Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Jarkko: That's not an easy question to answer. In short - yes, that would be a totally OK first proper camera. But you could also spend much less (and even go as far as buying and old OLD 300D with kit lens) or you could decide that this is the hobby you want to pursue for a while and then you might want to read some info on the internet prior to buying and invest some more money.
An advice for you - act exactly as when reading info on guitars, mikes or amps, that is take seriously as little as you can. People talk a lot while knowing shit and brand fanboys can be worse than any other when it comes to photo equipment. The differences are really subtle from the point of view of a beginner and if you will grow to like photography, you'll learn what you need along the way - NOBODY can tell you everything in advance.
I, for example, prefer Pentax cameras, but just for one simple reason - availability of old manual lenses and their easiness to use. I prefer taking photos with those old lenses, as they can be had for cheap and you get excellent image quality (but you lose automatic focus and mostly zoom ability as well). So it's really about preferences rather than brand A being so much better than brand B.
Absolutely, and all valid points, I just wanted some reassurance that I wasn't falling into the same trap as an aspiring guitarist who googles Harley Benton guitars considering his first axe and finding 50% of the people calling it crap while the other 50% says it's perfectly fine for a first instrument. Then he ends up with bleeding hands from horrible fretwork and an instrument that fails to keep tune for more than two minutes at a time
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c5189/c51896754cb68cae40a1e4aa6cce06ce95147f43" alt="Wink ;) ;)"