I just wanted to say thanks to all those who have related experiences and given advice in previous posts. I am a decidedly amateur and have only used entry level SLR and digital SLR cameras (usually kits) in the past, most recently a Nikon 3300 with kit lenses.

Following advice here I picked up a used Nikon D600 and Nikon 70-200 f2.8 from keh.com and the difference is amazing. Again following recommendations here my next purchase will be the Tamron 24-70 f2.8. I am trying to broaden my knowledge and am doing the Essentials of Photography course by Satore and some of the Strobist lessons on flash.

Thanks again for all your help.

Does a Cannon "AE-1 Program" 35mm camera have any value?

Guitarsoup said:

---

Old Town Ag said:

---

Does a Cannon "AE-1 Program" 35mm camera have any value?

---

Sentimental

---

Guess not then.

If it is in perfect working order, maybe you could get 50-100 bucks from an art student. But they were majoring in art. And you probably shouldn't feel good about that.

I still haven't picked up the Canon 70, so I was thinking about your Nikon suggestion when I saw this at Costco. Thoughts on this camera and bundle for $1600? I also realize I probably need to add that $800 wide angle lens for interior:

https://www.costco.com/Nikon-D7500-DSLR-Camera-2-Lens-Bundle.product.100365110.html

That's a pretty good deal for the money. I wouldn't be that happy with those lenses, but that camera retails by itself with no lenses or accessories for $1300, so $200 for that extra stuff isn't that bad.

Why wouldn't you be happy with those lenses?

They are the cheapest, worst lenses Nikon makes, which is why they are included in that pack.

I'd like to buy the 70D if Premium is going to pass. I'll be in Houston on Saturday.

Email in profile.

dubi said:

---

I'd like to buy the 70D if Premium is going to pass. I'll be in Houston on Saturday.

Email in profile.

---

I've been trying to meet up but haven't had success with our schedules due to the hurricane. I'm still interested but will tell you if I pass.

Are those lenses about the same I am looking at with Juans 70D package for $600?

Premium said:

---

Are those lenses about the same I am looking at with Juans 70D package for $600?

---

I think so. "Kit" lenses are bare bones. We have previously linked to the nice ones you should buy.

Thx. Seems like I should avoid all kits. You seem to prefer Canon over Nikon?

Once you buy into a platform, it is a huge pain to switch platforms. I was Canon because I was given a film rebel back in the mid 90s. Switching was a huge pain and I lost a good bit of money. But I would do it again in a heart beat and the Nikon D850 vs the Canon 5D4 is a perfect example of why. For the typical consumer, there is never a reason to switch.

If you look at the last 10 years of the histories, Nikon's cameras especially pro models have killed Canon's.

Each brand has some special lenses that are better than the other's. Canon has an edge on macros and tilt shifts. Nikon's had an edge on primes and wide angles (though Canon's 11-24 is supposed to be great, it's just like 3500 or something crazy.)

If you are video focused, Sony has been your best bet. Stills focused, Nikon has been best. Canon's main advantage is they have the best marketing and have cut huge deals with organizations like the AP, Getty & newspapers, so you see lots of Canon lenses on sidelines.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Once you buy into a platform, it is a huge pain to switch platforms. I was Canon because I was given a film rebel back in the mid 90s. Switching was a huge pain and I lost a good bit of money. But I would do it again in a heart beat and the Nikon D850 vs the Canon 5D4 is a perfect example of why. For the typical consumer, there is never a reason to switch.

If you look at the last 10 years of the histories, Nikon's cameras especially pro models have killed Canon's.

Each brand has some special lenses that are better than the other's. Canon has an edge on macros and tilt shifts. Nikon's had an edge on primes and wide angles (though Canon's 11-24 is supposed to be great, it's just like 3500 or something crazy.)

If you are video focused, Sony has been your best bet. Stills focused, Nikon has been best. Canon's main advantage is they have the best marketing and have cut huge deals with organizations like the AP, Getty & newspapers, so you see lots of Canon lenses on sidelines.

---

Guitarsoup is a pro and I totally agree Nikon is the way to go for his profession.

I am a bare bones amateur who takes lots of photos for fun. Canon more than meets my needs; it would probably meet your needs too. However, if you ever intend to advance as a photographer, you might just start out Nikon if you are going to start a collection of expensive lenses.

My 2 cents.

Sounds like I might need to throw in 4 free tickets to the 11am ULaLa game to sweeten the deal

tk for tu juan said:

---

Sounds like I might need to throw in 4 free tickets to the 11am ULaLa game to sweeten the deal

---

I want it for the $600. See your email.

