[condor]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

.. looked around but could not find a suitable Mirrorless at reasonable price. .. I was willing to pay up to 10% more, but had no luck.

The Sony A6000 with Kit Lens(es) was quite close to the D5500 +10% .. ?

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by condor

+1.

IMO, a mirrorless with kit lenses would be sufficient for general / family/ travel photography. Macro's too. But when it comes to wildlife / birding etc, or anything that needs more than 300 mm of focal length, then I would be looking at CaNikon. It is not about the capability of the mirrorless systems, but the big advantage of compactness , and also the balance of body vs lens
would be lost.

Originally Posted by Aroy

If you need long Telephoto Lenses, then it makes sense to buy DSLR rather than a mirrorless. The long lenses weigh upwards of 2kg and in many cases longer focal lengths are not available for mirror less.

For street photography a mirrorless that blends in with your shirt/coat colour is what most of my friends use.

+1. Mirrorless is as good as a DSLR, and far more portable, for any genre that doesn't require long lenses (or a fast telezoom such as 70-200mm), and very sophisticated auto focus. Mirrorless is ideal for street.

You decide on the budget, and then do some research on sites such as DPReview, which have a number of buying guides for various budgets.

Buy one generation older (e.g. Sony a6000 than Sony a6300) , you will get a very good deal.

[JLS]

I know suggesting a bridge camera on a DSLR forum will be a sacrilege, but couldn't resist.

New crop of 1 inch sensor camera look very interesting, and I found FZ1000 from Panasonic quite impressive with 1 inch sensor, 25-400 equivalent zoom and bunch of other features.
May fit requirements of light-weight(relatively of-course) setup for birding - for not-so demanding souls.

May want to check out here - not too costly at close to 50K INR.
http://www.amazon.in/Panasonic-DMC-F...nasonic+fz1000

Also check the review here
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pan...ix-dmc-fz1000/

Regards,
JLS

[the_skyliner]

Can someone please suggest a good Nikkor lens for portrait photography? Budget is around 25-30k.

[condor]

Originally Posted by the_skyliner

Can someone please suggest a good Nikkor lens for portrait photography? Budget is around 25-30k.

The Nikon 50mm f1.8 G is a Sharp lens. Alternately, the Nikkor 85mm f1.8

[HydroFuel]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Well folks I bought by Nikon D5500 less than six months ago. I looked around but could not find a suitable Mirrorless at reasonable price. They were mostly my old favorite Olympus, but mighty costly. I was willing to pay up to 10% more, but had no luck.

Can you please share your experience with Nikon D5500? I have almost decided on this model. Which lense are you using? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it? How is your experience with touch focus? I may go with 18-140 lense.

Originally Posted by ampere

They have come a long long way. Surely not infancy. Ask Samurai. He uses the a fantastic Olympus. I also have a Sony 6000 + 16-50 and a 50mm. If you look at DXO mark ratings for 6000+50mm, they are right up there. Plus with the compactness, they are a brilliant buy.

Can you please share your experience of Sony 6000? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it? Did you anytime feel need of longer zoom lense say 18-140 or 55-200?

[condor]

Originally Posted by HydroFuel

Can you please share your experience with Nikon D5500? I have almost decided on this model. Which lense are you using? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it?

Can you please share your experience of Sony 6000? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it?

@Hydrofuel, I suggest that the focus be on your requirements than what gear @SG sir or @Ampere have , and what they shoot.

From your post - esp mention of the 18-140, I think you are going to do general photography. If yes, then the D5500 + 18-140 would be quite sufficient.

Having said that, both D5500 & the A6000 are good camera's for their intended use. The A6000 would be more compact. If you dont mind spending a little more, then the A6000 ..

I myself have a D5200, and am able to do my shooting. For what I shoot, the longest zoom I have is 200 mm on the 55-200 VR-II. Fair results so far.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by HydroFuel

Can you please share your experience with Nikon D5500?

Can you please share your experience of Sony 6000? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it? Did you anytime feel need of longer zoom lense say 18-140 or 55-200?

Assuming you know the basic differences between a mirrorless and a dslr, and the pros and cons (e.g. size advantage of a mirrorless vs cost advantage of DSLRs) it helps to do one's own research. Especially when you are making a big investment decision.

Basic Q is what do you shoot? OR would like to shoot? If you are wondering about 200mm, and not clear, then perhaps a mirrorless makes a lot more sense, since it is as good as a DSLR for non-long lens shooting scenarios.

The D5500 sensor is very nice. Better than the a6000 sensor. Rest, depends on your use cases and budget.

https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Niko...g-noise-and-DR

Edit:

The first one you can get with any decent mirrorless. The last two would be very difficult. #2 because of autofocus, and #3 because of reach.







Edit 2: this one might be difficult with mirrorless, because of extreme shallow depth of field and lack of cost effective fast lenses. But many people don't like such photos.

[sairamboko]

Thanks everyone for your suggestions! Ordered the canon Eos 1300d for ₹20,449. It fits my budget and requirements. Thanks again everyone for your suggestions!

[ampere]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Edit 2: this one might be difficult with mirrorless, because of extreme shallow depth of field and lack of cost effective fast lenses. But many people don't like such photos.

The Sony 50mm 1.8 is superb and comes under 20K. DXO Mark Rating
(Even I was stunned at the performance.)


