Newbie: what camera should I get?

canoflan wrote in post #2388911
Welcome.

I would get an excellent condition (perhaps new) Rebel XT body and a 17-40 f/4L lens. That will keep you close to $1000. The lens will make the most of your pictures than any camera in that price range.

No offense, but that's an absolutely horrible first lens.

Who recommends an "L" as a first and only lens to someone who's never used an SLR before?

On top of that, as an only lens, she'll be stuck with an F4, no flash, no bag, no nothing. She'll be able to take daytime landscape shots and thats about it. The lens will be built like a tank, there will be no chromatic abberations, and it'll focus real fast but how does that help her get started in SLR photography?

Bill

Bill Ng wrote in post #2389344
Get yourself a Rebel XT or Rebel XTi with the kit lens and a Canon 50mm 1.8 If all you have is $1000 you have to remember that you're going to need a filter or two, a camera bag, you'll want to save for a decent flash, and you should get a tripod or monopod.

The equipment I listed will be enough to get you started and learning which right now, is more important than anything else.

Bill

Thanks for your suggestions...

Camera bag will not be a problem to get. I have one home right now I can use if I don't get too much lol and also shouldnt be too expensive for someone to get me as a gift for my birthday which is not far off from when I get the camera.. On the tripod, I have one that I bought for my camcorder which is very sturdy and should work for the camera that I get (butI don't know like I have said I am new and dont know anything lol)

Just a couple of questions

What kind of filters are good to start out with? Are they ok to buy used?

The lens you suggested, what kind of situations is that good for?

And what lens would be good for baseball, sometimes under the lights.

This may sound like I am stupid, which I am not because I know what they are used for lol... but you mean that I would need an external flash? Is that best for taking pictures of kids and such..

Thanks everyone for your help!!

I hope noone took offense or misunderstood what I meant about the way a Rebel looks. Actually, I didn't mean at all how the pro's see you, they know the camera is just a tool. Alot of books do refer to the presence of a camera, and that if you have a low-end that clients family members have, it CAN be a harder sell. This isn't something I just made up. Walking into a shoot with a 1Ds gives the impression that you KNOW what you're doing. Walking in with a Rebel gives the impression you MAY be new at this, and you MIGHT KNOW what you're doing. The reason I even mentioned this, is the fact that there is intention to eventually go pro. Another fact is the Rebel is a small camera, and getting used to that, then upgrading will have a different feel. I went from a 20 to a 5, and there's not too much difference. Had I gone from a Rebel, the 5 would be a much larger camera. The Rebel is a great camera and will give high quality results, just as the 30D would. Besides, the 30 is 2 frames per second faster, has higher ISO settings and feels better to me. Go with what feels right!

Get a UV filter mainly for glass protection. Used cameras can be good as long as they have a lower amount of shutter actuation and the body is in good condition. The external flash is great indoors if you bounce it off of the ceiling or a nearby wall. It can work well in bright background light for shadow fill if reflectors and strobes aren't in the picture. I use mine all the time indoors and you'd never know. It won't do much outdoors past 105mm. Still will help a little though. For what you're looking to spend, Tamron and Sigma make some good lenses with an aperture of 2.8. The lowr aperture is crucial for stopping action in low light situations. The lenses that work best for this start at about $750 and work there way up. Ideally, you'd want a 70-200, but for nowget what you can afford.

kgauger30 wrote in post #2389530
Thanks for your suggestions...
Just a couple of questions

What kind of filters are good to start out with? Are they ok to buy used?

The lens you suggested, what kind of situations is that good for?

And what lens would be good for baseball, sometimes under the lights.

This may sound like I am stupid, which I am not because I know what they are used for lol... but you mean that I would need an external flash? Is that best for taking pictures of kids and such..

Thanks everyone for your help!!

