Quote from: Difydave on January 14, 2016, 15:43
Far better to do anything like HDR on the computer where you have control over what is done, rather than relying on the processor in the camera.
Again these "features" are added by the makers to make the camera look more attractive. They're "selling points" if you like.
Image quality over gadgets and extras every time. I'm fairly sure that either of the cameras you have mentioned will get you started.
You have a steep learning curve ahead of you as a beginner if you want to make successful stock images.

I think the features are not just a gimmick, the 700d got 9 crosstype focus points and the d3300 got only 1.
The 700d got AEB and the d3300 dont.
I think the Touchscreen and articulating screen are cool but not really "tools".
But d3300 got higher dynamic range 24 mpx vs 18 mpx , a little bigger sensor , lower weight.
So each one of them got his advantages and just make me confused..

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

The d3300 cant shoot hdr right?
I think 700d got some nice advantages above the d3300

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 11, 2016, 00:23

Quote from: nadavgs4 on January 09, 2016, 09:08
I can get nikon d3300 or t5i (700d) canon.
I heard nikon got a little better IQ because of the big sensor and resolution but the canon got more tools like AE Bracketing and bigger buffer that make it kinda more proffesional i think.
Video is not interest me, i buy the camera for stills ONLY so all the advantages that reffer to video isnt important to me.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

I think you need to consider things more broadly than just the camera. Lenses is the biggie. But there's also having budget left over for lighting (Speedlight and something to get it off camera; a reflector)

Do you have any idea what sorts of things you will want to shoot? Studio vs. landscape/sports/wildlife and so on?

Whatever your budget is, making sure you can get the best lens you can afford for the type of shooting you plan to do is very important. Both Canon and Nikon make great gear, but you might find one or the other has an ideal lens for your intended uses and that, not some laundry list of seldom used features on the camera, will be your deciding factor.

It's all about the light - the glass, the sensor, the things that provide or shape light. Work back from there with your budget in mind and only if you have a dead heat with everything else look at features like AE bracketing. I'd pay no attention to the 18 vs. 24 MP. They're both plenty good enough.

Good luck with your decision

Im going to shoot landscape, city, street, people , macro(flowers , animals) and objects.
I have two options , the 700d or the d3300, they are cost almost the same in my country.
My father got nikon too and he got nikkor AF 50mm 1.8 (without autofocus motor in it) which means i will have to focus it manually... but i really like the aperture and the results i will be able to get with this lens so it advantage go to the nikon d3300.

The canon is kinda look more simple and ergonomical with it touchscreen and articulating screen and fast live view with 9 crosstype focus points.
There are cheap great lenses of canon to me like the 10-18 for street and landscape .
So im little confused about which one to take.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 11, 2016, 00:23

Quote from: nadavgs4 on January 09, 2016, 09:08
I can get nikon d3300 or t5i (700d) canon.
I heard nikon got a little better IQ because of the big sensor and resolution but the canon got more tools like AE Bracketing and bigger buffer that make it kinda more proffesional i think.
Video is not interest me, i buy the camera for stills ONLY so all the advantages that reffer to video isnt important to me.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

I think you need to consider things more broadly than just the camera. Lenses is the biggie. But there's also having budget left over for lighting (Speedlight and something to get it off camera; a reflector)

Do you have any idea what sorts of things you will want to shoot? Studio vs. landscape/sports/wildlife and so on?

Whatever your budget is, making sure you can get the best lens you can afford for the type of shooting you plan to do is very important. Both Canon and Nikon make great gear, but you might find one or the other has an ideal lens for your intended uses and that, not some laundry list of seldom used features on the camera, will be your deciding factor.

It's all about the light - the glass, the sensor, the things that provide or shape light. Work back from there with your budget in mind and only if you have a dead heat with everything else look at features like AE bracketing. I'd pay no attention to the 18 vs. 24 MP. They're both plenty good enough.

