What were the deciding factors in choosing the D3500 instead of the others you were considering?
Hard to go wrong with Nikon. What shop did you go to if I may ask? Woodward Camera? I keep forgetting you're so close.
I've bought an old Nikon FM2 slr from them and some lenses. I need to get back there and see what Fuji lenses they have. Great to have a store nearby. I've not had the best luck with their developing but at least they do it. Congrats on the new camera!Yes, Dennis at Woodward Camera was very helpful.
The D3500 is a really nice camera. My wife has one of the previous versions, D3200 and it does fine work. I had a D200 and then went from that to full frame with a D750 - bit of overkill for your purposes.
The biggest attraction for me with full frame is that I already owned a stable of manual focus Nikkors and while could use them on my D200 the comparative effective focal length would always be considerably longer than when used on 35mm film. With full frame I can use all of those lenses exactly as I always have.To tell you the truth, I imagine full frame is a bit overkill for most of us amateurs. It certainly is for me, but I'm hoping that may change after awhile. A more flexible platform than the point-and-shoot I've been using is not overkill, however, it's been a neccessity.
The biggest attraction for me with full frame is that I already owned a stable of manual focus Nikkors and while could use them on my D200 the comparative effective focal length would always be considerably longer than when used on 35mm film. With full frame I can use all of those lenses exactly as I always have.
For work I carry a Sony p/s zoom camera, the DSC-HX80. Pretty decent quality, but a very small sensor with 30X zoom lens. Zooms out to 24MM (equivalent), which is a bit wider than the 28MM or so from most smartphone cameras. (I do shoot in some fairly cramped quarters.) But what I really wanted was the Sony RX-100 series. Much shorter zoom, but very wide constant apertures, Zeiss glass, and a great sensor, in a really small and durable body.
I played for a bit with a coworker's Sony RX-100v and it was phenomenal. The best small point and shoot I have ever seen. Just incredible the image quality and control you could get out of it.For work I carry a Sony p/s zoom camera, the DSC-HX80. Pretty decent quality, but a very small sensor with 30X zoom lens. Zooms out to 24MM (equivalent), which is a bit wider than the 28MM or so from most smartphone cameras. (I do shoot in some fairly cramped quarters.) But what I really wanted was the Sony RX-100 series. Much shorter zoom, but very wide constant apertures, Zeiss glass, and a great sensor, in a really small and durable body.
Getting hard to find a small P&S to buy these days. My tiny old Nikon S5 developed problems with a microswitch that is no longer available and I have been pondering a replacement to carry in a pocket for teaching etc. but haven't found a good equivalent yet. The shortage of new product means that for some odd reason even older used P&S are starting to be worth something. I was looking on ebay and many of the sellers want as much for a used S5 as I paid for the thing new a decade ago. Stupid stuff.I played for a bit with a coworker's Sony RX-100v and it was phenomenal. The best small point and shoot I have ever seen. Just incredible the image quality and control you could get out of it.
Phone cameras are, I know, creeping in on this category of cameras. By creeping in I mean utterly destroying it in sales. But I still feel that they are only great to the untrained eye, as much as I use my phone for daily photos. They do a lot with a bit of trickery and there really is only so much you can do with multiple small lenses and a small sensor before the trickery starts to show (if not glaringly glow as is the case of Apple's horrid "portrait mode" and its fake limited depth of field "bokeh").
I played for a bit with a coworker's Sony RX-100v and it was phenomenal. The best small point and shoot I have ever seen. Just incredible the image quality and control you could get out of it.
Phone cameras are, I know, creeping in on this category of cameras. By creeping in I mean utterly destroying it in sales. But I still feel that they are only great to the untrained eye, as much as I use my phone for daily photos. They do a lot with a bit of trickery and there really is only so much you can do with multiple small lenses and a small sensor before the trickery starts to show (if not glaringly glow as is the case of Apple's horrid "portrait mode" and its fake limited depth of field "bokeh").
See, even the phone itself didn’t want to use that thing. Yuck!
I have a drawer full of old manual focus lenses for my Fuji. There's several Minolta lenses (as I still use a Minolta film camera), variuos M42s including Super Takumars but also Mamiya, Helios and older Fuji, even Argus. I have a couple that have reverse elements in them to refocus the full frame onto the slightly smaller Fuji sensor, and some that just adjust focal length. I believe most of them focus to infinity, the ones without the element just have a crop factor on them but images still look good. In most cases, the current Fuji lenses are much better, but I just like the look of some of the old lenses and they're fun and cheap to play with. As for whether or not to use the reverse element adaptors like Speedbooster or Lensturbo, that's really kind of a personal preference. I have a speedbooster for M42 "universal screw mount" and Minolta, as that covers most of my old lenses, but sometimes I just use the basic adaptors as they're lighter/less bulky and I feel they might have a slight edge in crispness. The ones without the lens elements in them are super cheap, so you can get one for like $15 and just play around. As for the Speedbooster types, I have found Speedbooster to be much higher quality than Lens Turbo. There may be others around now, I haven't looked in awhile. I have bought them on both ebay and places like B&H.
That’s exactly it. And why the whole adapted lens thing really took off with the mirrorless craze. I can’t say that’s why I went mirrorless (that would be form/bulk and mirror noise) but it’s something I like about it.Useful little chart.... Flange focal distance - Wikipedia