Help a Newbie

[lambchops511]

so I don't know much about photography...sudden urger to wanna play around with it....

Looking at Canon 400D....or should I go with a Nikon? The Sony A100 seems pretty good too...but isn't sony really proprietary? Or should I wait till the 450D comes out.

What type of lenses should I get?

Are cannon lenses "superior" to sigma/tampron?

What are some "must have" lenses...macro/telephoto/normal


Right now I am looking at the ebay packages for 400D XTi....around $800 and comes with 3-5 lenses depending on brand...good deal? Or should I stick with brick and mortar for such an expensive toy

My budget is ~800 for camera/lenses....if REALLY GOOD...up to 1K

Thanks

 

[jpeyton]

If you're just learning about photography, I wouldn't worry to much about the camera body. If you're like most amateurs, your camera will exceed your capabilities for at least a couple of years.

Today, the only reasons to go Canon or Nikon are the lenses; Sony, Pentax, and Olympus have matched (or exceeded) their feature set for camera bodies. That isn't to say the other brands don't have good lenses (quality is very similar); it's just simply that the market for Sony/Minolta, Pentax, and Olympus lenses are much smaller (new and used), and you'll have fewer choices.

Forget all the numbers on the specs sheet and go actually hold some cameras in your hand. Try finding a local camera shop; otherwise take a trip to Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. Which one feels most comfortable in your hands? How is the size/weight? Which viewfinder do you like the best? How is the placement of the camera controls?

Ergonomics should be the #1 concern of a photographer; if the camera feels natural, like an extension of your body, you'll take better photos.

Once you've narrowed down your preference of brand/body, it's time to pick lenses. I do recommend buying the body with a kit lens; most kit lenses on the market today are of very good optical quality. The kit lens generally covers the 18-55mm range; *if* you want to shoot wildlife, sports, or other items from a distance, get a telephoto. Good telephoto lenses run from $300-$500. If you want to shoot portraits, things in low-light, pick up a prime lens. Most manufacturers have very inexpensive 50mm prime lenses with a maximum aperture of f/1.8, which will allow you to shoot in much lower lighting conditions than your standard zoom lens.

Third party lenses are generally inferior to first party lenses, but there are a few gems that are an excellent value for the price. Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma all have their gems; look at FredMiranda for lens reviews.

If you want me to just tell you what to buy: go used. Since PMA 2008 just came and went, lots of people are dumping their DSLR bodies for LOW prices. I've seen Nikon D50 and D70s for under $300 for the body; that leaves $500 for lenses. Canon Rebel XT are also around the $400-mark for bodies. Pentax bodies should be pretty cheap too.

A few misc. notes:

Canon and Nikon put image stabilization in their lenses; Pentax/Samsung, Sony, and Olympus put image stabilization in the bodies. That means every lens you attach to a camera with in-body stabilization will be stabilized. That is one selling point.

Another selling point in live-view, which means you can compose your image on the rear LCD; some newer models have this...people either love or don't really care for this function.

If you want to buy a new body, I suggest waiting just a little longer; Canon is releasing the XSi, and Nikon is releasing the D60; both great options, both with new image-stabilized kit lenses (the older models have non-stabilized kit lenses).

 

[lambchops511]

The XSi (450D) isn't comming out till a few months later.....and i think when it initially comes out, it will be priced way beyond my budget

The only thing buying used is if there is something wrong/damaged with the body....and you usually won't find out theres a problem until you really work the camera. like 1-2 months later

I will be really interested in taking macros and maybe with poor lighting

The reason as you said, for going with Nikon (D40x)/Canon(400D) for me is for the brand and all the third party choices...

how much would you say a decent 50mm prime lens with f/1.8 would cost?

perhaps i should buy the 400D w/ 1 lens from dell.com for $600 + buy lenses separately

are the image-stabilizers that important for taking macro pictures?

