[Closed] Used budget DSLR?

Going against the Nikon/Canon usual, I love my Olympus E-30.Its an older model now, but will be a better camera than I am photographer for another 10 years+. And its size - a lot smaller than the eqivalent Canons.
Other newer, more feature packed Olympus models are available too. Not the range of accessories available from the big 2, but this one suits me.
Ffordes and Park Cameras are relaible sellers.

MPB is a reputable used place and they have lots of stock but will obviously be a bit higher price than eBay.
Wish I hadn't looked as an excellent condition 5D for £300 is tempting!

If coming from what you and want maximum change (without going crazy and thinking film camera etc) I'd be looking for something maximum user control and ability to experiment with lenses.

For me a line I wouldn't cross would be two control wheels - one for shutter speed and a second for aperture. A small thing but I couldn't imagine shooting handheld in manual without both. The lower end models don't tend to have this.

Then I'd be going for a brand/lens mount that is popular enough that there are plentiful good quality third party lenses available secondhand. I've got a set of Art series Sigma lenses of f2.8 throughout their zoom range for my Nikon and a single 50mm prime. The Sigmas are great for IQ and the speed just adds to the creativity - which is why you'd want to go DSLR from what you have. I could no way have justified the money of the same from Nikon.

Also think a little about if you might fancy video too - if definitely not that makes the decision easier.

With the budget I'd be going for a mirrorless dslr equivalent now, mainly to reduce pack size on expeditions a little bit. But the cost is prohibitive at the moment.

For me a line I wouldn’t cross would be two control wheels – one for shutter speed and a second for aperture. A small thing but I couldn’t imagine shooting handheld in manual without both. The lower end models don’t tend to have this.

This is a top tip to bear in mind if you’re interested in anything other than snapping away with a big camera.

Also, don’t worry about megapixels - once you get past about 12 it’s diminishing returns. I say that as someone who has just spent their gov grant on a medium format system.

If you buy into something like Nikon then any lenses you buy are likely to remain useful as you upgrade. Camera bodies come and go, lenses hang around forever.

We've bought from MBP this year.

Son needed a DSLR for college photography course. He spent £320 and got an 'excellent' condition, fully boxed etc Nikon D7000 and two lenses, a Nikon 50mm and Sigma zoom.

I've also got an ancient Pentax K100d that is brilliant, cost me £62 on eBay and I bought a manual 50mm lens that's 50 years old, for £22.

There's a lot of second hand choice with MBP. The vast majority are going to be better cameras than I am photographer - just pick one with good reviews.

Just go for whichever second hand canon dslr fits budget.
The reality is the lenses make more difference than the body. Unfortunately, lenses continue to be expensive with one exception. Canon do a highly regarded 50mm f1.8 that you can pick up cheap. Worth doing.

I'm tempted by an EOS M series body and lens, would fit into a hip pack easily - M3 with the 22mm pancake lens can be had well under £300.

Just go for whichever second hand canon dslr fits budget.
The reality is the lenses make more difference than the body

Do look at Pentax then. The vast majority of the lenses they make are backwards compatible. They also all have in-body stabilisation, again taking pressure off lens choice.
Plus many are water and dust proof.

+1 for MBP

Canon do a highly regarded 50mm f1.8

Don't bother with the kit lens, whilst the focal range is useful it's a bit slow and compared to the bargain 1.8 50mm it's night and day.

I've had 2 of the 1.8s which I got new both times for around £80. They are a little plasticy but take great photos for the money.

I've a mirrorless Fuji X-T1 and having come from a 'proper' dSLR I can say that there's very little difference between proper dSLR and a SLR-style body with a decent EVF. The Fuji X-T series bodies are SLR-shaped, with lots of control dials, interchangable lenses, and excellent electronic viewfinders. They're just potentially smaller than SLRs (my X-T1 and lens is much smaller and lighter than the old Canon 40D and comparable lens) and have less moving parts to break.

Ah the nifty fifty. Great lens. I have an old 30D which I tried to sell a couple of times. Still a very capable camera. It's in the cupboard gathering dust at the moment.

