Whole new Set-up! help

[danielr]

Hey everyone,

My name is Daniel im 17 and im just getting started in photography, and more specifically surf photography but sports in general too. I've got a pretty healthy budget because of an inheritance and want to get my first proper set up or at least a start at it.

I'm 95% sure i will go with the Canon 20D but I'm just wondering now because ive read through the thread on all the issues is firmware and what not, are these serious enough issues to, say, hold off and wait for the next installment in the series or should i go with something else like second hand of something 1 series?My next step is to get an underwater housing for surf photography. This is the link of a possible housing, if your interested:

http://www.aquatech.com.au/products/D-35/D-35.htm (http://www.aquatech.com.au/products/D-35/D-35.htm)

I am thinking of getting two lenses to start with - Canon 15mm Fisheye f2.8 or Sigma 15mm fisheye (not sure yet), which could anyone recommend for this purpose? Is the sigma's AF as fast as the Canon? This would allow me to get up close in the barrel with the rider as is shown in this link:

http://www.fluidzone.com/pages/?pageID= ... geID=12453 (http://www.fluidzone.com/pages/?pageID=520&action=browse&setID=1019&imageID=12453)

The other lens i would get would be the Canon 50mm f1.4 lens to be a bit further back on bigger days when you can't be in the barrel. As shown here:

http://www.fluidzone.com/pages/?pageID= ... geID=12459 (http://www.fluidzone.com/pages/?pageID=520&action=browse&setID=1019&imageID=12459)

Eventually i can save and get more for land shooting and all the other types but this would let me get started and with good quality stuff. Are these two lenses you would recommend for these jobs or should i consider other lengths and lenses? Keen to hear your opinions.

Also with CF Cards im tossing up whether to get Lexar or San disk?

Thanks for your time,
Daniel

[fatrat]

WOW!!! thats pretty cool casing for under water..

wonder how you would ajust all the settings

Well cant go wrong with a 20D , as for Firmware i have firmwared a heap of things, not just my camera and i have never had a problem with firmware upgrades yet

[danielr]

they add each new button for AUD$40.

[Rob612]

WOW!!! thats pretty cool casing for under water..

wonder how you would ajust all the settings

Well cant go wrong with a 20D , as for Firmware i have firmwared a heap of things, not just my camera and i have never had a problem with firmware upgrades yet

Tested for 10 mt only, practically useless for scuba photo, very handy - if the price is right (no more than 100/150 US$) just for snorkeling/surfing. JMHO, of course.

[tim]

I've no issues with the 20D, I wouldn't worry about that. The squeeky wheel always gets the grease - you'll not hear from the 99% of people whos cameras work perfectly.

Good choice going with the 50mm F1.4 to start with, I think getting fewer of the best quality lenses is the way to go. That, the fisheyes, and maybe later a Tamron 28-75 and a Canon 70-200 F2.8 (IS?) and you'll not be able to blame your gear for taking bad photos ;)

[ShadowFlyP]

After looking at the pictures you showed, I think your lens choice might be a little "short" for surf photography. I've never done it myself, but just basing this on what you showed. All of the pictures are of the WATER. There is really no detail in the SURFER. Sure, it might be fun to get one or two pictures of the water, but I think you'd get bored with that.

I'd almost guess that for close up (as you showed in the first pictures), you'd really want to use the 50mm f1.4 (I have this lens and it's quality is amazing!). That lens will give you a good deal of detail of the surfer. The 50mm is well known as an excellent portrait lens, which is essentially what you're doing (in fact, I'd say that no matter how "close" you think you are to the surfers, you're really farther away than portrait distance...which is good since you want the whole body and some of the water).

A fish-eye is fun to play with, so you can still get that if you really want. I would recommend to start with (based on what you're doing), the 50mm and a 70-200mm (choose the f based on your budget, looks like you're doing outdoors, so f4 might be fine). The 70-200mm will fill the range that you gave for the "50mm shots". You might even want to look into the 100-400. (I'm planning on picking up the 70-200 in a few days, and based on all I've heard on it you will not be disappointed).

