I've got a 1200d and a few lenses 50mm, 10-18mm, 70-300mm and yet the kit lens is still my favourite. I can't believe your down to earth honesty, I'm so used to watching videos with camera snobs telling me that the kit lens is pretty much worthless. You just earned a subscriber my good man. I'm feeling quite proud of my little 1200d atm.... Great job!
The answer to your question is it worth spending the extra money on a expensive camera, no it is not, the only difference is you may have to nurse the cheaper camera against rough handling and maybe take extra care if you are shooting in poor weather (rain).......I love my so called cheap camera, but I do have a expensive camera as well which I have owned for 6 years and is well behind the latest specs, I shall never buy another camera but I may just buy another lens.....I loved your closing statement its one I have said many times, if you cant take good pictures with a cheap camera you will never take any with a expensive camera, the other saying I use is, if you cant take good pictures in your own back garden you will never take one anywhere else......thank you for the test.....
@@theschoolofphotography if you are well prepared with plenty of speedlites or larger battery powered mobile flashes, you should be able to get wall to wall detail with a crop sensored camera in 1 shot with F8!or do some multiple shots that can be stitched together in photoshop!but the budget cameras cant shoot high speed sync properly!
I broke a few plasticy cameras usally within a year before getting a magnesium metal body weather sealed one,.,, a good body will last 5-10 years easy... maby im just clumsy,, but for me getting a proper camera seems like the better option (not for 3800 thou, thats insane ,, but spending 1K isnt that bad considering what you get and how long you can use it )
@@TheKlingis Most people also break the screens on their smartphones... I keep mine for years with no protection and never cracked a screen. I hate making my phone more bulky if I don't have to. It just depends how careful you are with your things. A camera at least has a nifty strap if you're handling it with fallible human hands, or it's hooked to the tripod.
its not just dropping them, usally the cheapest dslr have little or no weather protection.. all it takes is some moderate rain drizzle and camera might go loco :/
I myself have started with a 1300D back in January 2017 to test out the waters of photography on a budget and to see how I enjoy it. I have a lot of great images from that camera. I used the 18-135 IS STM kit lens for an entire year before I bought any other lens. Since about July 2018 I own an 80D and I dont plan to go anywhere else for another several years. I got it on sale with free 50mm 1.8 which made it a good bargain since I planned to get it for christmas anyway (and christmas sale did not include the lens, so I got lucky). Having a higher end body improves the shooting experience considerably with button placement, and other functions but does not make one a better photographer in and of itself. It requires more practice with the added functions which can be intimidating for a new shooter. I got the 80D for a couple of reasons: 1) Number of focus points - I enjoy the flexibility and accuracy of the 45 all cross-type points over the 9 with just center cross-type. 2)DualPixel AF in live view - I plan to dabble in videography later so this was an essential thing and it also helps greatly when taking shots through LV. 3)Flip screen with touch control - taking pictures through LV from any angle is a breeze with a fully articulating screen where you can pick a focus point with a finger and use an electronic level.
You're completely right and the gap between quality and functionality can be even narrower if you buy an old pro body camera, such as the Nikon D3(s) with a 35-70 2.8 non-motorized focus zoom. You'll spend roughly 800 dollars and you'll get usable full frame depth of field, 6400 usable iso, 9-10 FPS, a large battery, and a weather sealed body, among other advantages. You can't go wrong with that. RUclips is filled with review channels, most of them secretly paid by manufacturers to make people change their gear.
As Barry says, a good lens is the right investment. I highly appreciate your time showing it to the world. I started learning photography in 1985 with a book "35 mm photography" That book had the same conclusion as you have. Those days I had to get it printed to see the result, note the exposure when taking pictures.
Thank you so much for doing this in depth study/ comparison - I got my first DSLR camera in Feb 2018 - as it happens the newer Canon 1300D which replaced the 1200D - I am really enjoying my photographic skills journey with this entry level but nonetheless very capable camera and have taken some pretty good shots with it - I've successfully shot a wedding, done a reasonable job of a new born shoot and to my great surprise and delight have sold several of my landscape (landscape photography is my real passion) photos on large format canvas and have some exhibited in a gallery and some in the rooms of a local hotel - all done with this modest camera. I still have a lot to learn but so agree that its all about first having an eye for the shot teamed with knowledge and knowing your camera rather than spending thousands and thousands on super kit which is nice to have rather than necessary to have! You've confirmed to me given the types of photos I enjoy taking, that I should continue my learning curve with my 1300D and spend any spare money I might have on photography destinations and spend my time getting to know and best of all using my camera.
I just stumbled onto your channel and wow. So informative. I'm a fresh user of an eos2000d and it actually is very encouraging what one can do with an entry level camera. I think I'll be your regular viewer now. Keep up the good work.
My equipement is a 700d with 3 prime lenses, 35,50 and 85. That is more than enough. Thank You for this video, It saved me a lot of money. I do not lomgert think about a fullframe
I totally agree with your verdict. People are always amazed with the pictures I take on my iPhone and think they are from a DSLR, but the equipment is really not that important. Same reason I haven't upgraded my Canon 5D mk II. It's still an awesome camera many years later :)
I have seen a difference in low light and dynamic range, as well as auto focus possibilities allows to catch right moment and more shallow depth of field for portraits. Also there is more difference shooting video. I agree - the difference is not critical, but makes your life as a photographer - easier.
Thanks for your helpful video. Recently I bought my 800d and I'm very happy with it. I'm not a professional photographer. I just like to photograph the beautiful moments for me. This cheaper one is so good to me. I never approach the expensive market. This cheap photography satisfies all my needs. Thanks for your in depth comparison video
For my genre (astrophotography) it's a bit more important because of the signal to noise ratios during long exposures, but generally I think the glass is way more important than the camera body.
Thank you so much for producing this Marc. I recently purchased a Canon EOS T7i 800d with a kit lens and then quickly added a "nifty fifty" F-1.8 prime lens (that's all I've got in my bag). I had a big amazon wish list of "better" more expensive lenses and was beginning to get frustrated and a little disillusioned. But then I watched this and also "All the idea but no gear!" and it was like a light bulb switching on - the truth has indeed set me free! Since then, I've been out a couple of times on my days off work and took some shots, with my kit lens, that I'm quite pleased with. I'm enjoying my photography again and realising that I can do an awful lot with just my kit lens and I'm not going to get frustrated or think about the need to get more lenses. So, thank you soooo much bro. (From a former Essex guy now living in Scotland). God bless you.
I moved from a 600D (I still use it) to a full frame 6D and that low light ability of the 6D certainly makes a difference. I did a natural light photo-shoot in a house on a very dull foggy day and struggled with the 600D, lots of noise on the photos. I know with the 6D full frame would have made a big difference. I'm not knocking the 600D though it's an excellent camera I've used it for years and I've had thousands of great photos but certainly would not want to go back to the 600D on my photo-shoots unless I had no alternative. One other advantage of the 6D is it's weight. A heavier camera is much more stable when hand held and you can safely knock up the ISO together with the shutter speed for those speedy shots.
Yeah, I definitely see more variance in quality between the glass than the bodies. Having said that, the upshot of having a full frame body is you have access to better glass without crop factors. But if you have £200 to invest in becoming a better photographer, the best investments you could make is taking time off and split the time between being in the public library looking at great photography, art and design books and going out shooting. As the saying goes, the music isn't in the piano.
@@kapwakomahalko7 So you want it both...the processor and the lenses almost free? I advice you Huwaei with Leica lenses. Like this...you had it a new phone and camera too :D
Yep agree! Sometimes I take out the old Sony A6000 with the cheap Sigma lens at weddings and the couples love the images. We should look at photography more as an art rather than just gear talk subjects
A very informative video, all new to photography people should watch this, it’s not the camera, we don’t take a photo, we make a photo, you explained the process perfectly
Am using D700 With the lense that came with it originally 18-55 mm . And i use 100mm lense for my dental clinic pictures. . My question: what is the best lense that i can upgrade my camera to, for doing outdoor landscapes pictures and youtube movies clips ? Thank you
What a fun video. Helps to know if I ever go down the ILC road, there’s a way to start without breaking the bank. I would love to see a similar comparison using a full frame vs a consumer bridge camera (I use an FZ1000) in the hands of a pro, and just what could be done... I find so little channels that acknowledge the hobbyist (on a budget) and really, half of camera sales and potential audience, are fixed lens types.
Great video and quite surprising! Your video proves what I've always suspected. I learned to shoot on a Olympus E420 for about 8 years. I recently bought a Canon 4000d and a couple of cheap lenses. I've always said that so many people have "all the gear and no idea" when it comes to photography.
It's great, you show that you don't always need the latest camera to take great pictures. Only in difficult lighting conditions does the lens and camera show their advantages.
I got the 1200D over 6 years ago, maybe more than that, the camera was recently launched in market. I haven't seen the entire video but I have great respect for this entry level DSLR, i have used it extensively and even now i use it to take portraits and record short clips for my vlogs. The only reason i have reduced its use is stabilization but still a great camera.
Interesting video - thanks for that. I've purchased one expensive lens from the outset (bought the Canon 800D body with a 17-55mm f2.8 lens). They shipped me the kit lens too and didn't want it back, so I've had a chance to compare the two side by side. For portraits and some close-up stuff I do prefer the 17-55mm lens as it is great for blurring out the background, so it does make some difference. For general shots in good light it makes no difference at all. When I go on vacation I'll be taking the kit lens as its lighter to be carrying around all day and I won't be as worried about damaging / losing it.
