I nearly always buy secondhand camera bodies nowadays - it was the only way I could afford the "better" gear. My Nikon D800 was purchased over a year ago from MPB.com for less that a grand when they were £2300 new.
For example a Nikon D3200 can be bought for £129 (a D5200 will cost £189). Add a Nikon AF-S 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G VR DX (available at £149) and you have a decent starter kit well within your budget.
Craig Higson said
Mon Mar 14 9:21 PM, 2016
I see where you're coming from John, but having used bridge cameras I found them limited. The big zoom is ok but other areas suffered. Plus, I can now choose to either upgrade my body, or my lenses separately if I need to rather than having to buy a whole new camera. As I said above I have no interest in publishing except maybe on the odd website, and no interest in big lenses for real close ups so for me a £300 DSLR camera makes total sense.
JOHN TYMON said
Fri Mar 11 7:10 AM, 2016
Craig Higson wrote:
JOHN TYMON wrote:
For a £300-£500 You won't have enough for a decent DSLR Kit ,you will be looking at Bridge cameras, and if its for bird record shots ,the best at the moment is probably the Nikon P900 ,which has a lens that goes from 24mm-2000mm a length DSLR fans can only dream of ,the quality will never be the same as and expensive DSLR kit,but will knock spots off the kit lenses you get with cheaper kit. Canon and Panasonic make good ones too.
I think that depends what you intend to use it for though John. It's like saying you won't have enough for decent bins with £400. You would, it's just they won't be as good as the more expensive ones. I paid £350 ish ( in that sale admittedly) and it is absolutely great for me and bridge cameras I used were not up to what I wanted. Not every one wants or needs the D7 or whatever with top end lenses.
Recent decent Bridge cameras are much better than basic DSLR lenses and cameras in my opinion ,I know ive had both in the past many times,If its just record shots of birds you want ,why carry the bulk of Dslr, you may as well get the biggest zoom possible in the smallest package ..If you want to publish in magazines etc now that's another story DSLR then is the way to go ,for sticking on the web both are fine :)
-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Friday 11th of March 2016 07:12:56 AM
Craig Higson said
Thu Mar 10 10:31 PM, 2016
JOHN TYMON wrote:
For a £300-£500 You won't have enough for a decent DSLR Kit ,you will be looking at Bridge cameras, and if its for bird record shots ,the best at the moment is probably the Nikon P900 ,which has a lens that goes from 24mm-2000mm a length DSLR fans can only dream of ,the quality will never be the same as and expensive DSLR kit,but will knock spots off the kit lenses you get with cheaper kit. Canon and Panasonic make good ones too.
I think that depends what you intend to use it for though John. It's like saying you won't have enough for decent bins with £400. You would, it's just they won't be as good as the more expensive ones. I paid £350 ish ( in that sale admittedly) and it is absolutely great for me and bridge cameras I used were not up to what I wanted. Not every one wants or needs the D7 or whatever with top end lenses.
Paul Richardson said
Wed Mar 9 9:13 PM, 2016
Hi Scott
Just another word on the Panasonic range. The most advanced of their FZ range, the FZ1000, has a 1" sensor, and gets some really good recommendations from users. It's not got quite a big a zoom as some bridge cameras but it is probably better quality than some. It costs about £550.
Might be worth a look.
Paul
Scott robinson said
Wed Mar 9 8:05 PM, 2016
Thanks for your reply Richard much appreciated, I will take a good look at the Fuji and Panasonic cameras. I have a few weeks to save up yet so I have got time to weigh up my options and buy the right camera for me.
Richard Thew said
Wed Mar 9 2:55 PM, 2016
I've been there Scott, I have had the same budget issues a few years ago. For me, I use the fuji X-s1, but, as good as it is, it can struggle a little in low light. Panasonic FZ range is a very good option too since they tend to have a superb zoom range that is super sharp throughout. But for quality, you need a sensor that is larger then 1/2 inch. The Panasonic is a tad smaller at 1/2.3 inch but is still perfect for beginners. Fuji uses a 2/3 inch in the xs1. My recommendation is to create a short list of potential cameras and search on Flickr for those models and even google some reviews on them. That way you can check them out for quality and details before you buy.
All the best to you........
Scott robinson said
Wed Mar 9 1:38 PM, 2016
Thank you both for your replys and I am going to buy a p900 after reading many reviews. Hopefully have it in the next few weeks, now it's a bit of research in how to use it!
-- Edited by Scott robinson on Wednesday 9th of March 2016 02:04:08 PM
JOHN TYMON said
Wed Mar 9 6:52 AM, 2016
For a £300-£500 You won't have enough for a decent DSLR Kit ,you will be looking at Bridge cameras, and if its for bird record shots ,the best at the moment is probably the Nikon P900 ,which has a lens that goes from 24mm-2000mm a length DSLR fans can only dream of ,the quality will never be the same as and expensive DSLR kit,but will knock spots off the kit lenses you get with cheaper kit. Canon and Panasonic make good ones too.