Thanks all. I used an SLR in my teens and am told having info in the viewfinder and dials for control are significant benefits to mirrorless.

Pentax seems a good shout (I learnt on my late dad's Spotmatic). I have been offered the 600D for the weekend so I'll try that (or make a beer influenced purchase later!).

I like my Pentax k5. They are fairly cheap on eBay now. All Pentax SLR take the same lenses so with any modern DSLR you can use the old manual Pentax lenses. The Pentax DSLR bodies are image stabilised so that also makes the lenses cheaper.

I've got a 60D and an rx100.
I would say that the difference isn't actually that great. It's the zoom range that limits the rx100. Since getting the rx100, I haven't taken the DSLR out on a trip. I use it for studio stuff mainly now.

When you get into low light conditions the Canon is slightly ahead, but the Sony and Nikon cameras at the same price are even better. I bought the 60D to use partly as a video camera and it is really good at that.

Good that you can get a loan - that will help you see if it's for you

I’ve a mirrorless Fuji X-T1 and having come from a ‘proper’ dSLR I can say that there’s very little difference between proper dSLR and a SLR-style body with a decent EVF. The Fuji X-T series bodies are SLR-shaped, with lots of control dials, interchangable lenses, and excellent electronic viewfinders. They’re just potentially smaller than SLRs (my X-T1 and lens is much smaller and lighter than the old Canon 40D and comparable lens) and have less moving parts to break.

My wallet is going to hate you.

Lenses seem a bit pricier than the canon equivalent for the XF lenses though, roughly £380 for a body and 27mm pancake lens combo.

Just to add a bit of info regarding MPB regarding their used kit ratings; definitely don’t be put off by “well used” or high shutter counts, particularly on pro bodies like the Canon 1 series or 5 series. These bodies were built to last, and a few scuffs and scratches make no difference at all.

Same with high shutter counts on these bodies - 100k is nothing to be concerned about unless you plan on taking a huge amount of images. Recently I have owned a 170k 1d4, 140k 5d2, 130k 1dX and 100k 5d3. That’s probably approaching £18k when new, I paid less than £3k for the lot and got some money back when selling on. I think all these were rated “well used”, but have been great, and I probably take upwards of 20,000 shots a year.

My one line suggestion for a cheap body would be a Canon 5d2. Bombproof, full manual but with custom presets and dust cleaning.

Then bung as much money as you can at a lens or two, that is where the real image difference can be seen.

Pssst. Anyone want a Canon 70-200 L f4 is before it goes to MPB....?

Depending on which RX100 you have will depend on if an older dslr is better or not. Also think about size, an RX100 will fit in a bag on any occasion, a dslr is a choice whether you take it or not. Even the mirrorless cameras are big with good lenses.

If you are looking for better gear then lenses are where you need to invest. Whether that is canon or nikon or sony or fuji. An Xt2 with a 16-55 lens will do everything. A sony A7 will get you into full frame cheaply and then you can invest in lenses. There are some very good sigma lenses. Are you planning on photographer everything or mainly mountain bikes?

I used to have a RX100 then upgraded to an A7. Lenses were expensive so I swapped ti Fuji. Now I just have an XT3 and 16-55 2.8. It's a big set up but stops me looking for more gear and does everything.

@cynic-al:

Thanks all. I used an SLR in my teens and am told having info in the viewfinder and dials for control are significant benefits to mirrorless.

SLR-style mirrorless cameras have viewfinders and dials. Modern DLSRs are moving to less dials and touchscreens too. The viewfinders are electronic, but 'proper' optical viewfinders can't increase the brightness of an image to reflect the exposure that will be captured, or show the effect of shutter speed, or highlight regions that are over-exposed.

@ta11pau1:

Lenses seem a bit pricier than the canon equivalent for the XF lenses though, roughly £380 for a body and 27mm pancake lens combo.