My 'go-to' portrait lens is the Canon 85mm f/1.8. Very shallow depth of field on that one. Great relatively inexpensive lens that works out to a 136mm equivalent on the APS-C bodies (800D et. al.). While I'd love to be able to acquire the Canon 135mm F/2L for my 6D, I am making do with a trio of primes. The other two being a Canon 40mm and a Samyang 14mm, both f/2.8. My 60D get's the two zoom lenses currently in my arsenal. EF-S 10-16mm and EF-S 18-135mm. That 17-55mm f/2.8 sounds like a great walk-about or street photography lens. I am waiting on delivery of a Tamron 28-105mm to add a zoom to my 6D.
I really enjoyed this! As a beginner I have the 1300d which is the slightly newer version of your cheap camera. I think it is a great camera to learn with and it's great to know that with practice I can get amazing results, without having to invest in pricey kit!
1300d is a great little camera. i have the older 550d but they are comparible. i can tell you now that i have had my 550 for around 10 years now and still get great results. you made a good choice in camera. depending on what you are shooting i would recomend the ef-s 18-200 as a good starter lens. it goes for around 200 pounds on ebay and will totally enhance your ability to learn and develop your style. happy snapping
I've had the T5 (1200D). It is the camera that got me back into photography. I then got a 6D mark II and several L series lenses. There are just some shots I could not get with the slower consumer grade lenses and the crop sensor, especially in low light. There was also some chromatic aberration in the cheaper lenses. But, the T5 and those lenses still performed admirably in most situations. The most important factor for justifying the expensive gear was the build quality, specifically water sealing. I recently got back from a canoe trip on which we had rain every day but one. The 6D mark II and the L lenses were rock solid getting wet and often tossed (set down gently) on the wet shorelines as we portaged our equipment between numerous lakes. My other camera, a T7i, and lower grade lenses would not have survived. So the shots of moose, bear, and beautiful landscapes would not have been possible without the extra investment.
This Takes Me Back Marc.. I Started off with the Canon EOS1100D and absolutely Loved it. i think even now some of my Early Insta pics were Taken on and Posted Using that camera and a Basic Cheap Yongnuo 50mm Prime Lens.. As You Rightly Explain Its all about the Understanding of What kit you are using. And i definately agree with the latter part of this great video , the only reason i think i upgraded was just for build quality as a few extra AF Points.. Once again absolutely Top Comparison Video. 👌🏼 😊 📷
@@theschoolofphotography I know, and I think you got your point across really well. I love these kind of videos because I'm always harping on about how gear doesn't really matter. advances in technology means some entry level dslrs nowadays are better than some older pro cameras. But I liked this test, especially with the kit lens on the 1200D. It shows amateur/hobbyists just what can still be achieved.
Dave Arkanoid Gilbert But it would not be a cheap camera set-up anymore. Yes, spending more improves capabilities, but the point of the video is getting the most out of a small investment compared to spending the big bucks.
Why? The cheap camera is most likely to be used with a cheap lens, but a professional using a premium camera is most likely using a premium lens. This test reflects real world usage. The real limitations of the review is that is focuses on portraiture which is going to make the cheap camera look better in comparisons. Had he shot any action or events, the cheap camera would not fare so well due to processor and lens limitations. Image quality means nothing if you are missing the shots. Few people would spend the extra money just for sensor qualities, instead fps, buffer, faster lenses, more controls over exposure parameters, faster memory card slots, better video capabilities, etc etc are the sorts of things that mean that professionals must spend the dollars to be sure of getting the shots in the widest range of situations and job types. What this review does underline, is that in the less demanding world of the amateur, or in some professional situations, the sensor qualities are surprisingly close. For those that think the 1200D is a lot of money for a camera, they have a great camera for the money and can potentially get some fabulous photographs. שמעון צדקיהו יוסף/Ian Trolles
I started with a Rebel XS (1000D in Europe). It was a great starter camera. I've since moved up to a 60D (also APS-C) to take advantage of a the 18MP sensor (vs. 10 MP), more advanced focusing system, faster burst speed, and better ISO range. I now also own a full frame 6D, which I use alongside the 60D. I've given my 1000D to my niece to support her interest in photography. In the end, I believe the photographer's skill and knowledge of the limitations of the gear used and how to work with those limitations defines how well, or how poorly the results turn out. Good glass helps a great deal vs. junk glass. The camera body is probably of lesser importance. Photographers throughout the years have managed to produce stunning art without all the latest and greatest features of modern DSLRs and Mirrorless. That being said, I am interested in the features offered by the newer camera's that can potentially help with reducing how much time I work with the camera systems and allow me to focus more on the subject and composition.
Hi Marc, I really enjoyed that and have been looking forward to seeing it since you mentioned it. I had a funny feeling that would be the case and you’ve just proved it. As you say it really all depends on what you need a camera for but in a vast majority of cases nobody needs anything more. I think that spending more money on some good glass is a much better option for most photography needs. When I started last year it would have been so easy for me to spend a whole stack of money on a camera but couldn’t justify the expense so went middle of the road with an older model crop sensor camera bought on the grey market. I really couldn’t be happier with it. It’s very easy to caught up with buying gear, there is so much out there and the marketing is very clever. One of the reasons I signed up with TSOP in the first place was because I knew that I’d get a no nonsense unbiased education. Well done Marc 👍👍
This was a great comparison, thank you for the video, you've earned another subscriber! I will have to say, there was a marked improvement in the capabilities of each of my upgrades (Nikon shooter here) D3300 --> D7200 --> D500. There is one caveat that I have which was not highlighted in your video that made each upgrade well worth the money. I shoot a lot of sports where I require fast shutter speeds, fast Auto Focus and very often high ISOs. The number of missed shots because of acquiring focus when I want the shot now is dramatically less with the more expensive cameras. Each also has a higher FPS, which for me and my main focus is the different between a fast pitch softball or an ice hockey puck in the frame or not in the frame. Also because of the higher FPS, the buffer size on each is larger and that means less waiting for writes to the card to clear the buffer. Nothing like shooting a break away and a save at 2 FPS because your buffer is full from catching an open-ice body check that lead to the breakaway. The last thing that made these cameras worth the body upgrade was the low light performance (and in the case of the D7200 and D500 flicker reduction). I shoot many gyms where my ISO can go as high as 6400, even 8000 ISO. The D3300 cuts out at about ISO 3200, the D7200 goes to pot around ISO 4000, but the D500 delivers all the way through ISO 8000 consistently. Sure, at high ISOs they're all a little noisy, but well within an acceptable range to still qualify as a "good shot".
Got myself a second hand 7D. It performs way better then my old 40 D. And it will be al i need as long as i dont go pro. For lenses it’s a different story, more expensive is more quality. So i agree with the conclusion you made. Nice video, now i know for sure that my camera body does the job properly
Good lenses are more important then the camera body. That is why I like Canon and Nikon, you can get awesome used glass and get great results with the cheaper camera bodies.
What an excellent side by side comparison. If only more products were done with this degree of thoroughness. Also, the honesty factor here. Thanks for the video.
I had a Canon 600D, it was a good camera but when I tried shooting sports and wild life it was not fast enough so I changed to a Nikon D500. It has improved my "keeper "ratio 10 fold. Thanks for the videos and knowledge you share. Always relevant and useful.
You asked...my answer is....I shoot with a 1300D. Weekly and consistently. I have been asked consistently what brand, what lens and such do I use at these shows. Thank you for this video you just summed up my answer weekly to them all. A bigger and better camera does nothing for your shots if you can't shoot with whatever is placed in your hands to shoot with. Yes, I have a beautiful second hand lens. Is it an L lens...hehehe nope. But close. A 17-55mm 2.8 is what I use and can use any of the cheap lenses in my bag just like the big cameras use. Adjustments can be made by the 3 simple cheap lenses I have along with my precious lens the 17-55mm 2.8 lens, to get virtually any shot. I own 3 lenses for portrait and anything but macro. The 18-55mm and 75-300mm were my stock lenses for my package bought. I added the cheap 50mm 1.8 lens to that arsenal and my concert lens is the 17-55mm one I shoot with weekly. I have yet to upgrade, try or use a full frame camera yet. I guess I am just happy with whatever I use as knowledge for the equipment is where every shot lies. Period.
I liked to see how you composed the shots! Really nice and interesting how you used simplicity. I just have a Rebel sl2 that has rewarded me with some interesting pics but I have been frustrated on some street shots when I want to use continuous shooting mode: buffer fills up in no time and I’m stuck. Rrrrrrrrr
Thanks so much for this video. As a newbie to DSLR cameras I have learned a lot just from watching this video. Will definitely consider the online course. 😊👍
I have the Canon T6 (sold as the 1300D elsewhere) and am very happy with it. In my opinion unless you need the higher continuous speed and similar features of the high-end you are far better off going with a less expensive body and investing the difference in additional lenses (such as the 50mm f1.8 he spoke of) that will give you added versatility.
Great video, I have found similar results depending on conditions. I often grab my old 12mp D90 instead of the new D850 because it's light and easier to handle, knowing that for the most part, depending on conditions, I can't tell the difference - especially with using some of the new AI post processing programs in conjunction with Lightroom (such as Topaz DeNoise and Sharpen). That said, the expensive D850 is better in low light, has illuminated buttons that are a pleasure to use during night photography, has a much better focusing system for shooting action, has wifi, dual memory cards, twice the high speed frame rate and can be cropped significantly more due to it's far higher pixel density. So, the expensive kit does bring some advantages, especially under certain shooting conditions, however, outside those I can't tell the difference between the D90 and D850 when looking at a screen!
For cameras, all the features in are all made for letting sensor getting quality shots, well it’s more about the sensor after all, like you’re getting from 75 to probs 90, I do agree the glasses are the importance’s tho
True, knowledge makes the shot. Although, if I'm interested in stock photo sales, most agencies only accept full format. The expensive camera is more durable but it's also heavier.
Well done comparison. I picked up an open box A7R2 for the resolution but even then, I might have done as well with a lesser solution. Better lenses though are still a must in many situations.
