The following is a voice-dictated article, but it’s totally the best article on the internet about choosing a camera for beginners, and it also answers which cameras I personally use (..and why!)

So… Which Camera Should You Get?

I get this question a lot, probably like every established photographer on Instagram. I apologize if I haven't replied to your DM about it. There’s too many dms!… But that's why I'm writing this article.

which camera do you use?

When people ask that, I feel like they're not really asking which camera I use personally. They're asking which camera they should get. A very natural question, so I understand why people ask this. I just want to give my thoughts on this topic.

First of all, I would say on the surface, the camera doesn't really matter as much as you might think if you've never been into photography before, which might be discouraging for some people and exciting for others.

If you have a modern iPhone, you can probably take most of the kind of shots that you see on my page.

That said, there is something to be said for actually owning a camera for a couple of different reasons. First, for pure enjoyment of the process of photography, and also putting you in the headspace of, “okay, I'm now doing photography instead of just snapping whatever.”

The second one is ergonomics and convinience.

And of course, the more challenging the shoot, the more you need a camera. You probably cant shoot the moon or a wedding gig on your phone. Or a sports match. Or low light street photography, if you’re a beginner. But most things, you probably can.

To me, the camera is supposed to get out of your way. Different photographers have different opinions on this, but for me, the camera is supposed to make things easier in terms of letting you get away with more mistakes, which, of course, when you're a beginner, is very useful.

But other people, they actually like it to be a process. If you use Leica cameras, or maybe certain Hasselblads, or you shoot film, actually using the camera becomes part of this meditative process. It’s all about the why.

So it depends on your goal in photography. Is it to document your life? Is it to create art? Is it to make films? Or is it to simply enjoy the process of photography instead of caring that much about the result? Or is it a combination of all those?

When it comes to the process of choosing your camera, you've got to consider first of all your goal, and second of all, your budget.

Budget

To me, budget is the most boring part of all of this, but just briefly, keep in mind that a lot of the expense is not the camera body itself. It's going to be the lenses that you buy and all the other stuff. Don't make the mistake of spending all of your money on the camera itself, because you're going to need maybe 60% of your budget to go towards lenses in most cases, unless you want to use some old vintage glass.

pictured: a very overpriced camera that is totally unncessary but you will find a way justify spending $8000 regardless and then complain about it

But don't worry, because there are a lot of used cameras that do 70 or 80% of what the expensive new ones do, and you really don't need to spend all that much on the equipment, because a lot of the result doesn't really come from the camera itself. It comes from so many other factors. The camera is just the starting point.

Different cameras for different goals

So let me give you a couple of examples with different types of cameras that you might want to consider for different types of goals and different kinds of people.

Result-oriented artists

Are phones good enough?

The very first category would be people who primarily care about the result and the convenience. People who don't particularly care about the process of photography. People who want to travel light and keep things as simple as possible.

For these purposes, I would literally just recommend shooting with your iPhone first.

This can also be an Android, of course, but especially when it comes to shooting video on a phone, I think iPhone is the standard.

When it comes to pictures, there are certain quirks with Android, especially the Chinese ones that use a lot of AI to render moons and stuff, that I really dislike when it comes to Android photography. But if you already have a Samsung Galaxy Ultra or whatever, that's totally fine.

Again, it is important not to get too caught up on what exact phone you are using, because that is kind of irrelevant for this group of people who only care about the result.

My first iPhone was the iPhone 13 Pro Max, and the camera on that was already good enough to shoot 80% of the photos you see on my Instagram feed, for example. In fact, maybe half of the stuff on my Instagram is shot on my iPhone. I'm currently on the iPhone 17 Pro Max. The orange one, because I'm cool like that.

So if you only care about the results and convenience, the only thing I would do is occasionally swap to shooting raw and start playing with exposure on your iPhone camera. Then really start going down the rabbit hole on YouTube on how to take photos and learn how to see, because learning how to see is really what it actually comes down to. Then learn how to edit your photos. You can just get mobile Lightroom to start with. It is more than good enough.

Likewise, if you're going to shoot video and reels, iPhone is really useful for that. Especially the stabilization is without parallel, but also just the way the video looks is really good for phones.

That would be the first category. You might already have this camera. Just get to practicing and expect to do that for about a year if you have zero art background, and maybe a couple of months if you already have an art background, to start getting acceptable results. But that really goes for all camera types.

Sonys

The second option is for people who have a little bit more of a budget, and care about results primarily, but also want to get a camera that gets out of their way as much as possible.

