Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 17 Jan 2016 (Sunday) 12:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Equipment recommendations...

 
Brandon ­ James
Member
218 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Post edited over 2 years ago by Brandon James.
     
Jan 17, 2016 12:55 |  #1

Hello everyone,

I am looking for suggestions on equipment here (looking to spend about $5-6,000) based on what I am looking to shoot.

First and foremost, lifestyle portraits here in NYC and back home in rural PA (engagement photos, headshots for Broadway and performing friends, baby announcements, etc). Some studio settings, but mostly outdoor for head shots and experimental with friends until I gather a solid portfolio to where I feel comfortable charging.

Ideally I would like a camera with video capabilities to put together some packages.

I also shoot a fair amount of live music, so something that would work well for that. That along with some of the "experimental" work I am looking for, preferably something that works very well in low lighting.

I am fairly confident in my skills, I am just looking for the right quality equipment to help me achieve greater quality. I have always relied heavily on post processing, but it would be nice to use it just for touch ups and adding filters and lighting effects. I am aware it sounds like i am trying to take a lot on, but it's not as bad as it sounds :lol:

Here are the cameras I have narrowed down to, but I'm also open to suggestions:
- 5D mark III
- 70D
- 6D

I would also like a prime lens that would function (for the most part) across the board. I would also like to supplement 1 or maybe 2 less expensive lenses for some of the less serious shooting.

Along with the camera and lenses, what lighting would you recommend to get started? Any other staple pieces of equipment?

I know my laundry list is kind of all over the place, but I have my notebook eagerly awaiting notes and a shopping list!


-Brandon
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brandonsammons (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
s1a1om
Senior Member
Avatar
502 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 442
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Hartford, CT, USA
     
Jan 19, 2016 17:44 |  #2

I'm surprised you haven't had any responses yet

Read the specs of the 5DIII, the 70D, and the 6D. I really wanted the 5DIII, but couldn't find anything in its specs to justify it (to me) over the 6D. So, I ended up with a 6D, which I really like so far.

With some searching on this forum, you'll probably see recommendations for the 50, 85L, and 135L for prime lenses for portraits. Some people prefer the primes for the extra light, but I've seen some threads suggesting the 70-200 F2.8L II gets similar results to the 135L above F2.8. To each his own, just something to consider.

I am really enjoying my new 16-35L f4 and see it as my primary "walk around" lens.

How much do you want to be lugging around for lighting? Speedlights can be a good lightweight option. Strobes can be more powerful. I like my Alienbee B1600 and have fun playing with outdoor portraits, but with a softbox, light stand, and battery it does get kind of unwieldy. I frequently need a ND filter to stay below the max sync speed. I use Radiopoppers to trigger my strobe and haven't had any issues with them.

I'm obviously still new, but am having a lot of fun (and learning a lot) with my setup.


Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,011 posts
Likes: 1013
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 19, 2016 17:47 |  #3

What is your experience level? I suspect many of us are reluctant to suggest spending that much without knowing more.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lilkngster
Senior Member
721 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 38
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Jan 19, 2016 18:59 |  #4

Taylor Swift's people are going to come after you!

Have you considered Sony gear? I don't have myself, but looks like an a7rii or one of the a7s's with the 25mm f/2.0 Batis would do nicely with your flickr type pics. The 55mm or 85/90mm for your other stuff based on your focal length/macro needs. Im sure an a7 owner can chime in re: 4k video and thoughts on bodies and lenses.

What are you using now?


6dII/80d/1dIII|8mm to 400mm|Pro-10/100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,590 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3176
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jan 19, 2016 19:27 |  #5

.

lilkngster wrote in post #17865082 (external link)
What are you using now?

I was wondering that, also. You (OP) say that you is confident in your skills, so I must presume that you are currently shooting and keeping those skills honed.

Knowing what gear you already have would help us to give more informed suggestions.
Also, do you plan to keep the gear you have, or do you plan to sell it?

