Got 15 minutes to decide, should I buy a Olympus E-410 10.0MP

please dont buy a 4/3 slr. Yor viewfinder will be smaller than a late 90's bargain bin compact 35mm point and shoot with the f8.3 lens and zoom ovf.

>>3046461
So it's viewfinder will look like a 4:3 ratio screen and have shitty zoom? I am a green as grass beginner and I'm thinking of picking up photography as a new hobby and maybe career if I get good.

>>3046471
the viewfinder will be 4:3 and look incredibly tiny. not to mention dark. a panasonic g1 or olympus ep2 with clip on evf are both much better choices, but slightly more expensive at about $80 body only

>>3046459
no

>>3046459
>>3046459 (OP)
No. In that price range Canon 20D for example is a better choice.

File: alphasliced.jpg (48KB, 620x409px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 620x409px

>>3046473
I see a lot of "body only" camera's, whats with that? I assume I you can buy body onlys and interval onlys and combine them?

>>3046474
I put a bid on but was sniped at the end. It was way less than £60 so worth it even for a shitty camera I guess.

I know people say "dont buy a shitty *blank* buy a good *blank* because you will out grow the shitty one really quickly". But I feel even a shitty cheap camera is better than nothing.
Counter points? Opinions?

>>3046478
Found a Canon 20D currently at £40. Worth it?

File: 1200px-Photographic_lenses_front_view.jpg (192KB, 1200x799px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1200x799px

Looking at camera's, I feel I'd have more fun building them. Why can you buy camera bodies seperate?

>>3046487

lol wut

>>3046480
Yes, its certainly worth more then that if it's in good condition. Try to learn how much it was used. Ask the seller.

This was a high end APS-C body, so it has a lot of advanced options and physical controls that many entry level cameras lack. It has all important features, and does not have clutter like modern cameras do. Its easier to learn photography on something like that. Also, older sensor gives you less margin for error, and smaller crappier screen should discourage chimping.

For the price, truly important things are all there:
a lot of physical controls, bracketing, metering with old manual lenses, a bit bigger viewfinder then entry level models(still small compared to Full Frame), great autofocus speed with USM lenses, good low iso performance for the time and price. Don't think that 8mpix is low, because to get a sharp image a lot of megapixels isn't enough. You need a good(usually expensive lens), if you are going to use a kit lens it's useless to have a 24mpix camera anyway, because it does not resolve nowhere near that resolution.

File: s-l1600.jpg (130KB, 1600x1062px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1600x1062px

>>3046504
Judging from the pictures I say it hasnt been used too much. It's fairly old but the buttons dont seem worn down. Light scuffing on the mounting bracket on top, neck strap isnt frayed very much. (pic related)

>>3046507
Yes it does not look abused at first glance. DSLRs can't make infinite photos btw, there is a number of shutter actuations they were designed to withstand(usually around 100 000). I don't remember if its possible to check shutter count on 20D.

>>3046479
10 years ago people used these cameras to make great professional looking pictures. Some still do. These are DSLRs that were very expensive back in the day, not shitty cheap stuff. It's cheap beacuse most photographers are obsessed with gear and discard them for small upgrades in new models.

>>3046513
Thanks for your help. Got sniped again, but I will stay on the look out for more Canon 20D's.

>>3046513
There are many other cameras that could be decent. I think 20D offers the biggest bang for the buck, but there are good Nikon, Sony and Pentax options too. Canon 30D is the same with identical image quality, autofocus speed, viewfinder... everything basically, it just has a better screen, and is a bit more expensive now.

Just don't get an entry level camera, or micro 4/3 sensor(Olympus, Panasonic).

>>3046527
>dont get a 4/3 sensor
...but on a super tight budget m43 is the best ilc system
>$99 bodies with modern features and technology
>not sacrificing things like live view and good software support for ancient bodies
>lenses as low as $99 brand new and made to shoot wide or near wide open
good deal to me senpai

>tfw still use e510 with kit lens

>>3046666
Micro 4/3 is still a good option. 4/3 is a mess since there's no possible upgrade path.

>>3046701
I agree. full 4/3 is a shit option today, but m4/3 is an amazing option on a budget when you wont be able to afford flagship options anyways

>>3046666
Which camera would you suggest then?
I suggested 20D mainly because of it's good high ISO performance. How will an ancient m43 camera perform over ISO 200?

I don't understand Spanish, but pictures speak for themselves:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba-Zuz3tJCM

Well you get live view(Real-time preview of exposure is great), but you lose OVF. How does that old EVF perform at night, when you want to compose for a long exposure shot?

>lenses as low as $99 brand new and made to shoot wide or near wide open
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1111454-REG/yongnuo_yn50mm_50mm_ef_for_1_8.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/543923-GREY/Canon_2044B002AA_EF_S_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_IS.html

I second a used cheap Canon, your upgrade path can be super cheap!

You can get the YN 35mm f2 to start instead of a kit lens and then either get a zoom or an ultrawide next depending on what you think you will use more.

>>3046845
Any 16mp m4/3 body will be similar or better than the 20D at high isos. The older 12mp ones aren't that good though.

File: 20170327_142541.jpg (917KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

917KB, 2560x1440px

New to photography. Saw this at my local Walmart. Is this a good deal?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-J320V
Camera Software	J320VVRS2APL1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2560
Image Height	1440
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:27 14:25:41
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	2.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	3.30 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2560
Image Height	1440
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	C05QFIC05CM

>>3047353
Sorry for horizontal image.

>>3046479
you got lucky.
it's not even worth 10quid.

>>3047353
Yes, image quality wise, that's the best camera you can get for that money.

>>3047353
Yeah that's pretty good but soul sucking for me at least.

For some reason I like stuff I struggle with, usually beat to shit pro or semi pro bodies with really mediocre lenses. If the dynamic range is tiny, it's not bad but the body better have comfy pro level features out the wazoo.

>>3047353
that's pretty cheap.
can't lie.