 

[lambchops511]

and thanks for the reply ^

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: aznium
The XSi (450D) isn't comming out till a few months later.....and i think when it initially comes out, it will be priced way beyond my budget

True; the XSi kit would be slightly above your budget; D60 kit would be slightly below. But once both hit the market, you can bet the number of dirt-cheap used DSLR bodies will shoot through the roof.

The only thing buying used is if there is something wrong/damaged with the body....and you usually won't find out theres a problem until you really work the camera. like 1-2 months later

True; that is a risk you take with buying anything used. But from my general experience of buying used bodies and lenses, a good 10-15 minute test is enough for me to determine if its in good working order. That is why I prefer buying used camera equipment on Craigslist; I can inspect the item for a few minutes before I decide to buy...can't do that on eBay. I live in a medium sized city, and I've seen used D50/D70s bodies for under $400, D80 bodies for under $600, and I even saw a legit D200 body for $700 today...any one of those easily exceed my abilities as a photographer. Saw some Canon Rebels too around the $500 mark.

I will be really interested in taking macros and maybe with poor lighting

Both Canon and Nikon have great macro lenses in the 100mm range, which is the most popular size for macro lenses; I believe Canon has a 100mm f/2.8 Macro...Nikon has a 105mm f/2.8 Micro. Both are around $500. There are cheaper 50mm/60mm macro lenses available, but those will usually require you get much closer to your subject to get large magnification, which can be a problem for some subjects (like bugs) and can also require different lighting setups with your camera so close to the subject.

The reason as you said, for going with Nikon (D40x)/Canon(400D) for me is for the brand and all the third party choices...

Personally, I would pick a used D50/D70s before a D40. The D40 lacks an autofocus motor in the body, so it will only autofocus with lenses that have built-in motors (like any Nikon AF-S lens, and some third-party lenses); it limits your AF ability with many older lenses, and I don't see a point since the D50/D70s offer almost identical picture quality (and have more semi-pro features).

how much would you say a decent 50mm prime lens with f/1.8 would cost?

~$100 for a Canon or Nikon.

perhaps i should buy the 400D w/ 1 lens from dell.com for $600 + buy lenses separately

Up to you. Personally, on an $800 budget, I would spend about half on a beginner body and the rest on a second or third lens. You will find that your choice in lenses will affect your photography more than the body.

are the image-stabilizers that important for taking macro pictures?

Not really.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: aznium

are the image-stabilizers that important for taking macro pictures?

a tripod is the best thing for that. when doing actual 1:1 macro the part of the image in focus (depth of field or DoF) will be very very narrow. what you do is set up the tripod, manually focus the camera, and then move your object around. if you're really cool you'll have a rail for your tripod so you can make very small adjustments to the position of the camera. live view is also great for macro work because viewfinders are small and demagnified.

try an olympus e-510. the kit lenses are very good, the color rendition is very good, it's got live view, and it's got body-based mechanical stabilization. two lens kits for that are available inexpensively.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

The XSi (450D) isn't coming out till a few months later.....and i think when it initially comes out, it will be priced way beyond my budget

yup

The only thing buying used is if there is something wrong/damaged with the body....and you usually won't find out theres a problem until you really work the camera. like 1-2 months later

If the camera or lens is working fine when you get it, chances are it'll keep on working fine. Cameras and lenses are more or less solid state and don't just randomly die without a not-so-friendly push in that direction by the user. When looking for a body note how many shutter actuations it has, and compare this to how many shutter actuations the camera is rated at. If the number of shutter actuations is getting close to the rated number, the shutter is close to dying.

Buy from good websites. FredMiranda has Buy/Sell forums, and so does Canon Digital Photography on the Net (POTN), and Luminous Landscape.

I will be really interested in taking macros and maybe with poor lighting

Get a 50mm f/1.8 and a set of extension tubes. Total should be around $150-$250. You turn the 50mm into a bonafide macro lens with the extension tubes and it can provide excellent results.

how much would you say a decent 50mm prime lens with f/1.8 would cost?

New: $100
Used: around $50

are the image-stabilizers that important for taking macro pictures?