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brandon ­ James
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
218 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Jan 20, 2016 09:40 |  #6

s1a1om wrote in post #17864989 (external link)
I'm surprised you haven't had any responses yet

Read the specs of the 5DIII, the 70D, and the 6D. I really wanted the 5DIII, but couldn't find anything in its specs to justify it (to me) over the 6D. So, I ended up with a 6D, which I really like so far.

With some searching on this forum, you'll probably see recommendations for the 50, 85L, and 135L for prime lenses for portraits. Some people prefer the primes for the extra light, but I've seen some threads suggesting the 70-200 F2.8L II gets similar results to the 135L above F2.8. To each his own, just something to consider.

I am really enjoying my new 16-35L f4 and see it as my primary "walk around" lens.

How much do you want to be lugging around for lighting? Speedlights can be a good lightweight option. Strobes can be more powerful. I like my Alienbee B1600 and have fun playing with outdoor portraits, but with a softbox, light stand, and battery it does get kind of unwieldy. I frequently need a ND filter to stay below the max sync speed. I use Radiopoppers to trigger my strobe and haven't had any issues with them.

I'm obviously still new, but am having a lot of fun (and learning a lot) with my setup.

Thanks for your suggestions! Lighting is what I'm looking to master more of and where I need to put most of my focus. Im going to research those l


-Brandon
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brandonsammons (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neacail
Goldmember
Avatar
1,188 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Likes: 437
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Post edited over 2 years ago by neacail.
     
Jan 20, 2016 09:56 |  #7

Based on your projected uses . . . I'm going to recommend the 6D. The reason I'm suggesting the 6D is that it does really well at high ISO. If you're shooting live music (which is often in dark venues, I imagine), the 6D will serve you very well.

I have the 70D, and 6D, and I have borrowed a colleague's 5D III on occasion. I only use the 70D for sports. The IQ on the 6D is much, much, better (IMO). I prefer to IQ of the 6D to the 5D III, but the 5D III is quite a bit peppier than the 6D.

I also use the wifi on the 6D a lot: for tethered shooting.

Sorry. I can't offer advice for primes. I mostly use zooms. My 24-70 & 70-200 cover the vast majority of my needs. Actually . . . I do really enjoy my 40 pancake. That is an inexpensive and fun lens with satisfying IQ. It might be worth adding to your kit.


Shelley
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 591
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 20, 2016 09:58 |  #8

lilkngster wrote in post #17865082 (external link)
What are you using now?

gonzogolf wrote in post #17864991 (external link)
What is your experience level? I suspect many of us are reluctant to suggest spending that much without knowing more.

Both extremely relevant questions.
In what ways do you feel your current gear is holding you back?


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brandon ­ James
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
218 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Jan 20, 2016 10:11 |  #9

Tom Reichner wrote in post #17865106 (external link)
.

I was wondering that, also. You (OP) say that you is confident in your skills, so I must presume that you are currently shooting and keeping those skills honed.

Knowing what gear you already have would help us to give more informed suggestions.
Also, do you plan to keep the gear you have, or do you plan to sell it?

.

My starter kit (years ago) was my 30D where I did most of my basic learning. From that time up until recently, I relied on post processing to embellish and add all the bells and whistles (lighting/effects), which is one of my favorite parts of photography and the creative process. Since then, I regretfully have been renting my camera and lenses based on what I need and when I needed it.

I kind of had a wake up call when a friend of mine presented a job opportunity that I turned down. Could I have taken it and been successful? Most likely. But I didn't want to be that kid on American Idol (figuratively speaking) who's friend and family didn't stop them from embarrassing himself. The work ended up being featured nationally. Times Square, Good Morning America, physical copies that my friends all have. I don't want that to have to happen again. I'd like to hone and perfect my skills this year, and maybe within the next year photography can begin to be a nice chunk of my income.

Sorry for such a long story, but I just want people to understand where I am coming from. I admittedly have MUCH to learn. But I have had a solid start and I know where I am heading and what I want to do.