ETA: I'll take the tickets too

tk for tu juan said:

---

Sounds like I might need to throw in 4 free tickets to the 11am ULaLa game to sweeten the deal

---

To sweeten the deal for you?

Haha

https://hofferphotography.com/2017/09/19/nikon-d850-review-the-best-camera-nikon-has-ever-made-but/

Solid review of the Nikon D850

Would a beginner be overwhelmed by such a starting camera?

Anybody have interest in a Nikon D3200 2 lens kit? 18-55 and 55-500. This was my beginner kit to learn on and see if it was a hobby worth pursuing. I used it about a year before investing more into a new body and glass.

Premium said:

---

Would a beginner be overwhelmed by such a starting camera?

---

I thought your budget was like 2500 for everything? That camera is 3300 without any lenses.

It would have the same learning curve as any other DSLR. It's just major overkill unless you are a pro.

Was.

And still probably is. I was just curious if a newbie would even get the full use out of it.

Premium said:

---

Was.

And still probably is. I was just curious if a newbie would even get the full use out of it.

---

I don't get full use out of the 70D that I've owned for 1.5 years.

And I shoot lots of photos.

IMO, it would be a total waste of money.

One positive for starting out with the D850, it would be a long time before you were tempted to buy another camera. I say that with a smile since I am always tempted by the latest piece of technology.

Premium said:

---

Was.

And still probably is. I was just curious if a newbie would even get the full use out of it.

---

Are we still doing this? You got good advice a month ago. Pull the trigger!

Gramercy Riffs said:

---

Premium said:

---

Was.

And still probably is. I was just curious if a newbie would even get the full use out of it.

---

Are we still doing this? You got good advice a month ago. Pull the trigger!

---

I really tried to coordinate schedules but couldn't make it happen. I'm still interested in the 70D.

Turned out my Port A house wasn't in dire need of interior photos as the Sheetrock and flooring are ripped out. I do still need and want the camera though.

We need to put D850 into perspective. Great camera, yes. Game changer? Maybe. Does it make Nikon the best? No.

Decade ago, Canon 5D Mark II changed DSLR market forever by creating the DSLR video market. And it was the game changer and it's still a great camera fetching $700 on used market. Did that make Canon better than Nikon at that moment? Yes, for some.

Yes, Nikon just left hooked Canon the way Canon upper cutted Nikon with 5Dii. Do we believe Canon will sit back and do nothing? Doubt it. As a Canon/Sony/u43 user, I believe competition is the best innovator as I look forward to what Canon will do next...followed by Nikon...back and forth.

That being said, Camera is just a tool. There are great photos being taken everywhere, all the time with all different kinds of cameras.

One of the most iconic photos by GS for me is JFF holding up money sign. It was a great picture then and it is today. And 400mm f2.8 is my next purchase!

Quote:

---

We need to put D850 into perspective. Great camera, yes. Game changer? Maybe. Does it make Nikon the best? No.

---

I don't think a better camera for general shooting has ever been made.

Nikon's been the best at stills for a long time.

And for video, it does 4k at 1.0 crop. The 5D4 is a 1.74 crop. That's a really huge deal.

Quote:

---

Decade ago, Canon 5D Mark II changed DSLR market forever by creating the DSLR video market.

And it was the game changer and it's still a great camera fetching $700 on used market. Did that make Canon better than Nikon at that moment? Yes, for some.

---

It should probably be noted that the 5D2 was the SECOND HD video DSLR to make it to market after Nikon released one.

No question from me that the 5D2 was a revolutionary camera, HOWEVER, for day to day still shooting, the D700 was unquestionably a better camera.

I LOVED my 5D2, but the AF was terrible and the 22MP files weren't (and aren't now) always necessary. I loved the files, but it was a shock to our workflow for sure (just like the D800 and now the D850 are.) The D700 files were of higher image quality, the D700 had MUCH better auto focus and the D700 could rock out at 8fps while the 5D2 was at 3.9fps. Even now, my main camera is the D4 with the 16MP sensor. I love its image quality, editing capabilities and my ability to recover shadows.


If I was going to make a list of game changing DSLRs, the list would be:
1. Nikon D1 (First real digital for pros)
2. Canon 1D (Huge upgrade, shifted pros to Canon for it's IQ and 4MP)
3. Canon Digital Rebel (First DSLR for the masses at under $1k)
4. Canon 5D (First FF for consumers (1Ds had been FF before, but was ~9k)
5. Nikon D90 (First DSLR with HD video)
6. Canon 5D2 (First consumer camera with high MP and 1080p)
7. Nikon D3 (First great low-light camera with huge leap in AF - same sensor as D700, caused mass exodus to Nikon at Bejing Olympics)
8. Nikon D800e (First consumer DSLR with no AA filter, plus huge step up in MP)
9. Nikon D850 (1.0 crop 4K, huge MP, huge step up for AF/IQ/highISO/etc)

The non-DSLR digital cameras I would put on the list are the Leica M9 and the Fuji X100. Most mirrorless releases have been more incremental and not revolutionary.

