# Used equipment for beginners?



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Greetings.

I am currently looking at acquiring my very first dslr, and was thinking of getting it second-hand, but would appreciate opinions from those who actually use such equipment.
Photography for me is a hobby. I played with Canon and Pentax 35mm SLR years ago, doing color and B&W photography. Never actually owned a slr but always wanted to.

I enjoy taking shots of where I travel, and have made quite a few interesting ones regardless of the poor equipment I had on hand.

I was in Australia with my cell phone not long ago when I took shots for a few friends on their dslr, that is when the bug got me... Lol.

As I said I was thinking of going second hand, mainly for two reasons. I don't believe I need 35+Mp - I don't plan to print posters, plus it requires much more storage - and used is generally much cheaper, I am just a hobbyist.

The biggest I foresee doing a print would be 16x20 for the living room. I am thinking 10-12Mp to be an interesting format. I hear it is easier to shop used lens on Nikon, but am not sold on brands. What's the word on best newbe dslr brands??? 

Unless the shutter count is impressively high, should I steer away from ebay or kijiji/Craigslist?

Thanks for any and all discussion on this topic, it is greatly welcomed.


----------



## SCraig (Oct 6, 2017)

You can reduce the resolution of a high-resolution body but you can't increase the resolution of a low-resolution body.

There are good places to buy used equipment and there are bad places.  B&H, Adorama, and KEH are good places since they rate each piece of used gear they sell and they also warrant it.  EBay and Craigslist, not so good.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Thanks for your input. 

It is really appreciated. 


I am Canadian, and haven't found much in term of second-hand camera stores in Montréal. Maybe there's somewhere that Google doesn't know about.

I agree you can't add Mp to a camera while you can reduce the saved format. Doesn't that include some sort of compression on the processing end?

I was thinking a better lens was better invested money than extra Mp.


----------



## waday (Oct 6, 2017)

Most important question: what is your budget?

As long as you buy from a reputable place or can get your hands on to look at it before purchasing, used is good. Any local camera shops you can go to rather than online? 

What type of photography do you want to do? Do you travel a lot?

Don't discount mirrorless. They're small, but pack a big punch.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

I find the concept of mirrorless slr intriguing...

I like to travel. How much traveling is a lot? Lol

I take landscape and architectural mainly. I like old buildings or odd furniture, nice sceneries, and such. 
I like to play with sunlight or perspectives.


----------



## waday (Oct 6, 2017)

If you like to travel, definitely look into mirrorless and micro four thirds.

But, seriously, without a budget, it's hard to recommend anything. Throw something out to get started.


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 6, 2017)

What is your budget?

Ican recommend some very serious gear that is dirt cheap and can be had with very low shutter counts.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> I can recommend some very serious gear that is dirt cheap and can be had with very low shutter counts.



I am interested, can you please elaborate? 

I was thinking of getting a used kit for a few hundreds, and build a set of lens. And if things go smoothly, invest later on a more serious body when I know what I like and dislike, keeping the first one as backup. 

I think anything I can get now would feel like luxury compared to the Pentax I used to shoot with way back.


----------



## dunfly (Oct 6, 2017)

I can only speak to Nikon equipment since that is what I use.  I don't buy used, but I do buy factory refurbished items.  There are some good buys on refurbished Nikon bodies and lenses.  Also, B&H and Adorama periodically sell OB (open box) items that are essentially new.  I would also not be afraid of buying good condition used from them either.  I travel with a D5200 that suits my needs.  It is light weight with an articulating screen, which are critical considerations to me.  Also, the DX lenses are relatively small and light.  I have looked at mirrorless, but like the optical viewfinder.


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 6, 2017)

My philosophy was always "buy a used Mercedes Benz instead of a new Fiat and never buy a used Fiat."

A Nikon D3 with a Nikkor 1.8/50G is a nice used set and can be had with a low shutter count for less than 800 US$.

These cameras are built to last am image quality is outstanding.

Get a 24mm 1.8G later and you will have a great set for your purposes.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Thanks Frank, Dunfly.