I loved the comparison. I remember being given a hand-me-down Minolta X-700 which I loved to bits and about 10yrs later bought the auto-focus Minolta 7xi I gave the 7Xi to my wife as I loved the way I knew my way around the X-700, and as always, it's the choosing and getting the shot - not the camera with bells and whistles. I still love the look and feel of my old X-700 I have a sturdy Olympus E-330 (another hand me down) that takes time to set up, and I've found too heavy to have as a first choice for a quick snapping! I also have a Nikon P6000 that still gives me some of the fun and experimental ability that I love from a compact that's 13.5MP and still fits in my pocket. Thank you for sharing. I thought your video was excellent! I look forward to your future posts!
Interesting comparison. I had a feeling it would give these results. I have a Canon 600D which I bought new years ago. I post my photos on Facebook and occasionally, Instagram. I have lost count of the number of times folk have said "you must have a good camera". Yes, it is a good entry level camera. I have no intention of upgrading and will keep using this camera until either it or I give up the ghost.
Really enjoyed this video Marc. Best common sense about this subject on RUclips... You pays your money, you takes your pick. I've been thinking about this for a while now, as I'm considering upgrading my gear. I'm thinking now, buy an older, secondhand top end camera body and invest in decent lenses. Seems the best route to go without busting the bank and trying to keep up with "so called" ( Mirrorless ) tech improvements...
I got a decent second hand Canon 6D. Get some nice EF lenses (much choice and affordable) and you are gold. And for the future, if you got EF you don't have to worry. All brands have mount rings. First lens i got is the Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 (make sure it's a G2, the older lenses are not on the same level), and it's great!
To take a good picture you have to learn to see first. It does not matter what camera you got its the person pressing the button that matters and they are priceless.
I just bought the Canon 6d second hand and 24-105L and 50mm prime lens. I have swapped from Pentax K5 and K-x. I am loving the canon. The shots before photoshop are great!
Awesome article, thanks a LOT for it. The one thing is very true - no matter of camera, it is brain and eye of photographer, which making majority of difference. Spending fortune for equipment does not create good photographer from poor one, indeed. On the other hand, more expensive equipment give you opportunity to go further and beyond limits of cheap stuff, plus give you wider room for later postprocessing. -------------------- Sony A350 (recently upgraded to A65V) with Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and Sigma 50-500 f4.5-6.3
This is a really helpful video, split toning, masking, etc, and this ( I hope) will really help improve my approach to my photo's with things that I did not know about, definately a deeper understanding of Photography expectations of today, great free tutorial, Thanks Marc.
Before I clicked 'start', I knew what the outcome would be. Great review. I guess the newer models add functionality. I would say that the lens makes the big differences?
Bloody gem of a channel. Just subbed to it. Good to see some real honest information regarding this subject 2 years back I started a small business and invested in a G80 with a couple of lenses for stock photography I did not know what I needed or how to use any of the equipment at the time 2 years on, I am realising that the 12MP of the G80 and the mirror less form factor is not the best for stock photography that requires at times nice close ups. A huge function I need is wired tethering something that Lumix does not offer for my model I need to now invest in a new setup that allows for wired tethering has a flip out screen and will be good for stock photography mostly white backgrounds Any ideas?
Hi thanks for the comments and glad to have you on board. As for tethering, most modern cameras allow that now, so maybe just upgrade your body. There's so many models that do it, it's hard to pin down just one as it will be what suits you. If you can, go into a camera store and have a play with a few. Thanks 👍
@@theschoolofphotography Hi and thanks for the response. I managed to find a list of Lightroom Compatible cameras and you might be suprised to know that this list is not as extensive as one might believe. In fact, I would say be wary if you need this function I was about to invest in the 200D canon but discovered that's not supported But thanks again
Good job, thanks for pointing out how important are skills compared to equipment in most situations! Still, there are some cases where you need somehow more expensive equipment to do the job (or make it easier). I'm thinking of sports, landscape and night photography for example
I have a 7D and a 5D Mk III and the difference between the two cameras is very noticeable, and that's when using the same 24 - 105 L lens. there is a lot more criteria to throw in to the mix other than what has been discussed in the video (not a criticism by the way :-). It's a very interesting subject, and like others have hinted, it makes far more sense to buy the best lenses first and then upgrade the camera afterwards. Having said that, it you can afford it, buy the best. Cameras are rather like guitars (my other love in life). If you are a good player, you can make a cheap guitar sound good, especially to the untrained ear, but use an expensive Strat, or Les Paul etc, and it ices the cake. An expensive guitar feels and sounds better and therefore inspires you to play better. An expensive camera inspires you to get out and use it.
Good video and very true. I have a 7D and a 650D. The image quality (using the same lens) is identical, but the 650D is smaller, lighter and just as fast in practice. For what it's worth, I did a successful LRPS panel some years ago using a 300D (currently available in Exc condition secondhand for £59). Better lenses do make a difference, but mid-price Canons (eg. the 18-135) are fine for up to A2 prints.
But they are both not full fream. As a wedding photographer I can tell you, that cameras metter. You could never do wedding photos with a 7D or 650D that look as good as with a 5D.
Another great video Marc, have you ever thought about doing a video on the process of putting your photos to print and frame, as i feel this is a whole lesson in itself.
Thanks, glad you liked it. We have a video here ruclips.net/video/OGn3yPl59ZM/видео.html were we print the work for an exhibition. Hope that's what you mean. 👍
I'll check that out later as I'm going to be using a website to print my very first photo into a frame, i've ordered paper samples and I'm now just waiting for them to arrive.
ive got some fairly expensive gear (5D IV and 3 lenses)after my 600d , not so much improved photos just made it much easier and generally more enjoyable
@@distomos8118 like low light auto focus..... Just snaps on. Rather than endless hunting. Or the auto focus in general. The battery life. Low light performance The flippy screen on the 600d was nice but get by that with using phone as remote The lenses are a tad heavy but you get used to it.
Bazz p Hmm... Thanks for replying! Well, in some issues concerning the AF I’d speculate that the lenses you had on your DX weren’t that good. Can’t say much about the camera, as I’m a Nikon user, but maybe it wasn’t good at AF either. That also would explain the bad battery life. Hunting drains a battery. I was thinking to upgrade to FX, but I refrained. (The main reason I watched this clip.) Good lenses are way to expensive. I’m staying with my 6 year old D7100. I recently bought a Sigma 50-100 mm f/1.8 and that did improve low light performance at longer focal lenghts. I might get a D500, which is DX format, since the other is aging, but I’ll stay DX as long as it works for me and we see what all this DLSM-Hype is getting us to.
@@distomos8118 16-35 f2.8ii 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 Just found I ended up going with manual focus if the light went down a bit A lot of the features on the 5d iv aren't a need. But defo nice to have. Like a bulb timer for long exposures although there's magic lantern :) I could have stuck with the 600d but one came up pretty cheap new
@@kapwakomahalko7 Buy something from "ten" series example 70D/80D. I have had 5D Mark IV since launch and I have been happy with it (My photos: photography.petrilopia.net ) sadly I could get most of those photos example with 80D too.
depend what photos you want to take, if your camera does not had he capability to shot fast action photos then however great skills you had became useless because your camera or lens does not have the capability to capture the fast action. like prime zoom lens 200 mm f/ 2.8 pretty heavy and big size . and camera can had very burst speed at least 6 fps or more to get the shots.
hi i have a canon 1300 D with a Tamron 75 to 300 mm lens im into airshows and on a extremely tight budget i would love a 150 to 600 mm Sigma but unable to afford just yet cant i get away with a 2x convertor i go to Bournemouth and Biggin Hill and suggestions will be great
I was limited to a Sigma 75-200 f2.8 and a matched 2x teleconverter for many years. It produced some surprisingly good photos when the lighting was favorable. I take it your Tamron is limited to f4. You may find it challenging to focus, especially on auto, and will be forced to use a high ISO, which will add more noise. But, better to shoot with what you have than to not shoot at all. I now own a Tamron 150-600 G2 and it definitely takes better photos than the Sigma with the 2x while providing considerably longer reach. So, it was a great investment for me. I have a friend with a Sigma 150-600 Sport. I'd say the image quality is similar to what I get. The Sigma is build like a tank, but you have to be comfortable lugging around a heavier and bulkier lens. Sigma makes the lighter Contemporary as well, but it is not weather sealed like the Tamron G2. For me, the Tamron was the best compromise because I shoot in rain, dust, salt air and sandy places but am pretty careful not to bang it around. If you won't use the lens out in bad conditions, the Contemporary will save you some money. If your lens needs to survive rough treatment, you might be better off with the Sport. If you don't already have a tele converter and are not ready to buy the longer lens, most people say a 1.4x is a better option (less light penalty and sharper pictures) than a 2X, but only have the 2X so I can't confirm.
Thanks Victor glad you liked. The editing is explained more in the video but in a nutshell they were processed pretty much exactly the same in Lightroom. Hope that helps 😊
I upgraded from a 600D to a 7DMKII, mainly because it works faster, the second scroll wheel and, but that's personal, the better grip. I noticed a slight difference in my pictures, mainly in low light situations. But honestly... If a family member would ask for advice, I'll tell them to buy the 1000+/100+ series to start with. I had a look at the 5DMKIV, but with two f 2,8 lenses, wich I love to use, but are ef-s only, the choice was easy. Love this movie anyway.
