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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 31 Dec 2014 (Wednesday) 22:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is a Canon EOS Rebel T5 a good camera to begin with to use for professional photography?

 
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
42,025 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2656
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 5 years ago by Wilt. (5 edits in all)
     
Jan 02, 2015 20:03 |  #31

LevelPebble wrote in post #17360437 (external link)
Bokeh is a Japanese word that describes the background being out of focus when the subject is in focus. Very important for portraits as you don't want the background to take any attention away from the subject. However for something like landscapes you would probably not want bokeh effects, so you would use different settings than you would for portraits.

Uh oh, the spread of urban legend...let us stop a falsehood soon enough to not misinform OP permanently! :-D Unfortunately this particular urban legend is the STD of photography...it is widely communicated to others! :cry: But, like most STDs we can stop further spread of this one.


  1. What is within the Depth of Field is 'in focus'
  2. What is outside the Depth of Field is 'out of focus blur'
  3. The Out of Focus blur has a certain characteristic look, which is dependent upon the lens which is in use, and that 'characteristic' is called (correctly) 'bokeh'
  4. 'Bokeh' is NOT what you call 'out of focus blur'.


Many will argue vehemently that I am WRONG...let me call Zeiss to testify about the truth...

To quote a Zeiss paper, Depth of Field and Bokeh Carl Zeiss, Camera Lens Division, March 2010...

"Bokeh – properties of blurriness

"It is therefore perfectly right that the Japanese word “bokeh“ is used around the world as a collective term for all attributes of blurring."


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
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Chief_10Beers
Didn't get his vaccinations . . .
Avatar
487 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 120
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Kenly, North Carolina
Post edited over 5 years ago by Chief_10Beers.
     
Jan 02, 2015 20:09 |  #32

jessiekins wrote in post #17361506 (external link)
Intheswamp/Ed:

What is a prime lens? I don't understand this term. Wow, your intelligence in the field astounds me. I am somewhat envious! Thank you. I want a very sharp and fast lens--I will look into the Canon 85mm. I already feel a longing for the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 haha! The price tag saddens me! Especially because I'm in college, so it's quite hard to buy lenses... I will get there.

Thank you. :-)

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is a very good Lens, IMHO It rates right up there with the L Lenses. With that said, I saw some amazing Images with the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS II Lens in this Forum...............


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I am John Galt
TVC15
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
42,025 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2656
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 5 years ago by Wilt. (9 edits in all)
     
Jan 02, 2015 20:10 as a reply to  @ post 17361483 |  #33

'Prime' is also a term which has grown into the wrong meaning, but is it too late to spread this disease! :lol: This is the 'herpes' of photography...commonly encountered, difficult to control the spread, no known cure.

Originally, before zoom lenses were affordable and optically not coke bottle bottoms, the lens mounted on the camera body was the 'prime'. You could screw 'supplmental' or 'convertors' on the front of the primary lens to make it wider or more telephoto in effect. So back then it was 'prime' vs. 'supplemental'. Then along come removeable lenses, they are still 'prime'. With removeable lenses, you can use a 'teleconvertor' behind the lens, rather than the supplemental lens screwed into the filter threads. So a teleconvertor is the supplemental optic, behind the 'prime' lens regardless of it being a fixed focal length lens (or 'prime') vs. zoom.

So we started off using 'prime' lenses which had fixed focal length. Then along come zooms, or variable focal length lenses, and they are still 'prime'...after all, although there is no supplemental lens screwed into the front of it, it just might have a teleconvertor (supplemental) mounted on the back. 'Fixed focal length' vs. 'zooms' (properly stated).

But then folks start (wrongly!) saying 'prime' vs. 'zoom' and we have the current mess that we cannot get away from. Alas, today now we all call them (wrongly) primes vs. zooms!


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
Intheswamp
Goldmember
1,428 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 636
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jan 02, 2015 23:12 as a reply to  @ Wilt's post |  #34

Wilt, you're correct. They are either, wide angle, standard, telephoto, or zoom....with the "ultra" versions thrown in there. Thanks for pointing this out...makes sense!!!

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PineBomb
I have many notable flaws
Avatar
2,470 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Likes: 1190
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Jan 03, 2015 05:15 |  #35

Wilt, of course, correctly points out the ambiguity of the term "prime," but, with all due respect, me thinks his admonishment of its dual meaning is a little overstated.