You can get by with no filters for now. As you need them or want them, you can add them later. They are not essential. Um, that said, I recently started a thread titled "Why EVERYONE needs a polarizer". If you physically don't have the cash, then you don't ... but a polarizer will be a good addition down the road.

The kit lens is a great, inexpensive wide angle. Now, be careful with the word "inexpensive". At least one person in this thread used the word "inexpensive" to describe a $600 lens. That person is a crack addict. Inexpensive to me is something less than $200. There is a general concensus on these forums that anything that costs less than the price of a black-market kidney is just junk. Please do me a favor and try not to fall into that trap. The lens that has brought me the most joy and the best photos in the past 14 years cost me $79 brand new.

Anyway, back to the kit lens. The kit lens is inexpensive and covers the wide-angle area very well. It's not a fast lens (by fast I mean, "moves a lot of light") .... but it offers bang for the buck.

The other lens I recommended is Canon's 50mm 1.8. This is a very very fast lens and it costs about $80 brand new. It can only work as a sports lens if you are extremely close to the action. Where this lens shines is in portraiture and low-light situations.

If you're looking for a telephoto (what you will need for sports) that's inexpensive (that's MY version of inexpensive) .... the only options that exist will only be good for daylight sports, and will really blow when used in low-light.

Some people get by with the Canon 85mm 1.8 (about $350), which is an excellent portrait lens that can kinda be stretched for some indoor sports work ... but I'd personally put my money on the Canon 100mm 2.0 (about $375) that would be better at the sports end with a marginal loss of portraiture ability.

An external flash is a great addition to any bag, but don't expect it to help you get a picture of your kid out in right field while you're over by the dug-out ... flashes simply aren't that powerful. Flashes are best when used properly indoors or used for fill light (topic for another discussion)

Bill

I think I used the word "bargain" for the 70-200 F/4L non-IS...well...because it is! It's not cheap. Not at all.

And I agree that you can get FANTASTIC results from the 50mm 1.8 MKII, or even the kit for that matter, within limitations.

But I think there also is a direct relationsip with the cost and quality/performance of the lens, just like a lot of things out there.

You are always going to get people who don't care too much about the "L" and those that act like they are addicted to "L" stuff!

Just figure out what you want, what you think you need, and what you can afford...if that happens to be a $75 nifty fity or a $1500 "L" so be it!!!

You guys are great. Not only am I learning things from you, but I am getting a better idea of what I should get. Thank you for all the imput and keep it coming, I am a sponge for knowledge on this subject and welcome any opinons.

Kim

kgauger30 wrote in post #2389530
What kind of filters are good to start out with? Are they ok to buy used?

The lens you suggested, what kind of situations is that good for?

And what lens would be good for baseball, sometimes under the lights.

This may sound like I am stupid, which I am not because I know what they are used for lol... but you mean that I would need an external flash? Is that best for taking pictures of kids and such..

I use UV haze filters, but mainly for protection. Better to damage the filter than the actual glass! I invest in these though b/c I don't want it to affect my glass and IQ. I use B+W UV MRC filters.

For any kind of "action" shooting you need something that would allow you to use faster shutter speeds. That's the key to stopping the action. There are number of things you can do to help out...like boost the ISO, use fast glass (F/1.4, 1.8, 2.8, etc...which will allow you to use faster shutter speed albeit with narrow depth of field), etc...

I don't usually shoot in this style so I'm content with my lens setup but you might want to think about shutter speeds, etc...

Have fun!

Seeing has how the op has stated he is mainly interested in youth sports he needs a long enough lens to reach around the field. Regardless of the camera he still needs a long lens. Try this one for $619.00. The Sigma 170-500. I would recomend the 50-500 ( Bigma ) except it is over budget. I used my Bigma on a monopod as my main walkround lens for about a year very successfully.

http://www.sigma4less.​com …%2B%3D28SG17050​0F5CA%3D29

http://www.sigma4less.​com …F%2B%3D28SG5050​0F4MI%3D29

A used 20D would do a fine job with this lens and should fall close to his budget with the addition of a monopod, which he will need with a long lens. The inexpensive 50mm prime would fill out his needs for about a year if he needed a short lens.