Fuji lenses are a bit pricy but they're pretty much all excellent, no duds to avoid. Also there are compatible lenses like Viltrox which are good/cheaper, and Sigma just announced that it's going to start releasing Fuji X-mount lenses.

Thanks @rossburton, looks interesting but a bit spendy at this stage.

Following up to the myth that "mirrorless doesn't have dials or viewfinders":

There's another dial and button on the front too.

My son's Panasonic GX7 is covered in dials too, and micro-4/3 lenses can be very cheap, so that's another good option too.

Following up to the myth that “mirrorless doesn’t have dials or viewfinders”:

Is that a myth? Not one I've ever heard before.

DSLR style Mirrorless cameras need a new name to differentiate them from pretty much every other camera on the market that is not an SLR. It can get confusing in conversation. When I say the word mirrorless I think of something like a Sony A7rIV (and start drooling). When others think mirrorless they think of a pocketable point and shoot (with considerably fewer dials and mostly no viewfinder).

Hi Al,

I've got a Nikon D5200 that used to belong to my Father. Probably a wide angle zoom as well.
PM me if you're interested.

Donald

OMD E M1 at £274 plus the 14-42mm EZ pancake lens at £150 seems good value, that was a £1000+ body when it launched!!

God dammit the budget creep sets in again, I was only looking at a EOS M and 22mm pancake before...

TLR
price for the canon 70-200 L?
I just got a 100D and need a decent lens
I like birds and animals photos mostly

If I was going full size SLR it would 100% be a 5D classic (Mk1) and 50mm 1.8 to start me off, brilliant combo and the 5D mk1 is known for it's 'filmic' image quality with the full frame sensor.

I'm fan of Pentax cameras, they've used the same lens system for ages so you can buy older lenses and they still fit and work. I haven't checked with the latest ones but they used all have the image stabilisation built into the camera so any old lens you added had optical stabilisation rather than spending extra on a fancy new one and even the budget stuff has a good level of weather protection.

Bookmarking this thread, as I will be in the market for one in a few months so useful info for me.

Depending on which RX100 you have will depend on if an older dslr is better or not.

IME ‘better’ ultimately depends on what criteria you are making comparisons.

I’ve owned a number of olderCanon EOS DSLRs and an RX100. Never enjoyed using the RX100 but was impressed by the IQ for a compact zoom

My (situational) findings simply based on what I would choose:

Action/Sports? DSLR
Portrait? DSLR
Pocketability? RX100
Bokeh? DSLR
Macro? DSLR
Wildlife? DSLR
Creativity? DSLR
Street photography? RX100
Versatility? RX100
Video? RX100 (unless DSLR supports)
Weddings/events? Both (RX100 for backup/candids)
Battery/frames per charge? DSLR
Low light? Both
Usability ie hardware? DSLR
Usability ie menus/UI? DSLR
Usability ie wifi/social media? RX100 (from mk2 onwards)
Ruggedness? DSLR
IQ/RAW normally DSLR based on 5DMKii, but RX100 is a performer unless pixelpeeping.

go compare side by side (choose RAW on dropdowns)

What makes something ‘better’ I would say all depends upon what you want from a camera and which compromises you can live with <- Sounds suspiciously like a ‘what bike’ thread... 😉

Pentax always make innovative cameras and the most recent full frame models are fantastic value for money new. The lenses are always great too - the only trouble with choosing them as a second hand system is the reduced number available compared to Nikon / Canon.

OP be sure to confirm shutter count/shutter life of any used DSLR

That's just reminded me, I've got an old Canon 1000D stuck in a drawer somewhere. My dad bought it new but couldn't use it due to poor eyesight, think I've only used it a few times too. Must dig it out and see if I still have all the bits for it. Pretty sure the battery died from lack use though.

I have an RX100

If you want different (I did too) then perhaps rather than a DSLR, go for a cheapish mirrorless like X-E2, X-T2 etc and some funky manual focus lenses. Most mirrorless systems have focus peaking and other manual focus aids which are harder to come by for a reasonable price in a DSLR.  Then with a few cheapo adapters from K&F Concepts ebay and charity shops (once open) are your oyster.

