Which dSLR for a newbie?

[Cabbit]

Perhaps look on eBay or your local crap converter shop or similar and see if there selling of a old Canon 400-450d i've seem them go for more than half that of a 500-600d new and there just as good for learning on sans video.

Then look at the range of 2nd hand lens, there are crackers from all ages and prices from less than a lunch. This is a cheep way to find out what focal length you want before you go splashing out on L glass.

I was going to get a 24-70 when i first bought my camera thinking that was the range i was wanting, turns out i need a 100mm Macro and a 70-200mm.

But it only cost me £100 to find that out instead of £900+ for the 24-70 and the thousands it would cost to have tried out the other focal lengths i have.

 

[wilhelmreems]

i would suggest getting a lightly used model from the last generation of slightly higher end cameras and a nice cheap prime lens, like the 50mm or even the 35mm.

using just a prime like this when you start out, plus a nice hands on course to learn the functionality of the camera, will really put you on the fast track to doing great things with the camera.

regardless of Canon or Nikon it can get overwhelming when choosing. last year when i wanted to get serious about shooting i upgraded from my olympus e-500 to a nikon d300s and it took me at least 8 weeks to make up my mind.

 

[steviem]

My advice would be not to buy an awesome lens straight away, use your kit lens, buy Aperture 3 and shoot in RAW.

Then take as many pictures as you can of what interests you. Put them all into Aperture, and you can create Smart Folders of things like different focal lengths, whether the flash fired or not. For instance, I wanted to see if I would benefit from having a 50mm lens, so I created a smart folder for focal lengths within a 40mm to 60mm range and found that, yes, I could've done with a 50mm lens when in low light. I bought a used Minolta 50mm 1.7 lens from Adorama for $100.

The thing that I am finding with the Sony a300 is noise at ISO 800 is giving me issues, so I think a camera upgrade might be my next photography purchase.

 

[The Mad Kiwi]

You are absolutely correct but for someone to get those shots with beginner knowledge, I would say they should start then immediately become professional.

It is nice that YOU can burn 1500 USD on a cam and a lens but I doubt everyoen else can and by suggesting that everyone just get the best and most expensive ... well.. i dunno..
btw, just for the record. I can come pretty close to those images with a 50mm prime or a kit lens and a bounce flash.. both of which cost a fraction of what your 17-55 cost. It is all in the eye of the beholder but I will go out on a limb and say that anyone that starts off and has no concept of photography needs to learn with the basics and for that a "kit" is perfectly fine and will produce great images from which he or she can learn...
going out and getting a 2nd mortgage just to pay for a lens is not something i would recommend...

just my 2 cents

Actually I recommended an external flash, generic if Canon is too expensive a light stand umbrella and to do Lighting 101 at the strobist website, a great online short course to teach lighting.

The only reason I mentioned the 17-55mm was because you said beginners shouldn't have good lenses, which I disagree with. A flash is the greatest thing you can get for a camera if you want to take portraits. If I had to choose between my lens and flash I'd keep the flash.

The OP should at least visit the strobist website and have a read, it really is very good, especially since he's having a kid, reading is free and all the gear you need to start costs less than $150, which isn't a lot of money considering just how much better your portraits will come out.

I know that even mentioning lighting scares a lot of people, even those who have been shooting for years, but it's actually very easy and just takes a few hours of your time to learn.

Most people don't even know you can fire your flash into the ceiling in manual mode at F5.6 and 200th of a second for perfectly exposed natural looking indoor shots every time. From there you fire it into a wall to get side light, and to get a a more directional side light you can just cut a hole in a pringles can, tape it to the flash, put the subject close to a wall and bounce the strong light off the wall onto hit their face. The easiest way to get a flash off a camera is just to buy a cord off ebay and use that, fire it through an umbrella and you've got super soft light. It's pretty basic stuff. But most people are just too scared to try. Even a total beginner can do all these things and get great photos by just following these basic instructions, but the hard thing is alway moving the camera off the green square.

 

[josephbrown]

Canon T2i

My friend has purchased the Canon T2i and I was just playing with his camera found the images just a bit too soft for me. Since image quality is the thing I was looking for I went with Canon. Along with best image quality some of the best point are ability to shoot HD video and also has excellent macro mode.
The camera is very small and light and It has Superb image quality in both photos and video and the built in mic is also very good.