Good luck with your decision

Im going to shoot landscape, city, street, people , macro(flowers , animals) and objects.
I have two options , the 700d or the d3300, they are cost almost the same in my country.
My father got nikon too and he got nikkor AF 50mm 1.8 (without autofocus motor in it) which means i will have to focus it manually... but i really like the aperture and the results i will be able to get with this lens so it advantage go to the nikon d3300.

The canon is kinda look more simple with it touchscreen and articulating screen //

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: ACS on January 10, 2016, 18:48
Both will be manual focus on D3300.

By the way 35-70 might not cope with the new cameras sensor resolution. Results may be soft eith this lens on both camera.

Just fyi:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-worst.htm

Will it be difficult and annoying for me to focus manually or ill get use to it fast?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Mantis on January 10, 2016, 17:58

Quote from: nadavgs4 on January 10, 2016, 17:52
My father got nikon d7xxx which has autofocus motor in it and he got 2 old lenses that he bought maybe 20 years ago.
The lenses are 35-70 3.3f and 50mm 1.8.
I will probably get my nikon d3300 soon and i dont know if will be able to use these lenses with my d3300.
??

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

They should be F mount so yes. If the lenses are 100% manual then you will have to use manual focus but they should still work. The 50mm 1.8 is a sweet lens and very sharp.

I think it is F mount because the name that written on the lens is "AF nikkor..."
How can i know if it 100% manual lens?
And will it be annoying and hard to focus manually for a begginer?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

My father got nikon d7xxx which has autofocus motor in it and he got 2 old lenses that he bought maybe 20 years ago.
The lenses are 35-70 3.3f and 50mm 1.8.
I will probably get my nikon d3300 soon and i dont know if will be able to use these lenses with my d3300.
??

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Chichikov on January 10, 2016, 17:23
To Mantis

+1 for your answer.
But I have a different opinion or more exactly a different way to work than your.
I am not telling that mine I better. It is just better for me.

Well, I agree that Bracketing can help if you are not sure of what you are doing.
But using systematically the bracketing a beginner photographer will never learn how to expose correctly.
To make a good photo he also can make a bracketing on 5 exposures and shoot burst of 100 images... then chose the good one (some people do this you know?)... I don't call this to be a photographer, I call this to push buttons...

If you know how to expose it is very hard that you fail ± 1 stop, and 1 stop is nothing for a raw file. If you fail more that ± 1 stop... hmm you have no excuse if you were sober while shooting...

The points you expose are all extreme conditions, and in very extreme conditions the use of the bracketing can be a great help.

But

1) With the dynamic range of modern cameras (in particular Nikon ones), if you shoot in raw, HDR is  useless, 90% of the time, if you know what to do with a raw file. (Okay, I don't like HDR too much)

2) Always shooting in raw you can easily balance sky and foreground with softwares like Lightroom. At the limit, if necessary, you can process your photo in two different ways and then combine them in Photoshop. (Make a virtual copy with different corrections, export the original and the copy as layers in Photoshop and then combine the images as you want).

3) If you know how to set your flash you don't need bracketing, but to get the best result you have to test of course, and yes in this case bracketing can be an help to speed the process.

4) Again, with the dynamic range of modern cameras, if you shoot in raw you do not need bracketing, but I agree that it can help in some very extreme conditions. For the rest see point 2)

5) Well, as before I think that all this can be done in Lightroom if you expose correctly (mostly ETTR)

6) Tell that to Cartier Bresson, Doisneau, Don McCullin... ...

7) I use a lot the focus stacking technique, and it as nothing to do with bracketing, they are two completely different techniques. But you can combine focus stacking and bracketing of course, Helicon Remote does this very well (if you have a lot of time).

Ok.
So the D3300 wont be so bad.
I think ill go for it

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Mantis on January 10, 2016, 15:21

Quote from: Chichikov on January 10, 2016, 08:07

Quote from: Mantis on January 10, 2016, 02:01

Quote from: Chichikov on January 09, 2016, 22:10
If you learn to expose correctly, use histograms and shoot in raw the bracketing is useless...
I would not consider it a valid option for a decision in a choice.
The most important is the image quality, all the rest is only accessory.