If you really want something in the 15mm range, think about the 17-40mm L or the 16-35mm. After owning the 17-85, and noting that you have a nearly "unlimited budget", I cannot recommend it. It's great as a starter lens but the optic quality difference between the 17-85 and the 50mm 1.4 is VERY obvious. I'm quite frustrated with it's lack of detailed capture for landscapes (anything focused at infinity)

Hope this input helps you out. Take it with a grain salt though since I just started shooting in December (had other non-SLRs before). There are some great people in the forum; when someone responds, take a look at the quality of their other posts...it'll be a good indication of how accurate their advice is for you.

Patrick

[danielr]

thanks for your help everyone, really helpful.

Does anyone else have any ideas? Another thing would be the 70- 200 - i would be 99% outdoors, is there a big enough difference between the f2.8 and the f4 to need spend that extra wad of cash and get a 70-200 f2.8?

And when im out in the water what controls would you think are necessary? it is easy enough to ask for "full control". Because im not familiar with the camera any people who are i'd appreciate your reply on which controls are important in the water? Thanks again

Daniel

[ssim]

Those are great surfing pictures that you provided the link to. I would agree that a fisheye would be too short to give you what you want.

Given the underwater housing I'm not sure if you would be able to run the zoom controls on a lens like the 16-35. If you can I can attest to this lens as it is great. If you can't you would want to go with something in the fixed focal length of 50mm.

That underwater housing looks cool. Too bad it's only to 10meters

[tim]

If you're taking photos during the day the F4 will be great, it's only in lower light that the 2.8 is really useful.

When you're out in the water use a prime (ie not a zoom lens) and set the camera on auto, that way you won't need to touch the controls. It might take a couple of tries to get the aperture and iso right, after you've worked that out you can set it and forget about the camera, and work on taking great photos :)

[SurfKahakai]

Definitely get a fish eye if you're going to be shooting in the water and close to the subjects. Flip through Surfing magazine and you'll see a few fisheye pictures. I think a fish eye and the 50mm will be perfect for water shooting. But, only about 10-20% of surf photography happens in the water.

If I were you (and I'm in the same boat) I'd pick up something longer too. The 100-400L seems to be a popular choice among the casual shooters. Professional surf photographers shoot with 600mm from land. Right now I've got a 100-300mm and it just isn't as long as I'd like it to be. I'm going to pick up the 100-400mm L and a 1.4X TC for those days when I need a little more distance.

[danielr]

hey Surfkahakai, yeah i know not alot of pics are taken in the water - but that is what really interests me, like its good to shoot from land too but there is no atmosphere like swimming out on a pretty solid day at your local and shooting with all your mates!

I definatly want a fisheye but i'm having trouble seeing if i will get the angle i want with a 20D that will have the 1.6x crop factor... Do you shoot in the water? i'd love to some of your shots and especially how your 16mm Zenitar perfoms on your Drebel.
i asked about this in the ef / efs forum, here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=70933

Which 100-400L are you looking at, or is that the 400mm prime i'm thinkin of that has different options? i've been pretty sold on the 70-200/2.8 just for shorter and more pulled back land shots then hopefully one day to hook up a 600 f4... in my dreams.

I liked the site under you post, very cool.

Great to hear from someone who does surf photography.

[SurfKahakai]

I've never shot from the water because I just started taking pictures and don't have a water case yet. I plan on picking one up sometime though.

The 16mm Zenitar is an interesting piece. I've seen some awesome pictures from it but have yet to get mine taking good pictures (I've only had it a month). All of my pictures come out looking too soft. I've been told that the Zenitar usually needs some screw adjustments before it takes clear pics. I'm going to work on mine and try for clarity very soon.

I'm going to be picking up the 100-400 4.5-5.6 L IS. If the breaks that you shoot at are pretty close to shore, you'll be able to get away with a 70-200mm and a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter.

Thanks for the compliment on the site. Hope you sign up. If you check the photography section you can see some of my pictures. Most of them suck but hey, I'm new to this!

[SurfKahakai]

Oh here's a shot with my Zenitar.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v333/surfkahakai/10AprPismoPier.jpg