Camera and Lens advice

Hi,

I'm new to the site so go easy on me ....... I currently have a Canon 300D with kit lenses ( stop laughing ). I started at this level to see if I would enjoy taking photo's ...... damn it, I do so once again my interest is going to cost me heaps

So I felt its time to ask a brains trust ........ this is where you all come in.

Firstly I am considering upgrading to a 30D, my reason is with the 40D out, the prices of the 30D will be less and I can put the extra $$$ into lenses. Or is it simply worth staying with my 300D and upgrade to better lenses and learn more on how to take photo's, upgrade camera later.

If that is the case to upgrade to better lenses I was looking at 28 - 105 IS or a 70 - 200 IS Canon lense any other options? in lense (not brand).

The photography I am interested in are landscapes, desert flowers, sunsets and night shots around campfires etc etc.

I would like to do some animals / birds although I figure I will need a bigger zoom lense. I'm not into sports photo's.

As I travel in the outback of Australia, dust is a major issue so any idea's on a camera case that is dust sealed?.

A tripod will also be on the cards as I'm as steady as a one legged belly dancer.

Any other advise is most welcome and thanks in advance.

Brian

First, what doesn't the 300D do that you want to? If you're not finding the camera to limit your picture-taking, then there's no need to upgrade it. Next, what doesn't your current lens selection do for you? Spend your money where it'll make the biggest difference in what you can do, not in what's new on the market. The lenses you've picked out are good choices. If night campfire shots are very important, you might also consider the 50 f/1.8 (very inexpensive but good opics) or 50 f/1.4 (much more expensive, but sturdier).

Hi PB. No ones laughing at you so don't worry. I did exactly the same as you, in that I tried out an S3 to see if I wanted to go back to snapping, then jumped on a 400D in a few weeks.
30D is a good start on your upgrade path, as are both lenses you've mentioned. I would suggest an ef 50 f1.8 to start tho' as it would cover a lot of what you're wanting to shoot.
As for weather sealing, that's the reserve of the proffesional 1 series bodies, or the new 40D for a lower level of sealing.
Good luck with whatever you decide on. Oh, abnd remember to fun along the way.

Jon,

To me my photo's are not sharp a friend had a 24 -105 lense and when I looked through it it was crystal clear where my lense seemed foggy. This was my reason to looking at upgrading in lense. I don't do any editing as I don't know how or even what program to use as yet.

As for the camera ...... I get your point and if honest I need to work with the camera I have to get a better handle on taking better quality photo's.

Basiclly the user (me) needs to learn the basic's before spending on better camera in the hope it will take better shots.

I figure with the lenses I get they will last for ages and I can still use them on a 30D or maybe a 40D later on. I will have a look at the lenses you both have suggested.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Brian

Although I prefer the 24-70 f/2.8 to the 24-105, they're both good lenses (I have both, for different purposes). But even the kit 18-55 is capable of taking very good, sharp photos. There may be things you can do, even without buying more gear, to improve your photos. Post an example or two, with EXIF data, and see what people think.

Ok Jon,

First off what is exif do I assume this is what I have taken the photo in IE the detail.

Next how do I post a photo, told yeah i'm a newbie .

Brian

Ok,

See what you think about these two thats if they work of course.

And maybe these two remember just learning and dare say clearly seen no editing. Comment away

Welcome to POTN! Nice pics!

I like them. May be a little on the dark-side, but they are ok. Oh! and welcome.

Apart from the exposure, they look okay

Pitbull, what do you think of those photos? Do you think there is anything wrong with them, which would not be wrong if you had used better gear?

My opinion of them:
#1 is nicely composed, good use of slow shutter speed, but seriously under-exposed. It's hard to see whether the image is sharp because it's all so dark (except for the water of course, but you wouldn't expect that to be sharp )
#2 appears well focussed, good use of shallow depth of field (though I think the two out-of-focus bits in the foreground are a bit distracting), nice background colours, but perhaps the main subject is a tad under-exposed.
#3 was a failure, I think. You used the flash, but all it did was light up the branch and tree in the foreground; the background is still seriously under-exposed. It would have been preferable to avoid the flash and use a longer shutter speed, as in #1.
#4 is OK. The subject is perhaps a little on the dull side (a brightly coloured car on the road would have made a huge difference!), and the lighting is difficult because you're shooting into the sun, but the exposure is good and the focus is good.

One thing: what exposure mode did you use? Was it one of the automatic programs? If so, I would suggest that the best route to better pictures (aside from concentrating on composition and lighting, of course), is to learn about some of the technical stuff that affects your exposure, so that you can take control of the camera rather than letting it do all the work. Learn about exposure compensation, fill-in flash, depth of field, stuff like that.