It can be useful, but you can certainly live without it. I find that a tripod for doing macro is way too inconvenient. Because the depth of field is so shallow, you don't even need to use autofocus or the manual focus ring on the lens - simply move the camera and yourself in and out and take the shot when the object pops into focus. If you're grounded by a tripod you can't move in and out easily, and chances are you won't be able to grab the OBJECT and move it in and out if you're taking shots of insects and such.

A tripod is useful and almost required at high magnifications though, but this is beyond the scope of what most people consider everyday photographic macro.

 

[Jawo]

With your budget I would get the Canon XTi Body, the Canon 18-55 IS lens, and the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. Total new is $775, less if you find it used. I personally find live view a worthless feature for its harder to take a picture with the camera farther from you. Not to mention that live view is a reason that camera batteries die so quickly.

You will need IS if you are hand-holding a telephoto lens. In camera IS does not work as well as IS in the lens due to the fact that the sensor can not correct as much motion as the optics in a camera.

 

[warmodder]

Good advice so far. As a beginner through, I would definitely lean more towards a nikon system instead of canon. The ergonomics of nikon just far surpasses canon at those levels, and being comfortable shooting is extremely important, especially when you start out. The only way I can recommend a rebel xt(i) is if you plan on sticking with the canon system for a long time and will be moving up to more expensive bodies. A d50 will look and feel like much more of a camera than any comparable canon body at the level. If you must buy new, the d40 is also a fantastic camera with several draw backs you would probably never notice day to day.

A good beginner outfit would include a 50mm f/1.8 which is extremely cheap (<$100) on either system, a wide angle (the kit lens is basically good enough), and if you want it, a budget telephoto. Nikon doesn't have an inexpensive tele (canon has a 300m for around $100), but you can get a 200mm with VR for $2-300 I believe (It's been a while don't quote me! ). The 50mm can be flipped around if you wanna do macro (You lose manual focus/auto exposure, but it's fun and you'll learn alot) or you can use extension tubes (toilet paper roll!).

Most importantly though, whatever you get, make sure you have fun with it! Good luck.

 

[Krioni]

Just to back up the perspective of buying a good used system. My budget was even lower than yours. I just purchased a used Nikon D50 with a 55-200mm lens for $320 shipped! I also picked up a 18-55mm kit lens for $80.

That put me at $400 total for a body, 18-55mm lens and 55-200mm lens. I assume this camera setup will easily get me through a couple years of actually learning how to take pictures.

The D50 is a little older, but is a GREAT camera from everything I've read (I just got it, so I can't comment from experience yet).

I also agree with the comment that you should go FEEL the cameras... I was originally thinking I wanted a Canon because I already have a good Canon zoom lens. I went to BestBuy and picked them all up. To *me* the Canon just didn't feel good in my hands and the Nikon D40 did... so I decided against Canon.

Originally posted by: aznium
so I don't know much about photography...sudden urger to wanna play around with it....

Looking at Canon 400D....or should I go with a Nikon? The Sony A100 seems pretty good too...but isn't sony really proprietary? Or should I wait till the 450D comes out.

What type of lenses should I get?

Are cannon lenses "superior" to sigma/tampron?

What are some "must have" lenses...macro/telephoto/normal


Right now I am looking at the ebay packages for 400D XTi....around $800 and comes with 3-5 lenses depending on brand...good deal? Or should I stick with brick and mortar for such an expensive toy

My budget is ~800 for camera/lenses....if REALLY GOOD...up to 1K

Thanks

 

[Funyuns101]

You must definitely look, feel and touch a DSLR prior to buying it. Stop by a Ritz/Wolf Camera or the big box retailers (BB&CC) to take a look. To me, the Canon's XT(i) were way too small for my hands and wouldn't prove to be comfortable for a day's shooting.
The D50/70s are discontinued but great camera's. If you do decide to go with used one, just make sure to give it a good inspection.
I wasn't terribly impressed by the D40 and the D80 was out of my price range.

