Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    298

    Default Sell me a camera

    I will be in the market for a camera this summer. I have always loved taking pictures of wildlife ever since I was young. I enjoy that as much as looking at an animal through the scope and pulling the trigger. I know there are a lot of HT people who take amazing pictures. Depending on how much business I get with my private contracting this summer for certified hay and straw will determine how much I will spend on one.

    I am looking at $1,000-$1,500 for the camera and a lens or two. Am I better off buying a higher priced camera and maybe one lens right away rather than a mediocre one and a couple lens? I know Costco sells bundles on sale from time to time.

    Thanks for any input on what you guys like and dislike.

    Jamen
    What we do in life... echoes in eternity...

  2. #2

    Default

    I would put money towards a good lens and avoid the kit lens. If you are serious about getting into it (sounds like you are) it is worth investing in the decent lens right away. I use the lens that came with my kit some, but mostly for normal pictures and not for wildlife.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    447

    Default

    What exactly will you be using the camera for? Primarily wildlife? Packing into the back country?

    DSLRs are nice but the lenses that give you enough reach for wildlife photography are expensive and heavy.

    I've got a DSLR and a superzoom that I choose between depending on weight/space/how much I want the best photos possible/etc.

    I'm not sure what the lens selection is like, but Sony and Fuji's mirrorless cameras have very good image quality. For DSLRs, Canon and Nikon are the two big players with a wide array of lenses to choose from.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    298

    Default

    I will be doing both pictures from my truck and packing in back country. I do not do a ton of back country right now but I am doing more each and every year.

    Thank you for your input guys!
    What we do in life... echoes in eternity...

  5. Default

    You might look at the Sony RX10 III. It is considered a "bridge" camera so it doesn't take interchangeable lenses but it has a 24-600mm zoom range. It has a Zeiss lens and a 1" sensor. With that zoom range it is good for anything from landscapes to wildlife. A DSLR with a wildlife lens will be bigger and heavier than the RX10. Supposedly it is a really good camera for video too. I know if I had the money laying around I would own one.

    https://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...ords=sony+rx10

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Almost North Dakota, not quite Canada
    Posts
    707

    Default

    I assume you are talking DSLR, and that's all I really have experience with. If I were starting from scratch, I would buy a camera body that is not the newest model - one that might be two or three models ago (will save quite a bit of money), and then get the best glass I can afford. Successive camera models rarely show drastic improvements in quality from one to the next. The quality of the lens makes a much bigger difference.

    That said, those 20-55mm zoom kit lenses aren't completely terrible for general shooting. I use one and I get decent pics with it, you just have to be aware of its limitations. If you can get a decent price on a camera body plus one of those, go for it. You can usually find kits like that for somewhere in the neighborhood of $300-$500. For a longer lens if you want something that you can travel with or carry in a pack, I'd look at a tele-zoom. They are smaller and lighter, and there are a lot of affordable options that provide decent pictures too. That's what I have - I've carried one camera body and those two lenses in a backpack around Costa Rica, on hunting trips, on vacations. I still drool over fancy lenses (someday!) but I can do quite a bit with the lenses I have. A lot depends on what you want to photograph, and how you want to do it I suppose. You can always upgrade gear down the road, as your skills improve or your needs change.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigsky2 View Post
    You might look at the Sony RX10 III. It is considered a "bridge" camera so it doesn't take interchangeable lenses but it has a 24-600mm zoom range. It has a Zeiss lens and a 1" sensor. With that zoom range it is good for anything from landscapes to wildlife. A DSLR with a wildlife lens will be bigger and heavier than the RX10. Supposedly it is a really good camera for video too. I know if I had the money laying around I would own one.

    https://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...ords=sony+rx10

    Not to step on Jamen's thread but this camera looks amazing! Thanks for the lead BigSky.

  8. #8

    Default

    I was in the same spot as you last year and decided against a DSLR because of the zoom problem. I have a Nikon p-900 super zoom that takes real quality pictures at great distances for a lot less then a DSLR, and I don't need to do anything with lenses.

    GoatName:  DSCN0751.jpg
Views: 617
Size:  78.0 KB these are over 100 yards from me

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Thanks for all the input guys I will definitely research the suggestions made here.
    What we do in life... echoes in eternity...