I bought an X-E2 in basically unused condition for £200 from MPB, loads of dials and a 7 Artisans 35mm 1.2 for £60, aperture dial on ebay which was also basically unused. Then I got a couple of adapters (M42 and Pentax) and well.....there is a whole new world of bokeh, swirls and ridiculous macro stuff for £20 quid a pop!   Just today I had a Soligor 28-80 Macro drop through the letterbox. The thing weighs more than a ton, built like a tank, i think the metal screw in lens cap weighs more than my phone but WOW it has no fungus or haze despite being  40 years old and takes some pretty nice shots. £15 plus postage from ebay!

I picked up a Pentax KS-2 which si a quirky but decent camera from MPB last week to replace my K-50 which just suffered a fault. It was £229 and is a great camera for the money.

Not much to add other than picked up a 2nd hand Canon 50D on here a few years ago for £200 inc kit lens and some extras. Have since picked up a nifty 50, an 18-135 and a 24-105 EF series lens too... Rarely use it these days sadly, but it still soldiers on and returns some incredible results!

Thanks everyone, just pushed the button on a GX7 and 12-32, seems the best EVF 4/3 camera around that price.

^

(having tried mirrorless before, it’s not different enough to the Sony I don’t think).

Oof 😉

Good reviews, it should be fun and looks easy enough to carry around?

This may be useful:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3587178#forum-post-52663066

Cheers. When I made that comment I didn't know that mirrorless were getting so close to DSLR. Thanks for the link, I may well be going for random lenses in time.

^

random lenses

I must admit to having hope for a day when can afford a camera to help me spend hours in boot sales and charity shops looking for obscure yet brilliant lens treasures!

@convert

For me a line I wouldn’t cross would be two control wheels – one for shutter speed and a second for aperture. A small thing but I couldn’t imagine shooting handheld in manual without both.

This. Even my (Pentax) compact zoom (which replaced the dead RX100) I partly chose because it has a few control wheels (aperture/assignable + exposure comp)

The only reason I stick with my old bulky DSLRs is for the reasons you mention. OK, that and maybe addicted to the simple ground-glass optical finder. I suspect I’m a ‘purist’ (in that respect) but a menu-driven/touch-screen operating style is sort of the ‘anti-photography’

Peering through ground glass at a clear image and just breathing steadily while your fingers knowing exactly where to select the shutter speed and aperture (as second nature) is a joy to me. It’s superbly satisfying IME, and a single prime (50mm) lens I’ve found has been a joy for decades. It’s this that makes me realise that some people are attracted to DSLR more for lens-variety, while others for some kind of ‘purity’ (not enjoying that word, I think mean ‘stripped back/less-distracting’)

I’m not wedded to a viewfinder though. Also enjoy the articulated screen on this 12mp compact for low level shots shooting from the waist/hip - almost as if I have an old twin lens reflex 😎 (I think I still have a Kodak Duaflex somewhere)

This looking down option is perfect for street photography. But, ultimately nothing for me beats being ‘lost’ in the roomy ground-glass finder of a ‘barebones’, ergonomic DSLR. That, and limited by a 50mm prime lens. Weird old stick

Anyone here tried the hybrid (OVF/EVF/ERF?) viewfinders in the Fujifilm X100 something? That’s been on my bucket list for years now but yet to try one out even.

Bookmarking this for future - Just wasted spent 10mins browsing on MPB at Canon bodies and fancy a 5D mk2.

Currently have an old 350d body languishing in a drawer. Tend to just use my EOS M with 22mm to chuck in the bag most of the time, but have wanted a better body for fullsize DSLR for a while.