Craig Higson said
Tue Mar 8 9:08 PM, 2016
Scott robinson wrote:
After seeing cracking pictures not only on this website but on Facebook also, I'm thinking of buying a camera, not just yet but in a few week once I've saved some money up. I'll probably have a budget of 300-500 pound. I just wanted some advice really on which camera would be ideal for me. I've never used a camera ever and would like some feedback on which would be good for a beginner?
Hi Scott. There are far more experienced photographers on here than me, however I was recently in your position - decided to enter the world of the dslr after being unimpressed by a couple of bridge cameras. I used to use a Canon SLR film camera years ago so plumbed for the Canon EOS 1200d kit - 18 - 55mm lens and a 75-300mm zoom all for about £350 with a bag and card. Not the highest quality camera on the list, not the best lenses in the world, but to date the results have been more than adequate for my needs.
I'm not an aspiring wildlife photographer. Just someone who wants the odd record shot so perhaps it's less than you were aiming for. I did watch a review video on YouTube where some photographer compared a 1200d with ( I think) a 50d and a 7d and even he said the difference was very small. Bit like top end optics I guess more you pay you get better quality but it's decreasing returns. Plus it's obviously things like fps and other wonderful functions that improve the more you spend - but I'm not even a tenth of the way to looking at that sort of stuff yet.
I guess the biggest problem will be brand. You'll find Nikon advocates tell you you must buy Nikon and ditto for Canon. Not sure about the other brand supporters.
Scott robinson said
Tue Mar 8 4:25 PM, 2016
After seeing cracking pictures not only on this website but on Facebook also, I'm thinking of buying a camera, not just yet but in a few week once I've saved some money up. I'll probably have a budget of 300-500 pound. I just wanted some advice really on which camera would be ideal for me. I've never used a camera ever and would like some feedback on which would be good for a beginner?
Chris brown said
Sun Sep 9 5:25 AM, 2012
Thanks Dennis for all the info. I will let you know how I get on.
Dennis atherton said
Sat Sep 8 12:20 AM, 2012
The 7d is very nice, i have no regrets with mine, once its set up as you like it its great to use, only thing i dont like is the size, its a little small in hand, a battery grip doubled the battery life and made it feel better in the hand, a bigger firmer grip, other than that though, no probs, enjoy, give us an update once youve had a good doe with it.
Chris brown said
Fri Sep 7 7:23 AM, 2012
Thank you all for the advice it is much appreciated. I will check the price comparison between a 7D and 50D but think I already knew the 7D was probably the right option but it is good to have this confirmed off some of you guys.
Ps Martyn: No more playing rugby (Darts instead now) mean to me old age is upon me!!!!! I desperately look forward to retiring (more time for wildlife) but I have a long time to go!!!!!!!!! LOL
Nick Isherwood said
Thu Sep 6 3:48 PM, 2012
If you've got the cash then get the 7d. If not, then like Joe I fully recommend the 50d. All my recent shots have been taken with the 50d using the canon 400mm. F5.6 lens like the one you have. Take a look at my Flickr page and see what you think.
Martyn Jones said
Thu Sep 6 3:06 PM, 2012
Chris brown wrote:
Hi all,
I recently had my 40th birthday. (Yes I now feel very old!!) ....
God help the rest of us then ...
JOHN TYMON said
Thu Sep 6 2:03 PM, 2012
I would go for the 7D,as with what you already have its probably the best route,but with what you already have ,like dennis says the difference in pictures will be smaller,but there is always that little bit of improvement,that makes the difference in the end-Go for it
Dennis atherton said
Thu Sep 6 6:33 AM, 2012
i use a 7d and have also used the 550d, i would say the 550d is the best value for money camera around with a great 1.6 crop sensor, the difference in picture quality in the two is negligible, the 550d is a great camera, but what you pay for with a 7d is the solid magnesium body, two processors instead of one giving faster frames per second for longer with less buffering catching up, up to 90mbs a second, also the waterproof body is also a major advantage, the cheaper cameras are not waterproof, if you want faster frames per second, waterproofing then 7d, if not too bothered then the 550 is a great contender,much cheaper too, only you can decide, in this country with the weather as it is i feel safer with a waterproof camera for if i get caught as i usually do, good luck
Joe Wynn said
Thu Sep 6 5:45 AM, 2012
Chris brown wrote:
Hi all,
I recently had my 40th birthday. (Yes I now feel very old!!) I was very kindly given money off friends and family to go towards a new camera. I was planning on paying some money towards it and getting a Canon 7D. I know there are some very good wildlife photographers on this forum and I would be interested on their thoughts as to whether it is worth paying the large amount of money out for a 7D or is there another body that is comparable for a lesser price. I currently have a 5D and a 1000D and feel neither quite do the job I need. Ie photograph quality not good enough on the 1000D but the extra reach helps and the 5D has good photo quality but I always feel the full frame sensor prevents me getting enough reach to my subjects. I use a canon 400mm F5.6 Lens for birds and a Tamron 90mm macro lens for insects. Any advise will be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Chris
I've recently made the jump up from the 1000D, not a bad camera but I went up to the 50D which was the predecessor of the 7D. Worth looking second hand I think, but i've heard good stuff about the 7D and some complaints about noise. Some forum members could probably tell you more about the 7D, but what i'd say is don't rule out some of the older models, the difference is often only the number of megapixels!
