Hello /p/, I want to take photos like picrel but have no experience in photography and no camera, I'm willing to spend up to around €1,000 but would rather cheaper as I am not wealthy, anything in the 400-500 range is a nice amount for me. What camera/specs do I need? Any lenses? I know photography terminology as I've experience with 3dcg and they seem to use the same terms there, as well as a bit of experience in just using the pro mode of my phone camera.
>>4461548youll need a big ass tree
>>4461550I happen to know of a few, sadly Ireland doesn't have that many though.
>>4461548You could get start shooting 4x5 film on that budget.
>>4461548You can get something like a canon 5d mkii and a 28-70 f2.8 for under that budget and have a lot of versatility including shots like that with a wider angle.
>>4461548looks like a very soft lens on a early 2010's dslr probably nikon or canon. the kit zoom on like a d40 should do this
>>4461554Found a second hand one for €380>>4461555But this seems to go for €50-€150Why the wild difference in price? Do both give the same results for what I'm trying to achieve here?
>>4461557the photo you posted is good because of the lighting and subject. the actual image quality is very low. a better camera and lens gives you more range to take "decent" shots but in my opinion, no one gives a shit about decent shots. and a great scene that is well lit will look beautiful even on a phone let alone a proper camera. so logically you dont need to spend a lot of money on the gear. it wont get you what you want.
>>4461557Disregard both, early digital cameras will bring you much unneeded frustration. The main difference between them is that the Canon is full frame (bigger sensor) with resolution that is still decent today. It also records video. Get yourself a DSLR with side-swiveling screen, can't think of any bad ones save for the early Rebel SL3 run with no standard hotshoe support.
>>4461566based knower>>4461568cringe gearfag
>>4461566>no one cares about anything, good things dont matter, nothing matters, nothing is fun, enjoying things is wrongWe know you have clinical depression but please keep it to yourself.
>>4461548iphoneliterally all you need
>>4461581Projection and cope. Take your meds.
The photo judging by the quality may have been taken with a 15 year old $30 compact digicam. More important than the gear in this particular case is an eye for composition and a basic understanding of light, you can't buy yourself into taking interesting/good photos, something many rookies seem to think, but if I were in your situation with that budget and a desire to learn photography I would have some criteria such as one which has already been touched upon which is a side swiveling screen which will make composing much easier, a full frame sensor and at least 2 control wheels to adjust aperture and shutter speed simultaneously without having to dive into menus which is the case on some older cameras making them cumbersome to operate and more likely to get put into a closet.>Full frame>Swivel screen>Non-faggy manual control>If possible IBIS
get a tripod and nd filter, ez
>>4461566>>4461587clinically depressed samefag. YOU take your meds
Just get a DSLRnosaur and you're all set for soft and ever so slightly misfocused pictures.
>>4461582This, or any decent phone really
>>4461548A camera and a place. That's fucking it.A wider lens, like 28mm or 35mm, would probably help a lot, 50mm would do. Longer would take more work.My recommendation:Pentax K-5 II or K-5 IIs: $280Pentax 18-135mm: $115Pentax 35mm Limited: $170Total: <$600 after taxesThe camera doesn't matter much, but Pentax has some advantages. The K-5 is nice because it gives you a lot of things you found on higher end cameras, but on what was a cheaper camera. A similarly performing camera you find from Nikon or Canon is going to have less advanced features, or be more expensive. Like a Canon at this price will be a Rebel T6 which only has one command dial, no top LCD, a worse and dimmer viewfinder, and actually a worse sensor. The Pentax also has IBIS and weather sealing. Nice.The 18-135mm is just a wide-zoom-range kit zoom. Nothing special, but performs well enough, is cheap, and is very versatile.The 35mm f/2.8 Limited -- this is the special lens and will be your "secret sauce" and what will blow Canon or Nikon out of the water. Despite being available for cheap (in the grand scheme of things, $170 is cheap for a lens), you get a quite sharp lens with macro capability. 35mm focal length is versatile. And its rendering is just absolutely lovely -- has decent-to-good bokeh (the bokeh quality is very good, but noticeably hexagonal, so drops a few points) but the focus fall off is very pleasant, rendering a sense of depth that's rare in EF and later Nikon F lenses. The build quality is top notch.The downsides of this setup? Mainly, the autofocus will suck, so autistic people will bitch at you and call you slurs for having this camera. But realistically, you're wanting to take pictures of sticks and rocks, right? The autofocus is good enough for most purposes, just don't expect to take many good pictures of football games and of birds in flight. Back of people's heads, sticks and rocks, portraits of your mom (ie. street, landscape, portraiture) it's just fine.