Quote:

---

Yes, Nikon just left hooked Canon the way Canon upper cutted Nikon with 5Dii.

---

In the time period when Canon released that 5D2, people switched in DROVES to Nikon because
1. Nikon AF was vastly better
2. Canon's 1D Mark III was trash
3. Nikon's image quality was vastly better
4. For still shooting, the D3/D700 combo were overall vastly superior to the 1D3/D700.

Canon did get a lot of video shooters, but most primarily video shooters are now Sony because Sony has been better than Canon or Nikon and it can take Canon/Nikon/Sony lenses.

Nikon upper cutted Canon with the D800 with it's vastly superior sensor/IQ while the 5D3 used outdated technology crippling the SD card slot for all the professional shooters that used dual cards. The D800 had significantly bigger files but also had a significantly better write speed and buffer. Also, you could get the e model that didn't have a AA filter, making for sharper images.

What you saw in the marketplace was that corporations were specing 30+ MP files for their freelance photographers, which meant either shooting the D800 or getting medium format. Anyone that had Canon had to rent cameras to do jobs and wait three years to buy Canon's high MP camera.

Quote:

---

Do we believe Canon will sit back and do nothing? Doubt it. As a Canon/Sony/u43 user, I believe competition is the best innovator as I look forward to what Canon will do next...followed by Nikon...back and forth.

---

Canon already released their flagships. I'm sure they have something planned for the future - well both Nikon and Canon are overdue for Mirrorless, and that is probably what we see next from them.

But since the 5D3/1DX/D800/D4 release, Nikon has put in significantly more effort for pro still cameras and it shows. Canon has not fared well at all when talking about stills in the pro market.

But the fact remains that on the still side, Canon has

Releases:
Bottom tier:
Canon 6D (hampered by single card slot) vs Nikon D600 (dual card slot, had oily shutter that was recalled)
______ vs Nikon D610 (marginal improvements over D600)
______ vs Nikon D750 (Significantly better than the Canon 5D3 for ~$1000 less)
______ vs Nikon D810
______ vs Nikon D810a (astro-photography, very small niche indeed, but cool to be able to get free loaners from Nikon whenever I want)
______ vs Nikon Df (optimized for shooting with manual focus, could accept focusing screens)
______ vs Nikon D4s
Canon D5s/r vs ______ (Canon trying to strike back vs the 36MP D800/e and D810 three years later)
Canon 1DXII vs Nikon D5
Canon 7D Mark II vs Nikon D500
Canon 5D4 vs Nikon D850
Canon 6D II vs _______ (While 6D2 has better AF, it has worse IQ and still only one slot - not appropriate for professional use)

For stills, Nikon's been winning this battle for ten years dating back to the 5D2/1D3 vs D3/D700.

For video, Canon has beaten Nikon for the most part, but video nerds have been disappointed in some of the releases and codec Canon has used in their lower end cameras. But Canon also has those higher end cinema-only cameras that Nikon doesn't have anything like.

Quote:

---

That being said, Camera is just a tool. There are great photos being taken everywhere, all the time with all different kinds of cameras.

---

A mentor and fellow Aggie once said "It's a ****ing box with a hole in it. You take the pictures."

Quote:

---

One of the most iconic photos by GS for me is JFF holding up money sign. It was a great picture then and it is today. And 400mm f2.8 is my next purchase!

---

Thanks!

That image is for sale as wall art as is the 400mm 2.8 IS I that I shot it with if you are interested. Comes with original warranty cards (never filled out) big Nikon case, leather hood, Don Zeck lens cap.

What would be a solid lens upgrade for a Canon Rebel T2i?

I mostly shoot landscape and portraits. No sports. Very little video. Not looking to get a $1,000 lens, but something to upgrade my amateur hobby from what I've got (just the basic lens that came with the camera).

I discovered KEH.com from one of the older threads, and found a nice deal on a flash last year, so that's probably where I'll look. I'm just not sure where to start in terms what to upgrade with.

Landscape and portraits are things that want different lenses.

The defacto landscape lens for that camera would be the Canon 10-22mm EF-S.
My recommended portrait lens would be the 85mm 1.8.

You can get a 10-22 for under $400 and a 85 1.8 for under $300. Both are excellent lenses.

Thanks.