Cheap body, better lenses for hobbyist photographers, surely? Should you ever get to a point where you would consider taking photography up as a career, in this incredibly crowded field (good luck), then you can look at a better camera body. I've seen photographers take better pictures with an iPhone, than someone with a 5D and and L series lens - why? Simple really, they are better photographers. Some people are instinctive, they know how to frame a shot, they know how to see opportunities, how to work with light. A while back, I took a city and guilds photography course which was an eye opener in many ways. I never forget a bloke called colin, with his flash sports car and his top of the range kit, who was completely incapable of taking a good photograph. Every single photo he took was as dull as ditchwater, because he thought the kit was where it was at. It's exactly the same as an amateur guitarist who shells out £5000 on a guitar and an amp, but can be outplayed and outclassed by someone on a £100 guitar. Whilst I no longer actively pursue photography as a hobby, what I learned over the 6 or 7 years I was having fun with it, if you can master light and composition, you can take a photo on a £5 disposable film camera to rival someone flashing their £5k of kit about like a total knob. Light and Composition - and the moment. If you can master those three aspects, all the other technical details can be filled in later, because quite simply, those three things are a black art - you've either get it or you don't. There ARE people with a natural ability, but like most things, the skills can be learned. It takes a very long time and requires an exceptional amount of patience. My other half has natural ability - she's not too hot on the technical details, but she can do a great wedding or event shoot. She does it part time for fun. One of the underestimated skills she has is an ability to work with people, to bring them to life in a photograph - this is an aspect of photography which I fail at, because I'm not a big 'people person' . Once again, with something like wedding photography, it's not so much the kit, it's the way you work the people - get them into a composition, get them into the right kind of light, get them at ease, natural. Being able to spot those little things that can ruin a shot, like background details - that ugly 'exit' sign you never noticed, right behind the head of the bride, in an otherwise perfect shot. THOSE skills. That is where it's at. I challenge any amateur photographer starting out who really wants to improve, to get the most basic of cameras and learn about light, composition, depth of field and the moment before they go any further. Learn the basics. These basics are actually surprisingly difficult to bring together into a cohesive whole. Working with light requires so much experience. If you don't get these basics down, you could end up wasting thousands of pounds for absolutely no reason, because that kit will not make you better right away. It's that simple.
I feel my Canon M5, with native lenses, gives me beautiful images. I can print them at 11x17, 360 dpi, and they look great. I will admit I use noise reduction software along with lighting, sharpening and contrast settings specially set for inkjet printing. The lighting, sharpening and contrast settings will vary depending on what kind of output is needed. Great video as always. Thanks.
Got my 1200D back in 2014, great camera in most situations but the max of 3 successive shots can be a killer in wildlife and sports photography. That had me buying an 80D just recently.
I dig what you're doing. Still using a 5D (the Mark I), bought well used and cheap, and three modest primes (all used and cheap enough). Still getting decent results and enjoying myself without all the GAS stress of the current market. Cheers
@@hachewie Very good choice. A lot of very competent people produced a lot of very, very good photos with these "old" cameras... no reason it can't be done today... we are what can make a difference behind these cameras, not the friggin' specs touted by savage marketing. Cheers
In the first shot I don't think I would have awarded equal performance. There is visibly more noise on the 1200D which can be seen in the blacks on the image. Look at the jeans, for example. Still, would I say there is £3,650 of improvement in the better camera? From a personal point of view, because I am nothing more than a novice photographer, I'd say absolutely not. But for a professional shoot, if this was going into a print for example, I'd say yes.
A breath of fresh air to me this. Limited budget and an old pentax mx and a couple of cheap lenses to get me into the digital world had me worried. No longer. Thank you!
I started off with an entry level Nikon, after 2 years I've moved on to a mid range Nikon. My pictures are only better because of experience. The upgrade in kit is just better to use,, like for autofocus etc.
If you shoot a cat, even a very expensive camera just can't turn it into a dog. But TIME is the most precious resource of our life - don't waste it for some "cheap" works.
I notice on the 2nd shot that the histograms are swayed heavily towards blacks. Would it be possible to get a £3800 vs. £150 comparison with a tri-pod included so that we can trade out some shutter speed? Or maybe a different style of shoot?
I've still got one of the two Minolta XE7's which were the forerunners of the whole "7" series. Best 35mm body I've ever owned and I've got a Nikon D750 in the closet.
I think i will be sticking with my Nikon D5500, Its nice and light for one thing, You can carry it in hand all day at airshows etc with no fatigue, And if i was to go full frame i would have to buy all my lens's again not to mention they are more expensive and heavy as well.
Great video, very thought provoking. I shoot a high end Nikon crop sensor camera. Good glass is cheaper than full frame and I don’t hesitate to buy refurbished to get better stuff. I learned photography with a 35mm Pentax Spotmatic and a 50mm kit lens because that was all I could afford in High School. The tools we have now are vastly superior but I had a ton of fun with that Spotmatic. Get out there and shoot what you have and don’t ever apologize for your equipment!
Hi new to your channel. I use a Canon1300d and an old Canon120sx, and the results, for me are just stunning. Cheaper dslrs are usually underestimated, but hey, we can't all afford silly money for our photographic adventures, praise to Canon and Nikon for producing reasonably priced dslrs. Great video by the way.
Good video...Would have been even more interesting putting the original 5D Mark 1 which is around 300 ebay US against the 5D Mark 1V..and using the same lens.
I've been stunned by the quality of the pictures from the latest iPhone and as I carry it with me everyday when I'm out and about it's the most likely camera I will use. I have Nikon with good glass but the camera is heavy and bulky so I have been using a Fujifilm X100T for street photography and I like the colour science with Fuji. I shoot RAW and JPEG and process in a limited fashion with "Photos". Maybe trading in older camera bodies is the answer?
This is a great comparison. I am always looking at new cameras, mirrorless and DSLR and wondering about investing in something new, but most new cameras are really expensive. I own a Nikon D90 which is about eleven years old, in the last few years its age alone made me lose interest in using it, it tended to just use my smartphone instead. Recently I picked it up and was really impressed with the quality of shots, so much so that I am now using it regularly again, I love it. I now photograph mainly in RAW and process in Lightroom, the D90 still produces some awesome quality when used in the right way - which is the same for newer models.
@@MultiRay67 bullshit. As much as you all wish that it's the same Shooting with a cheap camera and a pro camera, it's not. The cheap DSLR are good, but there is a reason wedding photographers don't use them.
I have a Canon M50 and while I am still learning, I don't know why I would need anything else. This video really proves it's your knowledge, not your equipment. Thanks so much! This was awesome!
Thanks so much Marc, I have the Canon 1200d with the stock lens and this video inspired me to not worry so much about the techs specs... just to improve my skills with the limitations.
I've got a 1200d and a few lenses 50mm, 10-18mm, 70-300mm and yet the kit lens is still my favourite. I can't believe your down to earth honesty, I'm so used to watching videos with camera snobs telling me that the kit lens is pretty much worthless. You just earned a subscriber my good man. I'm feeling quite proud of my little 1200d atm.... Great job!
Thanks Justin, good to have you on board and thanks for sharing your thoughts 😊👍
@@theschoolofphotography yep you are completely correct.. kit lens is my favourite too.....
The answer to your question is it worth spending the extra money on a expensive camera, no it is not, the only difference is you may have to nurse the cheaper camera against rough handling and maybe take extra care if you are shooting in poor weather (rain).......I love my so called cheap camera, but I do have a expensive camera as well which I have owned for 6 years and is well behind the latest specs, I shall never buy another camera but I may just buy another lens.....I loved your closing statement its one I have said many times, if you cant take good pictures with a cheap camera you will never take any with a expensive camera, the other saying I use is, if you cant take good pictures in your own back garden you will never take one anywhere else......thank you for the test.....
You're welcome and thanks for sharing your thoughts with our audience 👍
Its refreshing to hear/see such honesty ... Great vid 👍
Thanks Chris, glad you liked it 😊
The camera manufacturers do not like these kinds of videos. Awesome job here, and I agree with you 100%
Thanks Gian, glad you liked it 👍
@@theschoolofphotography if you are well prepared with plenty of speedlites or larger battery powered mobile flashes, you should be able to get wall to wall detail with a crop sensored camera in 1 shot with F8!or do some multiple shots that can be stitched together in photoshop!but the budget cameras cant shoot high speed sync properly!
I broke a few plasticy cameras usally within a year before getting a magnesium metal body weather sealed one,.,, a good body will last 5-10 years easy...
maby im just clumsy,, but for me getting a proper camera seems like the better option (not for 3800 thou, thats insane ,, but spending 1K isnt that bad considering what you get and how long you can use it )
@@TheKlingis Most people also break the screens on their smartphones... I keep mine for years with no protection and never cracked a screen. I hate making my phone more bulky if I don't have to. It just depends how careful you are with your things. A camera at least has a nifty strap if you're handling it with fallible human hands, or it's hooked to the tripod.
its not just dropping them, usally the cheapest dslr have little or no weather protection.. all it takes is some moderate rain drizzle and camera might go loco :/
I myself have started with a 1300D back in January 2017 to test out the waters of photography on a budget and to see how I enjoy it. I have a lot of great images from that camera. I used the 18-135 IS STM kit lens for an entire year before I bought any other lens.
Since about July 2018 I own an 80D and I dont plan to go anywhere else for another several years. I got it on sale with free 50mm 1.8 which made it a good bargain since I planned to get it for christmas anyway (and christmas sale did not include the lens, so I got lucky).
Having a higher end body improves the shooting experience considerably with button placement, and other functions but does not make one a better photographer in and of itself. It requires more practice with the added functions which can be intimidating for a new shooter.
I got the 80D for a couple of reasons:
1) Number of focus points - I enjoy the flexibility and accuracy of the 45 all cross-type points over the 9 with just center cross-type.
2)DualPixel AF in live view - I plan to dabble in videography later so this was an essential thing and it also helps greatly when taking shots through LV.
3)Flip screen with touch control - taking pictures through LV from any angle is a breeze with a fully articulating screen where you can pick a focus point with a finger and use an electronic level.
