Just sold my low end dSLR....suggestions for replacement?

I just sold my Nikon D3100. I have wanted a better camera for a while and somebody just offered to buy it today out of the blue.

Any suggestions on what I should upgrade to? Within reason of course, I cannot afford a 5D mk II or I would buy one haha.

EDIT: Okay so I have been doing lots of research and trying to figure out what would be a good option. I am looking at 4 different cameras right now and I would love any and all feedback I can get. My choices are:

Pentax K-50
Pros: Price, Weather Sealed, ....maybe more?
Cons: Can't figure out if it will be good for shooting lasers

Nikon D5200:
Pros: Price(when compared to D5300), Good rep for lasers
Cons: D5300 Exists, Lenses are Expensive

Nikon D5300:
Pros: Seems to be a very good camera....
Cons: Expensive Body and Lenses, Don't have enough info regarding improvements

Canon T5i:
Pros: Great photos(friend has one)
Cons: Older Sensor than Nikon's, Still fairly Expensive


I will be mostly just using a zoom lens so that is what I am basing things off of. I want to take wildlife photography and laser photography and a zoom seems like a great balance. One issue I have is that figuring out a good lens that will give me sharp photos is very hard. I don't really know what to look for.

Any advice is appreciated. Will put this in OP.

Thanks,
Isaac

PS - Also considering the Pentax K5 II or K5 IIs. The IIs would be without an Anti-Aliasing filter which should give sharper images.

I like the Sony cameras with steady shot as it gives any lens a stabilisation feature. That very feature on mine is broken so it needs sending off for repair but it's good when it works. Other than that I'm so out of the loop now when it comes to digitals. Newest I've had before that was a canon 450d, and I'm sure we're now on or past 600d.

What are your main objects of interest?
Do you want to stay with Nikon?
What is your budget?
Lenses already available?



I´m able to suggest the Canon 5D "Queen Mum". Best Low ISO performance I´ve seen in the Canon segment, fully usable up to ISO 1600/3200. Very crisp pics, full frame. Available for $500 used. But no liveview, WLAN, slow AF, small display. For lense suggestions we need your budget and preferences first.

I have the 5D mk III but friends who have the 7D say that it is a great camera. I had a 50D before that and it was a great camera also.
The 7D is around the $870 au plus the cost of a lens.

I don't know what your budget is, but I recommend the Canon EOS Rebel t3i. Its usually around 500$, but if you look you can get them around 400 or less. The one we have we got for 600$, and it came with a bag, extra battery, extra SD card, and 2 different lenses. Well worth the money.

I am a long time hobbiest photographer that went semi-pro for a little while. I'd be happy to help decipher some of the choices as you narrow your search. I will tell you that if you are looking to make an investment in your next purchase, don't think about the camera body as the purchase... think about what the body selection implies as a commitment to a lens system. Over the coming years, it is the mount format that will determine just what lenses are available, the quality of those lenses (and inherent retaining of their value), etc. The glass you buy will be investment you can leverage for future body upgrades that doesn't have to be lost. As cameras become more like computers and less mechanical in nature, the obsolescence curve changes in kind... the price and desirebility is driven by things like what sensor is used, the AF system/processor, image processing chip(s) (frame rate, color depth, etc)... all of this doesn't make you a better photographer - just expands your toolbox. The optics however are a constant... so the selection of lens system is really the gravity of your body choice we are dealing with...

Personally, I have shot with Canon for over 30 years. Not because other cameras aren't as good or even better in some cases (as a consumer, you really can't go wrong with any of the big companies these days), but because of the breadth and quality of the lens system. It really comes down to personal preference. I really, really like the ergonomics of the Canon bodies much more than Nikon and Sony (the buttons, menus, etc)... but again, just personal preference.

If you do decide to move into a Canon system, I have a well cared for Canon 1Ds Mark II with a Really Right Stuff quick release L-plate and two extra batteries... in the original box with docs, etc. that I'll consider selling for $999. I paid $7800 for the camera, $275 for the plate, and probably around $250 for the extra batteries all about 8 years ago, so I think a grand for the whole lot is about street value these days. It actually isn't for sale currently, so this isn't a B/S post hijack but I'd sell it to you as an LPF buddy... even willing to negotiate. She was good to me over the years:


If you are looking for a brand new body that also does things like LiveView and video recording, that I would suggest you take a look at the Canon Rebel SL1. It gets you into a DIGIC5 processor (current gen chip) versus DIGIC4 which will allow you to do 1080p video with autofocus versus 720p with manual focus on the T3/T3i series (previous generation consumer model). You get some more resolution (18MP vs 12MP) and low light shooting performance (higher ISO support) as well as a tiny bit faster shutter rate. B&H has a bundle where you can get the body and 2 lenses that cover 18mm up through 300mm for about $750.