I think at least for now I'll go with something that has an optical viewfinder.


----------



## jaomul (Oct 6, 2017)

If you could get a good condition used d700 it might be a good option. It's a nice fullframe imager, well built, can use older (less expensive) Nikon lenses, has a good autofocus and is weather sealed (double check the weather sealed bit). 

I've seen them go for 400-500 euro, I'm sure with the bigger market where you are you'd bag one for 400-500 dollars.

It does a lot of what the d3 mentioned above does, but has a slower (but not slow) 5 frames per second, but is smaller lighter and cheaper.

I use among other cameras a Nikon d7200 and if you could get one for up to 700 dollars I wouldn't hesitate to recommend one, either second hand or refurbished. It's a crop sensor camera that does not have earth shattering specs, but does most things well


----------



## beagle100 (Oct 6, 2017)

i agree, if you're buying for travel look at *mirrorless* cameras,  They are smaller and lighter with all the features of a DSLR  and can easily use DSLR lens.

or look at a used or refurbished Canon and lens if you want the best value
*www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless*


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

I don't mind traveling with a full sized slr, it fits my carry on. Thinking about it, I very much prefer optical viewfinder to anything they can come up with, I don't think I'll go for a mirrorless, even if it's smaller and lighter. 







jaomul said:


> If you could get a good condition used d700 it might be a good option. It's a nice fullframe imager, well built, can use older (less expensive) Nikon lenses, has a good autofocus and is weather sealed (double check the weather sealed bit).



There's one on ebay right now that has 111,000 on the counter, with a couple lens and a travel case. I am tempted, but the shutter count scares me.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 6, 2017)

Well, a D700 is sadly "only" rated for a 150k shutter count. Mind you thats a very conservative estimate of the producer; most D700 should actually manage more actuations.

The actual shutter count ultimately depends a lot upon how you treat the camera. Do you keep the back of the lenses clean. Do you keep the rear lenscaps clean. Do you keep the lensmount clean.

Usually people dont - and thats why dust enters their camera and kills the shutter blades.

With a used camera you dont know what the previous owner did, but again - usually they dont realize how important this is.

Thats why a 111k shuttercount wouldnt fly with me.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2017)

beagle100 said:


> i agree, if you're buying for travel look at *mirrorless* cameras,  They are smaller and lighter with all the features of a DSLR  and can easily use DSLR lens.
> 
> or look at a used or refurbished Canon and lens if you want the best value
> *www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless*



Beagle posts this same nonsense everywhere. I simply have  to vehemently disagree with the cannard he posts every time, which is "*Easily use*" DSLR lenses, which in actuality means NO autofocus, no diaphragm automation, missed focus on many shots, limited light metering modes, limited flash metering modes and other system incompatibilities...perhaps 40 to 75% compatibility with whatever camera one happens to have is what Beagle means by "easily use DSLR lenses"?

Mirrorless: the new religion. Zealots spreading lies about it, over and over in little cannards like "easily use DSLR lenses":.Easily? Hardly. "Use"? Again, if limited metering, limited flash modes, no autofocusing, and other incompatibilities meand "easily used" then--we've got a new Beagle-definition of the word "easily".

Beagle's mirrorless zealotry borders on ridiculous fanatacism, as he tries to convert newbie buyer after newbie buyer with *a big lie. Oh, excuse me.. a cannard...a lie by a prettier name*.

Spreading bullspit about mirrorless cameras and lenses is really beneath this poster, and this forum. It's about time we put a stop to somebodyrepeating a lie over and over and over again, especially in a forum dedicated to HELPING people make accurate decisions based on truths, not on lies and personal whackery.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2017)

Oh, and another part of the lie he repeats: "with all the features of a DSLR"

Uh..NO, sorry, but NOT TRUE AT ALL. You want a camera that can fire 3,000 shots over two days on ONE, single battery charge??? Lookat a Nikon d-slr...OR, buy a mirrorless with the same capabilitis, and be prepared to burn through five or six batteries PER DAY, or 300 to 400 shots PER CHARGE!