@p7eaven The hybrid X100* viewfinder is worth a look, although the electronic overlay is a distraction compared with a classic rangefinder Leica M* or Canon model 7 etc.
The full frame viewfinders of pro classic 35mm SLR cameras are just amazing compared with the peephole consumer dslr viewfinders , worth having a peek if you can then finding a pro DSLR with a similar screen if you can.
Nice to see the nanny with the Rollie , a really amazing story behind that picture:

http://www.vivianmaier.com/about-vivian-maier/

I have a Pentax KS-2 which I bought 6 years ago for a walking holiday in Yosemite - well, that was the excuse. Compact with a foldaway standard lens, weatherproof, two control wheels, and lenses from the 80's (although obviously not the autofocus bit) as they kept the same mount. Fab little camera. People with big hands may not like it, as it is a bit on the dinky side, but then again I find the controls just fall under my fingers whereas Canon cameras just seem, well, wrong somehow.

I find the controls just fall under my fingers whereas Canon cameras just seem, well, wrong somehow.

TBH, I think this is where the real difference is in cameras these days. Most if not all high end camera are very good and there isn't too much in it. Really its about how the camera feels and if the UI and button layout suits you or not. Sure a serious amateur or pro will have genuine reasons to go for one model over the other due to image differences but I think for most consumers its hard to buy a bad camera or even a mediocre camera, they are all pretty good.

Update!

The GX7 arrived and seemed pretty good, but there was a mark somewhere in the lens or CCD so it's going back.

While the compactness of it was great, it felt a bit tricky to handle with my big hands. I may look into something a bit bigger but not full DSLR size. Pentax does appeal.

Go big or go home 🙂

😀 currently researching...

I've got an Olympus OM-D E-M1 (mk1) and a M.Zuiko 45mm (90mm 35mm equivalent) F1.8 prime lens, both in 'as new' condition, coming from MPB tomorrow. 😀

Meant to be a cracking lens with lots of BOKEH! I'll pick up a 25mm F1.8 and maybe the 14-42mm pancake lens later on.

My last proper camera was a Nikon D70!

Update!

The GX7 arrived and seemed pretty good, but there was a mark somewhere in the lens or CCD so it’s going back.

While the compactness of it was great, it felt a bit tricky to handle with my big hands. I may look into something a bit bigger but not full DSLR size. Pentax does appeal.

Are you keeping the M43 lens you got? Olympus OMD range might be worth a look, any M43 lens will fit. M1/M5/M10.

Actually my last proper camera was this Canon A1 35mm film camera I bought a few years back, did some film shots but not many.
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/3815/9359733954_d6eb1bf392_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/3815/9359733954_d6eb1bf392_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/XqgQS1B4/1534932-10151813986010588-1151196241-o.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/XqgQS1B4/1534932-10151813986010588-1151196241-o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

This came today - the body and lens look like they've never been used.
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032456947_eefcffca4b_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032456947_eefcffca4b_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032456942_70e730e72c_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032456942_70e730e72c_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

Couple of shots straight out the camera whilst testing it, uploaded to my phone (and Google photos backup), with the 45mm f1.8, going to enjoy using this! I'd forgotten how much nicer it is using a proper camera vs a phone.
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032434417_88622f9d3f_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51032434417_88622f9d3f_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51031601658_2ef6b7e6ba_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51031601658_2ef6b7e6ba_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

That’s a great choice and looks minty 🙂👍🏼

Heh! My replacement, an OM D E M10 arrived yesterday! It seems to have some issues tho so it's probably going back but yes it's lovely.

Just checked the shutter count on the body, and yeah there's a reason it's in good nick! A little over 800 actuations! 😁

Interesting thread. I’ve also been dabbling a bit with photography over lockdown. Using a LUMIX LX15 (so quite similar to the RX100 the OP mentioned) and also thinking of “upgrading”. The kicker for me though is that it has to provide a noticeable improvement in image quality but still be small enough to fit in my handlebar bag along with my jacket or I’m unlikely to take it to the places where the nice pictures are.

I’m interested by the comment that mirrorless isn’t a big enough jump from the RX100. Was this based on image quality or user experience?

I’ve toyed with something like a Fuji XE* with a pancake lens (or even an X100* if I can live without interchangeable lenses). But again, will I really notice a difference in the images? I’m mostly interested in landscapes but landscape photographers all use much bigger cameras than I’m prepared to lug around.