Hi, thanks for taking the time to share your experience with our audience, really appreciate it 👍
You're completely right and the gap between quality and functionality can be even narrower if you buy an old pro body camera, such as the Nikon D3(s) with a 35-70 2.8 non-motorized focus zoom. You'll spend roughly 800 dollars and you'll get usable full frame depth of field, 6400 usable iso, 9-10 FPS, a large battery, and a weather sealed body, among other advantages. You can't go wrong with that. RUclips is filled with review channels, most of them secretly paid by manufacturers to make people change their gear.
Thanks Boris for taking time to post this and share your experiences, really appreciate it 👍
As Barry says, a good lens is the right investment. I highly appreciate your time showing it to the world.
I started learning photography in 1985 with a book "35 mm photography" That book had the same conclusion as you have. Those days I had to get it printed to see the result, note the exposure when taking pictures.
Thanks Vimal. appriciate the comments 😊👍
Thank you so much for doing this in depth study/ comparison - I got my first DSLR camera in Feb 2018 - as it happens the newer Canon 1300D which replaced the 1200D - I am really enjoying my photographic skills journey with this entry level but nonetheless very capable camera and have taken some pretty good shots with it - I've successfully shot a wedding, done a reasonable job of a new born shoot and to my great surprise and delight have sold several of my landscape (landscape photography is my real passion) photos on large format canvas and have some exhibited in a gallery and some in the rooms of a local hotel - all done with this modest camera. I still have a lot to learn but so agree that its all about first having an eye for the shot teamed with knowledge and knowing your camera rather than spending thousands and thousands on super kit which is nice to have rather than necessary to have! You've confirmed to me given the types of photos I enjoy taking, that I should continue my learning curve with my 1300D and spend any spare money I might have on photography destinations and spend my time getting to know and best of all using my camera.
Hi Isobel, thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences with our audience here, really appreciate it 👍
I just stumbled onto your channel and wow. So informative. I'm a fresh user of an eos2000d and it actually is very encouraging what one can do with an entry level camera. I think I'll be your regular viewer now. Keep up the good work.
Thanks Krysztof, glad to have you on board 👍
My equipement is a 700d with 3 prime lenses, 35,50 and 85. That is more than enough. Thank You for this video, It saved me a lot of money. I do not lomgert think about a fullframe
Thanks Jack, glad to help 👍
I totally agree with your verdict. People are always amazed with the pictures I take on my iPhone and think they are from a DSLR, but the equipment is really not that important.
Same reason I haven't upgraded my Canon 5D mk II. It's still an awesome camera many years later :)
Thanks, appreciate the comments 👍
I have seen a difference in low light and dynamic range, as well as auto focus possibilities allows to catch right moment and more shallow depth of field for portraits. Also there is more difference shooting video. I agree - the difference is not critical, but makes your life as a photographer - easier.
Thanks for your helpful video. Recently I bought my 800d and I'm very happy with it. I'm not a professional photographer. I just like to photograph the beautiful moments for me. This cheaper one is so good to me. I never approach the expensive market. This cheap photography satisfies all my needs. Thanks for your in depth comparison video
Thanks for the comments and glad you liked the video 👍
For my genre (astrophotography) it's a bit more important because of the signal to noise ratios during long exposures, but generally I think the glass is way more important than the camera body.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, appreciate that 👍
Thank you so much for producing this Marc. I recently purchased a Canon EOS T7i 800d with a kit lens and then quickly added a "nifty fifty" F-1.8 prime lens (that's all I've got in my bag).
I had a big amazon wish list of "better" more expensive lenses and was beginning to get frustrated and a little disillusioned. But then I watched this and also "All the idea but no gear!" and it was like a light bulb switching on - the truth has indeed set me free! Since then, I've been out a couple of times on my days off work and took some shots, with my kit lens, that I'm quite pleased with. I'm enjoying my photography again and realising that I can do an awful lot with just my kit lens and I'm not going to get frustrated or think about the need to get more lenses. So, thank you soooo much bro. (From a former Essex guy now living in Scotland). God bless you.
Your welcome Andrew, glad its all going well. Really appreciate the comments😊
This is the best video on this subject I've seen, well worth the watch time. Thanks for making it 👍
You're welcome, glad it helped 👍😊
In a choice between a great camera and great light, choose light every time.
👍
I moved from a 600D (I still use it) to a full frame 6D and that low light ability of the 6D certainly makes a difference. I did a natural light photo-shoot in a house on a very dull foggy day and struggled with the 600D, lots of noise on the photos. I know with the 6D full frame would have made a big difference. I'm not knocking the 600D though it's an excellent camera I've used it for years and I've had thousands of great photos but certainly would not want to go back to the 600D on my photo-shoots unless I had no alternative. One other advantage of the 6D is it's weight. A heavier camera is much more stable when hand held and you can safely knock up the ISO together with the shutter speed for those speedy shots.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Keep the cheap camera and invest the savings in good lenses
Thanks for the comments Barry 👍
Yeah, I definitely see more variance in quality between the glass than the bodies.
Having said that, the upshot of having a full frame body is you have access to better glass without crop factors.
But if you have £200 to invest in becoming a better photographer, the best investments you could make is taking time off and split the time between being in the public library looking at great photography, art and design books and going out shooting.
As the saying goes, the music isn't in the piano.
Agree 100 percent
Perfectly right said!!!
@@kapwakomahalko7 So you want it both...the processor and the lenses almost free? I advice you Huwaei with Leica lenses. Like this...you had it a new phone and camera too :D
Yep agree!
Sometimes I take out the old Sony A6000 with the cheap Sigma lens at weddings and the couples love the images. We should look at photography more as an art rather than just gear talk subjects
Thanks, appreciate the comments 👍
Definitely
A very informative video, all new to photography people should watch this, it’s not the camera, we don’t take a photo, we make a photo, you explained the process perfectly
Thanks Paul, appreciate the comments 👍
Excellent in depth video with surprising results, a bit of an eye opener
Thanks for the comments Gary, glad you liked it 👍
Am using D700
With the lense that came with it originally 18-55 mm
.
And i use 100mm lense for my dental clinic pictures.
.
My question: what is the best lense that i can upgrade my camera to, for doing outdoor landscapes pictures and youtube movies clips ? Thank you
Thanks for watching. The list on that is endless. Just get the best you can for your budget.
Great video Marc as always very interesting results. Really enjoyed it 👍
Thanks Philip, glad you liked it and appreciate the comments 👍
What a fun video. Helps to know if I ever go down the ILC road, there’s a way to start without breaking the bank. I would love to see a similar comparison using a full frame vs a consumer bridge camera (I use an FZ1000) in the hands of a pro, and just what could be done... I find so little channels that acknowledge the hobbyist (on a budget) and really, half of camera sales and potential audience, are fixed lens types.
Hi Jonmicheael, thanks for sharing your thoughts and glad to help 👍
enjoyed watching this. great urban look with the model. I would love to see a similar comparison with a deep depth of field and landscape photography.
Thanks for the comments, glad you liked it 👍
knowledgable video, I just want to say a coming from the heart thank you! I have listened to every word you said, worth it!
Thanks Deo, glad to have you on board 👍
I have been jumping bits of this video so did not get where it might have stated that the 1200D has the kit lens fitted. Does it?
Great video and quite surprising! Your video proves what I've always suspected. I learned to shoot on a Olympus E420 for about 8 years. I recently bought a Canon 4000d and a couple of cheap lenses. I've always said that so many people have "all the gear and no idea" when it comes to photography.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Mike 👍
It's great, you show that you don't always need the latest camera to take great pictures. Only in difficult lighting conditions does the lens and camera show their advantages.
Thanks 👍
I got the 1200D over 6 years ago, maybe more than that, the camera was recently launched in market. I haven't seen the entire video but I have great respect for this entry level DSLR, i have used it extensively and even now i use it to take portraits and record short clips for my vlogs. The only reason i have reduced its use is stabilization but still a great camera.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Great video! Very interesting results. Really enjoyed watching 👍
Thanks, glad you liked it 👍
Interesting video - thanks for that. I've purchased one expensive lens from the outset (bought the Canon 800D body with a 17-55mm f2.8 lens). They shipped me the kit lens too and didn't want it back, so I've had a chance to compare the two side by side. For portraits and some close-up stuff I do prefer the 17-55mm lens as it is great for blurring out the background, so it does make some difference. For general shots in good light it makes no difference at all. When I go on vacation I'll be taking the kit lens as its lighter to be carrying around all day and I won't be as worried about damaging / losing it.
Thanks for the comments James, glad you liked it 👍
My 'go-to' portrait lens is the Canon 85mm f/1.8. Very shallow depth of field on that one. Great relatively inexpensive lens that works out to a 136mm equivalent on the APS-C bodies (800D et. al.). While I'd love to be able to acquire the Canon 135mm F/2L for my 6D, I am making do with a trio of primes. The other two being a Canon 40mm and a Samyang 14mm, both f/2.8.
My 60D get's the two zoom lenses currently in my arsenal. EF-S 10-16mm and EF-S 18-135mm.
That 17-55mm f/2.8 sounds like a great walk-about or street photography lens. I am waiting on delivery of a Tamron 28-105mm to add a zoom to my 6D.
I really enjoyed this! As a beginner I have the 1300d which is the slightly newer version of your cheap camera. I think it is a great camera to learn with and it's great to know that with practice I can get amazing results, without having to invest in pricey kit!
Thanks the comments Kate, glad the video helped you out 👍
1300d is a great little camera. i have the older 550d but they are comparible. i can tell you now that i have had my 550 for around 10 years now and still get great results. you made a good choice in camera. depending on what you are shooting i would recomend the ef-s 18-200 as a good starter lens. it goes for around 200 pounds on ebay and will totally enhance your ability to learn and develop your style. happy snapping
@@oscarmike47 Thank you! I will keep an eye out for that lens.
