Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

simonsi

Contributor
Jan 3, 2014
4,851
735
Auckland
Once you do you will have a better appreciation of the realm of possibilities and all the creative means by which images can be made.

Really? You think that is what it will do? Pinhole cameras have no controllable aperture or shutter speed (so out goes any appreciation of those key aspects), and you learn a <single> method of using chemistry to produce an image (which I guess gives you an appreciation of where "dodge" and "burn" terms come from...)

Photography course by all means but if you want to recommend such a pinhole/chemistry/BW course as giving you any appreciation of "all the creative means" then I'd seriously think again...
 

lennyeiger

macrumors member
Jan 6, 2015
90
80
Santa Cruz, CA
Really? You think that is what it will do? Pinhole cameras have no controllable aperture or shutter speed (so out goes any appreciation of those key aspects), and you learn a <single> method of using chemistry to produce an image (which I guess gives you an appreciation of where "dodge" and "burn" terms come from...)

Photography course by all means but if you want to recommend such a pinhole/chemistry/BW course as giving you any appreciation of "all the creative means" then I'd seriously think again...

Since I started with film (a very long time ago) it is hard to imagine how my aesthetics would be different had I started with digital. There are a lot of people who suggest that learning about film and darkroom printing is a way to have a good understanding of the processes. I don't know how important the distinction between an MQ and a PQ type developer is today. However, it is fun to develop and make prints, at least for the first while. I have never done this myself, but I do think that making a camera gives you an elemental understanding of "a lens, a piece of film and a dark space in between". Change the dark space, the focus changes, etc. I shortcut the process and went straight to using a view camera which will do the same thing for anyone. Most people that use view cameras (for those who don't know that means 4x5 inches and larger), or even who used them at one time and changed to something else, suggest that the larger camera on a tripod was an incredible learning experience. It makes one stop, consider what one is photographing, etc. You stop looking at life through a little hole (or 2 inch display) and you interact in a different way. It's more intimate.
 

sarge

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2003
597
136
Brooklyn
Really? You think that is what it will do? Pinhole cameras have no controllable aperture or shutter speed (so out goes any appreciation of those key aspects), and you learn a <single> method of using chemistry to produce an image (which I guess gives you an appreciation of where "dodge" and "burn" terms come from...)

Photography course by all means but if you want to recommend such a pinhole/chemistry/BW course as giving you any appreciation of "all the creative means" then I'd seriously think again...

I'll think again if you start thinking to begin with.
 

Freida

Suspended
Oct 22, 2010
4,077
5,874
If I had to rate mine it would be
105 macro
200-500
14-24
24-70
70-200
70-300
10.5 fisheye

But it's very much horses for courses.
Do you think that 24-70 from Sigma Art will beat the Nikon's one in terms of picture quality & price? On paper it looks amazing (compared to the other Art ones released - the 85 is meant to be the best lens out there, true?) so can we expect this same quality from 24-70 too? (And still cheaper than Nikon's)? :D
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
57,003
56,027
Behind the Lens, UK
Do you think that 24-70 from Sigma Art will beat the Nikon's one in terms of picture quality & price? On paper it looks amazing (compared to the other Art ones released - the 85 is meant to be the best lens out there, true?) so can we expect this same quality from 24-70 too? (And still cheaper than Nikon's)? :D
I've not had any experience of Sigma lenses.
I paid £150 for my 24-70 so I doubt it will beat my price ;)

It's just for me it's a compromising lens. Not wide enough or long enough.
 

robgendreau

macrumors 68040
Jul 13, 2008
3,471
339
What? there are cellphone camera tech advancements coming? I thought two lenses was maybe it, as cell phone cameras edge toward commodification.
 

daimos

macrumors regular
Feb 23, 2009
212
179
a hobby is more of an activity, more the journey than destination. why do people bike when they can drive ? because it's a hobby. if your gadget can do everything, then there's nothing left to do.
 

HBOC

macrumors 68020
Oct 14, 2008
2,497
234
SLC
i use my phone as a documentary camera, nothing more. My A7r is my go to camera.

If one never prints anything, a cell phone would be ok, as it is pretty much all auto.
 

glenthompson

macrumors demi-god
Apr 27, 2011
2,983
844
Virginia
tl;dr: Is it worth getting an entry level DSLR as a hobby when cellphone camera tech is advancing with each new release?

Bonus question: Anyone with a DSLR / mirrorless that bought one to also start out as a hobby continue to use it over their phone cameras and do you still find it a fulfilling hobby in which you are always taking it with you on travels and investing in new lenses?

Different cameras address different needs. Phone cameras are great because they are always with you. I have some great pictures taken with my iPhone because it was with me at the time a particular scene came to me. They do have their limitations such as limited ability to change lenses and control over camera functions like aperture and shutter speed.