I had a LUMIX FZ1000, with the 1" sensor, the autofocus was fantastic, great for birds in flight etc, though I didnt take many photos of them.Also it had 4k video
I wanted brighter pics so looked at DSLRs. For under £200 I could get a used 100D, which is small and light, but I reckon the autofocus isnt so good. Is it a 9 area system?
So could I get a Canon dslr with as good autofocus as the LUMIX, for £200?

^

So could I get a Canon dslr with as good autofocus as the LUMIX, for £200?

£200 for the body? (Assuming already have a fast 400mm Canon-friendly lens to match/better the FZ1000?)

@roverpig look at any camera on dpreview and you can compare images with others on its review page. The RX100 is surprisingly good, it's the user experience that gets better with a M43 camera I think.

Thanks @cynic-al The problem with that site is that all the images look pretty good. The ones from my LX10 look pretty much as good as anything, which would support the idea that all I’d gain from an “upgrade” would be a different user experience at the cost of a bigger camera and a lighter wallet.

Some of the pictures people post from a Fuji X series camera seem to be significantly sharper than anything I can get though, which is what had me looking at XE or X100 cameras (same sensor and processor as the XT cameras used by a lot of landscape photographers but a fair bit smaller).

Best not to get caught up in sharpness of the image as in good light most cameras of the type talked about in this thread will be very good and better to try and take better pictures rather than thinking a low depth of field shot of anything makes a good picture 🙂

To me it is about the feel of actually using a proper camera over a phone or a tiny little compact. The camera I enjoyed using the most was a Canon 20D (probably about £50 now!) which is a much lesser camera than what I have now but the images I got from it just seemed nicer.
Second to that was the X100 which again just felt right to use.

So if, for example, I blew a grand on a Fuji XE4 or X100V it wouldn’t actually produce noticeably sharper pictures than I get with my (1” sensor) LUMIX LX10. I’d just have a few more buttons to play with and a camera that is harder to slip in my bike bag.

I know what you mean about the user experience though. That LX10 doesn’t actually take pictures that are noticeably better than I could get with my iphone but it does give a bit more “creative control” and can get good shots in situations where the phone would struggle.

The problem with that site is that all the images look pretty good. The ones from my LX10 look pretty much as good as anything

Look again?

Studio shot comparison tool

(Imagine the brush hairs are feathers)

But if you’re not looking for/not seeing IQ gains, then I’d agree with you that you wouldn’t gain anything by upgrading.

Best not to get caught up in sharpness of the image

+1.

Detail? Yes. But that’s only one metric of consideration when evaluating IQ and one that can be misleading when comparing images online (especially jpgs where in-camera and/or PP sharpening is applied, which can be utterly misleading. This is why I selected ‘RAW’ in the studio comparisons above)

In a former life I shot and printed wide format fine art photographs, so my needs are/were very particular as far as commercial work was concerned (and per my own interests in pushing for the best I could achieve)

Yet I now carry for hobby use and reference a compact zoom of 12mp. I’d be happy printing from that (scaled via RIP) on a ‘large’ canvas print. Well, not really because I dislike canvas prints, but my point being that unless your work is commercial then don’t sweat the pixel-peeping if all you’re doing is making canvas hobby prints or saving to instagram etc, just use a camera that you enjoy using, one that gets you close enough to your subject, and one that delivers consistent results with no ‘mush’.

For me, now, I look for

1 User-experience/interface/controls
2. Colour-accuracy
3. Dynamic-range
4. Corner-sharpness

Those 4 key-features of a camera are what I require to ensure success, as I use my images for painting reference. Any other considerations can be worked around.

For someone else, key features might be battery life, compactness, budget, superzoom, new toy-itis, etc etc. Everyone is different.

*edit - looking at those comparison shots, the LX10 lens seems to exhibit some major ‘purple-fringing’? Used to be a real bugbear of mine with quite a few compact zooms (have been through a few!), Powershots, Lumix etc.

