Question - SLR advice

[Bunk3r]

I dont get what all the fascination with DSLR's for exploring is (with the exception of some users which really make the most of it). A decent compact (with manual controls, RAW file format, long exposure etc -not just a point and shoot) gets some spot on results and suits carrying round exploring more. Thats how I roll.

If you want something more in the camera then look at the interchangeable lens compacts (AKA mirrorless), they sit nicely between a compact camera and a DSLR (where as bridge cameras were kind of the worst of both, interchangeable lens compacts are the best of both IMO)

 

[Vulex]

Well I want something that I can look down, my hands get a minor shake for some reason and using my face absorbs most of it. I should get a tripod too and will.

 

[Vulex]

Just an update, I went to my parents today to have a play with her Nikon 3100, I really liked the lay out of it and how it felt. So I think i'll be going down that avenue either a 2nd hand one of a new 3300. Thanks for all your help.

 

[Exploring with Andy]

I dont get what all the fascination with DSLR's for exploring is (with the exception of some users which really make the most of it). A decent compact (with manual controls, RAW file format, long exposure etc -not just a point and shoot) gets some spot on results and suits carrying round exploring more. Thats how I roll.

Couldn't agree more! DSLRs are great if you are going to learn how to use them (which takes time and practice). Otherwise most people will find they get better pictures with a more basic, mid-range camera which allows them to shoot without having to think too much about all the settings.

 

[Vulex]

@AndyK I want to get into it properly. And not just for derps.

 

[OPEN&ENTER]

I want to get in to it, and got a full manual compact a couple of years ago. I still can't get my head round all the settings and rely on semi-auto a lot. My only reason for now wanting a SLR is cos mates use a remote for their shutter, and can expose for well over 30 seconds, which is all I can.

 

[Bunk3r]

Couldn't agree more! DSLRs are great if you are going to learn how to use them (which takes time and practice). Otherwise most people will find they get better pictures with a more basic, mid-range camera which allows them to shoot without having to think too much about all the settings.

whilst this is true, its not my point. I know very much how to use cameras (I am a technical person, so understanding iso's fstops etc was all fine), my compact camera has more settings than my DSLR had (the buttons are beautifully configurable). I say buy a high end compact rather than a low end DSLR. (or buy a half decent mirrorless interchangeable lens)

I want to get in to it, and got a full manual compact a couple of years ago. I still can't get my head round all the settings and rely on semi-auto a lot. My only reason for now wanting a SLR is cos mates use a remote for their shutter, and can expose for well over 30 seconds, which is all I can.

are you sure you cant get a remote for your model of camera? my advice is just take multiple pictures and stack them in photoshop. I used to do this with the DSLR anyway as its far more flexible, otherwise for example you wait 120 seconds to find its well over exposed, or your 60 second exposure is mostly good but has blown highlights, if you stack 2x 30 sec images you can mask out one of the images in the highlights to even out the exposure.

 

[Exploring with Andy]

whilst this is true, its not my point. I know very much how to use cameras (I am a technical person, so understanding iso's fstops etc was all fine), my compact camera has more settings than my DSLR had (the buttons are beautifully configurable). I say buy a high end compact rather than a low end DSLR. (or buy a half decent mirrorless interchangeable lens)

My response, although expanding on what you had said, wasn't really aimed towards you, more targeted towards the OP and the multitude of people who assume a better camera will result in better shots.

 

[ACID- REFLUX]

I wish i had a £5 for every DSLR user i"ve given advice to over recent years : i"d be able to buy a Dummies Guide to DSLRs for myself

Urbex = Auto Mode it seems FSR ? Obviously before ruining the pics even more, in some Software or other

 

[OPEN&ENTER]

are you sure you cant get a remote for your model of camera? my advice is just take multiple pictures and stack them in photoshop. I used to do this with the DSLR anyway as its far more flexible, otherwise for example you wait 120 seconds to find its well over exposed, or your 60 second exposure is mostly good but has blown highlights, if you stack 2x 30 sec images you can mask out one of the images in the highlights to even out the exposure.

I'm told i can get a remote, and even bought a cheap shit one from china, that wouldnt sync up/work.
I've also been told to shoot in RAW, and use lightroom. Neither of which i do. Yet..

I have a Samsung EX2f, been very happy with it, but I'm not close to utilising its full potential. I'm in no rush to upgrade

 

[Coxieboy]

Although a good SLR will help, its the photographer that takes the photo, not the camera. Best photo I ever took was with a Zenit B Camera. manual focus, speed and apature setting, althogh it did have a light meter built in (You may want to google that bit)

 

[Grom]

I've got a Fuji X mirrorless (X-M1) camera and I love it to bits. The range of lens isn't as good (yet) as that of Canon and Nikon, but the picture quality and size of it is fantastic. It's great if you want something that's a bit smaller and lighter but offers similar (or even better than some) picture quality than a DSLR.