Im new...help!

[ravidrabit]

Hello. Im just now starting to get into photography. Right now, my family has a digital camera, that we use for just takeing pictures(beach, birthdays, family stuff), but I'm looking into getting into it more seriously. I honestly am a noob at this :oops: , and have no idea what kind of camera I should start out with. Im personally a avid fisher, and we live close to a lake, so I like to take a lot of pictures by the water. Now, Im homeschooled, so Im lucky in that my mom and I go on hike's and too the zoo alot. Now to the point...what would be a good camera for me? Im 14, so I dont want to go spending alot, but I want a good quality camera that will last me until I can get a better one. My parents will help me out finacially(another good thing about the homeschooling), so Im thinking like $500-$1000 price. I dont know what Im looking for in a camera though. Im trying to get into some local classes, but have yet too find any.

Anyhelp would be very apreciated,

Mike

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hi,

Welcome to the forum :)

I'd look to start with a handy size portable camera like the A80 or any of the "G" cameras.

These are great tools to learn on.

[Syldorian]

I'd also recommend the A80. That's the one I own (my first camera). It can handle everything automatically when you're starting out, but you can also change all the settings manually once you start getting to know what you're doing a little bit better. Plus it's small, so you won't think twice about carrying it around with you, and it makes it a little easier to get candid shots of people and things. I don't think the same can be said of a DSLR, and one of those would have easily been enough to overwhelm me when I first started. One would probably be enough to overwhelm me now, as a matter of fact. :D
The A80 can also take additional lenses. Not as good as a true DSLR because you're just adding a lens to the ones that are built into the camera, but they're not bad at all. I've borrowed a 2X teleconverter from my brother that's great (basically gives you twice the zoom that the camera has built in).
All the photos on my website (in my signature) are from my A80. The ones from the zoo are with the teleconverter. I think the camera goes for $350-400 now, and the teleconverter lens was something like $90. You can also get wide-angle lenses for about the same price.
I think it'd also be good to have a point-and-shoot camera even when you have bigger, better ones. Sometimes you can use a P&S in a situation where you couldn't really use an SLR. Just my opinion, though....I only own the A80, so I don't really know first-hand.
Anyway, just wanted to try to tell you a little bit about the camera. Welcome to the boards, and be sure to post some photos once you get going. :D

[ravidrabit]

Thanks for the help guys. I was on a trip to my grandparents and thought I'd take my(parents) camera.


EDIT: Link doesnt work, I will try and find a host. When I do, alot of the pics are fuzzy. It was very windy.

It might not work, let me know if it doesn't.

Thanks again!

[DeeplyDigital]

Don't know if you like that kind of thing, but

how about shooting film and getting basic dark room equipment?
Doesn't have to be expensive, you can give it a go with b&w.
Developing and printing your own pictures is awesome...
You can do this easier than most as your time (I assume) is flexible.

Just an idea from the word's no.1 home-schooling fan....

-

[ravidrabit]

"Just an idea from the word's no.1 home-schooling fan.... "

hahaha.

I still havnt decided what I want to do yet. Digital is more exspensive, but I dont have to get the stuff developed(sp), Film is less exspensive, but then I get it developed.....ugh.


Yeah I'll think about it.

[Andy_T]

Mike,

What digital camera do you have in your family now?

Best regards,
Andy

[jukas]

"I still havnt decided what I want to do yet. Digital is more exspensive, but I dont have to get the stuff developed(sp), Film is less exspensive, but then I get it developed.....ugh.


Yeah I'll think about it.

Digital is usually a more expensive inital investment, but film is usually more expensive in the long run. I was at a photographers open house yesterday and in talking to him he said he's shot over 80,000 slides in the 20 years he's been doing photography. I got curious when I got home, so I started running numbers to figure out what that cost him.

80,000 slides / 36 exposures per roll = 2223 rolls of film
2223 rolls x $8 per roll = $17,784
$17,784 / 20yrs = $889 per year.

Keep in mind that's based on 36 exposures per roll, if he was shooting 24 exposure rolls he was looking at $26,672 total and $1333.60 a year.

Also keep in mind this was only to develop his slides, this didn't include prints. Now obviously he's making enough money to offset those costs but espeically for the amatuer photographer, the benefits of digital capture can be directly linked to the cash in your pocket! :D

[ravidrabit]

Mike,

What digital camera do you have in your family now?

Best regards,
Andy

right now we have a Powershot A70, and its not to shabby.