I've had the T5 (1200D). It is the camera that got me back into photography. I then got a 6D mark II and several L series lenses. There are just some shots I could not get with the slower consumer grade lenses and the crop sensor, especially in low light. There was also some chromatic aberration in the cheaper lenses. But, the T5 and those lenses still performed admirably in most situations.
The most important factor for justifying the expensive gear was the build quality, specifically water sealing. I recently got back from a canoe trip on which we had rain every day but one. The 6D mark II and the L lenses were rock solid getting wet and often tossed (set down gently) on the wet shorelines as we portaged our equipment between numerous lakes. My other camera, a T7i, and lower grade lenses would not have survived. So the shots of moose, bear, and beautiful landscapes would not have been possible without the extra investment.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with our audience, appreciate that 👍
This Takes Me Back Marc.. I Started off with the Canon EOS1100D and absolutely Loved it. i think even now some of my Early Insta pics were
Taken on and Posted Using that camera and a Basic Cheap Yongnuo 50mm Prime Lens.. As You Rightly Explain Its all about the
Understanding of What kit you are using. And i definately agree with the latter part of this great video , the only reason i think i upgraded was just for build quality
as a few extra AF Points..
Once again absolutely Top Comparison Video. 👌🏼 😊 📷
Thanks Bryan, appreciate the comments 👍
Had you have put the L series lens on the 1200D I feel they would have looked even more alike. Good video
Hi thanks for watching, that wasn't the point of the video.
@@theschoolofphotography I know, and I think you got your point across really well. I love these kind of videos because I'm always harping on about how gear doesn't really matter. advances in technology means some entry level dslrs nowadays are better than some older pro cameras. But I liked this test, especially with the kit lens on the 1200D. It shows amateur/hobbyists just what can still be achieved.
Dave Arkanoid Gilbert But it would not be a cheap camera set-up anymore. Yes, spending more improves capabilities, but the point of the video is getting the most out of a small investment compared to spending the big bucks.
@@artistjoh He could put a cheap 50mm in both cameras... Or a cheap lens on the expensive camera.
Why? The cheap camera is most likely to be used with a cheap lens, but a professional using a premium camera is most likely using a premium lens. This test reflects real world usage. The real limitations of the review is that is focuses on portraiture which is going to make the cheap camera look better in comparisons. Had he shot any action or events, the cheap camera would not fare so well due to processor and lens limitations. Image quality means nothing if you are missing the shots. Few people would spend the extra money just for sensor qualities, instead fps, buffer, faster lenses, more controls over exposure parameters, faster memory card slots, better video capabilities, etc etc are the sorts of things that mean that professionals must spend the dollars to be sure of getting the shots in the widest range of situations and job types. What this review does underline, is that in the less demanding world of the amateur, or in some professional situations, the sensor qualities are surprisingly close. For those that think the 1200D is a lot of money for a camera, they have a great camera for the money and can potentially get some fabulous photographs. שמעון צדקיהו יוסף/Ian Trolles
I started with a Rebel XS (1000D in Europe). It was a great starter camera. I've since moved up to a 60D (also APS-C) to take advantage of a the 18MP sensor (vs. 10 MP), more advanced focusing system, faster burst speed, and better ISO range. I now also own a full frame 6D, which I use alongside the 60D. I've given my 1000D to my niece to support her interest in photography.
In the end, I believe the photographer's skill and knowledge of the limitations of the gear used and how to work with those limitations defines how well, or how poorly the results turn out. Good glass helps a great deal vs. junk glass. The camera body is probably of lesser importance. Photographers throughout the years have managed to produce stunning art without all the latest and greatest features of modern DSLRs and Mirrorless.
That being said, I am interested in the features offered by the newer camera's that can potentially help with reducing how much time I work with the camera systems and allow me to focus more on the subject and composition.
Thanks for sharing your experience with our audience Micheal, really appreciate it 👍
Hi Marc, I really enjoyed that and have been looking forward to seeing it since you mentioned it. I had a funny feeling that would be the case and you’ve just proved it. As you say it really all depends on what you need a camera for but in a vast majority of cases nobody needs anything more. I think that spending more money on some good glass is a much better option for most photography needs. When I started last year it would have been so easy for me to spend a whole stack of money on a camera but couldn’t justify the expense so went middle of the road with an older model crop sensor camera bought on the grey market. I really couldn’t be happier with it. It’s very easy to caught up with buying gear, there is so much out there and the marketing is very clever. One of the reasons I signed up with TSOP in the first place was because I knew that I’d get a no nonsense unbiased education. Well done Marc 👍👍
Thanks Garry for taking time to post this and share your thoughts, really appreciate it 👍
This was a great comparison, thank you for the video, you've earned another subscriber! I will have to say, there was a marked improvement in the capabilities of each of my upgrades (Nikon shooter here) D3300 --> D7200 --> D500. There is one caveat that I have which was not highlighted in your video that made each upgrade well worth the money. I shoot a lot of sports where I require fast shutter speeds, fast Auto Focus and very often high ISOs. The number of missed shots because of acquiring focus when I want the shot now is dramatically less with the more expensive cameras. Each also has a higher FPS, which for me and my main focus is the different between a fast pitch softball or an ice hockey puck in the frame or not in the frame. Also because of the higher FPS, the buffer size on each is larger and that means less waiting for writes to the card to clear the buffer. Nothing like shooting a break away and a save at 2 FPS because your buffer is full from catching an open-ice body check that lead to the breakaway. The last thing that made these cameras worth the body upgrade was the low light performance (and in the case of the D7200 and D500 flicker reduction). I shoot many gyms where my ISO can go as high as 6400, even 8000 ISO. The D3300 cuts out at about ISO 3200, the D7200 goes to pot around ISO 4000, but the D500 delivers all the way through ISO 8000 consistently. Sure, at high ISOs they're all a little noisy, but well within an acceptable range to still qualify as a "good shot".
Thanks Paul, glad you liked it 👍
Got myself a second hand 7D. It performs way better then my old 40 D. And it will be al i need as long as i dont go pro. For lenses it’s a different story, more expensive is more quality. So i agree with the conclusion you made. Nice video, now i know for sure that my camera body does the job properly
Cheers Max, glad you liked it 👍
Good lenses are more important then the camera body.
That is why I like Canon and Nikon, you can get awesome used glass and get great results with the cheaper camera bodies.
Thanks for the comments
What an excellent side by side comparison. If only more products were done with this degree of thoroughness. Also, the honesty factor here. Thanks for the video.
Thank you!
I had a Canon 600D, it was a good camera but when I tried shooting sports and wild life it was not fast enough so I changed to a Nikon D500. It has improved my "keeper "ratio 10 fold. Thanks for the videos and knowledge you share. Always relevant and useful.
You're welcome glad you liked it and thanks for the comments 👍
You asked...my answer is....I shoot with a 1300D. Weekly and consistently. I have been asked consistently what brand, what lens and such do I use at these shows. Thank you for this video you just summed up my answer weekly to them all. A bigger and better camera does nothing for your shots if you can't shoot with whatever is placed in your hands to shoot with. Yes, I have a beautiful second hand lens. Is it an L lens...hehehe nope. But close. A 17-55mm 2.8 is what I use and can use any of the cheap lenses in my bag just like the big cameras use. Adjustments can be made by the 3 simple cheap lenses I have along with my precious lens the 17-55mm 2.8 lens, to get virtually any shot. I own 3 lenses for portrait and anything but macro. The 18-55mm and 75-300mm were my stock lenses for my package bought. I added the cheap 50mm 1.8 lens to that arsenal and my concert lens is the 17-55mm one I shoot with weekly. I have yet to upgrade, try or use a full frame camera yet. I guess I am just happy with whatever I use as knowledge for the equipment is where every shot lies. Period.
Thanks for sharing your experience, appreciate that 👍
I liked to see how you composed the shots! Really nice and interesting how you used simplicity. I just have a Rebel sl2 that has rewarded me with some interesting pics but I have been frustrated on some street shots when I want to use continuous shooting mode: buffer fills up in no time and I’m stuck. Rrrrrrrrr
Thanks for the comments Chris, glad you liked the video
Thanks so much for this video. As a newbie to DSLR cameras I have learned a lot just from watching this video. Will definitely consider the online course. 😊👍
Thanks Sheryl, we'll be glad to have you on board and pleased you got a lot from the video 👍
I have the Canon T6 (sold as the 1300D elsewhere) and am very happy with it. In my opinion unless you need the higher continuous speed and similar features of the high-end you are far better off going with a less expensive body and investing the difference in additional lenses (such as the 50mm f1.8 he spoke of) that will give you added versatility.
Thanks for sharing this 👍
Great video, I have found similar results depending on conditions. I often grab my old 12mp D90 instead of the new D850 because it's light and easier to handle, knowing that for the most part, depending on conditions, I can't tell the difference - especially with using some of the new AI post processing programs in conjunction with Lightroom (such as Topaz DeNoise and Sharpen). That said, the expensive D850 is better in low light, has illuminated buttons that are a pleasure to use during night photography, has a much better focusing system for shooting action, has wifi, dual memory cards, twice the high speed frame rate and can be cropped significantly more due to it's far higher pixel density. So, the expensive kit does bring some advantages, especially under certain shooting conditions, however, outside those I can't tell the difference between the D90 and D850 when looking at a screen!
Thanks for sharing your experience Robert, appreciate that 👍
For cameras, all the features in are all made for letting sensor getting quality shots, well it’s more about the sensor after all, like you’re getting from 75 to probs 90, I do agree the glasses are the importance’s tho
True, knowledge makes the shot. Although, if I'm interested in stock photo sales, most agencies only accept full format. The expensive camera is more durable but it's also heavier.
