Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Photography

Urbandale2013

Urbandale2013

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2018
5,659
7,337
113
31
Urbandale
We are going to Europe next year and so I’m looking to get a camera and maybe get into photography with that.

I’m really looking to start out pretty budget conscious but still want to get quality stuff. My criteria is for a compact camera with room for growth and a viewfinder.

I’ve done some research and I’m thinking of the Cannon EOS R50. This seems to be the best entry point from what I can tell. It has some better features than the R100 but is still reasonably affordable.
www.target.com

Canon EOS R50 RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3mm IS STM Kit: Mirrorless Wi-Fi Digital Camera

Read reviews and buy Canon EOS R50 RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3mm IS STM Kit: Mirrorless Wi-Fi Digital Camera at Target. Choose from contactless Same Day Delivery, Drive Up and more.
www.target.com www.target.com

I’ve talked to some family about it and they think it is crazy expensive but from what I can tell it really is on the budget end.

Any other guidance for someone looking to buy a camera? Are there any good suggestions for beginner classes or anything? Any accessories that are necessary.

Like I said my primary goal is for a good camera separate from a phone that I can use on a European trip. We went on a trip last year to New York and had way too many pictures for our phones. Secondary goal is a camera that I could use going forward.
 
I'm no expert but I think the lens you buy/use is way more important than the camera body. It may make sense to look for a more basic or mid-range camera body and focus more $$$ on a few high-quality lenses.

No opinion on your Canon example, we've always been a Nikon family. :)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lafaester54 and Kinch
Urbandale2013 said:
We are going to Europe next year and so I’m looking to get a camera and maybe get into photography with that.

I’m really looking to start out pretty budget conscious but still want to get quality stuff. My criteria is for a compact camera with room for growth and a viewfinder.

I’ve done some research and I’m thinking of the Cannon EOS R50. This seems to be the best entry point from what I can tell. It has some better features than the R100 but is still reasonably affordable.
www.target.com

Canon EOS R50 RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3mm IS STM Kit: Mirrorless Wi-Fi Digital Camera

Read reviews and buy Canon EOS R50 RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3mm IS STM Kit: Mirrorless Wi-Fi Digital Camera at Target. Choose from contactless Same Day Delivery, Drive Up and more.
www.target.com www.target.com

I’ve talked to some family about it and they think it is crazy expensive but from what I can tell it really is on the budget end.

Any other guidance for someone looking to buy a camera? Are there any good suggestions for beginner classes or anything? Any accessories that are necessary.

Like I said my primary goal is for a good camera separate from a phone that I can use on a European trip. We went on a trip last year to New York and had way too many pictures for our phones. Secondary goal is a camera that I could use going forward.
Click to expand...
A 4.5 lens is probably not the best. Canon does make a 1.8 lens 50mm that is much better and not that expensive. The lens is what makes the camera. Look for a low f stop. The ones that are telephoto are pretty expensive but worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angie
  • Like
Reactions: Angie and Kinch
The only issue, if you call it that, with the 50 is for still photos you stand back a little more than you would with the lens that target has with theirs.
 
My first question is: what do you plan to use the camera for?

If you’re mainly shooting wide outdoor scenes like buildings, landscapes, or group shots, this camera should work fine. However, the f/4.5–6.3 lens isn’t great for indoor or low-light situations. The 18–45mm range is also fairly limited, so it won’t be ideal for zoom-heavy shots like wildlife, detailed architecture, or tight close-ups.

I agree with @Kinch that a f/1.8 50mm lens would be a strong upgrade if it fits your budget. It performs much better in low light and is great for portraits, especially if you want that blurred (bokeh) background. But it is limited if you are in a cramp space.

If you’re just getting started, I’d focus on learning the exposure triangle. Understanding how aperture, shutter speed, and ISO work together will help you get the most out of your chosen gear and make it easier to decide on future lenses.

As for price, this is a budget-friendly option, especially considering cameras can easily run into the thousands.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: Angie, Kinch and Urbandale2013
Kinch said:
Canon is the only one I used for our newspaper. It worked great. This is the 50mm lens I talked about. It was our workhorse. We used it to take track, basketball, baseball, golf, cross country. We didn’t use it much for football. We called it the poor man’s professional lens.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=canon+50...77d7f9bd&tag=hydsma-20&ref=pd_sl_2qx6e2n6fj_e
Click to expand...
MLawrence said:
My first question is: what do you plan to use the camera for?

If you’re mainly shooting wide outdoor scenes like buildings, landscapes, or group shots, this camera should work fine. However, the f/4.5–6.3 lens isn’t great for indoor or low-light situations. The 18–45mm range is also fairly limited, so it won’t be ideal for zoom-heavy shots like wildlife, detailed architecture, or tight close-ups.

