I've taken lots of photos on my phone, but I'm looking to start out with a camera. I don't want to spend a great deal of money and I would prefer a digital camera. Does anyone have recommendations? I'm fond of
>>4341724OH SHIT WHAT HAPPENED TO OP is there a sniper? I thought they only lurked /k/ threa
>>4341724A sinar norma would suit you perfectly!
>>4341724I'd suggest something with a affordable but quality kit zoom lens like the Nikon
>>4341808Optics is an important part of both /p/ and /k/, but I have no idea why OP would
>>4341808>>4341816Snipers are an urban legend like fucking Candlejack and all of you retards are stupid for perpetuati
>>4341724>I don't want to spend a great deal of money and I would prefer a digital camera.that sounds like your phone sir? so buy a new latest high end iphone perhaps? i'm not sarcastic really. budget 2k or just upgrade your phone to latest high end phone which probably offers you the best affordable carriable to everywhere easy to use digital camera humanity ever made.Plan B: Get some whatever digital camera either dslr or mirrorless under 600 with lens(24-70 zoom or 28mm or 50mm prime).In this plan, you might be satisfied with your demands like handling camera experience, just wanting to try a camera.but regard your statement>I don't want to spend a great deal of moneyI humbly recommend you to just upgrade your phone.You need to spend 4k at least if you want to see the eyes of people over the river by crop 300% and crop the people only and the resolution is still 4000x3000.
>>4341724Don't fall for the phone meme and dont fall for the specs or "prosumer" meme. get a nikon zfc and the kit lens. ignore gearfags. apply film sims in lightroom.
I'm not going to tell you which camera to buy but some basic advice is; don't be afraid to buy used (Camera censors have had only mild improvements in the last 4 years, with the main advances being in video), don't be afraid of APSC and M43 (those cameras have advantages particularly for price and video), know that it's much more about the lenses (buy based on the availability of those)And just generally be aware that all the minor differences in noise patterns and edge sharpness that retards like to argue over, are almost imperceptible unless you're looking at a raw image in an editor. Uploaded on Instagram it all looks the same. Even film.
>>4341841do be afraid of m43 lolworst shit i've ever used, same price and size as aps-c which is literally 2x better. only good for being a wuss about weight with macro and birding lenses. >instagramalso most worthless website for photography. flickr users can view in 4k and download original sizes. you cant even view photos on instagram without cucking and making an account with the only real candidate for the antichrist and they force the dumb square shit.
>>4341724>Buy an camera>Buy a nifty fifty>????>Profit
>>4341858>m43 raped my dog! grow up
>>4342054>Profit>Then proceeds to lose thousands on other cameras and lenses in the pursuit of marginal improvements
>>4342055m43 is just garbage. not because of the noise, but because it's aps-c ff sized for the same price for lower quality and less creative options. You need to spend big nikon S line prime money to get a manual focus f1.8 "equivalent" and it sucks all the character out of vintage lenses by only using the sharp-ish center, but worse than it would look on a real camera. It's just crap in every way unless you're an encyclopedia ID photo shooter with arthritis.If you're considering an m43 just get a fujifilm instead. The autofocus is somehow still 2x better than om-shit/panasoi and it's not even good autofocus.
>>4341724Keep using your phone and complement it with a film camera like a Nikon F80, a few primes and a tripod.If you want to into birds and wildlife try a D500 and the 200-500mm, or a MFT combo like the OM-1 and 40-150 f/2.8. FF birding is expensive and annoying to haul around, unless you know you're into it I would not bother until you use a cheaper lighter set.
>>4341858Well here you go OP. If you are a based chad who only uses flicker and zooms in on every photo to compare edge brightness and noise levels then full frame is for you. If you want however even a little bit normal M43 is really not bad.
>>4342247>if you are a based chad who only uses flickryes>and zooms inNo need, dont be a literal kid and you can look at photos on things other than phones. You know even the cheapest macbook has a 4k display right?I guess you're close tho if you are poor or a child m43 is really not bad. gotta jive with your fellow broke 16 year olds amirite?
>>4342054Only good advice in the thread
>>4341724>I don't want to spend a great deal of moneyHow much is that? Less than 2k? 500? 300? Sub 100? What kind of photos are you taking? You're going to need to give more info if you want real recommendations and not shitposts.
>>4341724Canon EOS RP/thread