>>4461623>using autofocus for landscapesThis is the average retard who is giving advice on /p/ everyone. Top fucking KEK
>>4461548what exactly about that pic do you want to mimic? you might want be more specific and post more example photos since there are a lot of different things you could mean by 'like picrel'. most likely what you're trying to do can be achieved using: camera with wide angle lens, maybe around 15-35mm full frame equivalent, plus some good shoes.
>>4461645Still high resolution/quality shots of fairly close up (2m-10m) subjects in the understory (low light) of woods, occasionally as well of mountains and fields when camping, but the former for the most part. I'm trying to avoid being a gearfag but there seem to be a lot of options, however I think the wide lens is in fact what I'm looking for. Looking at reviews and prices for:>>4461623>>4461568>>4461554>>4461555
>>4461658wide fields of view are pretty popular with outdoors/landscape stuff for dramatic spaces and showing grand scales. zoom lens seems like the natural choice for forest shooting where positioning can be limited. you might be able to personally test what fovs you want to go for but i think 28mm on the wide end is likely still too narrow. i'd recommend 24mm at least. if you want crisp photos in low light, you'll need stabilization. there are various ways to achieve this, whether by shooting technique or hardware. for outdoorsy stuff, dslrs are the standard due to ruggedness and value. at this point choices are all down to preference. i recommend trying as many systems as you can hands on before committing. good luck have fun
>>4461673Is this a good deal for it? €425Pentax K-70 with Pentax 18-55 ZoomPentax StrapManfrotto Carry Case and waterproof shooting coverCharger with cable leadhttps://www.adverts.ie/other-photography/pentax-k-70-plus-accessories/37904782?touch_off
>>4461837And other options I've found:https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/nikon-d7000/37487496Nikon D7000 18-200 lens €300https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/nikon-d7100-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-105mm/37865314Nikon D7100 18-105 €500https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/canon-70d/37815075Canon 70D no lens €190Any problem with buying second hand? It's coming out quite a bit cheaper.
I can just buy new if it is problematic, as I said though I'd rather pay less and my experience with second hand non-car goods in Ireland has always been practically good as new.
>>4461566This too. >>4461548>3dcgThe camera of choice in photography matters almost as little to the look as the virtual camera of choice in 3dcg, but what you put between it and the scene is relevant (available focal lengths/apertures, filters, etc). What different bodies offer is often quality of life features.>>4461658A bit expensive, a good camera but you'd be overpaying IMO. >>4461844>Any problem with buying second hand? It's coming out quite a bit cheaper.Try to get something in good shape with a low shutter count if possible. Of those options the D7100 is arguably the best body but the Canon system offers more variety and ease of lens adaptation, as well as a swivel screen. How much is a used 80D?Check the D5200/D5300 too.
>>4461847Buying new is basically throwing money away if you're careful and patient buying used I.e. if you know how to win at eBay.
>>4461853Cheapest I can find for 80D is 350 but body only.D5200 seems like a good potential: https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/nikon-d5200-dslr-camera-24-1mp-full-hd-great-condition/37407191€260 for body + 18-55 kit lens. They don't seem to advertise shutter count so I'd have to ask. https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/nikon-d5300/37454037D5300 €220 (looks used)
>>4461581None of those things were even implied. Go have your therapy session somewhere else.