I agree with @Kinch that a f/1.8 50mm lens would be a strong upgrade if it fits your budget. It performs much better in low light and is great for portraits, especially if you want that blurred (bokeh) background. But it is limited if you are in a cramp space.

If you’re just getting started, I’d focus on learning the exposure triangle. Understanding how aperture, shutter speed, and ISO work together will help you get the most out of your chosen gear and make it easier to decide on future lenses.

As for price, this is a budget-friendly option, especially considering cameras can easily run into the thousands.
Click to expand...
Have read that the included lens isn't great too. I guess my concern from the limited understanding I have so far is that lens might offer greater flexibility even if it can't do great pictures like a better lens. Is that accurate?

Like I said my primary goal is for our trip over to Europe to get good pictures not great pictures. Depending on how stuff goes I may get more into it after coming back. Would just a 50mm lens work for the variety of pictures I would want on our trip?

Even after we would get back I would envision mostly doing stuff with landscapes or buildings.

My current experience is really just with my phone camera and just basic stuff when my parents had gotten a Nikon COOLPIX P510 back in the day, but that was without really understanding how to use it.

Is your recommendation to buy what I have then also purchase a 50mm lens?
 
Urbandale2013 said:
Have read that the included lens isn't great too. I guess my concern from the limited understanding I have so far is that lens might offer greater flexibility even if it can't do great pictures like a better lens. Is that accurate?

Is your recommendation to buy what I have then also purchase a 50mm lens?
Click to expand...

Any lens can work if it has the appropriate amount of light. But what is the appropriate amount of light? That’s where the exposure triangle comes into play. I would say if you had both the 18-45mm and 50mm lenses, that would be a fairly good starter kit since they could do a mix different things as someone thinks through the beginning principles.

The 18-45mm should be okay in the outside setting and will handle a good family photo with outdoor lighting. The 50mm will handle inside, but it is a fixed lens meaning you have to physically move your body to zoom in or zoom out.

In practice, the 50mm will be able to do just about everything the 18-45mm can do, but the opposite isn’t true. Also for under $200, that is an extremely affordable lens while not being an obnoxious size.

One way to think about it is the 18-45mm is like your regular photo setting in your phone while the 50mm would be like portrait mode.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Angie
Never used to take a camera to Europe (or elsewhere in the world), but since social media is designed to make people jealous, I got a leetle Nikon Coolpix A-10 after losing a more expensive model in Spain (left it in the taxi at the airport, yup). The Nikon does what I want, doesn't bust the bank, and I can afford to lose it without too much heartache. A-10's have been discontinued, but I'm sure the cheaper current models are just fine. Never take anything pricey when you travel. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

Took these pix with the Coolpix. Just remember not to put the batteries together or TSA in reputable countries will flag you if the extras are in the same compartment touching each other. (U.S. no problem)

Tenerife this past February...

20260218_104535 (1).jpg

Vienna in March of 2025

DSCN2101.JPG

Flying into Queenstown, New Zealand, November 2024

DSCN1162.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdclone and Kinch
yes the 18-45 offers a little more flexibility because it’s a wider angle lens.I think it will do you ok, if you are ok with its limitations. Definitely think about getting a 50 in the future.
 
I think the R50 is a great starter camera, but it IS going to be pretty entry level. If you're just learning how to shoot, that's likely a good thing - especially since any lenses that you get for this would work likely for another Canon Mirrorless APS-C crop frame if you eventually upgrade to another. This is a good camera for travel because it's really light, and it has some video modes that are nice.

If you're more experienced and want to do manual mode, but want the lower price point of an APS-C crop mirrorless, there is also the R10. It's able to shoot more fps, has dual modes so it's much easier to go into manual mode, and the R10 has a little more "meat on its bones" - the body is a little bigger, so if you're looking for a long lens for something like sports or wildlife, it would be able to better support it.

As other mentioned, the lenses you look at are going to make a lot of difference. You're going to have a little harder in low light than you would with a full frame, but find the widest aperture lens you can in the range you need to shoot, and that's going to help a ton. Lightroom and Photoshop can clean up a lot of noise these days, anyway.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: MLawrence and Kinch
It is probably worth noting that most smart phone cameras are pretty good, and up to a certain point I'd say a lot of people take better pictures on their smart phones than they would with a nice camera. Phones should have some manual/pro setting (or apps that let you) and that could help with understanding some of the manual settings you would have on a camera.

You can do far more with a camera than you can on a phone, but you won't learn framing, angles, etc from a camera that you can't already explore on a phone. A lot of photography is learning how to do some post-processing in Lightroom and that's something I struggle with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom