Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 10, 2014, 8:58 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
mistwalker1006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Mississauga< Ontario Canada
Posts: 119
Default Upgrading

I am thinking about upgrading form my bridge camera to dslr. I cannot decide between Canon T5, Nikon D5100 or Sony A77II. Which system would be better for everyday photography ( kids, dog, some scenery)?

Last edited by mistwalker1006; Nov 10, 2014 at 9:21 PM.
mistwalker1006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 11, 2014, 5:22 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

That's not exactly a fair comparison.

  • The Canon T5 is an 18MP entry level APS-C dSLR that sells for ~$500 with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens, and has 9 focus points (all cross type.)
  • The Nikon D5200 (The D5100 is no longer widely available. The D5200 and D5300 have replaced the D5100.) is a 24MP mid level APS-C dSLR that sells for ~$600 with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens, and has 39 focus points (9 cross type.)
  • The Sony A77 II is a 24MP pro level APS-C dSLR that sells for $900 body only, or for ~$1,500 with the 16-50mm f/2.8 kit lens (which is far superior to the kit lenses from Canon and Nikon), and has 79 focus points (15 cross type.)
A more fair comparison would include the Sony A58:
  • The Sony A58 is a 20MP mid level APS-C dSLR that sells for ~$400 with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens, and has 15 focus points (3 points cross type).
What matters most is the lens you use, more so than the body. Among the kit lenses, the Sony 16-50/2.8 is far superior to the 18-55 lenses that come with the others (not surprisingly since it costs ~$600, more than the other camera/lens combinations you're considering). But among the others, Canon's 18-55 is the best. Unfortunately, however, the Canon T5 body is the least capable.

But choosing an interchangeable lens camera isn't just about the camera body or the kit lens. It's also about the other lenses and accessories from both the OEMs and the third parties. In that respect, the Sonys, otherwise the hands down winners in this comparison, come up short. And between the Canon and the Nikon, I'd go with the Nikon.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2014, 3:47 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
mistwalker1006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Mississauga< Ontario Canada
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
That's not exactly a fair comparison.

  • .
  • I wasn't really comparing them , just all three fall within my budget, I am just looking to get more "return" for my money and to be honest I am leaning toward the Sony. Also I never looked at the different systems closely maybe there is something else within the price range I should look?
mistwalker1006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2014, 3:56 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

As systems - all three, Canon, Nikon and Sony are perfectly capable of performing day-to-day photography. You're going to find out though that you cannot do everything with a kit lens. Some stuff, yes. But not everything. What additional lenses you need is determined by the specifics of what you shoot and your expectations of the level of quality of the results.
Additionally, if you do flash photography you'll find built-in flashes on DSLRs suck about as bad as built-in flashes on digicams. So, you should plan on an external flash as well if flash photos are important to you (think birthday parties, Christmas parties, etc). You might find that you need to allocate more of your funds to lenses & flash and spend less money on the body itself.

I would suggest getting to a store that sells all 3 and handling cameras from each manufacturer - the ergonomics between the 3 companies are quite different. If you prefer ergonomics of one system over another that could help narrow down the system. Then it's a matter of the lenses, flash and body that meet your needs within that system.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2014, 8:54 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Maybe consider buying a used camera. You can get used cameras and lenses that were dream models a few years ago in excellent condition for less than half price of new.

A basic old digital rebel and kit lens might set you back $130 at KEH.com (I don't work there). Certainly good enough for taking pictures of kids at the very least.
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2014, 9:10 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

While I'm a big fan of used lenses, from KEH, eBay, or elsewhere, I don't think that buying a used dSLR is such a good idea. dSLRs have a number of moving parts that can and do fail, and there's no way to know how much use and abuse a dSLR has had before you got it. That being said, KEH does have a 6 month warranty on everything they sell.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2014, 9:24 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

I've bought lots of used gear and never had a problem. Well, once I bought a cam that had a spongy battery (would only recharge to about 15 percent) and Adorama immediately sent me a new battery.

If you check out Adorama or KEH, there are some incredible deals out there. Canon 5D (12 megapixel version) in excellent shape for $500 to $600. Canon EOS-1DS (full frame) pro cameras going for $500+ in excellent shape.

I bought a used Canon EOS-1D last year in Excellent Minus condition for $325 including a charger and two batteries. Not bad for a camera that was $6,000 new, shoots up to 8 frames per second, APS-H (better than APS-C) format. When I got the camera I found out it had only 3,000 shutter actuations. Barely broken in! I figure it had been used for a couple of weddings and then sat for 10 years!

I've been helping friends buy used cameras. People are blown out by what they can get for short money. Of course, there is some cases where new makes sense, but for me (and my friends), used is where the action is!
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2014, 12:11 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 601
Default

i bought a used micro four thirds camera and lens from bhphoto.com, and we were so happy that my husband bought a DSLR from them. i also got a lens from keh.
pcake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2014, 6:26 AM   #9
JR1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: wales
Posts: 141
Default

Who says the Sony is a "Pro" camera, the adverts.

Here is one clue as to what "system" to buy into.

How many "Photographers/Pros" do you see shooting Nikon and Canon, and how many Sony etc (0), check out any high level sports event, Nikcan's
__________________
Nikon D5, D4s, 810, Nikkor lenses 14-24, 70-200 f2.8, 80-400 "Nano version", 24-120 f4, SB910s Lee filter system, Siggy 15mm, Siggy 150-600 Sport, Gitzo Tripods, many GoPros

https://www.facebook.com/JRSPhotography.co.uk
JR1 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:27 PM.