"All the features" of? Laughing my butt off!!!

Compare a mirrorless camera model against ANY Canon or Nikon d-slr...and look at the teeny-tiny systems the mirrorless cameras offer, then look at the hundreds and hundreds of items that Canon and Nikon d-slr cameras have available for their users!


----------



## Dave442 (Oct 6, 2017)

Just to note that I am still using a couple D200 bodies. One given to me to get me to move from film to digital and the second one I bought used as I wanted the grip and it just happened to come with a camera attached. Both were low shutter actuation bodies and they are both around 100k now. They follow the Nikon line of everything is focused on taking the picture.  I have used the D300, D700, D800, D500 and they all follow the same button layout with just one or two differences so it is easy to pick up one of these other bodies if you find that you really like photography. While those used bodies are very cheap, spend money on the lenses, although you can start cheap with something like the 35mm f/1.8DX lens. The D700 is also a very nice body, but a lot larger for tossing in the travel bag.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Solarflare said:


> Well, a D700 is sadly "only" rated for a 150k shutter count. Mind you thats a very conservative estimate of the producer; most D700 should actually manage more actuations.
> 
> The actual shutter count ultimately depends a lot upon how you treat the camera. Do you keep the back of the lenses clean. Do you keep the rear lenscaps clean. Do you keep the lensmount clean.
> 
> ...


And it's also why the price remains very low on that auction. As tempted as I am, I'll keep looking until I find a better deal.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

Dave442 said:


> Just to note that I am still using a couple D200 bodies. One given to me to get me to move from film to digital and the second one I bought used as I wanted the grip and it just happened to come with a camera attached. Both were low shutter actuation bodies and they are both around 100k now. They follow the Nikon line of everything is focused on taking the picture.  I have used the D300, D700, D800, D500 and they all follow the same button layout with just one or two differences so it is easy to pick up one of these other bodies if you find that you really like photography. While those used bodies are very cheap, spend money on the lenses, although you can start cheap with something like the 35mm f/1.8DX lens. The D700 is also a very nice body, but a lot larger for tossing in the travel bag.


There are a few d300 in my watch list on ebay. A d200 with a couple lens would be interesting I think.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 6, 2017)

How about Sony?

Theres an interesting a200 with two Minolta lens... I don't know anyone who even tried those.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 7, 2017)

No surprise there. Its basically a dead system.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

Solarflare said:


> No surprise there. Its basically a dead system.


So... To avoid?


----------



## Derrel (Oct 7, 2017)

I've bought a lot of used lenses and cameras over the last four decades; usd gear is a GREAT way to save money, and to be able to afford vastly MORE 'stuff' than if you buy all-new, all the time.

Honestly: I thyink the NEW-era Nikons with their superior sensor performance are much better than older, cheap, used cameras. The D200 and D300 Nikons, the Canon30D and 40D, all that stuff is old-tech and has limited dynamic range and real,serious problems on over-exposed images and blown exposures in the under-exposed direction as well. I would bypass ALL old-tech bodies, and buy a Nikon D3300 or D3400 or D5200 or higher model, used, and start off with what is basically, a camera that can handle all sorts of blown exposures, and can recover images to an astounding degree; that is the thing that Canon's behind on, and that Nikon and the new Sony and new Pentax d-slrs offer: ISO invariability, and the ability to software-correct a photo that was shot at utterly ridiculous degrees of 'wrong exposure" settings in the field. This can be used deliberately, by setting the shutter really fast in the field, and creating an almost-black image but one shot with a motion-stopping speed of say, 1/800 second in bad lighting, but which is then "lifted" from almsot-black and "up", to a decent exposure. This is where the new-generation Sony, Nikon,and pentax cameras excel!