Thanks for the comments 😊
Well done comparison. I picked up an open box A7R2 for the resolution but even then, I might have done as well with a lesser solution. Better lenses though are still a must in many situations.
Hi, thanks for sharing your experience with our audience, really appreciate it 👍
I've got an old Canon 1100D and it's been bashed around all over the place and still takes pictures, albeit it's not in great shape.
👍
Very interesting. And revealing. I use a 700d and kit lenses. Also have a Tamron 18-200 lens. Feel reassured with whatever I possess. Thank you👍
You're welcome, glad you liked it 👍😊
Enjoyed this, keep up the good work!!
Thanks 👍
I loved the comparison. I remember being given a hand-me-down Minolta X-700 which I loved to bits and about 10yrs later bought the auto-focus Minolta 7xi
I gave the 7Xi to my wife as I loved the way I knew my way around the X-700, and as always, it's the choosing and getting the shot - not the camera with bells and whistles. I still love the look and feel of my old X-700
I have a sturdy Olympus E-330 (another hand me down) that takes time to set up, and I've found too heavy to have as a first choice for a quick snapping!
I also have a Nikon P6000 that still gives me some of the fun and experimental ability that I love from a compact that's 13.5MP and still fits in my pocket.
Thank you for sharing.
I thought your video was excellent!
I look forward to your future posts!
Thanks Leon, glad to have you on board 👍
Interesting comparison. I had a feeling it would give these results. I have a Canon 600D which I bought new years ago. I post my photos on Facebook and occasionally, Instagram. I have lost count of the number of times folk have said "you must have a good camera". Yes, it is a good entry level camera. I have no intention of upgrading and will keep using this camera until either it or I give up the ghost.
Thanks for your thoughts 👍
Really enjoyed this video Marc. Best common sense about this subject on RUclips... You pays your money, you takes your pick. I've been thinking about this for a while now, as I'm considering upgrading my gear. I'm thinking now, buy an older, secondhand top end camera body and invest in decent lenses. Seems the best route to go without busting the bank and trying to keep up with "so called" ( Mirrorless ) tech improvements...
Thanks Paul, glad you liked it and thanks for sharing your thoughts 👍
I got a decent second hand Canon 6D. Get some nice EF lenses (much choice and affordable) and you are gold. And for the future, if you got EF you don't have to worry. All brands have mount rings. First lens i got is the Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 (make sure it's a G2, the older lenses are not on the same level), and it's great!
Well done, finally one of the best insights why which camera.
Thanks Paul, glad you liked it 👍
To take a good picture you have to learn to see first. It does not matter what camera you got its the person pressing the button that matters and they are priceless.
Thanks Malcolm, appreciate the comments 👍
I just bought the Canon 6d second hand and 24-105L and 50mm prime lens. I have swapped from Pentax K5 and K-x. I am loving the canon. The shots before photoshop are great!
Thanks for sharing 👍
Awesome article, thanks a LOT for it. The one thing is very true - no matter of camera, it is brain and eye of photographer, which making majority of difference. Spending fortune for equipment does not create good photographer from poor one, indeed. On the other hand, more expensive equipment give you opportunity to go further and beyond limits of cheap stuff, plus give you wider room for later postprocessing.
--------------------
Sony A350 (recently upgraded to A65V) with Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and Sigma 50-500 f4.5-6.3
Thanks for sharing 👍
Great video and comparison on a valid subject ! I truly feel this covers 90% of camera requirements for the average photographer. Thank you.
Thanks Rodney, appreciate the comments 👍
This is a really helpful video, split toning, masking, etc, and this ( I hope) will really help improve my approach to my photo's with things that I did not know about, definately a deeper understanding of Photography expectations of today, great free tutorial, Thanks Marc.
👍
Before I clicked 'start', I knew what the outcome would be. Great review. I guess the newer models add functionality. I would say that the lens makes the big differences?
Thanks Howard, glad you liked it
Bloody gem of a channel.
Just subbed to it. Good to see some real honest information regarding this subject
2 years back I started a small business and invested in a G80 with a couple of lenses for stock photography
I did not know what I needed or how to use any of the equipment at the time
2 years on, I am realising that the 12MP of the G80 and the mirror less form factor is not the best for stock photography that requires at times nice close ups.
A huge function I need is wired tethering something that Lumix does not offer for my model
I need to now invest in a new setup that allows for wired tethering has a flip out screen and will be good for stock photography mostly white backgrounds
Any ideas?
Hi thanks for the comments and glad to have you on board. As for tethering, most modern cameras allow that now, so maybe just upgrade your body. There's so many models that do it, it's hard to pin down just one as it will be what suits you. If you can, go into a camera store and have a play with a few. Thanks 👍
@@theschoolofphotography Hi and thanks for the response.
I managed to find a list of Lightroom Compatible cameras and you might be suprised to know that this list is not as extensive as one might believe.
In fact, I would say be wary if you need this function
I was about to invest in the 200D canon but discovered that's not supported
But thanks again
Good job, thanks for pointing out how important are skills compared to equipment in most situations!
Still, there are some cases where you need somehow more expensive equipment to do the job (or make it easier). I'm thinking of sports, landscape and night photography for example
You're welcome, thanks for the comments 👍
Honest, accurate and VERY helpful. Thank you.
You're welcome Tony, glad you liked it 👍
I have a 7D and a 5D Mk III and the difference between the two cameras is very noticeable, and that's when using the same 24 - 105 L lens. there is a lot more criteria to throw in to the mix other than what has been discussed in the video (not a criticism by the way :-). It's a very interesting subject, and like others have hinted, it makes far more sense to buy the best lenses first and then upgrade the camera afterwards. Having said that, it you can afford it, buy the best. Cameras are rather like guitars (my other love in life). If you are a good player, you can make a cheap guitar sound good, especially to the untrained ear, but use an expensive Strat, or Les Paul etc, and it ices the cake. An expensive guitar feels and sounds better and therefore inspires you to play better. An expensive camera inspires you to get out and use it.
Good video and very true. I have a 7D and a 650D. The image quality (using the same lens) is identical, but the 650D is smaller, lighter and just as fast in practice. For what it's worth, I did a successful LRPS panel some years ago using a 300D (currently available in Exc condition secondhand for £59). Better lenses do make a difference, but mid-price Canons (eg. the 18-135) are fine for up to A2 prints.
Thanks Kevin, appreciate you sharing your thoughts with our audience. 👍
But they are both not full fream.
As a wedding photographer I can tell you, that cameras metter. You could never do wedding photos with a 7D or 650D that look as good as with a 5D.
thank you for this video! it was very interesting!
You're welcome 👍
Another great video Marc, have you ever thought about doing a video on the process of putting your photos to print and frame, as i feel this is a whole lesson in itself.
Thanks, glad you liked it. We have a video here ruclips.net/video/OGn3yPl59ZM/видео.html were we print the work for an exhibition. Hope that's what you mean. 👍
I'll check that out later as I'm going to be using a website to print my very first photo into a frame, i've ordered paper samples and I'm now just waiting for them to arrive.
ive got some fairly expensive gear (5D IV and 3 lenses)after my 600d , not so much improved photos just made it much easier and generally more enjoyable
Thanks for sharing Bazz, appreciate it 👍
Just curious: what is so much easier now..?
@@distomos8118 like low light auto focus..... Just snaps on.
Rather than endless hunting.
Or the auto focus in general.
The battery life.
Low light performance
The flippy screen on the 600d was nice but get by that with using phone as remote
The lenses are a tad heavy but you get used to it.
Bazz p Hmm... Thanks for replying! Well, in some issues concerning the AF I’d speculate that the lenses you had on your DX weren’t that good. Can’t say much about the camera, as I’m a Nikon user, but maybe it wasn’t good at AF either. That also would explain the bad battery life. Hunting drains a battery. I was thinking to upgrade to FX, but I refrained. (The main reason I watched this clip.) Good lenses are way to expensive. I’m staying with my 6 year old D7100. I recently bought a Sigma 50-100 mm f/1.8 and that did improve low light performance at longer focal lenghts. I might get a D500, which is DX format, since the other is aging, but I’ll stay DX as long as it works for me and we see what all this DLSM-Hype is getting us to.
@@distomos8118 16-35 f2.8ii 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8
Just found I ended up going with manual focus if the light went down a bit
A lot of the features on the 5d iv aren't a need. But defo nice to have. Like a bulb timer for long exposures although there's magic lantern :)
I could have stuck with the 600d but one came up pretty cheap new
Great photos are not taken by the camera. They're taken by the person behind the camera.
True words! 😊👍
@@theschoolofphotography But simplistic crap.
Not behind my camera thought =(
@@kapwakomahalko7 Buy something from "ten" series example 70D/80D. I have had 5D Mark IV since launch and I have been happy with it (My photos: photography.petrilopia.net ) sadly I could get most of those photos example with 80D too.
depend what photos you want to take, if your camera does not had he capability to shot fast action photos then however great skills you had became useless because your camera or lens does not have the capability to capture the fast action. like prime zoom lens 200 mm f/ 2.8 pretty heavy and big size . and camera can had very burst speed at least 6 fps or more to get the shots.
hi i have a canon 1300 D with a Tamron 75 to 300 mm lens im into airshows and on a extremely tight budget i would love a 150 to 600 mm Sigma but unable to afford just yet cant i get away with a 2x convertor i go to Bournemouth and Biggin Hill and suggestions will be great
I was limited to a Sigma 75-200 f2.8 and a matched 2x teleconverter for many years. It produced some surprisingly good photos when the lighting was favorable. I take it your Tamron is limited to f4. You may find it challenging to focus, especially on auto, and will be forced to use a high ISO, which will add more noise. But, better to shoot with what you have than to not shoot at all. I now own a Tamron 150-600 G2 and it definitely takes better photos than the Sigma with the 2x while providing considerably longer reach. So, it was a great investment for me. I have a friend with a Sigma 150-600 Sport. I'd say the image quality is similar to what I get. The Sigma is build like a tank, but you have to be comfortable lugging around a heavier and bulkier lens. Sigma makes the lighter Contemporary as well, but it is not weather sealed like the Tamron G2. For me, the Tamron was the best compromise because I shoot in rain, dust, salt air and sandy places but am pretty careful not to bang it around. If you won't use the lens out in bad conditions, the Contemporary will save you some money. If your lens needs to survive rough treatment, you might be better off with the Sport. If you don't already have a tele converter and are not ready to buy the longer lens, most people say a 1.4x is a better option (less light penalty and sharper pictures) than a 2X, but only have the 2X so I can't confirm.
