Well, I always used a point and shhot camera, since i dont know how to use a proper camera. I would like to learn somehow nad would like to get my first DSLR with a lens. I know there are lots of lenses to choose from, all i need for now is a good all rounder to start learning, What would you guys advice? Thanks, Vince
What kind of photography do you plan to do? The perfect "vacation" lens is something like 18 to 200. It can cover most any photo op without having to change lenses. The downside is usually weight. A more practical lens is either 18 to 55 to 70 range or 18 to 105. Some prefer going with a modest telephoto say 18 to 105 and then a 70 to 300 range to cover the telephoto range.
I plan to do only car shoots as well as some track day shooting along with some hill climb photos. So motorsport and cars.
As far as a DSLR, I'd recommend one of the Canon Rebels. At the moment you have the following: Canon T2i (the newest in the rebel series) Canon T1i Canon XSi Canon XS If you go to Digital Cameras: Digital Photography Review, News, Reviews, Forums, FAQ you can find some really excellent in-depth reviews of virtually any dSLR. You can also do side by side comparisons of the two. If you're unsure of what certain features are, feel free to ask here as I'm sure others will chime in. Below are the names of the cameras as they appear on the dpreview site. You can do the side by side by navigating the top row links -- Buying Guide -> Side-By-Side comparison. Canon EOS 550D Canon EOS 500D Canon EOS 450D / Digital Rebel XSi Canon EOS 1000D / Digital Rebel XS The major difference between the TSeries and the XS/XSi is that the T2i and T1i both offer HD video recording. I recently bought the T1i for my girlfriend and coming from a few different higher end offerings by Canon (1Ds Mark I, the 20D and 40D now) I was very impressed with the overall functionality of the T1i. A big reason I pick canon over Nikon is because I have a lot of friends who use Canon so I can easily borrow their lenses. As I said I'm sure others will chime in but I wanted to give my two cents. I would however, recommend that you stay with the major players (Canon or Nikon) as their product support is always exceptional. You'll have a wealth of other Canon/Nikon users to compare experiences with. Learning to use the dSLR isn't a big challenge especially if you keep the user manual handy. A lot of it comes with playing around with the settings or shooting strictly in manual mode. This gives you the ability to manipulate all of the settings individually and that's where the camera really shines. You'll want to explore your own creative abilities and once you get the handle on what buttons do what that's when you'll start to get the shots you want from your camera.
What about on the Nikon side? I'm eyeing the D5000 and waiting for a sale so I can jump on it. What type of lenses would cover good automotive photography as well as some nice nature shots?
I can't speak for the Nikon side, but I can second what adriankeith said. Excellent few camera's listed. If you want the video, you're kind of stuck with the T1i/T2i as your cheapest options. But if you don't want the video, you can get a good camera for pretty cheap (shoot, I'd recommend older ones than the ones he listed) and spend the extra cash on lenses. Sounds like the type of photography you're wanting to do is going to require some high quality lenses. For motorsports you're going to want something with 1) a lot of reach, I'd say a 70-200mm (OK, not thats not a LOT, but sufficient), 2)fast/accurate focusing. I had the 55-250mm f/4-5.6 lens, and its a good little lens for $300, but it would NOT be sufficient for motorsports. You're going to need most likely the 70-200mm F4. Honestly I don't think you'll get good motorsports shots with anything less than that. The 100-400 would be a good choice too. But the only downside to those two is that they aren't good for general car shoots. For that you'll need something in the 18-70 range. You can get a kit lens most likely for pretty cheap, that is 18-55 f/4-5.6. I think the XSi kit lens is 18-55, but has Image Stablization. You can probably find one on Ebay for like $150, nothin too bad. For nature, those two should serve you well, unless you want to do macro stuff, in which case you'd need a macro lens. Canon's 100mm 2.8 macro is ~$500. The good thing is you can get a lot of this stuff used, in great condition, for less than retail. A good site for that is Canon Digital Photography Forums - Powered by vBulletin. Excellent forum, and if you register (free), there's a buy and sell section where people post items for sale. Great group of people, and you can always trust the stuff they sell over there is in great condition. As for a body, it's not all that important compared to the lenses (anyone will tell you that). But for motorsports photography you'll probably want something with relatively fast FPS (frames per second). I'd say check out the Canon 30d. It's a bit older (not that old though), but is a great quality camera and you could probably get it for less than $400. I have the 40d, and there really isn't a huge difference in specs between the 40d and 30d and I love mine. Cliffs: -Body=Canon 30d ~$350 used -Motorsports lens= 70-200mm f4 minimum (if not f2.8, don't forget to check out IS) ~$575 used -General car shots= 18-55 f/4-5.6 IS (must be bought used, is part of a kit) ~$100 -Macro shots= 100mm 2.8 ~$500 new
I would get a rebel xs/xsi for a starter camera. Find a Canon 28-135mm IS USM lens for a great walkaround lens. It works nicely for me because at 135 I do not need a tripod. At 210, my photos come out blurry if it's less than ideal lighting. Also, get a nifty fifty (Canon 50mm 1.8) prime lens. Excellent value (you can pick them up for $75) And to actually take good photos, check out your local community colleges for any courses on photography. This will make the biggest difference in the quality of your photos as opposed to a high end camera body/lens.
The D5000 is a good starter camera. For Nikon, I would opt for a 18-105 lens. It is more versatile than the stock lens but for auto photography (18-55,18-70) work too.