I dunno...buy used, get a couple of decent lenses, start in on the game. But, do not buy into old, outdated tech just because it is low in cost: the good cameras (for the most part) started in 2012, and are newer than that. AVOID older-tech cameras as a beginner, and you automatically give yourself a HUGE advantage, on every shot you make. Look at the DxO Mark sensor scores: I've owned cameras in the 56 and 67 range, and they are rubbish in tough light, not much better than color slide film was, and new-sensor Nikon gear with 87 and higher sensor scores: the performance there at 87 or so is **astoundingly good**.

Getting into Nikon's D600,D610,D750,D500,D800 and up...those sensors are amazingly good, and so are the higher-model D3300 and D3400 and D5300 and newer, as well as the D7100 and D7200 cameras: just amazing image quality, at various price levels.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

Shutterdog said:


> How about Sony?
> 
> Theres an interesting a200 with two Minolta lens... I don't know anyone who even tried those.



The Sony A200 is wayyyy too old tech to be worth picking up. If you are aiming towards lower costs in used product then I say stick to Nikon as there is soooo much stuff available for fair pricing. It is harder to get cheap Minolta/Sony lenses (trust me, I've been/am there) ... Sony has some great stuff if you have $$.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

... though, there is a Sony SLT-A58 with kit lens listed on eBay (from a Canadian seller) that is at a pretty good buy now price. That model is not bad ... I had the SLT-A55 and 57.


----------



## waday (Oct 7, 2017)

OP, if you start looking at Sony, check which ones have EVF vs OVF. You said you want OVF.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

Ah, yeah I forgot to mention that point (that Wade brought up) ... A58 is EVF ... if you want to know about it just ask me as I have been using EVF cameras for some time now.


----------



## fmw (Oct 7, 2017)

Derrel said:


> beagle100 said:
> 
> 
> > i agree, if you're buying for travel look at *mirrorless* cameras,  They are smaller and lighter with all the features of a DSLR  and can easily use DSLR lens.
> ...



Derrell, I can't help but say that your reaction makes you look fearful of mirrorless cameras.  Didn't you use cameras easily prior to the advent of autofocus?  I did.  I have a manual lens in my mirrorless system and have no problem using it.  Beagle isn't lying.  He is expressing opinions that differ from yours.  Personally, I won't go back to DSLR's after having my mirrorless system.

Since you don't like mirrorless cameras, don't buy them.  But don't criticize people who prefer them to DSLR's.


----------



## fmw (Oct 7, 2017)

I'm not trying to corrupt your preference for optical finders.  But at least you should know that electronic finders have at least one benefit that I consider valuable.  They can display what your image will look like at whatever exposure settings you or or meter have set.  If it is a little dark, you can dial in some compensation or other setting and see the effect of the change in real time.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

Derrel said:


> I've bought a lot of used lenses and cameras over the last four decades; usd gear is a GREAT way to save money, and to be able to afford vastly MORE 'stuff' than if you buy all-new, all the time.
> 
> Honestly: I thyink the NEW-era Nikons with their superior sensor performance are much better than older, cheap, used cameras. The D200 and D300 Nikons, the Canon30D and 40D, all that stuff is old-tech and has limited dynamic range and real,serious problems on over-exposed images and blown exposures in the under-exposed direction as well. I would bypass ALL old-tech bodies, and buy a Nikon D3300 or D3400 or D5200 or higher model, used, and start off with what is basically, a camera that can handle all sorts of blown exposures, and can recover images to an astounding degree; that is the thing that Canon's behind on, and that Nikon and the new Sony and new Pentax d-slrs offer: ISO invariability, and the ability to software-correct a photo that was shot at utterly ridiculous degrees of 'wrong exposure" settings in the field. This can be used deliberately, by setting the shutter really fast in the field, and creating an almost-black image but one shot with a motion-stopping speed of say, 1/800 second in bad lighting, but which is then "lifted" from almsot-black and "up", to a decent exposure. This is where the new-generation Sony, Nikon,and pentax cameras excel!
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot, there's a lot of information in that post.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

fmw said:


> I'm not trying to corrupt your preference for optical finders.  But at least you should know that electronic finders have at least one benefit that I consider valuable.  They can display what your image will look like at whatever exposure settings you or or meter have set.  If it is a little dark, you can dial in some compensation or other setting and see the effect of the change in real time.