Any interchangeable lens camera with full control will enable you to learn more about photography. You can explore different exposure settings, control depth of field, adjust white balance, and a number of other settings that are not available on a camera phone.

There are also some areas of photography that are nearly impossible on a phone. I do a lot of motorsports photography. Hard to get some of the shots without putting myself in grave danger. Lots of other sports photography in the same category. Think about what type of photos you might want to take. What will you need to get those images? Also consider what you will do with the resulting images. Share them on Facebook? Print poster sized images? Different image quality requirements.

Lastly, there's post processing. Digital photography gives you a lot more options over film. While you can greatly enhance an image, it always helps to start with a decent image. The less manipulation you have to do all the better. A camera that provides raw images gives you more control over the final result.

I have an iPhone 6s and a Sony mirrorless. Each serves its purpose well. I wouldn't want to give up either.
 

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
First, I know even an entry level DSLR and a mirrorless are still better than the iPhone 7+ dual camera set up.

Now, I use my moms D3100 (came out in 2010) to take family photos and what not. I use the 18/50 lens that came with it. 7 years later, I am looking to maybe get into the field of photography as a hobby. I was thinking the D5600 or maybe a Sony A6300 mirrorless. I love being outdoors so nature shots coupled with some shots of the dogs / family will be the primary usage.

I don't want to invest all this money into a hobby when it is becoming clear that cellphone camera tech is advancing with each release. I still use the 6+ and the camera is just okay obviously. I saw some photos taken with the 7+ and was amazed at the quality. Plus now companies are selling lenses to attach to the iphone to get even better shots.

From a professional standpoint, I know cellphones won't compete. Being this is going to be a hobby, I was wondering if its worth it to invest the money (a question I obviously have to ask myself instead of asking you all).

tl;dr: Is it worth getting an entry level DSLR as a hobby when cellphone camera tech is advancing with each new release?

Bonus question: Anyone with a DSLR / mirrorless that bought one to also start out as a hobby continue to use it over their phone cameras and do you still find it a fulfilling hobby in which you are always taking it with you on travels and investing in new lenses?


Hi,

Short answer, IMHO yes, it is worth it... It will be a while yet before cellphones truly replace the cameras of people who are seriously into it. Afterall, technology allows us to imitate musical instruments with amazing accuracy yet we still prefer to sound of the real thing. My opinion (and this is all it is) is that while smartphones will get better and better, enthusiast photographers will continue to want to have a large sensor. The laws of physics and how they pertain to lens design (size) prevent a smartphone remaining a "smartphone with a camera" as opposed to a "camera with a smartphone"

:)
 

Eggtastic

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 9, 2009
1,052
702
NJ
Thanks for all the replies. Birthday is coming up and I always buy myself something for it and a DSLR or mirrorless was on my list. All the information provided has helped greatly, thanks again!
 
  • Like
Reactions: No. 44 and kenoh

Freida

Suspended
Oct 22, 2010
4,077
5,874
I've not had any experience of Sigma lenses.
I paid £150 for my 24-70 so I doubt it will beat my price ;)

It's just for me it's a compromising lens. Not wide enough or long enough.
That really is a sweet deal.

Well, I am for events like weddings, parties, portraits, holidays :) and just one lens does it all kinda thing so that could work I guess :)
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
57,003
56,027
Behind the Lens, UK
That really is a sweet deal.

Well, I am for events like weddings, parties, portraits, holidays :) and just one lens does it all kinda thing so that could work I guess :)
Don't get me wrong it's a great lens. It's just that I've been spoilt by having such a range of sweet deals!
If I'm just taking one lens with me for a trip it will always be my 24-70.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freida

Ubele

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2008
903
344
Thanks for all the replies. Birthday is coming up and I always buy myself something for it and a DSLR or mirrorless was on my list. All the information provided has helped greatly, thanks again!

I got a Sony NEX 6 when it came out, followed by an a6000 when they went on sale during a holiday season. I couldn't be happier with both cameras, so I'd certainly recommend the a6300 that you mentioned in your OP. Actually, given what you've said, I'd recommend the a6000. Sony still sells it, and it's a lot cheaper than the a6300. If you eventually outgrow it (and I haven't come close to doing so), you can buy the a6300, a6500, a6700, a6900, or whatever model they're up to by then. The lenses you buy now will work on future models, and I suspect you'd want to keep your a6000 as a backup.

To add my two cents' worth to the discussion, I started with a 35mm SLR in the 1980s, got a 3MP Nikon 995 digital camera in 2001, and upgraded to an 8MP Canon Powershot in 2004. When I got an iPhone 4 in 2010, I was amazed by the camera's quality. At that point in my life, I was no longer seriously into photography, and I wondered whether I could get by with just an iPhone. I got one of those Olloclip three-lens kits. They were pretty cool, but it was a pain having to remove my iPhone's case every time I wanted to use the lenses. Then when I upgraded to the iPhone 5, which had a different form factor, the Olloclip lenses no longer fit. That's something to keep in mind when buying accessories for phones and tablets.

