New to photography and might be picking up the Nikon D3200.

File: 1483388085874.png (318KB, 802x633px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 802x633px

absolutely hideous choice

only olympus man, everything else people will tell you is slanderous lies

>>2994067
Im looking for something in the $300-$500 range. Any ideas. Im looking for a camera thatll do good for nature/wedding photos.

>>2994066
Yes it is.

>>2994066
look up the pentax lineup if you're in for some affordable weather-sealing. Otherwise, yeah, whatever's fine for your first camera anyway

>>2994076
Pentax is nice but mostly $1100 is what i wanna spend.

>>2994079
Not*

As a first camera, and with your budget, that one is a decent choice.

>>2994081
Yea its probably what im gonna pick up but i wanted farther advice.

i would it is a good choice for beginner/intermediate yes

>>2994066
Yes it still rather good, check dxomark.

Picked up one for my mum in a 2nd hand camera shop in Tokyo for about $230-$250 with lens and SD card.

>>2994070
>wedding photos
5DmkIV or something full frame

Get the 3300 with the 35mm

>>2994079
Have you seen any used K-50 or K-S2 with the kit lens?
Definitely nowhere near the $1000 mark you stated.

it's alright. It's what I use, it works and looks decent. desu for around the same price you could get a d7100, I wish I got it instead.

>>2994070
let us know when you find something for that price range
>>2994336
why ff if he's on a budget? and why is the 5dmkiv your first recommendation if he's also on a budget?

>>2994066
How new are you to photography, because you might wanna get a cheap film camera.

Shooting film can be really good for beginners because after wasting your money on developing shit pictures you will start thinking more and more about what you are taking pictures off.

And buying a film camera can help you decide which camera you want to buy later on.

Im saying this because it is far to easy to spend your money on a camera that you might not even like, take it from me i bought a mirrorless as my first camera once.

>>2994066
Got this as my first camera and i love it.
Still learning to shoot with it, but i suggest getting a tripod for low-light ASAP.

File: DSC_6039s.jpg (460KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1920x1280px

It's a nice camera, I'm loving it. I've got a 18-105mm kit lens with it and a Tamron 70-300 (it's shit, but does the job, cheap). The sensor is good,

>>2998740
The D3200 is grand for starting off but, like most beginner cameras, it's a bit limited and you'll feel the need to move on from it sooner. I'd recommend a little spending more on a D5400 or D5500 as you'll get longer use out of it.

File: DSC_5452s.jpg (463KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1920x1080px

>>2998744
To be honest, I feel like I need a better lens more than a better body. But I'd definitely welcome exposure bracketing, that thing must be hella helpful.

>>2994066
Consider buying a used camera body and ordering a lens seperate
I bought a D60 and an 18-55 mm lens and have as much camera as I know how to use for under 200 dollars

>>2994066
nope. on paper it's good but in reality the iphone 6 will beat it in almost every category

>>2999459
Mediocre bait.

>>2999459
kek

>>2999459
Yah, iphone is even better when theres no sun outside too.

>>2999485
Nope. Anon said 'almost'.

Does the Nikon have a phone mode? No? Thought so.
Can it play Music, download apps or even browse the web?Nope.
Can it take 4K videos with autofocus enabled? No? Aww.

File: new.jpg (209KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 2048x1365px

First photo I've taken with my Nikon D3300 is it shit?

>>3002379
Yes but because of the lighting, composition and the depth of field/focus

>>3002379
Warmer WB, framing, focus on eyes and bigger aperture if possible.

A better lens on an entry body will always give better results than a shit lens on a good body. Buy good (not always necessarily expensive though) glass, it's worth the investment.

>>3002379
Color is off. I hope you shoot raw.

>>3002416
What do you mean by good and not expensive?

I'm not talking about old MF lenses.

>>3002418
Rokinon/Samyang/Bower come to mind, they are MF, but not old and perform brilliantly for the relatively low cost. Also secondhand cheaper pro lenses. Lenses are generally okay secondhand unless they have issues with focus or fungi.

>>3002422
(Stuff like the Canon 17-40 f/4L, 24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/4L etc. Not sure of the Nikon equivalents)

File: madotsuki4.jpg (82KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 680x680px

>>3002424
>f4

I would stick with my 3.5-5.6 kit lens

>>3002427
>thinking the kit lens will outperform a Canon L lens

You have much to learn.

>>3002455
>paying for overpriced glass

If you want a 70-200mm save up and buy a 2.8 like everyone else.

People buy they because they are FASTER and BOKEH.

>>3002457

Yes, because all the landscape people who by good 70-200m lenses need that wide aperture and something that's weighs more than an f/2.8

>>3002455
The kit lens is often sharper than the L lens at f8, for example. If you get better results, use that tool. The L means nothing when something else is out-performing it.

Would I use the kit lens for most things? fuck no. But if I had time to plan some aspects, and another lens gives better results for that project, I'm leaving the L glass behind -- which, of course, would not be most of the time.

>>3002462
>landscape
>70-200

Sure, anon

>>3002472
I use a 70-200 quite regularly for landscapes. As does.. say, Thomas Heaton for example. (And the f/4 version, at that. Nobody wants to lug around the extra weight of a 2.8 when it's entirely pointless for what you're doing)

>>2998083
>K-50
what's the real difference between the k-50 and the k-s2?

>>3002490

the k2 is for weeaboos. the k50 is for amerifats.

the best IQ are from the k5 line. a used k5-ii or k5-iis.

i've heard the new k70 has a fantastic sensor and the dxo marks are way up there. haven't used one myself so can't comment as to actual performance.

>>3002501
>the k2 is for weeaboos. the k50 is for amerifats.
well that sure showed me...

>>3002424
>Nikon equivalents
16-35 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 70-200 f/4.

>>3002472
There's more to capturing good landscapes than throwing on an ultra-wide lens, setting it to the widest zoom possible and camping out at the beach or cliff side at sunset with an ND filter. Zoom lenses offer up possibilities for perspective and composition that others can't.