Why wouldn't the third option work best?
SurpriZe
Thanks. What's the main problem with the 18-150 exactly?
And is there any way to know if a used lens is damaged inside somehow by having been dropped? Or is it never a concern?
Which brand would you recommend, anything specific?
Got it. So after a heavy consideration I've decided to spend my money on R50 (the cheapest reliable option considering that I can't trust any used cameras in where I live), and the rest on one most versatile and high quality lens, for about the same price as the camera or maybe a bit cheaper. Can you recommend one or two top options in this case?
I'm in need of a good regular lens for all-round purposes that would take me a long way, and a decent macro lens. What would you recommend, the cheapest options? (only new, I can't find used where I live)
Thanks for taking the time! Appreciated.
After a rather deep research for a beginner, I'm deciding between R10 and Fujifilm x-m5. Any comments on that?
What if I'm not really that interested in editing photos in general? Should I get some other kinds of cameras like from Fuji, a little bit more casual, or something else you might recommend? Something where it's less important to post-edit.
Thanks. Fuji sounds interesting: what would you recommend from Fuji that would rival the R50 without losing any of the cool features? Or maybe you could suggest a place where I can read up on that with the most up-to-date information?
Oh, I see. And do you think you could recommend one cheapest Macro lens that'd do the job well for a beginner?
And 200mb/s is it for read or write? Is write 90 mb/s good enough?
Thanks. After checking, I don't think it's much of a difference in price across regions/countries, as it seems to be still about 600-650usd for the body with the basic kit lens in most shops.
So is the RF-S 18–150mm f/3.5–6.3 IS STM 'bad quality'? Is it worse than the kit lens? How much worse is it than the $2k lenses?