Lol there are many reasons to bracket. One shot does not always get it.

Can you be more precise?......

Sure. First, I make this statement based on NOT having MIRACLE PS skills, but having basic PS skills. But even with good PS skills, bracketing is extremely helpful. From a practicality viewpoint, it depends on what you shoot and when you shoot it, talking about, say, landscape photography.

1. HDR - typically requires three or more shots, but sometimes can be well replicated with software, again, it just depends on what the situation lends. But if you want to have the best of both worlds in your shots, you can shoot raw three times and go home with the ability to combine for HDR and/or just choose the best exposure for your aesthetic needs.

2. Bright sky darker foreground - a very common occurrence.  Even if one shoots raw, it's often hard to get a good balance of light (due to dynamic range limits) between the bright sky and a earth tone or larger foreground. It just depends on the sky contents (bright clouds, all blue sky, sun angle, etc), angle of sun etc. I frequently shoot 2-3 images of the same scene in raw and blend them later. I can push raw to some extent but at some point it becomes best from a quality standpoint to bracket and blend in post.

3. Using flash on close subjects. Below is an image that I blended two images, one with a flash and one without. Could it have been done in one shot? Probably. In this example I was shooting three systems at once so I didn't have time to concentrate on getting it right as I saw it with rapidly changing light conditions. Simply put it was just easier to bracket and create the image later.

4. City scares also benefit from bracketing, especially when you have backlit buildings. Very hard to get proper exposure without bracketing and blending later in post.

5. I shoot a lot around reefs at beaches where the reef is dark brown and the sky is either cloudy and bright or blue and not as bright. Using one exposure over the other with a single image in raw can be challenging. To ensure I walk away with usable content I bracket and blend later.

6. Also, when you are shooting on the fly bracketing is smart. For example, I was driving some highland areas in Hawaii and there were really no places to park, just pull off the road, jump out and shoot.  I would jump out of the car with my tripod, compose and shoot with auto bracketing to increase offs of a good image. Lots of light variation is the reason I did this, but I am sure a lot of people leverage bracketing as a tool. Exposure bracketing is especially worthwhile in difficult lighting situations when it's hard to be sure of the 'correct' exposure.

7. I won't get into this but there is also bracketing for focus stacking, which may not be related to exposure specifically but is still bracketing and blending in post. RIMGLOW in these forums is very good at this kind of bracketing.

In the studio I've also bracketed many times depending on my subjects color, reflectivity, backdrops and the "look"I am going for. Do I strive to get it in one exposure. You bet. But that's not always the best or easiest way to get that look you want.

To me it just makes sense to take a several extra frames at different brightness levels because I've learned that even with a good looking histogram you never really know what you've got until you get back to your the computer that you do your editing on. If one assumes your exposure is always right, they may be sorely disappointed when going through each image and saying, "too bright, too dark"etc.

Exposure bracketing, especially outdoors where usable, is a very useful tool whether you do it manually or with AE.

Then... i may think the better choice will be taking the Canon EOS Rebel T5i over the Nikon D3300.


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Copidosoma on January 09, 2016, 16:07

Quote from: nadavgs4 on January 09, 2016, 09:08
I can get nikon d3300 or t5i (700d) canon.
I heard nikon got a little better IQ because of the big sensor and resolution but the canon got more tools like AE Bracketing and bigger buffer that make it kinda more proffesional i think.
Video is not interest me, i buy the camera for stills ONLY so all the advantages that reffer to video isnt important to me.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Those cameras basically have the same size sensor and the resolution differences aren't going to mean much between them.

If features like AE bracketing are very important to you (I can't think of a time I've ever even used that one) then go with the one with the features you need.
I have a feeling you don't have a really great idea of what you need so I wouldn't sweat it.