Thanks @p7eaven I clearly need to spend a bit more time on that site. The brush images do illustrate what frustrates me a bit with the LX10. Full pictures are fine for my use and there is enough information in the raw files for me to have fun playing in Lightroom. Until I start cropping and then I wish there was a bit more detail.

Canon's 40mm prime is sharper than the 50mm and tiny. Lovely lens for anyone with a Canon DSLR.

I've always thought that the Olympus EPL3 pics look amazing for the price on DPreview.

EPL3

I have a few cameras but sold my DSLR because I wanted something to put in my pocket when out walking. If buying another DSLR I'd want full frame so I could use older lenses.

I clearly need to spend a bit more time on that site.

😬 Be careful. Addictive, not always in a good way. It can tend towards developing a pixel-peeping habit and upgradeitis. Missing the bigger picture.

Until I start cropping and then I wish there was a bit more detail.

Cropping???? 😉

Learn to frame the shot better? It comes with practice and study. Not saying you are, but if you’re finding you’re doing a lot of cropping then this can clue you in to the fact you may be taking what I call ‘the carpet-bombing’ approach’ to photography. ie ‘framing a shot’ initially doesn’t mean fitting everything in the viewfinder and then getting home and ‘pulling out the good bits’, quite the opposite. It means framing the good bits and cutting out the need for cropping. I say this ad a former serial carpet-bomber. It got worse again for a while when I bought a large sensor compact! ‘gotta capture it all...’

ie if I try and photograph that song thrush on that branch with my measly compact zoom - then no amount of cropping is going to make it a useful image for anything other than the bin.

But I’d have to pay ££££££s for a decent zoom lens and body to get that thrush in full frame? And then maybe a hide. A decent tripod? Yes, but I don't take pictures of birds for a living, I just wanted to try out my camera/record a thrush. So no I won’t spend thousands on a diff lens and camera.

Ok, so what I’ll do instead is walk over to that starling who seems unconcerned with the proximity of my measly compact zoom

(Pentax MX-1. 100mm equiv, f3.5, 1/250sec, ISO100)

Now I can see feathers and colours in decent details, and even my hulking self reflected (along with the clouds) in his eye. No cropping required.

No way would I compare this 12MP compact zoom with a full frame DSLR or medium/large format back with decent glass on the front. But it’s ‘good enough’ to get the detail I require, I just try and work within it’s limitations.

In fact, with it’s F1.8-2.5 lens it puts in a good performance even up against a Fuji X100, no matter the sensor is a lot smaller, and I get a useful small zoom to boot. It’s about a combination that works for both the user and the camera.

Given the sensor-size an (say) Fuji X100 would no doubt bodyslam my MX-1 for pixel-peeping and low-light performance etc, as would a decent DSLR (naturally), but the MX-1 was/is no slouch and I much, much prefer using it to the RX100 that it replaced even though the RX100 had double the sensor-size and a smaller form.

I also find the MX-1’s colour-handling to be more to my liking. Something about the RX100 OOC images often seemed ‘unnatural’, difficult to put a finger on. They both score similarly on DXOMARK, IIRC.

As they say, it’s what works for you, ymmv etc.

*Edit ^ Wish I’d had my DSLR with a nifty fifty on me ready for that starling to enjoy lush bokeh. Well no I don’t, as I didn’t that day wish to lug all that weight around the beach, and I’m not looking to sell the image. As it was I enjoyed walking around the beach with a compact that takes better pics than my phone.

If I decide to go out just to take pics and nothing else, then I’ll enjoy carrying the DSLR in a Slingshot bag, along with the results. It’s a bit like going shopping on the bike. I enjoy it on the town bike, and hate it on the MTB. And vice-versa when going rock-hopping on the bike.

Well re reading this thread is not helping my indecision!

I was going to replace the dodgy OMD E M10 with the M10ii but am now in a rabbit-hole with the EX2. More pocket-able, IQ seems better, nicer to use, not sure of EVF adapts to aperture/ambient light and the (native) lenses are more expensive and no IS.

