/p/ first time buying a camera, I was looking to purchase a D5300

Sony a6000

>>3099987

Thank you, it actually seems like a better option than the D5300, much lighter and smaller.
How's the A6000 for street, night and portrait photography since I'm mainly looking to do just that.

The A6000 handles very well overall. It's small and compact, and very discreet, which makes it ideal for street shooting. For portraits it'll work great and deliver highly detailed shots, and noise performance is great, so night shots wont be a problem.

It's important to note that even if the A6000 is awesome, what you really want to invest your money in is good quality lenses, especially if your shooting portraits. Fast aperture lenses let in more light, which in return gives you better quality and sharper pictures. Get the A6000 for sure, but id also recommend the 35mm f/1.8, as well as the 50mm f/1.8. They are amazing lenses, and i personally use both of them in with my sony A7R II.

>>3099991
> street
Just fine

> night
Not ideal at all, it's the domain of FF cameras. Buy an A7S II / A7R II or even A9 for that. Yea, it cost more - such is life.

Alternatively, buy a and carry a portable flash like a Godx TT685/V860II for Sony, so you can light more situations artificially.

> portrait photography
Quite okay if you have a sharp lens. And there are pretty good lens choices for relatively cheap (60mm Sigma f/2.8, 50mm macro, 85mm Samyang - and so on)

But FF with a more expensive lens is again quite a bit better.

Thanks guys!

>>3100009

I'm thinking about getting one of these two, which would you recommend? After looking at other websites it seems the difference is one is APS-C Format and the other is full-frame, is that it?

https://www.amazon.co.jp/SONY-OSS-E%E3%83%9E%E3%82%A6%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E7%94%A8%E3%83%AC%E3%83%B3%E3%82%BA-%E3%82%BD%E3%83%8B%E3%83%BC-%E3%83%9F%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AC%E3%82%B9%E4%B8%80%E7%9C%BC%E7%94%A8-SEL50F18-B/dp/B00EZK122Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498154635&sr=8-1&keywords=50mm+1.8+sony

https://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%82%BD%E3%83%8B%E3%83%BC-SONY-%E5%8D%98%E7%84%A6%E7%82%B9%E3%83%AC%E3%83%B3%E3%82%BA-50mm-APS-C%E5%AF%BE%E5%BF%9C/dp/B002AROQN8/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1498154635&sr=8-4&keywords=50mm+1.8+sony

>>3100014

The night cameras you mentioned are too expensive for my taste, it is my first camera after all. I think I'll go with the A6000. Could you give your input on the lenses I linked? (or another you'd recommend)

>>3100040
> Could you give your input on the lenses I linked? (or another you'd recommend)
The 50mm f/1.8 is okay. But I personally prefer the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 'cause it is sharper.

Also, you might actually want to start with a Sony 28mm f/2, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, or maybe that new Samyang AF 35mm that has been getting good initial reviews. Or just the Sony 35mm. 50 or 60mm is really quite narrow on APS-C. You'd mainly get a lens for focused portraits of people a bunch of meters away from you. It'll not be so great for street and general purpose shooting.

>>3099991
If you buy on old 50mm film lens with a good aperture (1.4 or 1.2) and just adapt it, your night capabilities will skyrocket. They're insanely cheap, you can get an old 50mm 1.4 canon FD lens for under 100$ all day. My setup is a used Sony a6000 (from amazon, looked brand new and only cost $400), and a 50mm canon FD 1.4 and 50mm Pentax SMC 50mm 1.2. My whole setup with both lenses cost me 425$ and it's kills anything in its price range.

buy a Pentax K3-II, KP, or K-70 dumbass nigga

There is zero reason to buy an APS-C Nikon or Canon

>>3100116

I really don't know much about photography.
I appreciate the suggestions but after looking at the size and weight of the mirorless cameras I think I'd rather go with that.

Any full-frame mirorless camera recommendations with similar price to the A6000?

>>3100122
> Any full-frame mirorless camera recommendations with similar price to the A6000?
The closest thing to a full-frame A6000 is an A7 II.

The closest thing in price is the older A7.

>he thinks a mirrorless can compete with a dslr

kekek

>>3100156
Yep. The end of the DSLR are is relatively near (in photographic equipment terms). There is nothing justifying that extra mirror anymore.

>>3100061
Both lenses only cost you a total of $25?

>>3100183
Yeah, I got lucky. The FD came with my dad's old AE1 Program, the adapter was ~15$. Then I got a Pentax ME for $10 at an auction which had a 50mm 1.2 lens on it which I also adapted, so it's actually more like $35 lol. If you were to buy them for market price you'd spend anywhere from $250-$400 for both, though I do not suggest the Pentax 50mm 1.2, the aberrations are insane even at like f8.

>>3100156
he really thinks that? holy fuck LOL

>>3100116
unless you need autofocus to catch moving subjects

kek

>>3100200
You're supposed to get the 1.8 version of that lens apparently. Best build quality.

I understand you got your at auction though lol.

>>3100268
I've got that lens too, art teacher gave it to me, I've had incredible luck with my film gear lmaoo

>>3100156
>>3100208
Kill yourselves

File: 7dc.jpg (649KB, 533x354px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 533x354px

>>3099986
>buying a DSLR in 2k17
>investing in dead technology
>wanting to look like a fucking neanderthal lugging around a giant brick of a camera
>not joining the mirrorless masterrace

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	Eduardo
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2448
Image Height	2737
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	200 dpi
Image Created	2014:08:27 23:00:29
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	533
Image Height	354

>>3100521

This post should show you exactly why you don't want a mirrorless.

>>3100522
>this post that explains why mirrorless is better shows you why you shouldn't get one
Ok...