I didn't go with the used route. This left me with the Sony and Pentax. I ended up with a K10D for about the price of a new D40x and am very happy w/it.
As noted above, the following as big, but the quality is definitely still there and more.

Third party lenses are made just fine. Check out dpreview and Steve's reviews online to read more in-depth.
Finally, you'll probably have to wait awhile to see the XSi and D60, but if you can hold out that long the older models should starting going on sale.

 

[Jawo]

Originally posted by: warmodder
Good advice so far. As a beginner through, I would definitely lean more towards a nikon system instead of canon. The ergonomics of nikon just far surpasses canon at those levels, and being comfortable shooting is extremely important, especially when you start out. The only way I can recommend a rebel xt(i) is if you plan on sticking with the canon system for a long time and will be moving up to more expensive bodies. A d50 will look and feel like much more of a camera than any comparable canon body at the level. If you must buy new, the d40 is also a fantastic camera with several draw backs you would probably never notice day to day.

A good beginner outfit would include a 50mm f/1.8 which is extremely cheap (<$100) on either system, a wide angle (the kit lens is basically good enough), and if you want it, a budget telephoto. Nikon doesn't have an inexpensive tele (canon has a 300m for around $100), but you can get a 200mm with VR for $2-300 I believe (It's been a while don't quote me! ). The 50mm can be flipped around if you wanna do macro (You lose manual focus/auto exposure, but it's fun and you'll learn alot) or you can use extension tubes (toilet paper roll!).

Most importantly though, whatever you get, make sure you have fun with it! Good luck.

I started with an XTi as my first dSLR. I didn't understand the button layout for the Nikon. Alas, I ordered the BG-E2 grip with the body to make it feel fuller. I have not had any problems using it, even though I have taken 10,000 pics since 05/07.

I strongly encourage you to attend a trade show where you can talk to knowledgable associates about their brands. This is what tipped me to a Canon from Sony/Nikon.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

are the image-stabilizers that important for taking macro pictures?

It can be useful, but you can certainly live without it. I find that a tripod for doing macro is way too inconvenient. Because the depth of field is so shallow, you don't even need to use autofocus or the manual focus ring on the lens - simply move the camera and yourself in and out and take the shot when the object pops into focus. If you're grounded by a tripod you can't move in and out easily, and chances are you won't be able to grab the OBJECT and move it in and out if you're taking shots of insects and such.

A tripod is useful and almost required at high magnifications though, but this is beyond the scope of what most people consider everyday photographic macro.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/..._Super_Mag_Slider.html

They make things like this for macro But not cheap solutions.

 

[warmodder]

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: warmodder
Good advice so far. As a beginner through, I would definitely lean more towards a nikon system instead of canon. The ergonomics of nikon just far surpasses canon at those levels, and being comfortable shooting is extremely important, especially when you start out. The only way I can recommend a rebel xt(i) is if you plan on sticking with the canon system for a long time and will be moving up to more expensive bodies. A d50 will look and feel like much more of a camera than any comparable canon body at the level. If you must buy new, the d40 is also a fantastic camera with several draw backs you would probably never notice day to day.

A good beginner outfit would include a 50mm f/1.8 which is extremely cheap (<$100) on either system, a wide angle (the kit lens is basically good enough), and if you want it, a budget telephoto. Nikon doesn't have an inexpensive tele (canon has a 300m for around $100), but you can get a 200mm with VR for $2-300 I believe (It's been a while don't quote me! ). The 50mm can be flipped around if you wanna do macro (You lose manual focus/auto exposure, but it's fun and you'll learn alot) or you can use extension tubes (toilet paper roll!).

Most importantly though, whatever you get, make sure you have fun with it! Good luck.

I started with an XTi as my first dSLR. I didn't understand the button layout for the Nikon. Alas, I ordered the BG-E2 grip with the body to make it feel fuller. I have not had any problems using it, even though I have taken 10,000 pics since 05/07.