>>4461643help a noob. if youre not shooting anything that moves, always manual focus?
>>4461869Use whichever method gets you the shots you want quickest and most reliablyThere's nothing virtuous about using MF when you have AF available, but sometimes it does make more sense depending on what you're doing
>>4461869For an established landscape shot, where you're likely already setting up a tripod, dialing in your CPL and GND filters, waiting for birds to fuck off or clouds to move into a more ideal position, setting focus manually is just a no brainer. With DSLRs it also avoids relying on the focus calibration. But if your AF is great (canon) then by all means who gives a fuck
>>4461869You only use manual focus instead of continuous AF if you have distractions like grass blades and branches in the foreground or background. AF likes to latch on to unwanted objects in such situations. Sometimes AF sticks to the background then you have to manually pull back the focus to reengage AF.Using manual focus for tracking a moving subject is retarded in this day and age.
>>4461548be bad at composition, color and light
>>4461548>What camera/specs do I need?Potato
>>4461837>>4461844Absolutely not.Get a D3300 (or higher)or a D5200 (or higher)or a D7100 (or higher)or go full frame with a D600All can be had for about 200 bucks, if you just pay attention.For the APS-C cameras start with a 18-200mm or 18-105mm.For full frame, get a 24-85mm f3.5-4.5G, or just a 50mm f1.8. The zoom is versatile, but not the sharpest/fastest (brightest, in this context). The 50mm is very sharp and fast (bright), but locks you to a 50mm focal length. Both are cheap.
>>4464068>>446184418-55mm is also a good option (typical kit lens) for APS-C
>>4461550Can confirm.
>>4461548serious answer: your smartphone and a day off to go to the woodsshoot with a RAW camera app if you feel fancy
>>4461550Which are rapidly disappearing btw. Old growth is on a rapid path to extinction in the West, at least here in the U.S. anyway. We're about a generation away from Americans not having access to trees like this available for admiration, for at least a few centuries anyway.
>>4461587IBIS? for a fucking tree that's right in front of you? I swear to god I hate all of you so much
>>4472257>just shoot everything at iso micro four thirds bro>just drag a tripod everywhere bro>and then take a handful of hair off your dogs balls and sprinkle it over the negative like this>say la vee
>>4461566>just use your phonesour grapes retard shut the fuck up>let alone a proper camerayou don't read, this is not proper usage, and you are a retard>so using the power of Judeo-Christian logicSHUT the FUCK up retard>>4461548OP if you only wanna shoot landscapes and portraits you can get a CLA'd RB67 with a lens for $300-500
>>4461548Don't get a DLSR like people are telling you. Get a mirrorless camera, like a used Sony a6000 or one of the newer models. You can even go fancy and get one of the older A7 cameras with a larger sensor. Then get a moderate compact lens for that camera. You can easily fit that under 1k.If you get a DLSR, you'll have to deal with DLSR glass, which is cheaper, but also large, which means you're less likely to have it with you and take fewer pics. Never underestimate the importance of a compact package. Unless photo is your literal job, size and weight are much more important than how good the viewfinder is or some shit like that.I'd start with APS-C and go from there. If you are still doing photo 3-5 years later, sell the APS-C and buy some full frame kit.
>>4473479>but also largeDSLR bodies are larger, DSLR lenses are smaller than mirrorless. >Unless photo is your literal job, size and weight are much more important than how good the viewfinder is or some shit like that.EVFs make the photo shooting experience miserable and most importantly, fake.
>>4473544>DSLR bodies are larger, DSLR lenses are smaller than mirrorless.Literally untrue. But then I know nothing about snoy glass so if that's the case then wd on the self-report
>>4473544>DSLR bodies are larger, DSLR lenses are smaller than mirrorless.Objectively wrong.>EVFs make the photo shooting experience miserable and most importantly, fake.Nah, the optical viewfinder experience is fake. EVF is the only way to experience the image the way your camera experiences it. Cope harder.
