature set. I've got a Nikon camera as well, but use my Pentax for stills. I use the Nikon mainly for video these days. My older K-x video capability isn't that great.
If you don't mind spending over a grand for the body only, the Nikon 7100 isn't bad. Buy a $700 body, spend $1,300 on glass and you can't go wrong.
This post was edited on 7/15/13 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:12 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
If you don't mind spending over a grand for the body only, the Nikon 7100 isn't bad. Buy a $700 body, spend $1,300 on glass and you can't go wrong.
Thanks. I guess the better question would be is this: In 2013, how much difference is a $400 body and a $700 body...or at least for my purposes? It sounds like the lense may be the tail that wags the dog here.
This is the sort of picture i'd like to be able to take...
Or this...
or even this...
Safe to assume these types of pictures were taken with some pretty high dollar peices of equipment?
This post was edited on 7/15/13 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:18 pm to TheGreat318
quote:
Thanks. I guess the better question would be is this: In 2013, how much difference is a $400 body and a $700 body...or at least for my purposes? It sounds like the lense may be the tail that wags the dog here.
It is.
People will steer you toward their favorite camera but hell, you can buy any 10 mp DSLR with decent glass and take fantastic photos.
It just depends on what features you want, but like computers these damn things get upgraded ever few months. If I acted on impulse, I would have dozens of camera bodies...
You can't go wrong buying an inexpensive body with kit lenses to start. Any name brand and you can take great photos. What's in front (lens) and behind (you) are more important than the body. Nikon, Pentax, Canon, Olympus, Sony all make fine products.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:25 pm to TheGreat318
Decoying birds might be close enough for a cheap 50mm prime lens, but the lower end cameras bodies might and might not focus quick enough to give you the desired results... I would be really nice to have a 70-200mm 2.8f lens, but those get expensive quick...
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:25 pm to TheGreat318
quote:
It sounds like the lense may be the tail that wags the dog here.
it does. you are also going to have a much larger lens selection with either canon or Nikon.
quote:
In 2013, how much difference is a $400 body and a $700 body...or at least for my purposes?
This is kind what I alluded to in my first post. Do you plan on just leaving it on Auto or actually changing settings? a lot of people think they need/want a DSLR, when its not really right or best for them. An advanced point and shoot would have been better and cheaper.
If you are stuck on a DSLR or it is the better option for you, first think of what lenses you need, what other important accessories will you need, then deduct that from your budget. you can use lenses on a newer camera in the future, as long as you are in the same brand.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:36 pm to TheGreat318
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:47 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
An advanced point and shoot would have been better and cheaper.
For landscapes they are fine.
I've also got a Canon SX30 and it's great for landscape photos, but sucks in low light and is slower than hell.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:50 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
but sucks in low light and is slower than hell.
Not a good combo for shooting ducks in the decoys at dawn...
Posted on 7/15/13 at 1:58 pm to wickowick
quote:
Not a good combo for shooting ducks in the decoys at dawn...
Yeah, my wife uses it sometimes and by the time she tries to photograph a whale tail, it's already gone. The processing time and shutter lag on most P&S seems to be a bitch too.
Mine is over a year old, maybe they've improved a lot..
I'm far from an expert on cameras, and don't know about top end stuff, but most folks can get by with a decent beginner DSLR and a couple lenses or a good walkabout.
I bought a 28-300mm and use it almost exclusively now.
Posted on 7/15/13 at 2:01 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I'm far from an expert on cameras, and don't know about top end stuff, but most folks can get by with a decent beginner DSLR and a couple lenses or a good walkabout.
I bought a 28-300mm and use it almost exclusively now.
I am the same. I started with a 28-200 an use it a good bit. I have a 11-16 wide angle and a 50 mm that I really like when conditions are right and have been looking hard at the 70-200 2.8, but $2400 is a tough sell with the wife...
Posted on 7/15/13 at 2:01 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
by the time she tries to photograph a whale tail, it's already gone
Posted on 7/15/13 at 2:04 pm to wickowick
quote:
70-200 2.8, but $2400 is a tough sell with the wife...
I'll bet. I have to get creative to spend money on my stuff. Probably why I'm still sporting the old K-x. I've bought most of my lenses used, haven't had many issues and saved a lot of money. I'm pretty frugal.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News