Prime or fixed focal length are acceptably equivalent and widely understood terms unless you're feeling a little cranky. ;-)a

Even using the term "fixed" introduces ambiguities.

I suppose we could call them unifocal, but then who would understand us? In a world where eyes are already glazed over from pedantic terminology, vision will grow cloudier, attention spans briefer, people will unfriend you on FB, your dog will fail to respond to the calling of it's name, neighbors will be sure to leave unpleasant gifts on your stoop, and bedfellows will vanish from thin air. How's that for overstating things?


-Matt
Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | instagram (external link) | street portrait project on instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,124 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 337
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Jan 03, 2015 06:00 |  #36

Directly translated from Swedish, they are "fixed lenses". The focal length is fixed, so that makes sense.

Since you are so far from the original subject here anyway, now if we just could get rid of people calling the 7D the 7DC, the 5D the 5DC and, especially, the 1D the 1DC, since there really is a model called the 1DC, and that's not at all the same as the 1D!

Back to the original question, my comment is this: No, the 1200D is not a good camera for professional use. Neither is the EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II. However, if the question is: Can I take photos like a professional with this stuff, then the answer would be yes. Within the limits of the equipment, you can. But the key is in the words within the limits of the equipment. You'll be limited in frame rate, focal length, max aperture, low light and a few other things. You'll also be limited in durability.
Thus such a setup isn't anything I'd recommend for anyone using it professionally, and by that I mean it's the equipment you use to put bread on your table. Hopefully someone living of his photography would be able to afford some heavier duty equipment, like a 5D Mark III with the EF 24-70 mm f/4L IS USM or a 1DX with the EF 24-70 mm f/2.8L USM, to give two examples that are more expensive or much more expensive.

But, again, as long as your stuff works and you know what it's capable of (and more important; what it's not), then you can use it like a professional.


Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,124 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 337
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Jan 03, 2015 06:22 |  #37

jessiekins wrote in post #17362338 (external link)
However, I want a closer zoom. I want sharpness.

I'm not sure what you mean by "closer zoom"? You can always walk closer to the subject, unless there's a steep cliff in the way, but that's rarely the case when it comes to portraits. Here are a few examples.

This one you can easily take with a 18-55 mm lens.

IMAGE: https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-ozrGioplK1M/S-aXVU1gJ3I/AAAAAAAAKMs/hbTMrsiowjs/s640/IMG_2388.JPG

This one you can't, since the subject would be too small (it's taken with the EF 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens at 400 mm and an 18 Megapixel camera). You can crop and thus magnify in post, but then you loose a lot of image quality in this case.

IMAGE: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-tpfEEVLcrwg/UXWok-lYAXI/AAAAAAAARSc/4zMcdRcTZmQ/s640/AP7D9831.JPG

This one is a bit on the limit. You can take something similar, at least if you crop the image a bit. This is taken with the EF 100 mm f/2.8L IS macro USM lens, and that's a special lens for close-ups. But if you back off a bit and crop, you'll get something similar. The background blur will be different, though.

IMAGE: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-ReDewIxNxKA/UyWReVKuLpI/AAAAAAAAU3c/0UeJG9lBfTk/s640/AP1D9423.JPG


Sharpness takes good quality equipment and good post processing, that's true. Remember that for everything, but especially for portraits, the quality of the lighting is essential for the result.

Anyway, I hope these samples add a bit to your understanding of where your equipment may limit you a bit. But don't forget that there's an unlimited amount of images that can be taken with what you have!

Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
42,025 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2656
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 5 years ago by Wilt. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 03, 2015 14:01 |  #38

CameraMan wrote in post #17362946 (external link)
Personally I would stay away from the EF-S lenses especially if you are definitely planning on going to Full Frame sensor in the near or distant future.

If one realizes that APS-C and FF cameras are different format cameras, and one does not expect 135 format lenses to be used on a new purchased medium format body, one realizes that one is merely 'lucky to be able to reuse any lenses on a different format camera'!

Buy and use what best suits the format that you are using right now...IF any can reused on a different format camera, you got lucky! :-D
If you need to sell the old stuff to buy something better suited to the new format, so be it.

If you buy used, you often buy at 80% of new, and when you sell you can sell the used stuff at about 80% of new...and the new price is likely higher than when you initially bought that lens! I can sell my 70-200mm f/4 L IS for more than I paid for it, for example.