Hi Kim,
Welcome to POTN. By the time February rolls around, it will be time for PMA....and with PMA comes the introduction of new cameras and lenses. Spend the next couple of months reading the various threads here...and then come February, look for some great deals to be coming out on models that are getting facelifts.

sjprg wrote in post #2391428
Seeing has how the op has stated he is mainly interested in youth sports he needs a long enough lens to reach around the field. Regardless of the camera he still needs a long lens. Try this one for $619.00. The Sigma 170-500. I would recomend the 50-500 ( Bigma ) except it is over budget. I used my Bigma on a monopod as my main walkround lens for about a year very successfully.

http://www.sigma4less.​com …%2B%3D28SG17050​0F5CA%3D29

http://www.sigma4less.​com …F%2B%3D28SG5050​0F4MI%3D29

A used 20D would do a fine job with this lens and should fall close to his budget with the addition of a monopod, which he will need with a long lens. The inexpensive 50mm prime would fill out his needs for about a year if he needed a short lens.

Thank you Paul for your input. That is a semi mack daddy lens huh? I kinda like it LOL Hey would this lens work with an XTI? I am highly considering this camera due to the fact that like everyone has said that I can upgrade the body( in the future when I get the hang of it) , and I also want to get a couple of lens to go with it you know. I love the lens you suggested though!! Thanks alot!

The Sigma 170-500 is available used (EXelent) at http://www.keh.com for $465.00. For your use this would be a great lens. I can't speak for the XTi camera, I started with the 10D. Look over my pbase for the different camera and lens images. You might also check the used camera section at B&H. http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …=FetchChildren&​Q=&ci=2872

http://www.pbase.com/s​jprg

traditionally (in 35mm format) 80 -100 has been the preferred focal length for portraits...that's the 50mm in eos format (50=80)...the 85mm on eos is 138, too long a lens for portraits...makes faces look rounder/flatter than they are...go here for my advice to someone buying a 10D...(pix with the 50 too)
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=250672

Just for my $0.02 worth as a recent starter with a digital SLR (I used film for a short time before so still a relative newbie) go for the body that suits your hand at the lower level as the size and materials used is about the biggest difference.

Lenses are an investment so buy the best you can but remember to start with a lense that gets you the image you want is better than a fantastic lense that is too long or short on the focal length so don't spend all your money on a fast sports lense like a 70-200 as this will give you problems when using it in the lounge getting shots of family! (remember that the bodies your looking at have a 1.6x crop fator which makes all the focal legths longer by that ratio).

I have all of what woud be considered the canon entry level lenses (2 kit lenses and the 75-300usm). I don't consider them to be fantastic when compared to L glass or super fast apertures but they hold up in most situations and at the minute there is way more I need to learn about taking pictures and figure if I learn to get good shots with these lenses when I upgrade I'll get stunning shots with better glass.

If there is one tip I will pass on as a new starter its to buy a UV filter for every lense you buy and leave them on all the time. Good ones seem expensive they are about £30 ($60) here but they are considerably cheaper if damaged than the lense they protected from that damage!

What ever you decide to buy I hope it brings you a lot of pleasure and as many people will say on here that the best way to learn with an SLR is to take pictures, take pictures, takes pictures and take some more pictures whilst posting here for comments.

Thank you all for your suggestions. I am on here now all the time to check to see what everyone has to say. I have to say this is the best Forum that I have ever been to.!!

Question about the used cameras. Where is the best place to get one? And what condition is the lowest you would go. I don't want to get one that is a 8+ and it need repair right after I get it. Also do you know if they come with warrantys if they are used?? Just trying to see if it is better to get a used body or spend the couple hundred more for a new one.

Thanks again for your kindness in helping me out!!
Kim