D5000 is a littler further in then a starter camera. I had a D60 which made a great camera. Recently sold it though. I personally like Nikons. I have never used a Canon but just like the feel of Nikons and the quality of the lenses and what not they make. If you can get a kit for cheap that is your best bet as they usually come with a: 17-55mm lens (or something similar) as well as 55-200mm lens (or something similar) so you get the best of both words . . . . . . . that will do you good for what you are trying to shoot. If you decide you want more quality then you opt for a higher end lens that has better quality glass. Nikon D40 Nikon D60 Nikon D3000 possibly the Nikon D5000 those are some excellent starter cameras to get your foot in the door with a DSLR camera. Having to many features could make the learning curve a little steep but in the end you get the camera that you decide on.
If you get only one thing from my above post, it's that the lenses are of far more importance than the body. Sure, the higher end bodies have some "cool" features, but invest money in good glass first. I really don't care whether you go with Nikon or Canon as they are both excellent producers, but what I said about the lenses stands. I'm not sure what the Nikon equivalent of a Canon 30d is, but I'm sure you could get a quality body for ~$350 or even less. Nikon carries a nearly identical 70-200mm lens as Canon. The focal length isn't the only important thing, though, thats the key. Like I said, for motorsports you'll want something that will focus and track very quickly and accurately. Canon has something called USM (ultra-sonic motor) in their higher class lenses, like the 70-200. Is uses a totally different type of focusing system than the cheaper lenses (ie. 55-250). It's MUCH faster and much more accurate, not to mention silent. I'm sure Nikon has a similar system in their upper level lenses. Just don't get caught up in the bodies. Everyone does, and it's easy to do. But next year they are going to come out with a new latest-and-greatest FOTM that is going to make the body you shelled out $XXX for look worthless, so just get quality glass for now and a body that will get you by, then in a couple years once you actually understand the features and how to use them, then invest some serious cash in a really nice body that will last you a long time.
I have to second hockeyplaya13 here. The lenses are definitely of great importance in a good setup but they'll also tap into your savings accounts hahahaha. I've done some pretty extensive reading and meetups with folks here in Southern California (Fred Miranda, SoCal) and not all of them choose "L" glass (the highest quality Canon lenses, usually denoted by their red stripe around the lens). There are some real gems out there from Sigma, Tamron and other Non-Canon manufacturers. Of course you'll have those who argue that the glass is that much sharper etc etc but see for yourself. If you're not blowing these images up to something poster sized (not sure of larger print dimensions) and you're sticking to the usual 4x6, 5x7 and maybe an occasional 8x10 you can get away with a much cheaper lens. Of course, if money is no object then why not? There are a lot of great, FREE resources just like detailingbliss out there for photography. fredmiranda.com: Specialized in Canon - Nikon SLR Cameras, Forum, Photoshop Plugins, Actions, Reviews, Hosting and Digital Darkroom has a great resource for lens reviews. They review the camera bodies as well but like hockeyplaya said, don't get too caught up with the bodies. I know he also recommended some of the "older" Canon bodies like the 30D and I think you can get those for a steal these days. Even the 20D is a great camera so long as you get a good price on it Lots of great advice here and I'm by no means trying to discourage you from a Nikon purchase. They are great cameras as well.
^^Yup. You can definitely get high quality lenses made by companies other than Canon/Nikon, but generally, unless you are going to do your homework, I just stick to those two names. But Sigma and Tamron are practically on par with Canon/Nikon, just a slight, almost unnoticeable step below. And cheaper .
I think the truth is that most DSLR's are capable of better pictures than the person holding the camera. The camera body or lens is not going to be what is keeping you from getting great shots. This applies to most any Nikon or Canon DSLR. If you are into long zooms or telephoto, the lens choice can be very important but for the shorter range (18-70 say) the kit lenses are usually pretty good. In the Nikon world, the D90/300 family is a noticeable above the D40/60/80 family (Ken Rockwell will disagree) and definitely more usable than the entry D3000. If going Nikon I would start with the D5000 for new. In the hands of a pro, most any camera can deliver results once you understand the strengths and weaknesses of the camera. I have always liked the Nikon ergonomics but the D3000 seems to be more like older Canons in forcing you into the menu system. I think latest entry Canons has improved the ergonomics (ease to access the important functions) if you want to use anything but the default settings.
dpreview.com is another good website for reviews on photography equipment, they also have an awesome forum covering a whole range of photography related stuff.
So excuse my idiocy here, if I buy a Canon body I can stick on a Nikon lens and vice versa? So lens companies cater for all camera bodies, so I assume that the mechanism to attach a lens to a camera is a universal thing?
Have a look at the Pentax K-x + 18-55 + 55-300 for 650-680$. Best ISO performance in its class, excellent IQ, very decent kit lenses, you can fit most older cheap lenses. Ex.: a 50mm F/1.4 manual lense for 20-30$.
No... Nikon lenses are very compatible from camera to camera, the only issues being really really old lenses and no auto focus on some lenses with the lower end bodies... Canon on the other hand has the big cut off date, nothing pre 87? works with anything newer...
Short answer: No. You can only use Canon lenses on Canon bodies and Nikon lenses on Nikon bodies. The reason being is exactly what you pointed out -- the mounting "plate" I'm pretty sure is different. Also, the way you twist the lens on I think is different as well. With canons you mount it then twist the lens a bit to the left when holding the camera in the shooting position. With Nikons I think you twist the other way? It's been a while since I've used a Nikon =X
