Photography: Help me buy a camera

[ChipWrecked]

offTopic:

I have always respected Olympus quality but would never own their equipment for one reason: You are locked in to Oly for any other accessories. They used to be notorious for not licensing out to after market companies, then reaming for their brand. If this has changed please let me know.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]


Good post. Just like anything I try, I go at it obsessively.

~td

[/ QUOTE ]

This means to you it's not an either/or proposition: You will buy an SLR and a PHD. The SLR is for when you 'go out to shoot pictures'. Or, getting those nice shots of the gf (they love this). The PHD is to just have along, use at parties and such. Do not be without it if you can help it. Once your eye gets used to composing shots, they jump out at you all over the place. Some of this stuff is newsworthy too, you can make a little change selling shots.

[fiskebent]

[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. I expect to suck at first just as I did at most anything I have tried.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. I just wanted to make sure you didn't expect your pictures to come out great from day one... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Just like anything I try, I go at it obsessively.

[/ QUOTE ]

That sounds like the right attitude. If you expect your interest in photography to increase and money is no object, then I'd recommend that you buy into an SLR 'system'. The big disadvantage is weight, but the system will grow with you as you get better.

Going with Canon or Nikon seems to be somewhat of an religious decision. I've chosen Canon because they seem dedicated to develop SLR's with full-size sensors. Nikon seem content with the APS size sensors. Bigger sensors mean higher light sensitivity which again means less noise in your images. Bigger sensors also let you achieve smaller depth of field - something I think is important in a lot of pictures like portraits and sports. Canon also seem slightly ahead technology-wise, but not by much.

As for a starter camera house, the 30D is definitely a good bet. If you have a bigger budget, the 5D seems to me like it's very close to the ultimate 'do-it-all' digital SLR. I have the 1D Mark II and I'm very happy with it. It's geared towards shooting sports and that's why I got it. I might have gone for the 5D but that wasen't available when I last upgraded my camera house.

Starter lenses:
The 50 mm f/1.8 mark II is a small, plastic, dirt-cheap lens that delivers very sharp images.

The 70-200 mm f/2.8 L is a truly magnificent lens. You'll see it on TV whenever there are press photographers in the picture. If you can afford it, you should get it.

If you shoot a lot indoors you'll need a wide-angle lens. Especially if you get the 30D because it has a 'focal length multiplier' of 1.6 (which, simplified, turns a 50 mm lens into an 80 mm lens). I have the 16-35 mm f/2.8 L and it's pretty good. It's not as sharp as the rest of the lenses I have, but noone has designed a really sharp wide-angle zoom yet. If you need really sharp wide-angle pictures, you need fixed focal length lenses (not zooms).

I'd stay away from the 'S' lenses Canon make. They only work with APS sensor sized cameras like the 30D. So if you decide to upgrade to the 5D or better later, you need to buy new lenses. The 30D is often bundled with an S zoom.

When you start out I recommend that you spend more on lenses than on the camera house. The investment in the lenses will last a lot longer. The camera house you buy today will be close to worthless in 5 years. Your lenses will still work and be valuable in 15 years.

Also get some books. I have the National Geographic Field Guide and it's a good all-round starter book. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/079225676X
There's also a 'digital' version. But based on the comments on it on Amazon, I think I'd get the non-digital version since it seems to concentrate more on photography as a craft.

And learn Photoshop. It's amazing how much Photoshop can improve a mediocre picture.

[ChipWrecked]

50 year old rangefinder cameras kick ass.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]


Top 10 Low Cost Digital Cameras

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,124917,00.asp

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never trusted camera reviews from sites that don't specialize in cameras.

I like this overview: http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html

[tdarko]

CW,

I am thinking that eventually I will have both but do I really need both at first? If not, would the PHD be the one to buy to first to learn with?

[ChipWrecked]

OK, I was just thumbing through it, the book I meant was 'Digital Art Photography for Dummies'. This sucker is great; it was given to me and now that I'm in the family way I don't have much time to devote to this stuff anymore. I will be studying the Photoshop section. I would say start with this book. It has all the composition basics as well as discussion of bw vs. color.

Petersen's Photographic used to be my fave of the magazines. Haven't read one in a while tho.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
CW,

I am thinking that eventually I will have both but do I really need both at first? If not, would the PHD be the one to buy to first to learn with?

[/ QUOTE ]

While you can train your eye with a PHD, particularly if you avoid the zoom function and limit yourself to one focal length, if you think you are serious at all about this and have a few hundred bucks, I would say not no but hell no.

True photography is done with SLR's. PHD's shoot snapshots. The ability to control depth of field, shutter speed, etc. is what it's all about.

[tdarko]

CW,

What are some good SLR's then? Any links? Just curious...this isn't to say I won't buy a PHD.

[offTopic]

[ QUOTE ]
offTopic:

I have always respected Olympus quality but would never own their equipment for one reason: You are locked in to Oly for any other accessories. They used to be notorious for not licensing out to after market companies, then reaming for their brand. If this has changed please let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still a novice at this, so I don't know if I'll be answering your question, but currently, Olympus and Kodak has been pushing this so-called " 4/3 sytem " which, depending on who you ask, is going to make the digital-specific lenses better (or make Olympus more proprietary money [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] )

I'm doing a quick search, and there are currently, I think, 5 cameras (4 Olympus, 1 Panasonic) that are supporting this system, and several lenses (mostly Olympus, but a few Sigma and one Leica).

The E500 does use a special battery, and I did not look into whether there are third-party spares available. Beyond that, I don't own any other accessories.