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
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,015 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1627
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Jan 03, 2015 21:42 |  #39

This is likely to make me very unpopular, but really the OP has absolutely NO business starting in business as a photographer. It is plain that they have no understanding of any even basic photographic techniques. Nor the equipment that is necessary to produce good consistent results, no matter what. It would be as if I suddenly decided to to go out and buy a cheap pair of scissors a hair brush, and a hair dryer and call myself a professional hairdresser.

What the OP really needs to do is go out and learn to be a photographer. Photograph your family, your friends, your dog even. Go photograph anything you like. Do this and learn about photography. get some good books, you should be able to borrow them from your local public libary service. Books are good, as they are generally more reliable than just stuff you might read on the net, afterall the author had to get past an editor, and publisher, which can weed out a lot of the rubbish you will find self published on the net. once you have done that, and if you still want to be a pro, then also learn about running a small business first, because that will stop you making too many mistakes as you start. The most important of which is realising just how much money you will actually need to invest in the business, and how much money you will need to charge, just to stay in business, let alone make a profit.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CameraMan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,337 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 742
Joined Dec 2010
Location: In The Sticks
     
Jan 03, 2015 22:12 |  #40

Unfortunately, there are countless of individuals who buy a cheap camera and want to become professional photographers. The good thing is that some actually have the talent to do it. Others think they have the talent and produce God awful pictures. And some will give it up within a year or two. The fact that she started out with a Rebel is good. She can learn how to use it and if she can master it then maybe work a few gigs to help pay for a better body with better ISO handling, faster shutter speeds, etc. But you never know unless you try and I commend her for giving it a try.


Photographer (external link) | The Toys! | Facebook (external link) | Video (external link) | Flickr (external link)
Shampoo sounds like an unfortunate name for a hair product.
You're a ghost driving a meat-coated skeleton made from stardust, riding a rock, hurtling through space. Fear Nothing!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Intheswamp
Goldmember
1,428 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 636
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jan 03, 2015 23:42 as a reply to  @ CameraMan's post |  #41

Yep...ya gotta start somewhere. :)

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,670 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3960
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jan 04, 2015 08:52 |  #42

BigAl007 wrote in post #17364767 (external link)
This is likely to make me very unpopular, but really the OP has absolutely NO business starting in business as a photographer. It is plain that they have no understanding of any even basic photographic techniques. Nor the equipment that is necessary to produce good consistent results, no matter what. It would be as if I suddenly decided to to go out and buy a cheap pair of scissors a hair brush, and a hair dryer and call myself a professional hairdresser.

What the OP really needs to do is go out and learn to be a photographer. Photograph your family, your friends, your dog even. Go photograph anything you like. Do this and learn about photography. get some good books, you should be able to borrow them from your local public libary service. Books are good, as they are generally more reliable than just stuff you might read on the net, afterall the author had to get past an editor, and publisher, which can weed out a lot of the rubbish you will find self published on the net. once you have done that, and if you still want to be a pro, then also learn about running a small business first, because that will stop you making too many mistakes as you start. The most important of which is realising just how much money you will actually need to invest in the business, and how much money you will need to charge, just to stay in business, let alone make a profit.

Alan

I completely agree. I've been doing paid work for a couple of years now, but I still refuse to refer to myself as a "professional". Until you have at least a basic understanding of photography there's not going to be any consistency in your work and thus it's unethical imo to ask anyone to pay you for it (unless you offer a refund if they're not happy with the end result).

CameraMan wrote in post #17364797 (external link)
Unfortunately, there are countless of individuals who buy a cheap camera and want to become professional photographers. The good thing is that some actually have the talent to do it. Others think they have the talent and produce God awful pictures. And some will give it up within a year or two. The fact that she started out with a Rebel is good. She can learn how to use it and if she can master it then maybe work a few gigs to help pay for a better body with better ISO handling, faster shutter speeds, etc. But you never know unless you try and I commend her for giving it a try.

Trying is great, but one should be doing that for free by shooting friends, family and random other things before attempting to take money from people.

Intheswamp wrote in post #17364925 (external link)
Yep...ya gotta start somewhere. :)

Ed

Yes, you do. That somewhere shouldn't be at a "professional" level.

Jessica; your camera will only work as well as you do. There's no such thing as a "bad" DSLR anymore, all of them are capable of professional grade images, but only when you understand how to produce them.

What you should be doing is posting your work for critique and consideration instead of chasing what gear to buy. I started with a T2i and Sigma's version of the kit lens (not including my 20D which I had first since back then I didn't care enough to learn about photography) and through taking lots of pics, trying new techniques, posting my images here, getting critique on my work and most importantly reading a lot and watching lots of videos I've come away with a much greater understanding and still have lots more to learn (which is the main reason I'm here), but this forum is a great place to do that.

Rather than starting a bunch if threads and essentially asking people to take your hand and guide you into becoming a pro, get out there, tale a bunch of photos and read/watch a lot of what others have already posted. If you feel more overwhelmed than excited then photography just isn't for you, because you'll never stop learning in this field.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,288 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 1741
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 04, 2015 09:17 |  #43

BigAl007 wrote in post #17364767 (external link)
This is likely to make me very unpopular, but really the OP has absolutely NO business starting in business as a photographer. It is plain that they have no understanding of any even basic photographic techniques. Nor the equipment that is necessary to produce good consistent results, no matter what. It would be as if I suddenly decided to to go out and buy a cheap pair of scissors a hair brush, and a hair dryer and call myself a professional hairdresser.

What the OP really needs to do is go out and learn to be a photographer. Photograph your family, your friends, your dog even. Go photograph anything you like. Do this and learn about photography. get some good books, you should be able to borrow them from your local public libary service. Books are good, as they are generally more reliable than just stuff you might read on the net, afterall the author had to get past an editor, and publisher, which can weed out a lot of the rubbish you will find self published on the net. once you have done that, and if you still want to be a pro, then also learn about running a small business first, because that will stop you making too many mistakes as you start. The most important of which is realising just how much money you will actually need to invest in the business, and how much money you will need to charge, just to stay in business, let alone make a profit.

Alan

Amen. When someone declares their intent to be a professional before they master the basics they don't appreciate how demeaning that is to the profession they aspire to.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 04, 2015 09:40 |  #44

jessiekins wrote in post #17361515 (external link)
I shoot in manual mode. I learned how to adjust my aperture, ISO, and shutter speed. I sometimes shoot in AUTO ISO because I find the lighting can be tricky.

"Tricky" lighting is best handled by the photographer understanding the lighting and developing a way to make the image he/she is intending to make, not by using the programming the manufacturer installed in a camera as a crutch and hoping it works.

jessiekins wrote in post #17362338 (external link)
However, I want a closer zoom.

What, exactly, do you mean by "closer zoom"?

jessiekins wrote in post #17362338 (external link)
I feel like my 18-55mm isn't the best for portrait photography.

What makes you think the 18-55 lens isn't suitable for portrait work? My son uses that lens and does some fantastic work with it.

jessiekins wrote in post #17362338 (external link)
I want to begin my photography business with great quality. Do you know what I mean? Perhaps it is my manual settings, so I will continue to practice.

You have a LOT to learn to become a good photographer. You need to completely understand the camera and lenses you are using for starters. You need to learn how to use a handheld light meter and work with lighting to create the look you want in your images. You need to learn all about post-processing. The list goes on.

I agree with the last few posts about diving into being a professional photographer without having the skill sets that are required. Jessie, I feel that you should plan a path that will help you learn to become a skilled photographer, how to deal with customers, and all of the required business skills before trying to turn "professional". Working with established professional photographers as a paid "helper" can teach you a lot.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2005
     
Jan 04, 2015 14:21 |  #45

One of the oddities of the world of DSLR's is that the people who purchase the devices all too often expect the toys will make them absolute experts as soon as they're unboxed. That attitude commonly persists with even those who have owned a DSLR for a few months and insist on the need to upgrade the equipment after owning it for only a few months, or want to learn the type of lens that will make their images look just like a fashion shoot they've seen in a magazine.

Of course, the basics of photography typically take a couple of years to learn, and anything beyond those basics requires far more time.
It's fair to say that you never stop learning about photography, and when you think you've started to master any aspect of photography, you're still going to be a beginner at another aspect. It's not unusual to read messages on this forum from people who are experienced portrait photographers but are nervous when they're faced with the challenge of capturing action sports.

Even with the increasing capacity of DSLR's, a photographer needs to be dedicated to a lifetime of learning.

Most difficult is to learn how to think as the combination of a camera and lens sees the world (of course. it's not the same as eyes and brains). When you start to approach the point that you think and anticipate as cameras work, the importance of equipment begins to fade and technique and experience becomes paramount.




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

51,534 views & 76 likes for this thread
Is a Canon EOS Rebel T5 a good camera to begin with to use for professional photography?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 JohnBlackburn
1514 guests, 254 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.