But yes its still a 50mm. If one needs some thing like a 24-70, then yes one needs to pay.

[badri]

Originally Posted by sairamboko

Aroy- thanks for the suggestion. Even the canon 1300 d is priced aggressively with lens and it has WiFi and nfc to share photos. Out of canon EOS 1300d and Nikon D3300 which one would you suggest?

One factor which would push towards Canon's favour (for future lens addition) is the superb 10-18 IS STM lens. You can go through the customer reviews in amazon link given below.

http://www.amazon.in/Canon-EF-S-10-1...=sr_1_1&sr=8-1

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...-STM-Lens.aspx

For under 20K, this wide angle zoom starting at 16mm (full frame equivalent), is a real good value for money.According to me a wide angle lens is the next logical step after the kit zooms and gives lot of creative flexibility. Unfortunately Nikon doesn't have an equivalent lens at ths moment.

Regarding sensor, Nikons do have better dynamic range and high ISO performance (for low light shooting). However, the situations under which you may need these can be limited. I use a 5 year old Canon (7d) which has bad ISO performance above 1600 but I don't find it a constraint for >95% of shooting conditions. I'm sure that the 1300D can do better at 3200 ISO than my 7D at 1600. Maybe in Nikon you can have similar performance at 6400. Question is, how many times do we use 6400? For me, not much. I would take a better range of lens collection over slightly better sensor performance.

[Aroy]

If you are interested in general photography (and in most cases do not plan buy more than a couple of lenses), then mirrorless is fine. On the other hand if you want to expand the lens collection, slowly adding macro, super telephoto and other fast lenses to your collection, then DSLR is a better option, as mirrorless lenses outside the normal range tend to be more expensive, and lenses at the extreme range (<20mm and >300mm FF Equivalent) are generally rare and or not upto the Canikon mark. In case of Nikon older manual focus lenses also work and they are reasonably priced on the second hand market.

[sgiitk]

Originally Posted by condor

The Nikon 50mm f1.8 G is a Sharp lens. Alternately, the Nikkor 85mm f1.8

Remember there is a correction factor of 1.52 on Nikon and 1.6 on canon due to the sensor size. So 50mm works out to be in the normal full frame 85-95mm range considered ideal for portraiture.

Originally Posted by HydroFuel

Can you please share your experience with Nikon D5500? I have almost decided on this model. Which lense are you using? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it? How is your experience with touch focus? I may go with 18-140 lense.Can you please share your experience of Sony 6000? What type of photography you have so far indulged in with it? Did you anytime feel need of longer zoom lense say 18-140 or 55-200?

I am quite happy with the D5500. I have moved to Nikon from Canon after about 15 years. Earlier I had the Olympus OMs (1 & 4). Now Nikon lenses have rotation opposite to the Olympus (still more fun). I have two lenses 18-140 and 35. The former is my main optics and the latter for specialized usage (size & aperture). before the Olympus I owned a Nikkormat with 50/1.4, Vivitar 28, and Vivitar telephoto (I do not recall which since that was 1973-75).

I am going out for a holiday, and am planning to carry only the former. Let me add that before switching to Digital and Rangefinder my optics was 35/f2, 75-150/f4 zoom, and 24/f2.8 on Olympus. For what I do 18-140 (equivalent to about 210 at the upper end in normal terms) is long enough. Remember going any longer entails use of a Tripod etc.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Remember there is a correction factor of 1.52 on Nikon and 1.6 on canon due to the sensor size. So 50mm works out to be in the normal full frame 85-95mm range considered ideal for portraiture.

That was the reason to suggest both the options. The focal length would also depend on individual preference. (Like - I have tried 50mm, but found it quite narrow. Would like to try a 35mm sometime)

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by ampere

The Sony 50mm 1.8 is superb and comes under 20K. But yes its still a 50mm. If one needs some thing like a 24-70, then yes one needs to pay.

That was at 85mm, wide open. That is why I said cost effective. The Canikon 85mm f/1.8 lenses are below 30K.

Originally Posted by Aroy

If you are interested in general photography (and in most cases do not plan buy more than a couple of lenses), then mirrorless is fine. On the other hand if you want to expand the lens collection, slowly adding macro, super telephoto and other fast lenses to your collection, then DSLR is a better option, as mirrorless lenses outside the normal range tend to be more expensive, and lenses at the extreme range (<20mm and >300mm FF Equivalent) are generally rare and or not upto the Canikon mark. In case of Nikon older manual focus lenses also work and they are reasonably priced on the second hand market.

That is a very good and simple summary applicable for folks starting today. General use = mirrorless. Specialist use = dslr.

All cameras are good today, giving image quality that wasn't possible a few years back without spending a lot of money.

Re folks who are saying Canon better than Nikon or vice versa:

I can't compare the mirrorless systems, but regarding Canon and Nikon in India, there is no compelling reason to choose one over the other. Both are equally good, and leapfrog each other.

I do pull legs of folks who are using Canon (I am a Nikon shooter), but that is in jest. Do not go by sellers or so called pros making definitive statements re which is better. And yes, the Nikon (Sony) sensors were better than the Canon ones in terms of dynamic range, but that changes with high ISO. And Canon has a whole new line of sensors, the gap has closed.