The biggest undertaking for me now will be lighting and delving into a bit more of the technical aspects. I plan to play around for the rest of the year with my model and actor friends to polish my work a bit, get a solid portfolio and launch my website.

Many may see this as too much too soon, but I don't feel that way. So that you to those who are enabling me  :p


-Brandon
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brandonsammons (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,945 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2253
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Wilt. (3 edits in all)
     
Jan 20, 2016 10:20 |  #10

I will be the first to commit photographic heresy with this statement:

  • You probably do not really need more than about 10-12Mpixels in a camera sensor, as that resolution sufficed for many years as 'professional' gear for all the photos of the type you listed!


Your choice of camera may be more driven by the operational video capabilities (limitations) of the body, rather than driven by the still image resolution!
After all, 10-12Mpixel cameras in 2007 were perfectly fine for professionals shooting portraits and weddings and other events with still cameras a decade ago, and today's consumer is no better able to detect pixel count than yesteryear's consumer! The newer bodies have far better low light high ISO stills shooting capability certainly.

So the complement of gear that you have to add to the standard Canon dSLR to turn it into a real video capture tool should be a consideration in the choice of which model.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maverick75
Cream of the Crop
5,702 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 610
Joined May 2012
Location: Riverside,California
     
Jan 20, 2016 10:42 |  #11

I would rent some gear to see how you like it. You can look at specs all day and get other's opinions but you won't know for sure until you use it.


- Alex Corona Sony A7, Canon 7DM2/EOS M, Mamiya 645/67
Flickr (external link) - 500px (external link) - Website (external link)- Feedback -Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 591
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 20, 2016 15:51 |  #12

Wilt wrote in post #17865751 (external link)
I will be the first to commit photographic heresy with this statement:

  • You probably do not really need more than about 10-12Mpixels in a camera sensor, as that resolution sufficed for many years as 'professional' gear for all the photos of the type you listed!

For the most part, I agree. When shopping for a camera, megapixel count should be pretty low on your required features list.
However, a camera both with the other features you want - great low-light capability, and a reasonably competent video mode - will likely also be a recent model, which incidentally has a high megapixel count.

Look for a lot of megapixels if you often have to shoot things that are very far away, and you expect to have to crop a lot.

Wilt wrote in post #17865751 (external link)
Your choice of camera may be more driven by the operational video capabilities (limitations) of the body, rather than driven by the still image resolution!
After all, 10-12Mpixel cameras in 2007 were perfectly fine for professionals shooting portraits and weddings and other events with still cameras a decade ago, and today's consumer is no better able to detect pixel count than yesteryear's consumer! The newer bodies have far better low light high ISO stills shooting capability certainly.

So the complement of gear that you have to add to the standard Canon dSLR to turn it into a real video capture tool should be a consideration in the choice of which model.

With that sort of budget, I might suggest a separate machine altogether for video work. For video work, DSLRs have a great sensor and great image quality - but it's there that the "Pro" list ends and the "Con" list begins: poor ergonomics, inadequate autofocus, terrible onboard audio, file size limitation for long clips.

We got a Sony NEX for video work - it's SO easy to use, and the image quality is really good. The DSLRs only come out for video on occasion.


Brandon, know that a single person can not do good video and good still photos at the same time. I might even posit that a single person can't do REALLY good video+audio at the same time - for event coverage such as weddings, ideally you'd like to have two or three cameras plus some dedicated audio gear.


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brandon ­ James
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
218 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Jan 20, 2016 16:01 |  #13

nathancarter wrote in post #17866137 (external link)
With that sort of budget, I might suggest a separate machine altogether for video work. For video work, DSLRs have a great sensor and great image quality - but it's there that the "Pro" list ends and the "Con" list begins: poor ergonomics, inadequate autofocus, terrible onboard audio, file size limitation for long clips.

We got a Sony NEX for video work - it's SO easy to use, and the image quality is really good. The DSLRs only come out for video on occasion.