Yes there is a place for equipment upgrades, when you encounter situations which your current gear simply cannot deal with - and campfire photos may be one of them, hence Jon's recommendation of the 50mm f/1.8. But the main difference between people who take good photos and people who take not-so-good photos usually isn't the camera; it's the person.

Have fun! Experiment, ask questions, learn, enjoy. And here are a couple of resources you might find helpful.
Enjoy! Digital SLR cameras
EOS 300D Tutorials

Pitbull wrote in post #3926726
Ok Jon,

First off what is exif do I assume this is what I have taken the photo in IE the detail.

Next how do I post a photo, told yeah i'm a newbie .

Brian

Yes,EXIF is the details of your shooting conditions. Zoom Browser or most other photo editing programs will let you look at it.
And (although you seem to have managed, but I can't see photobucket here) the link in my sig. has all you need to know about image posting here.

Thanks everyone for your comments. All the photo's were done hand held my opinion is. The photos do what I wanted, that is to remind me where I was ...

Now No1 the water looked ok but the rest seemed to bright and overall looks a bit foggy.

No2 This was just messing around I guess the two blurred bits distract your eye I could have positioned myself to eliminate this. In general better exposure I may have liked it more.

No3 Simply to dark and should not have used auto.

No4 The sun on the right was a **** maybe a polerising lense would have helped to combat that. I feel the photo just lacks any impact overall and thats my fault.

I can say I had issues with I feel was the lense or could have been the sensor I don't know but as you see in No4 the blue sky on the right is whitish well this stuck with me for many days even with the sun at my back and even a total blue sky I would get this white foggy look only to half or less of the photo so I had to stop taking photos with the sky. I put it down to (true or not I'm guessing) possible condensation from being in snow to heat to chilly and damp bush walk. A few days later it was way better. I have sinse had canon clean and service the camera and polish the lense. Have not had a chance to take a photo of just blue sky and see if it is still the same.

I have also decided to go do a basic / intermediate course in photography to get a better understanding of what to do and look for.

No1
File Name
IMG_9574.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Shooting Date/Time
23/07/2007 5:15:28 PM
Shooting Mode
Night Scene
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/8
Av( Aperture Value )
4.5
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
18.0 - 55.0mm
Focal Length
33.0mm
Image Size
2048x3072
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
On
Flash Type
Built-In Flash
Flash Exposure Compensation
0
Red-eye Reduction
On
Shutter curtain sync
1st-curtain sync
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters
Contrast +1
Sharpness +1
Color saturation +1
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB

No2
File Name
IMG_9213.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Shooting Date/Time
20/07/2007 4:14:03 PM
Shooting Mode
Aperture-Priority AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/3200
Av( Aperture Value )
5.6
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
18.0 - 55.0mm
Focal Length
55.0mm
Image Size
2048x3072
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
AI Focus AF
Parameters
Contrast +1
Sharpness +1
Color saturation +1
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB

No3
IMG_9528.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Shooting Date/Time
23/07/2007 4:20:40 PM
Shooting Mode
Auto
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/60
Av( Aperture Value )
5.6
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
18.0 - 55.0mm
Focal Length
55.0mm
Image Size
3072x2048
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
On
Flash Type
Built-In Flash
Flash Exposure Compensation
0
Red-eye Reduction
On
Shutter curtain sync
1st-curtain sync
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
AI Focus AF
Parameters
Contrast +1
Sharpness +1
Color saturation +1
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB

No4
File Name
IMG_9176.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Shooting Date/Time
20/07/2007 3:00:25 PM
Shooting Mode
Auto
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/200
Av( Aperture Value )
8.0
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Lens
18.0 - 55.0mm
Focal Length
18.0mm
Image Size
3072x2048
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
AI Focus AF
Parameters
Contrast +1
Sharpness +1
Color saturation +1
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB

OK, that EXIF data tells us something.

#1: 'Night scene' mode, ISO 400, 1/8 at f/4.5, flash on.
This auto mode is (I believe) designed to illuminate a foreground subject using the flash, but expose for the background enough so that it's not all black. If the picture had been of a person in front of the waterfall it would have looked good. As is, the flash isn't powerful enough to illuminate the scene so it's just under-exposed.

#2: Av mode, ISO 400, 1/3200 at f/5.6.
Not bad choices. Personally I always use ISO 100 or 200 when I can, just in case the image quality is slightly better, but 400 is OK.

#3: Auto mode (is that P?), ISO 400, 1/60 at f/5.6, flash on.
This has has the same sort of effect as #1.

#4: Auto mode, ISO 100, 1/200 at f/8.
Fine.

So: one shot in Av mode that was well judged, one shot in Auto mode that came out well, and two shots where the Auto modes couldn't handle the scene very well. I think there's a lesson here...