Can you tell us how much editing you did in the photos?
Did you have to work more with the photos from the 1200?
Thanks for a great video.
Thanks Victor glad you liked. The editing is explained more in the video but in a nutshell they were processed pretty much exactly the same in Lightroom. Hope that helps 😊
I upgraded from a 600D to a 7DMKII, mainly because it works faster, the second scroll wheel and, but that's personal, the better grip. I noticed a slight difference in my pictures, mainly in low light situations. But honestly... If a family member would ask for advice, I'll tell them to buy the 1000+/100+ series to start with. I had a look at the 5DMKIV, but with two f 2,8 lenses, wich I love to use, but are ef-s only, the choice was easy. Love this movie anyway.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Cheap body, better lenses for hobbyist photographers, surely?
Should you ever get to a point where you would consider taking photography up as a career, in this incredibly crowded field (good luck), then you can look at a better camera body.
I've seen photographers take better pictures with an iPhone, than someone with a 5D and and L series lens - why?
Simple really, they are better photographers. Some people are instinctive, they know how to frame a shot, they know how to see opportunities, how to work with light.
A while back, I took a city and guilds photography course which was an eye opener in many ways.
I never forget a bloke called colin, with his flash sports car and his top of the range kit, who was completely incapable of taking a good photograph.
Every single photo he took was as dull as ditchwater, because he thought the kit was where it was at.
It's exactly the same as an amateur guitarist who shells out £5000 on a guitar and an amp, but can be outplayed and outclassed by someone on a £100 guitar.
Whilst I no longer actively pursue photography as a hobby, what I learned over the 6 or 7 years I was having fun with it, if you can master light and composition, you can take a photo on a £5 disposable film camera to rival someone flashing their £5k of kit about like a total knob.
Light and Composition - and the moment.
If you can master those three aspects, all the other technical details can be filled in later, because quite simply, those three things are a black art - you've either get it or you don't.
There ARE people with a natural ability, but like most things, the skills can be learned. It takes a very long time and requires an exceptional amount of patience.
My other half has natural ability - she's not too hot on the technical details, but she can do a great wedding or event shoot. She does it part time for fun.
One of the underestimated skills she has is an ability to work with people, to bring them to life in a photograph - this is an aspect of photography which I fail at, because I'm not a big 'people person' .
Once again, with something like wedding photography, it's not so much the kit, it's the way you work the people - get them into a composition, get them into the right kind of light, get them at ease, natural. Being able to spot those little things that can ruin a shot, like background details - that ugly 'exit' sign you never noticed, right behind the head of the bride, in an otherwise perfect shot.
THOSE skills. That is where it's at.
I challenge any amateur photographer starting out who really wants to improve, to get the most basic of cameras and learn about light, composition, depth of field and the moment before they go any further. Learn the basics. These basics are actually surprisingly difficult to bring together into a cohesive whole. Working with light requires so much experience.
If you don't get these basics down, you could end up wasting thousands of pounds for absolutely no reason, because that kit will not make you better right away. It's that simple.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with our audience 👍
I feel my Canon M5, with native lenses, gives me beautiful images. I can print them at 11x17, 360 dpi, and they look great. I will admit I use noise reduction software along with lighting, sharpening and contrast settings specially set for inkjet printing. The lighting, sharpening and contrast settings will vary depending on what kind of output is needed. Great video as always. Thanks.
You're welcome Mike, thanks for the comments 👍
Got my 1200D back in 2014, great camera in most situations but the max of 3 successive shots can be a killer in wildlife and sports photography. That had me buying an 80D just recently.
Thanks for the comments 👍
I dig what you're doing.
Still using a 5D (the Mark I), bought well used and cheap, and three modest primes (all used and cheap enough). Still getting decent results and enjoying myself without all the GAS stress of the current market.
Cheers
Thanks 👍
I just bought a Nikon D700. Love it.
@@hachewie Very good choice. A lot of very competent people produced a lot of very, very good photos with these "old" cameras... no reason it can't be done today... we are what can make a difference behind these cameras, not the friggin' specs touted by savage marketing.
Cheers
@@Semeyaza Thank you. I've got a lot to learn, and love learning it.
In the first shot I don't think I would have awarded equal performance. There is visibly more noise on the 1200D which can be seen in the blacks on the image. Look at the jeans, for example.
Still, would I say there is £3,650 of improvement in the better camera?
From a personal point of view, because I am nothing more than a novice photographer, I'd say absolutely not. But for a professional shoot, if this was going into a print for example, I'd say yes.
Thanks for sharing 👍
A breath of fresh air to me this. Limited budget and an old pentax mx and a couple of cheap lenses to get me into the digital world had me worried. No longer. Thank you!
Thanks for the comments 👍
Great video, unbiased and very informative. I would like the same comparison on landscape. Great Stuff.
Thanks, glad you liked it
I started off with an entry level Nikon, after 2 years I've moved on to a mid range Nikon. My pictures are only better because of experience. The upgrade in kit is just better to use,, like for autofocus etc.
Thanks for sharing Craig, appreciate it 👍
If you shoot a cat, even a very expensive camera just can't turn it into a dog.
But TIME is the most precious resource of our life - don't waste it for some "cheap" works.
Thanks for the comments.
WTF?
this is a great video, thanks man.
You're welcome 👍
I notice on the 2nd shot that the histograms are swayed heavily towards blacks. Would it be possible to get a £3800 vs. £150 comparison with a tri-pod included so that we can trade out some shutter speed? Or maybe a different style of shoot?
Last camera I used was a Minolta 7000 in the late 1980's still have it in it's case in the wardrobe.
Get it out and dust it off 👍😊
I've still got one of the two Minolta XE7's which were the forerunners of the whole "7" series. Best 35mm body I've ever owned and I've got a Nikon D750 in the closet.
I think i will be sticking with my Nikon D5500, Its nice and light for one thing, You can carry it in hand all day at airshows etc with no fatigue, And if i was to go full frame i would have to buy all my lens's again not to mention they are more expensive and heavy as well.
Thanks for sharing the John, appreciate it 👍
I carry around a d700 with those heavy lens around , it's not that heavy .
I couldn’t agree more. A crop sensor really keeps the cost and size of those big zooms down when you shoot airshows or even real birds!
@@dougg6467 yeah I agree as well
Great video, very thought provoking. I shoot a high end Nikon crop sensor camera. Good glass is cheaper than full frame and I don’t hesitate to buy refurbished to get better stuff. I learned photography with a 35mm Pentax Spotmatic and a 50mm kit lens because that was all I could afford in High School. The tools we have now are vastly superior but I had a ton of fun with that Spotmatic. Get out there and shoot what you have and don’t ever apologize for your equipment!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Doug, appreciate that 👍
Hi new to your channel. I use a Canon1300d and an old Canon120sx, and the results, for me are just stunning. Cheaper dslrs are usually underestimated, but hey, we can't all afford silly money for our photographic adventures, praise to Canon and Nikon for producing reasonably priced dslrs. Great video by the way.
Thanks for sharing Rob, appreciate that 👍
As a 1200d user, I'm rather pleased with this. Subbed!
Thanks, welcome aboard!
Good video...Would have been even more interesting putting the original 5D Mark 1 which is around 300 ebay US against the 5D Mark 1V..and using the same lens.
Thanks Jack 👍
@@theschoolofphotography ...I say that because I just bought one and I love the thing.!
I've been stunned by the quality of the pictures from the latest iPhone and as I carry it with me everyday when I'm out and about it's the most likely camera I will use. I have Nikon with good glass but the camera is heavy and bulky so I have been using a Fujifilm X100T for street photography and I like the colour science with Fuji. I shoot RAW and JPEG and process in a limited fashion with "Photos". Maybe trading in older camera bodies is the answer?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Simon, appreciate that 👍
This is a great comparison. I am always looking at new cameras, mirrorless and DSLR and wondering about investing in something new, but most new cameras are really expensive.
I own a Nikon D90 which is about eleven years old, in the last few years its age alone made me lose interest in using it, it tended to just use my smartphone instead. Recently I picked it up and was really impressed with the quality of shots, so much so that I am now using it regularly again, I love it.
I now photograph mainly in RAW and process in Lightroom, the D90 still produces some awesome quality when used in the right way - which is the same for newer models.
Thanks Richard, glad it helped 👍
Interesting video you have got a new subscriber !
Thanks, glad to have you on board 👍
You can get a used nifty 50 for £50 that would have made a massive difference in low light.
Then you don't see a different
@@MultiRay67 bullshit. As much as you all wish that it's the same Shooting with a cheap camera and a pro camera, it's not.
The cheap DSLR are good, but there is a reason wedding photographers don't use them.
I have a Canon M50 and while I am still learning, I don't know why I would need anything else. This video really proves it's your knowledge, not your equipment. Thanks so much! This was awesome!
Thanks so much Marc, I have the Canon 1200d with the stock lens and this video inspired me to not worry so much about the techs specs... just to improve my skills with the limitations.