DIGITAL Vs. FILM - Canon Rebel? Professional work?

Hi -

Awesome board - I just discovered it.

I hope you guys can help me out. I'm really interested in getting into professional photography. Im taking a trip to Central America and really want to complete a photojournalism project. Im hoping to make it into a portfolio and using it as a resume to get a job with AP or Reuters? Is an unrealistic goal? What kind of experience do you need for such a position? How are most of you making money in photography. I'd love to figure out a way to get paid to take pictures around the world.

I've been borrowing my brothers old Nikin FA for the past two years. I'm wondering if its time to go digital. What are your thoughts? Is that the future of the industry? Would it be dumb to buy a film camera? From what I understand, digital photography has already surpassed the quality of 30mm. If thats true, it seems like a no-brainer to buy a digital. It would save tons on film costs, developing costs, and lab time. I could alters everything through Photoshop.

So I've been trying to find the best digital to buy and I've come up with the Canon EOS Digital Rebel. My price range is 400-1000 at the very most. It seems like this is the most professional digital camera I can buy. Any other worthy alternatives?

Thanks so much for everyones help.
Best,
Rudy

The two formats both have their uses, and their advantages. I personally think digital and film compliment each other in the photography world nicely, and would not wnat to have to make a choice of one over another.

If you only have $1,000.00 to spend,. then you are really not in the market for a DSLR (digital SLR)

The $1,000.00 will get you the camera,. but there is so much more you need! Lenses,. CF cards,. Batteruies tripods etc...

I supposed you could get by with the kit les for a while,. and yes it is a great camera,. but I'm just warning you,. when you spend the $1,000.00,... that will NOT be the end of the expenses..

Welcome to the club just about everyday I learn something from this forum.
People are visual creatures so I feel there will always be $$$ and a future in photography. The setback is there is so many of us & Pro's with names on the market, competition is high very high. So you have to be patient and continue your educational background & build a multi portfolio of different types of work.

I feel if you have or can get a film camera keep it I still have two for backup & speciality film. Also from experience digital is great I love it but everyone including major clients is still not ready for it. There is still alot of items that digital can't truley reproduce. Take the time learn Photoshop editing.
At least wait a couple of months to go digital so the new model can surface, something may hit the market to drive prices down or a better product worth saving for.
Good Luck

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
If you only have $1,000.00 to spend,. then you are really not in the market for a DSLR (digital SLR)

The $1,000.00 will get you the camera,. but there is so much more you need! Lenses,. CF cards,. Batteruies tripods etc...

I supposed you could get by with the kit les for a while,. and yes it is a great camera,. but I'm just warning you,. when you spend the $1,000.00,... that will NOT be the end of the expenses..

I can definitely agree, you can easily spend as much, or more than the camera in accessories. Lenses, for example...one of the lenses I have was $1900 when I got it! The camera I am using, the 10D was $1500 for the body. Now, God help you if you become an L-caholic!! In case you are not familiar with this disorder, it is the constant need for Canon L glass (Canon Pro lenses). It is incurable and has been know to cause relationships to cease under certain circumstances. The most notable feature on these lenses is the red ring and they have a red "L" after the aperature. For example like on one I have, the Canon 16-35mm F2.8 L for example. That lens runs about $1350. Mind you the 2 lenses aforementioned are pro lenses and they are awesome. I can't emphasise how much you can't half bake this! I can't speak for the 300D, but the 10D is really bad about exposing cheap glass. I have been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I have pics to prove it too! Enter the $1900 Sigma 120-300mm F2.8EX lens and that totally revamped an otherwise blah combo of the 10D and Sigma 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 dirt cheap lens ($150). The Sigma EX line is a great alternative to the Canon L series and costs a lot less!

CDS,
I know, my Sigma lens is second only to your trailer needing 500mm F4.5 lens! LOL

I just spent the morning at the Hope Classic Golf Tournament, and was interested to see that there were only about a half dozen still photographers working the event. It was an interesting mixture of equipment, mostly Canon, but more surprisingly, almost all shooting film. As it turns out, only one of the photographers was shooting digital, and that was a guy with a 10D and a 100-400L. I had an interesting conversation with another one of the fellows who was carrying a 600mm prime on an EOS-1(?), and he told me that most of the people there were working under contract with PGA and the event organizers, and were required to submit all work on film---digital not allowed, thank you very much. (Note: that was the first time I recall ever seeing the the 600mm f/4.0 monster in the flesh. Lordy, lordy. I almost built up enough nerve to ask him if I could touch it, but chickened out in the end.)

I believe the person with the 10D was with the local newspaper. I seem to recall him being the same person I met at the grand opening of a local casino a couple months ago.

This year was the first time they had Security personnel checking purses, backpacks, and fanny packs. I found out that they weren't looking for weapons of mass destruction...they were impounding cell phones and cameras. At least they weren't checking pockets, making us take our shoes off, or running us through metal detectors.

The PGA is a very anal group of people.

There are countless debates about film vs. digital. Both have their merits. Both have their uses.

I use both. I like both. I use digital now more than film but.....if I was on an assignment to live in the jungles of Madagascar for two years and shoot wildlife....I ain't bringing a computer to take pictures with, and I doubt I'd bring anything requiring a recharge.

Luckily I just shoot the wildlife at weddings. Hey, it can be very dangerous.

One grand... is gonna get you half of a decent lens.

Good luck with your pursuit.

I would just as soon shoot all digital, but like someone said above, the customer sometimes wants film.

Also a quick note, most of the places will require you to submit slides when interviewing for a photography job.

I've talked with some photogs that have shot for the PGA and hate it. They said they needed to grow up and wake up to the world of digital. The PGA film processing crew spends countless hours converting film to digital. What a waste of time.

I carry both digital and film cameras, although the film cameras (an old FTb and an AE-1) don't often see the light of day.

Before I bought my 300D, I considered going with a brand new film set-up; probably Nikon. From what I could tell, I could have gotten a pretty expansive film set-up for what I paid for the 300D.

But, I was getting tired of my Olympus P&S and its' 3.1 megapixels. I wanted more in a digital format, and I started to question the wisdom of getting another film rig when I've already got (let's see... one, two, three...) four of them. A fifth didn't make much sense...

Steve

Starting with the Digital Rebel is a good choice because that is a good starting point to learning. As to cost, $1000 wont' get far. You may need to get a 2nd mortgage for the rest... (kidding..)... but go slowly. The kit lens will at least get you started to know what direction for you to go. After you are familar, install the hack and you will be quite surprised. Caution, photography is addictive. Look at me. within a few months of getting my rebel, i've gotten many additional accessories...

I would say it is probably not worth oppeing any advise specifically aimed at the original poster as the thread is over a year old

It would be Korell's fault for looking back through very old threads and actually replying to one!