Brandon, know that a single person can not do good video and good still photos at the same time. I might even posit that a single person can't do REALLY good video+audio at the same time - for event coverage such as weddings, ideally you'd like to have two or three cameras plus some dedicated audio gear.

I am more than okay sacrificing the video for image quality and buying that separately. They are for completely different products, the video not being as important. Just for some side Vlogging.


-Brandon
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brandonsammons (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paul55555555
Hatchling
1 post
Joined Jan 2016
     
Jan 20, 2016 16:19 |  #14

Hello Guys
For some time I have wanted to get a telephoto lens which is very close to 500mm without spending well over £2000. So what are my options well there are many to choose from ranging from F4-F8 and its hard to know here in this little discussion. I will try to answer some questions and in the process perhaps someone can answer my dilemma.

So what are the options well we have many please see the list below.

Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 Sport-(at 320mm your F stop is at 5.6)
Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 C (at 387mm your F stop is at 5.6)
Sigma Prime 500mm F4.5 none OS APO DG HSM
Canon 500mm is/mark2 (too expensive for me)
Tamron 150-600mm F6.3 (380mm your F stop 5.6)
Canon Prime 400mm non is (very sharp)
Canon 300mm F4 (good lens close to the 400mm)
Canon 100-400 mark 1 (don’t like the idea of dust getting in)
Canon 100-400 mark 2 (seems very good quality closer to 370mm)

So as you can see the list is large and the costs of each lens vary the sigma contemporary is the cheapest option and considered sharper than the Tamron. I think the sigma sport will be slightly better quality but it is a lot heaver and according to a lot of reviews its only a little sharper. The other lens I have been looking at is the sigma prime apo hsm dg non OS lens. It is considered to be tack sharp at f8 and at 5.6 very sharp. I am really torn between them as the sigma prime can be picked up for around £1500 second hand but it has no image stabilisation. The next sharpest would be between the sigma sport and the canon 400mm and 100-400 mark 2. The 400mm prime being a lot cheaper please see the list below for price comparison.

Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 Sport £1200
Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 C £750.00
Canon 500mm £3000-£6000
Tamron 150-600mm £600
Canon Prime 400mm £1000
Canon 300mm F4 £1000
Sigma Prime 500mm F4.5 £1500 second hand
Canon 100-400 mark 1 £800
Canon 100-400 mark 2 £1400

So my choice comes down to two things price and sharpness. I am very tempted to have a 500mm prime lens such as the sigma F4.5 as it is a prime and is very close to what a 500mm F4 lens from canon can do. But the choice is yours but any advise would be appreciated what would you go for. I would be using the lens for wild life and possibly sport. I all ready own the following equipment so am wondering what to do.

Canon is mark 1 70-200 2.8
Canon 300mm F4
Canon mark 1 1.4x 2x extenders
Tamron 800mm prime f8 old manual lens
Sigma 17mm-50mm 2.8
Canon 600D and Canon 7D

So what should I add to my camera equipment I am not afraid of using manual focus when people talk about their lens not being sharp in their photos. It is very clear to me their focus is off as some part of the image is in focus and sharp. I do think people need to learn how to use manual focus and practise more.

Thank you for your comments regards Paul.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,339 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 233
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
Post edited over 2 years ago by kf095. (3 edits in all)
     
Jan 20, 2016 19:37 |  #15

Brandon James wrote in post #17861601 (external link)
Hello everyone,

I am looking for suggestions on equipment here (looking to spend about $5-6,000) based on what I am looking to shoot.


I would suggest 6D as FF camera with ISO capabilities to handle what you want, without too heavy light set, but light is still needed. Check on dedicated sub-forum.
And three L primes. Wide, 50L and 135L.
Wide is cool for video. And video in another bunch of optional equipment. Which starts with good video, sound and FX software.
FF, L and primes is old school, but will make you stand out.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,648 views & 1 like for this thread
Equipment recommendations...
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Byrdnest
810 guests, 397 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.