Chris brown said
Thu Sep 6 5:40 AM, 2012
Hi all,
I recently had my 40th birthday. (Yes I now feel very old!!) I was very kindly given money off friends and family to go towards a new camera. I was planning on paying some money towards it and getting a Canon 7D. I know there are some very good wildlife photographers on this forum and I would be interested on their thoughts as to whether it is worth paying the large amount of money out for a 7D or is there another body that is comparable for a lesser price. I currently have a 5D and a 1000D and feel neither quite do the job I need. Ie photograph quality not good enough on the 1000D but the extra reach helps and the 5D has good photo quality but I always feel the full frame sensor prevents me getting enough reach to my subjects. I use a canon 400mm F5.6 Lens for birds and a Tamron 90mm macro lens for insects. Any advise will be greatly appreciated.
I'd suggest you look at buying secondhand.
I nearly always buy secondhand camera bodies nowadays - it was the only way I could afford the "better" gear. My Nikon D800 was purchased over a year ago from MPB.com for less that a grand when they were £2300 new.
For example a Nikon D3200 can be bought for £129 (a D5200 will cost £189). Add a Nikon AF-S 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G VR DX (available at £149) and you have a decent starter kit well within your budget.
Recent decent Bridge cameras are much better than basic DSLR lenses and cameras in my opinion ,I know ive had both in the past many times,If its just record shots of birds you want ,why carry the bulk of Dslr, you may as well get the biggest zoom possible in the smallest package ..If you want to publish in magazines etc now that's another story DSLR then is the way to go ,for sticking on the web both are fine :)
-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Friday 11th of March 2016 07:12:56 AM
I think that depends what you intend to use it for though John. It's like saying you won't have enough for decent bins with £400. You would, it's just they won't be as good as the more expensive ones. I paid £350 ish ( in that sale admittedly) and it is absolutely great for me and bridge cameras I used were not up to what I wanted. Not every one wants or needs the D7 or whatever with top end lenses.
Just another word on the Panasonic range. The most advanced of their FZ range, the FZ1000, has a 1" sensor, and gets some really good recommendations from users. It's not got quite a big a zoom as some bridge cameras but it is probably better quality than some. It costs about £550.
Might be worth a look.
Paul
Hopefully have it in the next few weeks, now it's a bit of research in how to use it!
-- Edited by Scott robinson on Wednesday 9th of March 2016 02:04:08 PM
For a £300-£500 You won't have enough for a decent DSLR Kit ,you will be looking at Bridge cameras, and if its for bird record shots ,the best at the moment is probably the Nikon P900 ,which has a lens that goes from 24mm-2000mm a length DSLR fans can only dream of ,the quality will never be the same as and expensive DSLR kit,but will knock spots off the kit lenses you get with cheaper kit. Canon and Panasonic make good ones too.
Hi Scott. There are far more experienced photographers on here than me, however I was recently in your position - decided to enter the world of the dslr after being unimpressed by a couple of bridge cameras. I used to use a Canon SLR film camera years ago so plumbed for the Canon EOS 1200d kit - 18 - 55mm lens and a 75-300mm zoom all for about £350 with a bag and card. Not the highest quality camera on the list, not the best lenses in the world, but to date the results have been more than adequate for my needs.
I'm not an aspiring wildlife photographer. Just someone who wants the odd record shot so perhaps it's less than you were aiming for. I did watch a review video on YouTube where some photographer compared a 1200d with ( I think) a 50d and a 7d and even he said the difference was very small. Bit like top end optics I guess more you pay you get better quality but it's decreasing returns. Plus it's obviously things like fps and other wonderful functions that improve the more you spend - but I'm not even a tenth of the way to looking at that sort of stuff yet.
I guess the biggest problem will be brand. You'll find Nikon advocates tell you you must buy Nikon and ditto for Canon. Not sure about the other brand supporters.
Ps Martyn: No more playing rugby (Darts instead now) mean to me old age is upon me!!!!! I desperately look forward to retiring (more time for wildlife) but I have a long time to go!!!!!!!!! LOL
God help the rest of us then ...
I've recently made the jump up from the 1000D, not a bad camera but I went up to the 50D which was the predecessor of the 7D. Worth looking second hand I think, but i've heard good stuff about the 7D and some complaints about noise. Some forum members could probably tell you more about the 7D, but what i'd say is don't rule out some of the older models, the difference is often only the number of megapixels!
I recently had my 40th birthday. (Yes I now feel very old!!) I was very kindly given money off friends and family to go towards a new camera. I was planning on paying some money towards it and getting a Canon 7D. I know there are some very good wildlife photographers on this forum and I would be interested on their thoughts as to whether it is worth paying the large amount of money out for a 7D or is there another body that is comparable for a lesser price.
I currently have a 5D and a 1000D and feel neither quite do the job I need. Ie photograph quality not good enough on the 1000D but the extra reach helps and the 5D has good photo quality but I always feel the full frame sensor prevents me getting enough reach to my subjects. I use a canon 400mm F5.6 Lens for birds and a Tamron 90mm macro lens for insects.
Any advise will be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Chris