That is a good point. Don't you get live numeric view even when you have the optical viewfinder?

I really like to look trough the viewfinder to take the shot.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

What do you mean by "numeric view" ?


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> What do you mean by "numeric view" ?


Can't you have the equivalent of a viewfinder, live view, on the screen?


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

EVF, is a live view though the viewfinder instead of just the rear LCD ... with an OVF it will indicate what the meter reading is ... but you need to mentally interpret what that means as opposed to visually seeing it.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 7, 2017)

OVF vs EVF : Fun fact: they dont actually show up in your final picture. Thus yeah, how important is that choice anyway ? IMHO much less important than for example lens quality.

And both work fine, in general. Neither has a clear advantage over the other. So its really just a question of personal preference. Personally I probably lean more towards OVF, but I could work with both, really.


I like that OVFs require no current and put no stress on the main camera sensor, I like they dont blind you in low light, dont ever have any lag, dont have issues in artificial light, and dont have other such issues. Overall I find them much more natural to work with and I read from people in internet forums that they find EVFs outright intolerable.

I also like that if you have an OVF, you have an EVF anyway - the backside monitor in lifeview. All you would need is getting a protection so bright sunlight doesnt block the view. Unfortunately all the possible goodies found in EVFs that I would like to have usually dont show up in these backside monitors, except for magnification, and at least on Nikon cameras choosing the AF point in lifeview is extremely slow. At least the brand new D850 has now both touch screen and focus peaking, though not with 4K video for which it would actually be extremely important.


Because I definitely like that EVFs can have secondary functionality like focus peaking. Also magnification, zebras, false colors, life histogram etc. Very useful indeed. Unfortunately how much you actually get with an EVF and how easy it is to access etc depends upon the camera.

I also definitely like that EVFs allow shorter flange distances in comparison to SLRs. In theory this allows simpler wide angle lenses. However apparently all companies except Leica with their Leica M havent bothered to design their sensors in a way to allow sensors steep angles of incidence with the light in the first place. But without this property the shorter flange distance doesnt make much of a difference - you still have to design wide angle lenses as retrofocus designs, just as with a SLR. Also the issue is that straightforward wide angle lenses, i.e. those without retrofocus, dont allow larger apertures - in fact the geometrically possible maximum aperture goes down very quickly if the wide angle lens isnt retrofocus. Thus yeah the effect is nice to have but it doesnt matter that much.

EVFs also can be large and bright even for small sensor cameras, but I dont care about small sensor cameras, so I dont care about that aspect. Plus how much of that potential is actually realized is always another question, anyway.

They allow you to see a wrong white balance instantly, but I always shoot RAW, so meh. Also with a Nikon auto white balance its extremely rare I see any issues with the default choices of the camera anyway.

And right now even the best EVF, like in the X-T2, still have visible lag, even in bright sunlight - which I find quite irritating, especially since the advertisements claimed otherwise.

Finally, unlike some people apparently think, they certainly dont offer WYSIWYG. The backside monitor doesnt give you WYSIWYG and neither does an EVF. All an EVF really is is a backside monitor with some additional optics really, so nothing a backside monitor cant is doable by an EVF.


I find the prime aspect of any camera system I always care about is image quality; for example I tolerate manual focus lenses (Zeiss, Voigtländer, old Nikkor AI/AI-S) due to the fact they offer more image quality than any autofocus lenses. So I might lean more towards OVFs overall, but I would instantly work with EVF if said system would offer more image quality.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 7, 2017)

fmw said:
			
		

> Derrell, I can't help but say that your reaction makes you look fearful of mirrorless cameras.  Didn't you use cameras easily prior to the advent of autofocus?  I did.  I have a manual lens in my mirrorless system and have no problem using it.  Beagle isn't lying.  He is expressing opinions that differ from yours.  Personally, I won't go back to DSLR's after having my mirrorless system.
> 
> Since you don't like mirrorless cameras, don't buy them.  But don't criticize people who prefer them to DSLR's.