I should probably follow my own advice to noobs re bike buying: "it won't matter much".

Have to say the IS in the M1 body is amazing, will be perfect for getting a shot at the top of a climb when the HR is still in the 150's 😁

I wouldn't want to be without the in body IS.

What's needed for MTB action shots guys? Just some better than mobile phone type stuff really. I guess it needs to do burst/multiple pics so I can capture air time

What’s needed for MTB action shots guys? Just some better than mobile phone type stuff really. I guess it needs to do burst/multiple pics so I can capture air time

Probably still frames from video?

All depends what you want to achieve/final destination so ‘what’s needed’ varies to some degree (even ‘just better than a mob phone) depending on:

Commercial, hobby or social media?
What you can/wish to spend?
What you can/wish to carry?
How close do you ‘need’ to get to the action? (telephoto/zoom)
What limitations do you wish to live with/avoid? (happy with video stills or is the ‘thrill of capture’ a factor?
Do you need flash/will many shots be in dark woods? overcast weather?
Weatherproofing?

Etc etc. It’s a bit like the ‘what bike do I need for fast biking?’ question.

Mostly a social media thing but stills are not very clear as we record via phone.
Nothing spectacular needed, just 'ooooh that's cool'

[img] [/img]
[url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/152318156@N08/51035673332/ ]51035668062_76d2e0c155_k[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/152318156@N08/ ]Steve Weeks[/url] - [url= https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dariogf.flickr2BBcode_lite ]Flickr2BBcode LITE[/url]

That for example was a still from video. I'd like it clearer than that.

Budget, no idea, £200? £300?

^ that shot, were you tracking the subject when recording? That can make a huge difference to the clarity/lessening of motion-blur. A gimbal also can help.

Rule out technique before looking elsewhere is a good rule of thumb

https://mashable.com/2015/09/28/epic-iphone-6s-plus-4k-video/?europe=true

What’s needed for MTB action shots guys?

Possibly a GoPro?

This was taken on a Samsung Note 9 (I think)

[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/8025/29775275175_269ab478b5_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/8025/29775275175_269ab478b5_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/Mn94Xn ]2016-09-18_11-29-13[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/85252658@N05/ ]davetheblade[/url], on Flickr

These were taken with a Sony A77ii camera

[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4199/34637109262_2317207e65_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4199/34637109262_2317207e65_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/ULLeR1 ]DSC00672[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/85252658@N05/ ]davetheblade[/url], on Flickr

[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4220/34666773231_dba69dec86_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4220/34666773231_dba69dec86_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/UPogUK ]DSC00490[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/85252658@N05/ ]davetheblade[/url], on Flickr

[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4169/34666756311_da4593e85a_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4169/34666756311_da4593e85a_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/UPobT2 ]DSC00652[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/85252658@N05/ ]davetheblade[/url], on Flickr

[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4169/33989939083_6519ec6244_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4169/33989939083_6519ec6244_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/TMzjGt ]DSC00466[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/85252658@N05/ ]davetheblade[/url], on Flickr

P7ven -
Yes, a Canon Aps-c body only , around £200
What would be best for tracking/autofocus.??

^ alric, sorry not my field of expertise but this is a good resource (choose dates etc, older = more inexpensive, just be aware of condition/shutter-count)

https://www.dxomark.com/best-canon-cameras-for-sports

Maybe start with comparing a 60D and a 100D? (at first look they seems to be about the budget according to recently sold bodies on ebay)

You make some very good point @p7eaven. Thanks. Occasionally I’m cropping because I couldn’t physically get to where I needed to be for the shot, but in the vast majority of cases it’s because I didn’t frame it properly. Or I couldn’t work out how best to frame it until I got back home.

Working with the limitations of the camera is also part of the fun, I agree. I’ve never tried photographing birds but if I wanted to the lumix does have the option of controlling it from a decent distance with the phone. So, with burst mode, a tripod and a lot of patience it should be possible to get some decent shots. I’ll have to try it one day. That starling looks great by the way.