Camera talk

go nikon or canon
sony don't have great lens choice

canon generally felt to be better lenses

for sport DX (Nikon) or Canon - crop sensor best - canon(xxd bodies) 70d, or 7d or best of all 7dII (barring pro level 1dx)

FYI CANON BODIES. THE LESS NUMBERS THE BETTER, ie 7d better than 70d, 70d better than 700d etc

better cameras have better dust and water sealing as well

focus speed and accuracy other critical aspect for action sports, cant do anything with out of focus shots


second hand way to go imho

I went from a Canon 7d to the A6000 Sony and yes you will not find as many Lenses around (especially second hand)
but let me tell you, after a hour of pointing and shooting you will be happy with the Sony (lighter and super fast focus)

As I said before get the 10-18 wide angle and go for the 18-200 to use as your everyday (saying that I rarely take the wide angle off)

Don't install the Sony software on you PC though as it is crappy and will drive you nuts.

Okay, so let's get into some reality checks for budding photographers.

Reality 1 - Spend more on your lenses. What makes a photo look clear and beautiful is the quality of the glass in front of it. A cheap camera with a good lens will take far better photos than an expensive camera with cheap lenses. Expensive lenses generally focus quicker as well.
Reality 2 - the limit selection of lenses with Sony or any other brand probably won't affect you unless you have a sizable budget. Most of the brands have an equivalent of a full frame 24-70, 70-200 and maybe an ultra wide and those are your primary lenses.
Reality 3 - most of the bodies with interchangable lenses are pretty good these days. The entrance level cameras now are probably better than the average pro camera 5-10 years ago and the pros then seemed to do a good job with them so they probably won't affect your photography. So if you have a limited budget, buy a cheap body and an expensive lens, then upgrade the body again later after you have a couple of good lenses.

As for comments like the A6000 being faster than the 7D with focus, it comes down to lenses and a number of other factors so it isn't cut and dried. My guess is if you put a 70-200 f/2.8 on the 7D it would probably best the A6000. Generally speaking for high contrast situations, mirrorless can be quicker (Kiter or bird against a blue sky) but for low contrast (think kitesurfing on the water where there is limited contrast), DSLR's are generally better. If the person is coming towards the camera, a top DSLR will kill a top mirrorless any day of the week.

As for the comment about Canon having better lenses, well, *cough* bull. It depends on the lens. For nearly 5 years, Canon had nothing to match the quality of the Nikon 14-24 and only finally released a lens that matched, but didn't better it. It was so bad that a lot of landscape photographers switched to Nikon. The Nikon 24-70 was generally consider to be better than than Canon's equivalent, the Canon 70-200 was considered better than Nikons until about 5 years back and now they are even. Canon had a better selection of longer zooms, but Nikon released an updated 80-400 and 200-500 recently so I would say that's even. Canon's 50 f/1.2 is way better than Nikon's 50 f/1.4 but costs 4 times the price and neither is as good as the Zeiss, although the Sigma 50 ART matches the quality of the Canon and is less than half the price and available for both Nikon, Canon and Sony (I think). So yeah, if you say than Canon is better than Nikon, you better specify which lens because it's largely untrue that either is better for all lenses.

Saffer is right DSLR focus is quicker than Mirrorless and Nikon do make the best lenses. If DSLRs were smaller and Nikon lenses focused the same way as Canon it would be a no brainer .

Like working out which kite is better.. it depends on for who and for what purpose..

For photography Nikon/Canon are pretty comparable and it just comes down to how much you are willing to spend or the consistency of quality pics you need to achieve (Pros pay a premium for the number of good pics they can choose from in a shoot - amateurs are happy with a few good ones here and there).

I would think something like a 70D (or Nikon equivalent) would suit most regular person type needs and will give you enough room to grow as a photog (about $950 I think)

Add to this the best lens you can afford and then build up your collection of lenses to suit what you would like to shoot. (new or second hand is fine when learning)

For most people starting out I recommend the 50mm 1.8 which is a really really cheap lens (around $150 new) but gets amazing results, especially for the price.

For Kiting you are prob going to try to be really wide or really long for lenses, both aren't generally cheap (photography like kiting isn't really a poor mans sport either)

Id also read up on www.dpreview.com for the best current cheaper lenses as these guys are freaks and like most on here do more typing than photography but will generally know what new gear is good value for whatever reason..

A lot of pros are actually jumping ship with their lenses to after market companies as these guys have spent heaps in recent years creating great quality gear for around half the price of current Canon/Nikon.. (hard to believe but true)

JB HiFi and Digidirect will get you in the ballpark of what you should expect for a good price.

All the best

:)

Yep, that's what I'd do. ^^^

Sorry joining the party a little late, been chill'n on the Gili's. :-D

OP, how's your currently photographic skills? If you're crap, a dSLR will just take higher quality crap photos.

Better you buy a decent waterproof compact like a Panasonic FT4 and REALLY learn the fundamentals of composition, when to use then and when to break them.

Then you'll take awesome photos but you won't get side tracked with all the technical crap. If you find your creative skills exceeding the camera capabilities only then get a dSLR.

I've been taking photos for over 30 plus years, some of those as a professional photographer and this is the advice most people need but rarely get. Everyone thinks they need a bigger camera to take better photos, that's BS. Most people just need better skills.

Below is a photo I took a couple of days ago on the Gili's, my 12yr old son's 1st dive. Shot on a FT4 at 12m depth. Composed more or less perfectly in a fraction of a second for a once in a lifetime shot.

Decent choice.