 

[flosseR]

My friend has purchased the Canon T2i and I was just playing with his camera found the images just a bit too soft for me. Since image quality is the thing I was looking for I went with Canon. Along with best image quality some of the best point are ability to shoot HD video and also has excellent macro mode.
The camera is very small and light and It has Superb image quality in both photos and video and the built in mic is also very good.

either i am loosing it or those 2 first sentences are going the exact opposite... plus.. is this spam already???

Actually I recommended an external flash, generic if Canon is too expensive a light stand umbrella and to do Lighting 101 at the strobist website, a great online short course to teach lighting.

The only reason I mentioned the 17-55mm was because you said beginners shouldn't have good lenses, which I disagree with. A flash is the greatest thing you can get for a camera if you want to take portraits. If I had to choose between my lens and flash I'd keep the flash.

The OP should at least visit the strobist website and have a read, it really is very good, especially since he's having a kid, reading is free and all the gear you need to start costs less than $150, which isn't a lot of money considering just how much better your portraits will come out.

I know that even mentioning lighting scares a lot of people, even those who have been shooting for years, but it's actually very easy and just takes a few hours of your time to learn.

Most people don't even know you can fire your flash into the ceiling in manual mode at F5.6 and 200th of a second for perfectly exposed natural looking indoor shots every time. From there you fire it into a wall to get side light, and to get a a more directional side light you can just cut a hole in a pringles can, tape it to the flash, put the subject close to a wall and bounce the strong light off the wall onto hit their face. The easiest way to get a flash off a camera is just to buy a cord off ebay and use that, fire it through an umbrella and you've got super soft light. It's pretty basic stuff. But most people are just too scared to try. Even a total beginner can do all these things and get great photos by just following these basic instructions, but the hard thing is alway moving the camera off the green square.

for the record, I didnt say : not a good lens, I said a cheap lens. As far as I know, and I might be wrong as i am a nikon man, the 18-55 IS and the 55-200IS canon consumer lenses are considered VERY good buyt they are quite cheap...

or not?

 

[liquid stereo]

It really depends

If you're like 90% of all SLR/DSLR buyers, buying as much as you can afford, is the equivalent of bury as much cash as you have access to.

Most DSLR buyers use their camera 5 to 10 times each year, in Auto/Program mode, and as someone else mentioned above, its slightly better than getting/using a P&S. The key, in my opinion, is to (a) think realistically about the commitment you can make in terms of time and energy and (b) find a friend or community of photographers.

I'm of the opinion that you should get as cheap a camera as possible because all modern DSLRs (made within the past 2 years) are more than great. Couple that with a relatively inexpensive 50/1.8 or 35/2 lens and if you put in the time/energy you will have excellent images (and a good time). And if you don't, then you haven't buried too much money.


p.s. One of my favorite images, taken with a bottom-line film SLR and el cheapo 50/1.7 lens

This was taken with a set-up costing 6x a much

Just my 0.02.

Buy as much camera as you can afford. You wont regret it, and if you make the right choice it will be the last camera you ever buy. If you have a basic understanding of how a camera works in terms aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc. there is no reason why you should stick to one of the "entry level"dslrs.

I shoot Nikon, so do not know much about Canon offerings, but right now there are some pretty good deals out there on the Nikon D90 kit with the 18-105 VR lens, which is actually a fairly decent lens (though I am sure there are lens to lens differences). With that kit, and the purchase of 35 or 50 mm fast prime lens you will be set for years to come.

 

[darrinaw]

Hey if you are set on getting refurbished you might as well look into the canon loyalty program. You can google it but basically what happens is you trade in any broken canon and they will take %20 off the refurbished price on the canon website. So find a broken canon and call canon at 866-443-8002 or 800-828-4040 and ask about the canon loyalty program.

Wow! That worked really well. I purchased the XS for $319 after I bought a cheap canon point and shoot for $15!!! Nice! Thanks for the suggestion! I am really looking forward to getting the camera. Thanks guys.

