Alright, so I'm just starting to do some photography, so I was wondering if a reflex is a must have for a beginner or does a simple one like a Sony DSC-H200 is enough?

Let me know.

an slr isn't a must but obv it is nice to have
the sony u listed will be good enough to start with, if u get serious with photography in 6months or a year you will need to upgrade

why dont you try to look for a dslr user between your friends and family, in order to try if you are even into photography. this allows you to skip a low end purchase. if you decide that you are into it and want to improve you will want to get a dslr anyway.

Thanks for info.



Well I already have a DSC-H200 and wanted to know if it was good to start with.

I've always like photography but never had time to get into it, now i do.

oh, I thought you were asking wether to buy a point and shoot or not. in that case, whats enough or not depends on you. obviously you will have a ton of new possibilities with a decent DSLR or micro-four-thirds camera. that is, if you are even interested in the "real" photography or just like to take snapshots of your pet and parties.

Waiting for the gf to get here... super bored... no photos to edit and nothing to do... here's an essay. Bold is your answer down below.

If it's just as a hobby, then the answer is personal and comes down to what you want to do, and what you're willing and able to spend.

Ideally you'll be interested in the pictures and the artistic and technical stuff you can get into with photography. If you take this approach, then you can start with any camera and you'll be happy. Then, you can determine what you like shooting, and you can move forward with investments based on what you know you want to do. For example, if you like shooting birds, the answer will be more obvious. If you like shooting potraits and street photography, the answer will be more obvious. Etc, etc. Usually if you're getting more serious about photography, a DSLR is going to make the most sense.

In my case, I was interested in the technology equally as much as I was interested in taking photos. That's actually the same for me now. When I get excited thinking about new lenses, half the reason I'm excited isn't because of what the lens can do for me; half the reason is because it's technology and part of a tech collection (just like a nice car, or gaming computer, or audio system, or what-have-you). However, my interested in photography is what makes the purchases worth-while... if I lost interest in having new technology, I'd still love my lenses and camera. If I lost interest in photography, and still loved technology, then I'd feel like I have a pile of glass that was a waste of cash.

In summary... if you know you love photography (and possibly even a little bit of film), and you've got the cash, then look at getting a DSLR as well as a lens or two. If you don't know about aperture, lens sharpness (at various focal lengths), DX versus FX, depth of field, and various things like that, then I suggest you do a fair bit of research (and post here asking for advice on that); before you even think about making a purchase, you should know about that type of stuff so that you don't make a mistake on your purchase. For example, I picked up a 16-85mm VR lens (which I absolutely love now since its sharpness is top-notch for the price), however it is an f3.5-f5.6 lens which is limiting (and it was a $700 lens, meaning it wasn't a slight investment). However, it's a Nikon lens, its resale value is in the $400-$600 range (a good return), and it suits my purposes now. Had I known more about aperture, I might've splurged for an FX body, as well as a 24-70mm f2.8 lens. However, I had to experience all of this once-through to know I wanted that focal range and aperture (and at that high of a price-point!).

A lot of people are going to tell you one thing or another. You might be told to get a fast lens immediately and pick up a DSLR... you might be told to get a film camera... you might be told to use whatever you have... usually advice boils down to working with something or just about anything, and building up your knowledge, skill, artistic edge, and all of the foundations you need to progress. In my personal opinion, I would spend the money all over again if I could go back in time... I started with a decent DSLR and decent lenses, and I feel that was worth it for me. I'm immediately enjoying the capabilities a good 24mp camera alongside a sharp lens can offer me, and I feel like I'm growing fast with my equipment.

Do you need a DSLR? Nope... but get one if you want it and have the cash. There are things that you really can't do without a good camera & good lens... and to be honest, at least 75% of what I want to do involves having a good camera and good lens (but also requires I learn a lot).

This post was edited by Canadian_Man on Aug 9 2013 07:17pm

Well I will have to do some research I guess, haha.
Although as I said I already have an DSC-H200, so I'll start from this and see if I like photography enough to get into a DSLR.

Thanks for your opinions

It looks like you have a crop factor of 6x (maybe I'm wrong or things work differently). The camera doesn't look bad, and you get an equivalent of 24mm - 633mm for range, which is pretty interesting.

Something you should be wary of is the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed on your camera. Those will affect your artistic freedom in some ways (shutter speed can affect interesting shots where you have motion blur on everything but a moving object... aperture has to do with how much is in focus and how much is blurred out).

Thanks for the clue, I'm really new to this and it's nice to have someone helping you with it.

I'm not sure what the ISO is tho, sorry I'm French xD

"International Standards Organisations"

Low ISO equates to lower light sensitivity. If you are in bright sunlight (ex. at the beach on a sunny day), then you might be shooting between ISO 50 and ISO 500 depending on the shot (my camera comes down to ISO 100 and I usually don't go above ISO 200 on a sunny day at the beach). Generally it is favorable to shoot at a lower ISO, since that usually equates to a better quality image.

Your shutter speed is how long your camera collects light until it finishes. So if you take a 1/1000 of a second shot, then it collects light for 1/1000 of a second, and that is what your shot is. If you do a 1" shot, your camera takes its shot for 1 hole second. If you are shooting an image at ISO 100 and you are in dark light, you might require a shutter speed of 15", which means a 15-second exposure shot... So understanding shutter speed matters. Your shots will come out crisper and nicer (when hand-held) when your shutter speed is quick. There are general rules of thumb for this, but I won't get into that. What that basically means is you might want to bump your ISO up (the light sensitivity goes up) so that you can increase your shutter speed. With a faster shutter speed, there's less time for light to come through to your sensor, and as a result you need higher light sensitivity.

Finally, aperture equates to how open your camera lens is. If you have a very "quick" aperture, your lens might be at f1.8. This means your camera will let more light in over a given amount of time (this also effects depth of field and how much is in focus in the picture).

So these three things are important to understand. You will get sharper and clearer images with better contrast and less noise if you understand these settings. Aperture is very important since it's part of this triangle, and it also gets into the whole depth of field and blur thing which is important (ex. when you see a shot of flowers and everything in the background is dreamy and blurry, that has to do with the angle of the shot, the distance of the background from the focus area in the shot, and the aperture).