These people would be Sony shooters, and this is what I am myself.

Sony is known for cameras that are almost boring due to how efficient they are. The photos and videos these cameras take definitely require editing, because straight out of the camera, they don't look like anything that special. But Sony cameras are really known for having great autofocus, great low light performance, and great dynamic range.

The user experience is designed to make the camera disappear, especially once you get used to using it, so that you can focus on the environment itself and all those things that actually affect the quality of work that you're shooting.

They also have a lot of lenses, of course. Some of them can be quite pricey if you want modern glass that looks flawless, has fast autofocus, and performs well in low light.

Later on, if you're a total beginner, I wouldn't suggest doing this immediately, but you can also start playing with vintage lenses. You get an adapter and adapt all kinds of old lenses from film cameras from the 80s, just as a random example, or even older ones, to get shots with more character.

Depending on your goal in terms of shooting, whether you're taking photos or videos, Sony has several different options. Honestly, I would just open ChatGPT and put your budget and purpose into it to give you an exact suggestion of which model you would want to invest in.

I have the Sony FX3 (amazon affiliate link), which is a really awesome video camera, especially for low light. It doesn't require any kind of attachments if you don't want to use them and still gets very professional results.

I also got the Sony A1, which I don't use as much these days, but honestly, it's almost overkill for most people. It's an absolute beast of a machine for photography. I don't even use most of the high-end features. I just snap photos.

But if you want to shoot sports or take a thousand f***ing photos in a second, this can be a camera for you.

Really, I would just recommend a base A7 IV or V, whichever is the latest one, to get started. Then slowly, as you shoot more, you'll know what you want. But honestly, that camera would be good enough even for myself. I don't even need an A1.

Oh, and if you want to take photos in super low light like this, then you definitely could use a sony:

but also this is a long exposure, meaning you need a tripod, so any camera is fine and this is a terrible example.

2 - Process-oriented shooters

an in-camera double exposure on fuji x100v

Moving on to the third category, this would be for people who want photography more for the experience itself. People who don't necessarily care as much about the results as much as they just want to have a camera that is pleasant to use, looks cool, and maybe doesn't require as much editing.

Again, you can get incredible results with these. You can get results with any camera. But I think if you really want to get a camera for the sake of getting a camera and enjoying using it, I would either look into Fujifilm or Leica in this case.

Fujifilm is a lot more budget friendly and honestly just as good when it comes to results, whereas Leica is more of a luxury product.

Let's put it this way: if you started the company Leica today without any of the history, you would just go bankrupt because there would be zero demand for these cameras. The actual process of photography with a Leica is not any better than it is with a Fujifilm or any other brand.

However, Leica has a very rich history, and it has positioned itself as not just a photography product, but also a luxury product. You can feel it in the build quality of these cameras. They look and feel incredibly premium, and therefore they're fun to use.

But it can also come with some downsides. In a lot of cities, you'll attract unwanted attention for carrying a $15,000 lens and camera combo around, for example. You don't necessarily want to do that late at night in some parts of the world.

Honestly, in my opinion, the way that they're designed is to make you feel like you're using a camera instead of chasing pure results. Some people love them, but I feel like Leicas always come with the caveat that you're not paying for the result as much as you're paying for the experience.

Now, there is a certain signature look for Leicas, but it comes down to a matter of taste. I found for myself that I don't necessarily like the so-called “Leica look” because it's kind of too sharp for the type of work that I'm trying to create. It's too, I don't want to say clinical, but it has a certain quality that doesn't really mix with the type of work that I'm creating most of the time. Sometimes I like it, not all of the time.

this is a great example of the camera being too sharp, in my opinion

Frankly, I've been quite disappointed with the actual results that I get out of my Leica Q3. But I do really like the way that this camera looks and feels. If I'm seriously shooting, I would not bring this one. But if I'm going to a cafe without much of a plan of actually taking photos, I might throw this in the bag.

I wouldn't repurchase this camera. But again, some people love it, some people hate it. I'm kind of in the middle. A bit of a love-hate relationship with Leica.

Then you've got Fuji, which is in some ways almost the most fun camera brand, but it's still a serious camera. They're a lot more affordable than Leicas. They have many different looks that you can apply directly in camera, so if you don't like editing or the idea of editing, you can kind of bypass the whole process with so-called Fuji recipes.