Nice try, but no, what I dislike is people spreading lies to innocent beginners... I am not criticizing beagle's love of mirrorless cameras, but rather the massive lies he posts here, everty single time somebody who is confused or a beginner, asks a purchasing question. he spreads a cannard, a half-truth, whatever you wish to call it. BS information. Misleading information. Zealotry that is downright deceptive to beginners.

As a senior member here, with thousands of posts designed to HELP people get the best photographic information I know how to provide, I take it upon myself to challenge and expose outright deceptive statements.

I find it kind of lame that, instead of addressing my actual points, you made an ad hominem attack on "me". Classless move, dude.

I know you've convinced yourself that mirrorless cameras are the way you want to go, yet, instead of addressing the actual issues with mirrorless cameras with* ADAPTED d-slr lenses,* you know instead of you addressing the FACTS I brought up, you attacked ME, personally. And attacked my photographic experience. WTF, man.

Maybe you can respond like a grown-up in your folllow-up post, BMW? Maybe address the fricking hardware issues with *using adapted d-slr lenses*, instead of attacking me and casting aspersions on me?

And, maybe, just maybe, you will spell my name correctly if you respond. Okay, BMW?


----------



## fmw (Oct 7, 2017)

Shutterdog said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> > What do you mean by "numeric view" ?
> ...



Yes, you can.  As long as you aren't in bright sunlight that will do the job.  The EVF will work in all lighting conditions unlike the monitor.


----------



## fmw (Oct 7, 2017)

Derrel said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think you will get over it, "dude."


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 7, 2017)

fmw said:


> Beagle isn't lying.  He is expressing opinions that differ from yours.


 Well he's probably not intentionally lying but he's presenting his opinion in a misleading manner.

It is true one can use SLR lenses on a mirrorless with an adapter and that they will show the same image quality as on the SLR (that doesnt however contain any statement about how much image quality the mirrorless is able to record).

It is however not true that they would offer their full functionality.

Even if its one of the really advanced adapters with autofocus support the autofocus wont be as good as on a SLR, due to the differences in the AF system.

Most adapters however have reduced or no functionality. Then you're reduced to whatever the mirrorless has to offer - typically focus peaking for manual focus support and probably/hopefully some support for metering.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 7, 2017)

fmw]post:
Derrell said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > fmw said:
> ...



Indeed. I' m not too stressed by your personal attacks on me, nor by your smart-aleck comment in response. You responded about as one would expect.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

fmw said:


> Yes, you can.  As long as you aren't in bright sunlight that will do the job.  The EVF will work in all lighting conditions unlike the monitor.



I went to best buy and tried a few mirrorless today. I never did before. The camera size and weight is indeed interesting and the EVF is better than I expected.
But I still prefer the OVF.

That said, I see why people suggest the mirrorless for travel, it sounds like a solid compact choice. I may look for one in the future.

For now, I'm still on the market for a DSLR.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

I like it (EVF), but not everyone does, and it does have its faults/limitations ... it's not perfect ... but it is good that you actually tried one out.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 7, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> I like it (EVF), but not everyone does, and it does have its faults/limitations ... it's not perfect ... but it is good that you actually tried one out.


Well I got curious. It is quite different to what I had imagined. Really closer to an optical one. But not quite the same.

I happen to like manual focus and optical viewfinder.

I am happy I gave a try to electronic ones to confirm my preference.


----------



## dxqcanada (Oct 7, 2017)

Hmm, a DSLR with OVF and a split screen !!!


----------



## fmw (Oct 8, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> Hmm, a DSLR with OVF and a split screen !!!



Agreed.  It is strange to me that digital cameras have virtually abandoned manual focus aids.  While they all have something, it is never as effective as the old split image finder.


----------



## fmw (Oct 8, 2017)

fmw said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm, a DSLR with OVF and a split screen !!!
> ...