  10. #10

    Default

    I also have the Nikon P 900. The zoom is like taking pictures with a good spotting scope. This bull is a easy 1/2 mile from me. Maybe not as good of picture quality as some other cameras but 600 dollars at Best Buy
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  11. #11

    Default

    I would recommend that you "know what you are getting into". I don't doubt that you do. What I mean when I say that is, a lot of people buy an expensive DSLR and expensive lenses expecting to be better photographers and able to take better pictures. For a lot of people, that is not the case. Many people end up spending a large amount of money only to learn that with said equipment, they take worse pictures than those they take with their $100 point and shoot. Some, to tell themselves they didn't make a mistake, end up using that expensive equipment on the automatic pre-set. I'm not trying to dissuade you. It is a fun hobby and I encourage everybody to learn enough more to make such equipment beneficial and enjoyable. I was that guy over many years through about 3 or 4 DSLR setups. I finally dove in a little further to learn a lot of the stuff that seemed alien to me. Finally, everything clicked to where I thought to myself, "self, I wish I knew all of this years ago". Good luck in your quest into the realm of a fun, rewarding and challenging hobby.
    __________________________________________________ _______________________
    “Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
    John Steinbeck

  12. #12

    Default

    I have a Nikon DSLR that I'm looking to sell.
    Nikon D60 Gold Edition. Includes two lenses, camera body, battery+charger, carrying bag, manual, and strap. Lenses are 18-55mm & 55mm-200mm.
    It's in great shape and takes good pictures. Certainly there are more expensive cameras out there, but as others have suggested I would sink my money into lenses before an expensive camera body.
    This was my wife's camera and since I also have a DSLR we don't have any need for two of them.
    I'm looking for $250 + shipping. PM me if interested.

  13. Default

    Sounds to me like you need two camera's. I have a D5000 and D7000 Nikon and tried carrying them with me hunting, they are always in the way. I tried several different point and shoot's to carry and finally I'm using a Nikon Cool Pix S6900. The hardest part of it for me is viewing through the back instead of through the lens. I fit's in a cell phone case and I wear it on my belt. I don't remember how many pixels but more than you need, more than my D5000. A drawback is shooting with the sun behind you, sun overpower's the screen on the back and can't see it. It's pixel count is high but not as good as my D7000, but then it didn't cost as much either. Say's 12x optical zoom on it, don't know what that means. Think I got it from B&H Photo in NYC through the mail. It was a refurbished one and got it well over half off. Adaorma in NY is right there with B%H. They also have refurb cameras. My D7000 I got from B&H refurb, around $500. When a camera is discontinued they usually sell them as refurb. The D7000 when I got it only had had the shutter snapped 72 time's. I've also bought len's referbed and same deal. Like new stuff. If I were you I'd look for something like a 18-300 min lens. If you could go it, something like an 18-140, I have it, and a 170-600 Tameron or Sigma. I think all those lens will work on that D60 the guy back up Has. I have the older 150-500 Sigma. No stabilizing in it and got it well before DSLR's. It does work on them though.

    B&H has several DSLR's in the $500-600 range. Kit cameras and they do come with one or two lens. One Nikon comes with a 18-55 and a 70-300. I don't have a use one for the 18-55 lens. First I went with an 10-105 and then sold it and went with an 18-140. I don't know that it's a better lens but the focal range suited me much better I have two Nikon lens, other than thr 150-500 Sigma. They are 18-140 and 55-300. I think I'd rather have had the 70-300 but the 55-300 works fine for me for now. Try a couple photo's. Didn't work, try to ind out how to do it.
    Last edited by Don Fischer; 06-27-2017 at 03:07 PM.

  14. Default

    Try this. Have no idea how this happened. This is my Bodie taken with the D7000 w/18-140 lens
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Paradise Lost
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigsky2 View Post
    You might look at the Sony RX10 III. It is considered a "bridge" camera so it doesn't take interchangeable lenses but it has a 24-600mm zoom range. It has a Zeiss lens and a 1" sensor. With that zoom range it is good for anything from landscapes to wildlife. A DSLR with a wildlife lens will be bigger and heavier than the RX10. Supposedly it is a really good camera for video too. I know if I had the money laying around I would own one.

    https://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX10...ords=sony+rx10
    If I find a sale on this camera in the future I will pick one up.
    "if we allow the freedom of the hills and the last of the wilderness to be taken from us, then the very idea of freedom may die with it."

    -Edward Abbey

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Lake Macquarie Australia
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Two years ago after always carrying a camera when hunting, I went and did a formal basics course in photography. It improved my ability out of site.

    I then went balls in on a Canon DSLR and a selection of lens. A big mistake for me. It was just to big and heavy to carry and you never could just take one lens as you inevitable take the wrong one. So that just added to the bulk.

    In June just before I went to New Zealand I sold all of that kit and I bought a Olympus E-M5ii. It is a four thirds format. The camera is awesome and takes great shots as well as being nearly half the size of a 35mm DSLR. It has great functionality as the dial at your fingers control the Aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation. They are also weather proof bodies.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  17. #17

    Default

    I went with the Nikon 3300 kit from Sams Club a couple years ago and I think it is a pretty good camera, it took me a little while to get used to, but after I went to a new lens (Tamron 70-300mm) I noticed a huge difference from the kit lens' it came with (18-55 & 55-200). I recently got my hands on the 16-300mm from Tamron for it and I love the combination, it can be a little cumbersome to carry, especially with a pack on (I usually have it slung across my body like Binos on a 3D range), but it's managable and always within reach for when a shot opportunity may arise. I have it in my head that I'd like to jump to a Full Frame someday, but the crop sensor and aftermarket lens have been good to me so far.