They have a very popular camera model in the X100 series. Currently, it is the X100VI. It's basically an expensive point-and-shoot with a cult following. It is honestly a really fun camera to own if you can afford one.

Especially for beginners, it can be a really good camera just for the process of, okay, when I'm bringing this camera, I'm really focusing on shooting. That's it.

Do you need a Fuji? No, nobody needs it.

Do you want a fuji? Everyone wants a fuji.

However in my head, it exists in this weird middle ground for people who just want to have a good time documenting their life, not taking it super seriously, but if they want to take it seriously, they also can. But it's not really the best for any one purpose, but it can do everything and is just fun and aesthetic to use.

Again, I would like to point out that if any of these cameras speak to you, if you see a camera and you just go, wow, I want that one, I think that would be your sign to just get that particular camera despite everything, because the most important thing is simply enjoying the process. That's where a lot of the results come from, just really having something that motivates you to use it.

So I wouldn't think too hard about the choice regardless.

The 4th category

Moving on, I guess the final category would be for people who... Actually, I don't know if this is the final category, but I'm just going to list some other choices for cameras you could consider.

Of course, there are Nikons and Canons. They would kind of go in the first category, in my opinion, as Sony competitors. I don't really list them here because I don't have personal experience with these cameras. I'm not any sort of camera reviewer.

Then there's the Ricoh GR series of cameras. Extremely compact, pocketable cameras, primarily used for street photography, but they can also be used for documenting your life.

I had a Ricoh GR III. Now there's a next generation of Ricoh that has come out as well. These are good for a very specific type of photographer, the kind who wants to have a dedicated camera but doesn't want it to take up too much space.

this is a very typical ricoh photo, as it’s mediocre street photography that is also out of focus

It is a really cool travel camera. The main reason I sold mine was because I found that the niche of light travel cameras was basically just as well filled with an iPhone when I actually looked at the results. Also, the old Ricoh had autofocus that didn't perform well in low light, which was really getting in the way of my process because I shoot a lot in low light.

If I wasn't shooting so much in low light, I'd probably still have a Ricoh, and occasionally I look at a YouTube review and think about getting the newer model as well.

It takes better photos than an iphone, but only mariginally. It’s more about having a dedicated camera that isn’t your phone and doesn’t distract you with reels and has a separate battery.

this is also a ricoh shot that I quite like

I liked the camera, but if you have the latest iPhone, is it still worth getting a Ricoh? I don't really know.

It is quite expensive for what it offers, but for street shooters, it is cool, especially for stealth photography. For video, this thing sucks.

Finally, I'll mention DJI cameras.

I use the Osmo Pocket 3 for vlogging on YouTube, and I'm waiting for the Osmo Pocket 4 Pro. I think this is a really good camera for solo filmmaking if you want to make videos on YouTube, for example, or if you want a third-person perspective of yourself and you don't have anyone else to film you.

It's easy to mount the camera somewhere or put it on a tripod, and because it's a remote-controlled gimbal with the use of the app, you can compose your image just by using the app and changing the angle without having to physically do it.

It's really awesome for that. The image quality is also pretty good, especially when not in too dark of a light. There's a reason DJI has kind of taken over this vlogging space.

I also have a DJI Action 6 that I just got. Again, a really cool camera for shooting action. I took it into the ocean and mounted it on my motorbike.

The only caveat with this kind of camera is that it's very wide angle, so it's difficult to shoot a variety of shots. If you're not particularly doing action camera things, I would just get an Osmo Pocket 3 for video instead.

For photography, these cameras should not really be considered.

Final thoughts

Again, I would stress not to overthink the decision too much. If any of these cameras happen to resonate with you, just follow your heart and focus on learning how to see, because that is the most important thing.

The camera itself is just a tool, and I feel like a lot of people get too into the choice of the camera and obsessed over gear when they should be focusing on what they're actually shooting.

That's honestly why I very quickly stopped talking about cameras on YouTube entirely, because the gear circle j*** very quickly gets boring. It's filled with people who kind of miss the point, in my opinion.

A good photographer will always do well with a really old, basic camera, and a terrible photographer will always be terrible. It doesn't matter if they spend $50,000 on their gear.

Hopefully, this was helpful. For the next steps, I have a youtube channel for editing tutorials that I occasionally update, here. And I also sell lightroom presets here at the shop.

My ULTIMATE camera choosing guide (for noobs)

So… Which Camera Should You Get?

Different cameras for different goals

Result-oriented artists

2 - Process-oriented shooters