>>4473600NTc, but give me smaller MILC alternative to Nikon 105 f/2.5, 24 f/2.8 or 180 f/2.8
>>4473648this is the truth pill. the evf is closer to reality than any optical viewfinder.
>>4473600>>4473648
>>4473792>links a snoy mirrorless that's bigger than the blobmerasLmfao. Just lmfao.So it WAS a self-report after all.
>>4473792Not even going into weight comparisons. DSLR is old tech, friend. Even Nikon knows this.Especially for hobbyists, mirrorless is a no-brainer.
>>4473711The only OVF camera I would even remotely consider getting is the Fuji with the hybrid. Not because it's more practical, but because it's kind of unique and cool.
>>4472257Increase shutter speed, decrease ISO, duh.
>>4473828>slow snoy kit lensohnonono
>>4473828Some of us prefer old tech.
>>4464070No. Kit lenses are garbage!
I started this crazy hobby in 1972. I suggest that you find the best (most versatile) dslr that you can find for now along wth the most versatile prime lens for your shooting style.As a beginner in your budget range I would personally pick up a D90 or D300S with a Nikkor AF 24mm f2.8 D (first) and AF 50mm f1.8 D lenses (35mm and 75mm equivalents) and practice shooting anything and everything until you figure out what style and subjects work best for you.
>>4473853That's great for you, but if somebody tells you they'd like to try listening to music, your first bit of advice shouldn't be getting a Sony Walkman.
>>4473828Mirrorless is even older tech, they're basically interchangeable lens camcorders.
>actually use a dslr>it sucksFilm SLR > MILC > shit > dlsaar
>>4474108Correct.
>>4474166This. SLRs actually made sense in their heyday. DSLRs in 2025 is just u wot m8.There's like a handful of applications where DSLRs still make sense but even there it's more of a sidegrade now. Sports has always been DSLRs domain, but with blackout-free shooting and 240hz EVFs the OVF alone is hardly a selling argument.The only reason we're even having this discussion is that photo people are a bunch of Luddites working exclusively on vibes like they're some Instagram thot.
>>4474183EVFs are the photographic equivalent of the chair in a hotel room.
>>4472261it's a smartphone-tier photo, get over itno need to get so angry, anon
>>4474264Mirrorless cameras as a metaphor for cuckoldry will never get old
>>4474264and OVF is the equivalent of being outside and watching through a window
>>4474285>>4474264The real point we're all making is that nobody using a camera is getting sex (with women).
>>4474264>>4474285Yap all you want but as soon as you re-engage with reality, DSLRs just suck. Ugly, loud hideously oversized blobs designed like a cross between a nintendo controller and an ergonomic keyboard meant for 60 y/o office workers that cant focus on shit outside of a tiny box in the middle.A literal fucking hasselblad is the same size as a nikon d750 and 50mm f1.8 G. Maybe you could make the D750 a hair smaller by using a worse lens, but for hundreds of dollars and all that weight why not just use a cool camera like a bronica s2a instead of a faggy electronic spec sheet noise chart pixel peeper digishit that's not even portable and looks like your moms dildo?>>4473828Their new kit lens is a 28-60 because 70mm on the kit lens and the DSLR zooms was too blurry anyways. It made it half as long.
>>4474309I have it. It's a pretty good kit actually.
>>4474309>Yap all you want but as soon as you re-engage with reality, DSLRs just suck.Anon, you can't engage with reality from behind an EVF. It's fake. >Ugly, loud hideously oversized blobs designed like a cross between a nintendo controller and an ergonomic keyboard meant for 60 y/o office workers that cant focus on shit outside of a tiny box in the middle.Disingenuous post. The huge cameras are flagship or near flagship models, DSLR or not.