    Just my $.02
    Name:  Fleet.jpg
Views: 165
Size:  67.7 KBName:  Float Landing.jpg
Views: 166
Size:  83.2 KBName:  muley1.jpg
Views: 168
Size:  90.6 KBName:  roadrunner.jpg
Views: 167
Size:  46.8 KB
    Attached Images Attached Images   
    “Well, Arizona’s some place,” I told John. “I knew you climbed for water and dug for wood, and that it had more cows and less milk than any state in the union, but it’s the first time I’ve ever climbed for ducks.” - Jack O'Connor

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Eden Prairie, MN
    Posts
    362

    Default

    For future reference, cameras are like rifles. Lots of good value bodies (aka rifles), but the key is spending 2x-4x on your lenses (aka scope). You can take much better pictures with an $1800 "L-series" lens on a $750 camera body than you can with a $1200 body and a $500 lens. One old saw is for portraits and artistic buy Nikon bodies and lens, for sports and wildlife buy Canon. The over all quality is so high these days that you really can't go wrong with either. The investment is in the "glass" (lens) - bodies are frequently upgraded, but good glass can last for many many years. I would start by deciding the distance and lighting of your most likely shots and pick an appropriate "L-series" grade Canon lens (or the Nikon equivalent) and then buy a $800-$900 body. Then when you can afford, buy a second "L-series" lens, and later a 3rd (if you map it out, 3 lens can cover just about everything) and by then look to upgrading your body -- but stay within a brand -- you really can't mix and match, and with a few exceptions 3rd party lens do not match up at the high end.
    "Freedom is NOT Free"

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AussieHunter View Post
    Two years ago after always carrying a camera when hunting, I went and did a formal basics course in photography. It improved my ability out of site.

    I then went balls in on a Canon DSLR and a selection of lens. A big mistake for me. It was just to big and heavy to carry and you never could just take one lens as you inevitable take the wrong one. So that just added to the bulk.

    In June just before I went to New Zealand I sold all of that kit and I bought a Olympus E-M5ii. It is a four thirds format. The camera is awesome and takes great shots as well as being nearly half the size of a 35mm DSLR. It has great functionality as the dial at your fingers control the Aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation. They are also weather proof bodies.
    I also have the em5II, and I love it! Its by no means an equal to larger sensor cameras as far as image quality goes, but I'm not a professional photographer. The Olympus PRO lenses are absolutely worth the money. I've gotten a few great images this season. The size of the micro four-thirds cameras are perfect for what I need.

    Name:  LRM_EXPORT_20171008_160038.jpg
Views: 115
Size:  126.9 KB

    Name:  LRM_EXPORT_20171008_170842.jpg
Views: 115
Size:  87.6 KB

    Any DSLR or quality mirrorless camera will be better than a point and shoot. Just make sure you spend time learning how to use the camera, and get off of the auto setting. Also, you can do A LOT in post production to turn an ok image into a great image.
    "Never follow your passion, but always bring it with you." ~ Mike Rowe

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Bitterroot Valley, MT
    Posts
    974

    Default

    The Fisher-Price® Classics Changebale Disc Camera:


    Name:  104628860287113p.jpg
Views: 107
Size:  117.7 KB
    Here me out on this beauty. Reasons this should be in your next camera bag:

    First, nostalgia. I mean who doesn't remember playing with these and dreaming of big hunts? Now you can do that same dreaming while you are on your dream hunt.

    Second, Easy for even the most techno-challenged. No buttons! Not a single one. You don't need to read directions, just turn the dial. That's it!

    Third, Never worry about unfocused pictures. Since the pictures are already taken for you, they are always in focus! Never again will that hero shot only cover half your face or will you have a thumb instead of a memory to treasure.

    Lastly, Since its for ages 24 months and up, you know you qualify to use it! You don't have to wonder if you camera isn't as good as your buddies or if you should have it. Own it with pride! When his breaks down becuase a piece of sand got in the aperture, just keep clicking and smiling knowing you're camera will never break down.
    "There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness, that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy, and its charm." ~TR

    "He was a mighty hunter before the Lord." ~Genesis 10:9

  21. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antlerradar View Post
    I also have the Nikon P 900. The zoom is like taking pictures with a good spotting scope. This bull is a easy 1/2 mile from me. Maybe not as good of picture quality as some other cameras but 600 dollars at Best Buy
    Something you can see here about letting any camera choose the setting's.Blue snow! The camera did it's light reading on the snow and determined it was grey, that's the default. I think it's 13% gray. If you have the ability in snow add a +2 the the aperture opening and the snow will come out white. My little point and shoot I don't think will do that but then don't recall shooting in in any snow either.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •