Big Choice!

Bonecollector wrote in post #17419238
Thank you very much!

What camera do you have?

I now use a 1D Mark 4. That has been my primary camera for a year and 4 months.
Prior to that, a 50D was my primary camera from 2010 thru October of 2013.
Prior to that, the 5D "classic" was my primary camera.
Prior to that, a 1D Mark 2.......my first DSLR.
In between some of those I tried a 7D a couple of times.....couldn't stand the noisy files, so those "experiments" were quite brief.

Most of the photos on my website were taken with the 50D. I paid $400 for it. No need to spend a lot. That $400 body has taken hundreds of photos that have been sold for use in magazines, calendars, advertisements, etc.

Would you recommend I get a 50D? They must be cheaper now.

I really want to be able to shoot in RAW. I don't need a $2000.00 camera, I just want to be able to do everything a $2000.00 camera can do, maybe without the ease, and without a few features. That should be possible right? It's kinda like this... I don't know if your into archery, but you can buy a $500.00 PSE and shoot the same deer that a guy with a $1500.00 HOYT shot... the guy with the Hoyt, may have a little easier draw, a little less noise/vibration, and a little lighter bow. But they both can do essentially the same thing.

Am I right? Or are cameras not quite like that?

For learning even an old 300D (Digital Rebel) if it were working OK would be very good for learning what you want to lean. Although I would suggest that probably the best bang for buck in this sector would be either a 40D or 50D depending on just how much budget you have. There are some advantages to the 50D that the small difference in price to the 40D make it a better buy. I upgraded from a 20D last summer to a good low shutter count 50D and it cost me £250 from a retail dealer with a good warranty. The 20D I had had for about two years, that one came from one of those Cash Converter type places, only £130 with a 12 month warranty. Befor that it was a 300D that I had from new in about 2005.

Alan

The other think I'm looking for in a new camera besides RAW is the Slow Exposer? Id that what it's called?

When the photographer sets the camera up on a tripod, and it takes a long photo, and make the water look smooth, or the lights really stand out.

Bonecollector wrote in post #17420039
Would you recommend I get a 50D? They must be cheaper now.

That is one camera I would recommend. I responded to your PM, and listed a few other cameras that give a lot of bang for the buck.

Bonecollector wrote in post #17420039
It's kinda like this... I don't know if your into archery, but you can buy a $500.00 PSE and shoot the same deer that a guy with a $1500.00 HOYT shot... the guy with the Hoyt, may have a little easier draw, a little less noise/vibration, and a little lighter bow. But they both can do essentially the same thing.

Am I right? Or are cameras not quite like that?

Cameras are like that, Seth. Or I could expand on that statement a bit and say that photography is like that.

In the example you gave, what is it that truly enables either shooter to harvest that deer? Is it the bow? Or, is it the hundreds of hours of scouting that the hunter put in prior to the season? All those days he spend searching for tracks to learn the deer's travel routes? All of the days he spent carefully placing trail cameras so that he could learn more about the deer's whereabouts and daily habits? The care and attention he exercised when he chose a location for his tree stand? The additional care and attention he used when constructing (or erecting) the stand, along with the diligence he employed when he identified key shooting lanes from the stand down to the deer trails, and when he painstakingly cut away all of the brush and branches that were in the way of any future shot?

Those are the things that enable the hunter to harvest the deer. Give a guy like that any bow (even an old recurve) and he will be able to harvest a deer. Conversely, if you gave the $1500 Hoyt to a guy who was lazy, or who didn't spend time doing all of the things I just mentioned, do you think he has any chance whatsoever of getting a deer? Heck no!

Furthermore, besides all of the woodcraft involved, there is the hunter's mastery of his equipment. I guarantee you that if you gave a hunter that $500 PSE bow and gave him three months to practice shooting it, he would shoot much more accurately than a guy who was given that $1500 Hoyt, and only two weeks to practice (all other factors being equal). In fact, I bet the results wouldn't even be close. The $500 PSE guy would blow the other guy away!

And that is what photography is like. The guy who spends a lot of time doing all of the legwork, all of the practice, is going to get good results, time after time after time. Whether he has a 50D or a new 5D3, or even if he has a point-and-shoot.

The doofus with the barely-ever-used 1Dx and 70-200mm L lens is going to take crappy pics. Why? Because he is a doofus, and having a great camera isn't going to change that.

So, does the camera make a difference in how good the pictures are? Yes, it does. But the photographer also makes a difference......a much, much bigger difference.

Great reply... you put so much time into helping me out... I hope I can repay you sometime!

If you ever come to MA I can guide you.. I know where ducks, deer, bear, fox, raccoons, squirrels, rivers etc. are that you could take some great pics of are. Only problem is you live on the other side of the country!

Thank you so much,
BC

50D, 5D(first version) or t2i would be a great start.

Third the 50D - I still have one for backup, and out on ebay used they are 200-300 body only, 400-500 with lens/batteries, etc... Excellent starter camera that can let you get pretty darn serious before you 'have to' upgrade.

From Canon 70D with EF-S 18-55mm IS STM Lens Kit Refurbished for $863.36 + sales tax
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Refurbished for $167.99 + plus sales tax

That is going to total about $1,100 after taxes. You will end up spending that much or more so do it now and enjoy a great camera while you learn the finer things of photography. I went from a Kodak Brownie to a 100% manual Minolta SLR and it didn't stunt my growth.

Then start saving for some additional gear like a flash, fast lens, top quality telephoto lens, etc. That will be something like $3,000 and it gets worse.

I recently upgraded from a 50D to a 7D Mark II and I am keeping the 50D because I feel it is worth much more than the current used prices of around $300 (in case you are seriously considering getting a used camera.)

Bonecollector wrote in post #17420039
Would you recommend I get a 50D? They must be cheaper now.

I really want to be able to shoot in RAW. I don't need a $2000.00 camera, I just want to be able to do everything a $2000.00 camera can do, maybe without the ease, and without a few features. That should be possible right? It's kinda like this... I don't know if your into archery, but you can buy a $500.00 PSE and shoot the same deer that a guy with a $1500.00 HOYT shot... the guy with the Hoyt, may have a little easier draw, a little less noise/vibration, and a little lighter bow. But they both can do essentially the same thing.

Am I right? Or are cameras not quite like that?

I've had my 50D for 5 years or so - and I feel I've reached a plateau with it. The 300D (original Digital Rebel) was my first DSLR, then I got a 30D, then the 50D. Big jump in image quality and autofocus performance each time - but the jump to the 70D (I wouldn't want a 60D) isn't attractive to me because I don't care about video and the improved autofocus wouldn't make much difference to me. (I wouldn't want a 60D because, for some reason, Canon eliminated the microfocus adjustment function in the 60D. 50D has it and it's back in the 70D.)

My point is the 50D is everything I need at this time. If that sounds like your situation, you should be able to find a 50D at a good price.

-js

I would agree with No6, the 50D is a really good camera, and currently in the S/H market probably offers the best bang for the buck, if you don't need video. I got mine last August and it was £250 from a retail store with 12mth warranty. Pick up a second hand 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS secondhand to go with the body and you have a really good system to learn with. That gives you a good wide angle right up to a good telephoto range of focal lengths with very good optics, although the build quality is not as good as the more expensive lenses. For learning general photography that is going to allow you to do just about everything you need to do. Eventually you will try things and find that you are limited, probably more by the lens than the body, that is then the time to start to look for alternative gear. My range of digital bodies over the last ten years has been 300D, 20D, 50D. The main reason I went to the 20D was because the AF packed up in the 300D, and AF lenses are a pain to manually focus all the time. The 20D was OK but it was my 50th birthday so I treated myself.

Alan

Thank you for all the help!

Thank you all for the help...
I've been quite busy lately so I haven't been on much!
I hope within the next few weeks I'll be freed up again!
BC