In 2013, I started following some photographers' blogs, and that inspired me to get back into more serious hobby photography. I was leaning toward a Nikon D7100, but after reading positive reviews of the NEX 6, and playing with both the D7100 and NEX 6 at Best Buy, I decided that the Sony's smaller size and lower weight offset the Nikon's few technical superiorities. I remembered my years of lugging around my SLR and lenses in a backpack, and I didn't want to return to those years.

These days, I always have my iPhone 6S Plus with me, and I use its camera all the time. But when I travel or otherwise go out explicitly to "take pictures," I use my a6000 and whichever lens(es) are appropriate for the situation: the 16-50 kit zoom, the 55-210 zoom, the 35 prime, and the macro (all native Sony e-mounts). At home, I keep the 35 on the camera, because it's great for getting those low-light indoor shots of our pets doing cute things. Outdoors, the 16-50 does most of what I want. (No, it's not the greatest lens ever made, but neither is it the piece of crap that some people say it is.) The 55-210 is great for wildlife photography when I can't get close to the wildlife in question. That's one thing you can't do with a phone camera: extreme optical zoom. I bought the macro for food photography, when I was thinking of starting a food blog. I didn't start a food blog, but I use the macro occasionally.

My 27-year-old stepson had been posting really nice iPhone photos on his Facebook page. It was apparent he had "the eye." He started accompanying a couple of pro-photographer friends on photo shoots. I recently decided to give him my NEX 6. He was thrilled, and he's been learning all the camera's features, experimenting with manual mode, and putting great thought into his compositions. I'm thrilled that he's thrilled.

Maybe there will come a time when smartphone cameras will be good enough for what I do, and when software algorithms will compensate for the limitations of optical physics. If you like experimenting with depth of field, there's only so much you can do with a phone camera. Anyway, good luck with whichever camera you choose!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eggtastic

lizardofwoz

macrumors regular
Aug 9, 2012
195
131
Australia
I'm purely a hobbyist photographer and this is only my personal view...It's a bit of a cliche but photography is more than just the equipment: the equipment is simply a tool to let you achieve what you want or to achieve it more conveniently. If you can achieve what you want with a cameraphone or a compact camera or whatever then go with it. If you need more from a 'technical' quality point of view (e.g. large prints or extremes of capture scenarios) then you need to judge what you need to do what you are after. Like any hobby though, there is usually Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) that you'll see a lot in this forum and elsewhere. Nothing wrong with GAS - if the process of researching/buying/acquiring/using new stuff gives you pleasure then that's surely part of the hobby experience. I'll leave the symptoms of GAS for others here to comment on!

The problem with all technology is that it becomes obsolete - some faster than others. One way to look at it is if you spent the money on kit now that does what you want for three or four years, what is the actual cost to you per year (taking into account you may be able to sell the kit at the end of your useful life for it)? Is this cost worth it to you or would you rather wait for the cameraphone to reach the technical standard you want? Could say the same about the cameraphone you have now - upgrade now or wait another couple of years until the better model comes out.

Good luck with your choice but remember a hobby is about enjoyment.

I absolutely agree.

The hobby is 'photography', the equipment is secondary. Take lots of pictures and learn composition and the techniques of 'seeing pictures' before you hit the button. Digital photography has freed up the taking of multiple pictures... with film you were always conscious of wasting shots and money, so things are easier these days.

I am not saying that advanced camera equipment is not a delight in itself, but the original enquiry was about photography, and photography is achieved with any device able to capture an image.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anotherscotsman

HBOC

macrumors 68020
Oct 14, 2008
2,497
234
SLC
I absolutely agree.

The hobby is 'photography', the equipment is secondary. Take lots of pictures and learn composition and the techniques of 'seeing pictures' before you hit the button. Digital photography has freed up the taking of multiple pictures... with film you were always conscious of wasting shots and money, so things are easier these days.

I am not saying that advanced camera equipment is not a delight in itself, but the original enquiry was about photography, and photography is achieved with any device able to capture an image.


this is true - BUT if technology gets in the way of actually enjoying where you are, than the point is moot. I can't tell you how many "photographers" today are worried about focus bracketing and zooming in on Live View to see if everything is in focus, and only see the "what and where" when they load them up in CC.

To really have any control of the camera in a cell phone, you have to dig around deep in the menus (at least in my limited experience with cell phone photography).
 

Ray2

macrumors 65816
Jul 8, 2014
1,170
489
Lest we all forget, great photographers and great images were taken before the word "tech" was part of the English language. Those images haven't lost their excellence with time.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.