Don't worry about which camera is "more professional". That is a description that is for the person using the camera more than one for the camera. Neither of these bodies is particularly high end but either will be more than you need as a beginner. Use your money for lenses and classes on the fundamentals of photography.

I need camera that is overally will be best i can get for my budget because it will have more tools to offer me in the future.
I dont really know what i need in terms of little features but i prefer to get more for the same budget.
Which one of this cameras will be better for the begginer?

Oh and my father got nikon d7xxx with old lenses like 35-70mm 3.3f and 50m 1.8 which he bought really long ago.
I pretty sure that lens doesnt has focus motor so if ill get nikon d3300 will these lens be useable to me?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Jens G on January 09, 2016, 09:44
You could also have a look at the Sony A6000.

It has about the same IQ as the D3300, but I think it has more bracketing options and larger buffer than the 700D.

This camera is too expensive compare to the other cameras.
So canon or nikon?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

I can get nikon d3300 or t5i (700d) canon.
I heard nikon got a little better IQ because of the big sensor and resolution but the canon got more tools like AE Bracketing and bigger buffer that make it kinda more proffesional i think.
Video is not interest me, i buy the camera for stills ONLY so all the advantages that reffer to video isnt important to me.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

I heard the d3300 dont have ae bracketing and t5i got it.
Is it important for the future of a begginer?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: PhotoBomb on January 07, 2016, 23:15
I'd buy a refurbished d5200 from nikon - about the same pice as a new d3300
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/refurbished-dslr-cameras/d5200-refurbished.html

I know it is the better camera compare to both cameras but in my country d5200 cost almost 200$    more than d3300

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Big sensor  vs tilt screen and touch screen with more cross type af points...
What should i choose as a beginner (i will buy kit lens too)

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Hello?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

They are both have only 1 cross type focus point.
Is it that bad?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: chuckcars on December 05, 2015, 18:53

Quote from: nadavgs4 on December 03, 2015, 22:20
I want to get my first camera now so i need you help.
What would be better for microstock use and general use?
And what will work better with 50mm lens?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Nikon. And the Nikkor 50 mm 1.4 is perfect combination.

Is it much better than the 1.8?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Srry please

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: dk on December 04, 2015, 19:03
I don't know about Canon but if you decide to buy Nikon i would suggest looking at the 5000 series (d5000, d5200, d5300 etc) as it is better for stock compared to the 3000 series.

Why?
The 5000 cost almost x2 and this money important for a good lens i think

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Microstock Posts on December 04, 2015, 17:29

Quote from: nadavgs4 on December 04, 2015, 16:01
Leave the feeling for a moment, i want to know which one of them suits better to microstock.

I would say categorically without feeling that this question can't be answered. There are microstock images with countless types of cameras. It's often about the photographer suiting to microstock not the camera.

Of course the photographer is the main key to good photos but i just want to know what will technicaly will do the job better if you suit to both cameras

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Leave the feeling for a moment, i want to know which one of them suits better to microstock.
And the canon 600d + kit cost the same as the d3200 with kit because the black friday price

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

I want to get my first camera now so i need you help.
What would be better for microstock use and general use?
And what will work better with 50mm lens?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Android users dont have getty moment, stockimo but i saw that we can get to these markets with our android phone with these apps:
eyeem photos can go to getty image instead of Getty Moment App that is only for iOS
Snapwire photos can go to alamy(i heard so , is that true?) instead Stockimo that is only for iOS
so is that a good replace for the original apps or with these apps we will get less paid than the iOS users ?

p.s is there any app that work with iStock?

i heard that photos the people upload from their mobile smartphone to the app Snapwire can go to a collection in Alamy , is that true?

Quote from: Lodimup on January 11, 2014, 09:02
Don't upgrade yet. Get lenses.

18-55 is crap.
50 is okay.
get 100 macro it's sharp on the cheap up close. Also get a tripod then you're good to go.

for nikon d3200 what would be better the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G or Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G in terms of image quallity and microstock uses?