I strongly encourage you to attend a trade show where you can talk to knowledgable associates about their brands. This is what tipped me to a Canon from Sony/Nikon.

I use an xt with a bg-e2 grip and it's rubbish compared to the Nikon's I've also used at the same price point. Hold the xt in landscape orientation, then flip it and hold the grip--you can tell without a doubt which has inferior ergonomics. That's not to say it can't take great pictures--it's just I think for a beginner holding something that conveys a great deal of quality is as or more important than anything else.

 

[troytime]

you should definitely go check them out at a store.

i was 120% sold on an XTI. My issue was cash flow. When i finally got enough money, i didn't want to wait for an online purchase to ship - so i went to the local camera shop in hopes to buy it on the spot.

When i got there, i handled the xti and it almost made me cry. It felt like i had 3 extra fingers that were all in the way. It took a whole minute for me to realize that I hated it.

I handled the sony, it felt a lot better. But i didn't like the brand.

Then when i handled the d80, it like getting a hand massage by a group of naked asian cheerleaders.

It was out of my budget, but I'm still glad i went with the d80.

 

[ElFenix]

some of you would have just died with cameras from before the mid 80s.

 

[Fardringle]

Nah. They just wouldn't have been properly spoiled yet.

If you only drive subcompacts, you don't have any idea what you're missing until you hop behind the wheel of a luxury sedan..

 

[Jawo]

Originally posted by: Fardringle
Nah. They just wouldn't have been properly spoiled yet.

If you only drive subcompacts, you don't have any idea what you're missing until you hop behind the wheel of a luxury sedan..

I've used the 5D and the 1D MII at demonstrations and those would be luxury sedans without a doubt. Nostolgia is great...but the technology has enabled more people to take excellent pictures. I'm just glad I don't have to worry about film and developing costs anymore. So whats the advantage of cameras pre-1980?

 

[lambchops511]

Thanks for all the replies

Went to my local Future Shop and checked out the

Nikon D80 (no D40)
Canon 350D
Canon 400D ($730 CND...prices here are insane...the exact same thing from dell.com is $600 [both come with a 18-55mm starter lens])
Olympus e-510

The Canon 400D Rebel XTi definitely felt the "best" for me

The only major concern I have with the Canon 400D is that there is no image stabilizer on the body...and it seems the lenses that do come with the IS are wayyyy out of budget for me...should I be concerned about this? I won't be limiting myself to just macro, I'll be trying to do some longer range outdoor stuff too

Right Now I am planning on getting the
Canon 400D w/ 18-55mm
Prime 55mm f/1.8

What other lenses should I be looking for that would be nice for a starter. I checked ebay and they have packages that are around $800 with 5 lenses (am I allowed to post links here?...they are all buy it now and not auctions...)...they come with some wide angles lens and telephoto...they look really cheap but I would like to play around with some wide angle stuff too

 

[ElFenix]

the new 55-250 IS is a decent lightweight telephoto lens and inexpensive. much better than the old mushy junk. whether it's better than the e-510's telephoto zoom i don't know.

i think the 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS are canons response to the travel zoom and in-body IS.




edit: while picking up sins of a solar empire at best buy, i wandered over to the camera section. i determined that i don't like the D80 grip all that much. my pinky finger lands right on the edge of the grip, so it's neither fully on it like a D300 or underneath the camera like on the compact SLRs.

 

[lambchops511]

I think i am going to get the 50mm F/1.8 for sure (since it is so cheap, and I hear pretty good things about it)

what do you guys think of

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

or

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 (the one with the starter kit)
Canon EF 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 III

as well, what about the 0.5x wide angle lenses, i see a lot of no-name brands on ebay for around 50-100, are they worth it?

for a beginner?

 

[kalster]

if you are getting your first lens, get the tamron 17-50 , nothing that canon makes can beat it for the price, 18-55IS is ok, but cant hold a candle to the tamron, ofcourse if you want to keep it under 200, then the new kit lens with IS is a good choice