I'm sure you'll get contrasting views about mirrorless options (like Sony) and lower market share competitors (Pentax, Olympus, etc), but the lens systems available with Nikon and Canon are unrivaled and I urge you to take this into consideration. My suggestions are Canon-centric because that is what I know and have been using for 30+ years, but either manufacturer is an equally good risk. The real magic in the photo is inside YOU and not in the camera. The camera and the accessories are tools that you use. I am always amazed that when you create a frame, the first thing people as is what superwhamplodyne camera made that for you? It's like a virtual rochambo negating things like researching a loc for composition, following weather for the right light, careful calculation of exposure, using tools like stacking neutral density, ND grads, polarizers, etc to create the image as close to your minds eye prior to development, or maybe the use of temp correcting gels and light modifiers for non-ambient exposures, careful selection of the proper focal length glass and aperture to create the field of view and depth of field just right for your composition. In the old "film days", photography was more a craft or art form, but with the onset of readily available consumer digital cameras, the process is diluted. I'm not by any means an elitist or one to deter amateur photography by any and all. I'm merely saying that apparently if you go to a music store and you buy a flute, you're not a flautist, you own a flute... but if you go to a camera store and buy a camera, you're a photographer! (by today's standards)

TL;DR - Pick your camera body based on the lens system you want to live with in the future, not the bells and whistles. All the camera bodies are pretty good now-a-days and the difference is how you use them...

After you get your purchase decision made, let me know and maybe we can plan a photo outing around Austin one day. I'd be happy to help you with questions and give you pointers on how to be a better photographer... well, just share my experience. I'm not a pro... just passionate about the hobby. Cheers!

/c

Bump!

I agree with KapHn8d the SL1 (or 100D at european market) is a very good camera.
It's light and small and makes nice pictures.
I've just bought it and it makes nice laser pics.
Take a look at this thread Good Canon DLSR for beginners?

Okay guys I think I have decided on either of these two cameras:

Pentax K-5 II
Pentax K-5 IIs

The only difference between them is the IIs has no Anti-Aliasing feature which *could* give better sharpness. The downside is that it is possible that sharpness would only be realized with a damn good lens. It is also 100 dollars more than the normal K-5 II.

Any advice? They both SEEM to be excellent prosumer bodies for stellar prices. The nice thing about the II is I would be able to afford it sooner.

The lens I will be buying is a

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM

The lens is on sale from 550 dollars to 350 dollars.

Thoughts?

The Pentax K-5 is a fine cam. Personally I wouldn´t buy the lense you have in mind. A big focal length range always goes hand in hand with optical compromises. The Sigma 18-250 is not a bad lense, anyway, I would buy the Pentax 17-70 f/4. It performs a lot better. You might get it for a similar price used.

DJNY said:

The Pentax K-5 is a fine cam. Personally I wouldn´t buy the lense you have in mind. A big focal length range always goes hand in hand with optical compromises. The Sigma 18-250 is not a bad lense, anyway, I would buy the Pentax 17-70 f/4. It performs a lot better. You might get it for a similar price used.

Click to expand...

I just want a good zoom lens for nature photography and stuff. And I need it to not be expensive. 350 is kind of the max for me. Is there a good zoom you would recommend? I want to be able to take decent pictures of the moon.

Heard great things about the Pentax 55-300 f/4-5.8. You should get this one for about $220 used locally. It has a better optical quality than the Sigma 18-250.

Additionally an 18-55 for the lower end should run you about $80.

DJNY said:

Heard great things about the Pentax 55-300 f/4-5.8. You should get this one for about $220 used locally. It has a better optical quality than the Sigma 18-250.

Additionally an 18-55 for the lower end should run you about $80.

Click to expand...

I will look for it....problem is trying to find used lenses. Not many places seem to have them and craigslist has nothing either. Also, are there any things you need to be wary of when buying used glass?

When you´re lazy and/or good with medium-possible quality, the Sigma 18-250 is fine. Otherwise I would think about one of the biggest advantages when getting into DSLRs, changing lenses! Imo you´re learning the most with training the photographic eye when starting with a fixed focal lense, like a 35mm.

There´re some good deals in ebay. IMO there is not much to worry about when buying used lenses. Maybe I would look if the guys also has other lenses ffor sale, so if he knows what he is selling. Glasses shouldn´t be scratched, especially the rear one. Mostly you can save very good cash when buying used camera lenses. 80% of my equipment I bought used.

If you're going to be taking photographs of the moon you'll be heavily cropping no matter what, unless using a telescope or something ridiculous like an 800mm lens. Given this fact sharpness will be important, but even reasonably priced lenses are generally acceptably sharp at f/5.6 - f/11. Generally this isn't much of a problem as you expose for the moon in much the same way you expose for a sunlit scene (understandable given it's the same light source) so sunny 16 rule comes in to play.

trencheel303 said:

If you're going to be taking photographs of the moon you'll be heavily cropping no matter what, unless using a telescope or something ridiculous like an 800mm lens. Given this fact sharpness will be important, but even reasonably priced lenses are generally acceptably sharp at f/5.6 - f/11. Generally this isn't much of a problem as you expose for the moon in much the same way you expose for a sunlit scene (understandable given it's the same light source) so sunny 16 rule comes in to play.

Click to expand...

I don't know that one.


@DJNY: I have been thinking a lot about what you said and I think one of the first lenses I get will actually be an older manual focus lens. A 50mm f/1.7 that is supposed to take REALLY sharp shots. SMC Pentax-M 28mm F2.8 Reviews - M Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

And then from there I will expand up into a zoom lens. Probably a 55-300 or something. And then maybe a used 18-55 for my wide angle shots.

Thoughts on that plan of action? The 50mm will run me 20 bucks. The 18-55 probably 100. The 55-300 will be the most. I might go for a 300mm prime but I am afraid of the cost.