----------



## birdbonkers84 (Oct 9, 2017)

My first camera was a D3300, I bought brand new because it was a "first", but I can tell you now a year on that my set-up for shooting wildlife is second hand and I like to think I've gotten some pretty good images from that.  I even still use the kit lens that came with my D3300 on my second hand D7100. If you're going to buy second hand, just make sure the sensor is clean and your lenses don't have fungus growing on the optics/no scratches.  My g.f now uses my D3300 and loves it because its easy to carry about and a good handle. 

Good luck with your search!


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 10, 2017)

I went ahead and manage to win an auction for a used D3200 on ebay with two batteries, the kit 18-55 and an additional 55-200 lens.

It should reach the farlands of my suburbia within the next two weeks.

Thanks to everyone who chimed in.


I'll post pics when it reach here.


----------



## birdbonkers84 (Oct 11, 2017)

Shutterdog said:


> I went ahead and manage to win an auction for a used D3200 on ebay with two batteries, the kit 18-55 and an additional 55-200 lens.
> 
> It should reach the farlands of my suburbia within the next two weeks.
> 
> ...



I've been using my kit lens (18-55) alot recently for landscapes, starscapes and more recently long exposure landscapes and it's actually pretty good, I've found it has good sharpness around the 24-45mm mark.  All the best with your new equipment when it arrives


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 21, 2017)

The D3200 arrived. It's almost new, I had a real bargain. No dirt at all. Shutter count was just below 2200!

I am starting to experiment with it. Still unsure what all the modes are for, I feel better using M mode.

I didn't have much time yet, but we get along well, I'm having fun, and I like the results I get.

Thanks again for the comments. It helped direct me in acquiring this one!


----------



## benhasajeep (Oct 21, 2017)

Shutterdog said:


> The D3200 arrived. It's almost new, I had a real bargain. No dirt at all. Shutter count was just below 2200!
> 
> I am starting to experiment with it. Still unsure what all the modes are for, I feel better using M mode.
> 
> ...



Congrats on the new camera.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 21, 2017)

Errrrr ya' goooo! A good, clean, used camera outfit! Woo-hoo!


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 22, 2017)

Thanks Darell and Ben


----------



## TonyBallas (Oct 23, 2017)

A D3200 was and is my second digital camera. They do pretty well. They are still some better in low light than my Original digital D60 NIkon. 

It was commented about the auto focus not locking in on a still subject a park bench, and one thing I know is when in low light they have trouble auto focusing. If the light is low enough, and or the area where your AF setting is set to is very dark, and you’re set on a single point focus setting it will keep trying to catch the right focus and move in and out, and some times after a minute or more it might lock on, but wouldn’t depend on it. Glad you found one option to set to AE-L. I like to manually focus in those instances but that can be hit or miss in low light also, unless you have really good eyes. Thanks for informing me of the AE-L remedy. Hope is helps a little. 
@Tony 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 23, 2017)

TonyBallas said:


> A D3200 was and is my second digital camera. They do pretty well. They are still some better in low light than my Original digital D60 NIkon.
> 
> It was commented about the auto focus not locking in on a still subject a park bench, and one thing I know is when in low light they have trouble auto focusing. If the light is low enough, and or the area where your AF setting is set to is very dark, and you’re set on a single point focus setting it will keep trying to catch the right focus and move in and out, and some times after a minute or more it might lock on, but wouldn’t depend on it. Glad you found one option to set to AE-L. I like to manually focus in those instances but that can be hit or miss in low light also, unless you have really good eyes. Thanks for informing me of the AE-L remedy. Hope is helps a little.
> @Tony
> ...


There was an "AE-L" flashing in my viewfinder, I got no credit!

I am somewhat used to manual focusing, but the autofocus is way faster than me. That said, the autofocus sometimes focus on the wrong area, so I don't dislike manual.


----------



## SubOhmGirl (Oct 24, 2017)

Congrats on the new setup!! I just got my d3400 a month ago and am loving it.


----------



## Shutterdog (Oct 24, 2017)

Congrats on the d3400!

Those are great cameras for sure. I am really enjoying using it. I find myself finding opportunities to get out and try shots.


----------

