Ditto Richards advice from me too. I am hardly a photographer, but I bought the EOS1300D's predecessor and, whilst it may not have the functions of say, a 7D its great for learning, can produce excellent images and you can get with kit lenses for less than £600. I have used bridge cameras and although you can benefit from massive zoom ranges I have found them lacking in some of the manual functions available. Than could be entirely down to the models I have used. But, for me the big advantage of going DSLR is you can upgrade a bit at a time. So you get the EOS1300D and decide you like photography but want a better lens, just upgrade the lens (a 400mm Canon lens can be bought for around £5-600 secondhand). If you're happy with the lenses but want a better camera, just upgrade the body. With a bridge camera its buying the whole thing again. A key piece of advice I was given by a well respected photographer - the kit wont make you take better pictures no matter how much it cost. I remember that when my photos turn out less than good, which is quite often. There are some pictures on my blog taken with the eos1200d set up - the most recent are a tad ropey though due to photographer inadequacy (some taken with an iphone too but its fairly obvious which are which).
__________________
No one on their death bed ever said they wished they'd spent more time at work. http://bitsnbirds.blogspot.co.uk
With such a healthy budget Scott, I would recommend getting something more in the lines for quality if you want great bird pictures. I must admit I used to go for bridge cameras years ago till I got a DSLR. The quality is vastly better and my mother got her hands on a Canon EOS1300D with a tamron 70-300 lens (tamron lenses i found are sharper and cheeper) and she is taking some of the best pictures she has ever taken. The above model is easy enough for beginners too, no fiddly buttons to zoom in, So this kit is my recommendation. I'm sure others will give other suggestions but it's always best to test different models and go for what you feel most comfortable with. You can get an idea what to expect by searching for images on the web such as Flickr as an example and search for the camera model (if bridge) or lens. I did this before I got any of my cameras then I have a good idea what to expect and what to go for. Hope this helps. Ta!
-- Edited by Richard Thew on Monday 13th of November 2017 08:08:50 PM
__________________
Which bird is ideal for keeping cakes in? I asked. The answer: a Bun-tin.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/135715507@N06
I know this has been asked before but serious question! Going to get a camera for after Christmas, which will be the best for a brand new beginner, someone who has never even used a camera before. Been thinking about it for a while now but never actually took the plunge. Will have about 600 quid to play with!
Hiya Stephen, with regards to digiscoping, you'd be better off using a compact camera with a small optical magnification value not more than 4 x magnification. This would be lighter to carry than a DSLR and the small magnification would be just enough to remove any vingett you would get from the scope it would be attached to. You could also consider using a mobile phone rather than a compact camera, but the quality maybe not what your looking for. Also a shutter release maybe desirable to remove any shake whist taking the pictures to give sharper images. Any of the Canon S series or G series are pretty good and bought second hand may give a bargain to be had. Like anything, practice makes perfect with whatever you choose to use ,and camera/phone etc is subjective to available funds you've got to play with. With regards to the adaptors the DSLR/universal ones are considerably bigger due the camera being alot bigger, and if you wanted to buy an adaptor specific to your scope these come a little more expensive. Some of the Jakar adaptors are reasonable tho, but with most thinks a try before you buy maybe worth considering first. As Doc has previously stated the quality of your scope will also impact the quality of your images ,so the bigger and better quality of scope is also worth considering.
-- Edited by Peter Nolan Woolley on Thursday 22nd of June 2017 04:12:14 PM
Hi Chris, to add to what Craig says, which seems sound advice to me as I too think that cheap Bridge Cameras give soft images when printed up or enlarged even though they may look good on the small screen on the back of the camera! In addition you mention digiscoping which is my area, I have given lessons in it for years and the quality of image is related to quality of the scope (i.e. lens glass, just like a camera). For your budget the scopes you can get will allow you to take adequate record shots but not much else. Again shots may look OK on the back of the camera but do anything with them and they are soft. Even 2nd hand you probably wont get much for £150, and remember a sturdy tripod is essential and that would have to be budgeted for. Of course phonescoping is getting ever more popular but the quality of the scope will determine the quality of your pictures. Hope all the advice you are getting gives you something to mull over. Main thing is, take your time, look at all the great advice on these forum, and don't rush into anything
Hi Chris, I'm definitely 'not' a photographer so may well get shouted down for saying this, but it's based on my own experiences. A bridge camera is good for some stuff, not others. For £150 I doubt you'd get one that allows you to change settings which I found incredibly frustrating and sometimes prevented me getting the picture I wanted.
So, I bought an entry level dslr with a couple of kit lenses including a 70-300mm zoom. This has given me much better pictures than my bridge camera ever did, albeit with sometimes smaller images. I've also learned a lot more about photography. Personally I'd have a look on somewhere like Camera Jungle Website where you can get a second hand body and entry level zoom to start off for round about your budget. The advantage for me in doing it this way is a) you can see whether you like photography without breaking the bank, and b)you can upgrade your lens and camera body separately (as long as you stick with the same manufacturer) as you advance your skills. You might not get magazine quality images, but to be honest, neither will just buying a £600 or even a 600mm lens - a reason I suspect there are so many pics of photographers intruding where they shouldn't to get a bit closer!
Just my opinion.
__________________
No one on their death bed ever said they wished they'd spent more time at work. http://bitsnbirds.blogspot.co.uk
Cheers will have a look around like you say maybe the way to go is scope and attachment just wanted to document the birds I see initially then maybe move onto better photography as my skills and knowledge increases.
It depends on what you want out of your photographs.
I see some genuinely excellent images people have taken using bridge cameras - that might be something else for you to consider.
Hi Chris. For your budget you will only get a very basic camera. For good bird photos it is more about a decent telephoto lens. As a rough guide you need something il a focal length of at least 300mm. The cost of a good second hand one will be at least £600. The camera body depends on so much and what you want to do with it. I.e. Garden birds on feeders, flight shots or other hard to get images. If it is just record shots you may be better off getting a decent scope and an adaptor for a smart phone and using that. Have a look on amazon for some bird photography books. You can get them second hand for 3-5 quid. Money well spent for advice if you are just starting off. Be warned though, it is addictive and becomes a very expensive hobby.