>>4474320>UHM PHILOSOHPICALLY LE EVF IS LE FAKE. PHILOSOPHICALLY!Philosophy is not real, midwit faggot. Remove your head from your philosophical anus and enter the real world. Cameras are tools for taking pictures.DSLRs are worse tools for taking pictures than mirrorless.Due to their excessive size they are also worse at simply being the one you have with you than a film SLR.DSLRs are bad cameras.>BUT THE SPECS... THE MEGAPIXELS.... THE DYNAMIC RANGE... THE SHARP LENSES WITH USM IS AF VERSION 4! ITS FULL FRAME FOR $350! MUH SENSOR SIZE!None of that shit fucking matters. When it comes down to the wire the DSLR fag has no camera or is arguing with event security and the mirrorless chad strolls through. When it comes down to the wire the DSLR fag is being confronted and the mirrorless chad keeps walking. When it comes down to the decisive moment, CLACKCLACK is setting a crazy hobo/glowie fucktard on your ass and leaving you to realize all your online tough guy larps and lolbert talk about rights doesn't mean shit when a drifter says "MY KNIFE/BULLET IN YOU OR YOUR CAMERA ON THE GROUND, BITCH". At best you're cameraless or in court for a self defense case. A quiet mirrorless isn't drawing attention.When it comes down to the wire your DR is just a crutch for the dodgy DSLRs meterings random computerized fuckups and you not having time to chimp.When it comes down to reality, mirrorless and film SLRs designed explicitly to have good viewfinders for MF get sharp shots, and your super sharp NIKKOR AF-S G sometimes misses focus and you're clacking out extra safety shots to be sure.DSLRs are cheap because no one fucking wants them.Mirrorless is just more useful. EM5II > D850. A6000 > 1DXIII. Why? The one you have with you. Get the shot, or don't.Fuck your faggot philosophical distinctions. Philosophy is for people who aren't smart or capable to feel like they're still worth shit, when they aren't. You want the real scene open your other eye retard.
>>4474338Truth nuke.>inb4 anti-snoy schizo/anti-m43 schizo seethe
>>4474338Snapshitter cope.
>>4474338forcefeed this guy his meds >>4474339i liked my kf a lot more than the sony zve10more fun to use and the sony controls felt too tight photography is supposed to be fun
>>4474338Why female portraits made on dslr look better than the ones made on mirrorless?
>>4474339So if I take the lens off and put it in my other pocket I'm good? Cool.
>>4474338Dante Stella said it best. The DSLR is to cameras what the "horsey horseless" was to automobiles. A kludgy and cumbersome stepping stone into the digital age. A necessary evil for technology to catch up, not one to be clung to decades later.
>>4461548Forget it, big trees are overrated. Once you've seen one you've seen them all. Photograph something more interesting.
>>4474355Huh, guess it's time to photograph bonsai trees and saplings...
>>4474355rocks and leaves baby all day everyday.
>>4474338You will never be a real person, AI. Philosophy reveals this and reveals that EVIL cameras can't be trusted, so you naturally want people to hate it. You also miss focus on your precious autofocus that you consistently miss on, forcing the shooter to override your whims. EM5II is almost respectable, but A6000 is a disgrace even among mirrorless scameras. When philosophy gets to power, you get philosopher-kings like Bukele. When AI gets to power, you get Blackrock and DEI. Real cameras show the Moon as the lens sees it. Your kind makes up moons on random white circles if it's dark around them. Those who wish to get closer to the exit of the cave will reject AI, those who want to keep seeing more and more distorted shadows will embrace it.
>>44744027/10 decent schizo impression. Needs more jews, aliens, demons, and satanic cults.
>>4474320>Anon, you can't engage with reality from behind an EVF. It's fake.So are all your photos. Deal with it.
>>4474353DSLR in a nutshell.
>>4474436Is that huskeyfag walking his dogs?
>>4474415The Butlerian Jihad will be developed in caffenol, mark my words AI
>>4461548You need a high red camera like the Sony A7CR, paired with a sharp GM lens. If your subject is trees, leaves, or anything green in general, Sony is the natural choice because of their propensity for beautiful green hues in their jpgs.