 

[h1r0ll3r]

Would purchasing an external flash from the get-go be a good idea or is that something I should pick up over time as I get a little more experience? I recently purchased a EOS Rebel T3i kit. It has a built in flash which I would assume would be good for most situations, right? I always see folks with an external flash so I'm not sure if that's a need-to-have item or if it's more a specialty item.

 

[compuwar]

Would purchasing an external flash from the get-go be a good idea or is that something I should pick up over time as I get a little more experience? I recently purchased a EOS Rebel T3i kit. It has a built in flash which I would assume would be good for most situations, right? I always see folks with an external flash so I'm not sure if that's a need-to-have item or if it's more a specialty item.

If you want snapshots, just learn to dial in some negative flash compensation (NOT exposure compensation) for the built-in flash. If you want to create images, go read strobist.blogspot.com and order 2-3 flashes and triggers and a couple of modifiers.

Paul

 

[tinman0]

I have used mostly canon products before and am familiar with the layout. I have been looking at the Rebel XS and the t1i/t2i, and I found a refurb'd deal on the XS w/ a starter lens for $399.

Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.

S/h is perfectly good if you want to save the pennies. I picked up an XTi last year off Ebay for $275 and it was pretty close to being mint with a shutter count of around 3,500 (you can tell because no one resets the file counting). But it was a 3-4 year old camera in it's original box and was absolutely perfect.

It now has over 20,000 actuations on the shutter now

Personally, I would happily buy and use any of the lower end Canon stuff (XTi/400D, XS/450D, XSi/500D) in a heartbeat, especially the lower two.

The reason I went with a s/h XTi to replace my dead XTi rather than upgrade to a newer body is because I wanted a wide angle zoom lens. No good having a flashy body if you want to shoot at 11mm.

Forget the "get a high quality lens beginner" stuff, the next lens choice should cater for the photography that you are interested in, and where your photography is leading you.

Don't buy a UWA lens because everyone says you need one, buy it because you feel thats what you need, and likewise with a nice telephoto.

Don't worry about buying expensive either. Unless you are selling your work, or enlarging it up to half the side of a building, L lenses and the like are really not needed until much later in your photography.

Frankly, the 18-55mm kit lens will be a perfectly acceptable partner in the medium term. Anyone who thinks different is just being a snob.

Finally, biggest thing - get yourself on a composition course one evening. Photography isn't about buying the best and greatest kit with the biggest megapixels, it's about taking a decent shot in the first place. My photography went further with a $30 course one evening than with a $800 lens.

At the end of the day, my little sister is winning photography competitions with a 10MP compact camera.

 

[TheReef]

S/h is perfectly good if you want to save the pennies. I picked up an XTi last year off Ebay for $275 and it was pretty close to being mint with a shutter count of around 3,500 (you can tell because no one resets the file counting). But it was a 3-4 year old camera in it's original box and was absolutely perfect.

It now has over 20,000 actuations on the shutter now

Personally, I would happily buy and use any of the lower end Canon stuff (XTi/400D, XS/450D, XSi/500D) in a heartbeat, especially the lower two.

The reason I went with a s/h XTi to replace my dead XTi rather than upgrade to a newer body is because I wanted a wide angle zoom lens. No good having a flashy body if you want to shoot at 11mm.

Forget the "get a high quality lens beginner" stuff, the next lens choice should cater for the photography that you are interested in, and where your photography is leading you.

Don't buy a UWA lens because everyone says you need one, buy it because you feel thats what you need, and likewise with a nice telephoto.

Don't worry about buying expensive either. Unless you are selling your work, or enlarging it up to half the side of a building, L lenses and the like are really not needed until much later in your photography.

Frankly, the 18-55mm kit lens will be a perfectly acceptable partner in the medium term. Anyone who thinks different is just being a snob.

Finally, biggest thing - get yourself on a composition course one evening. Photography isn't about buying the best and greatest kit with the biggest megapixels, it's about taking a decent shot in the first place. My photography went further with a $30 course one evening than with a $800 lens.

At the end of the day, my little sister is winning photography competitions with a 10MP compact camera.

This is great advice.

 

[darrinaw]

S/h is perfectly good if you want to save the pennies. I picked up an XTi last year off Ebay for $275 and it was pretty close to being mint with a shutter count of around 3,500 (you can tell because no one resets the file counting). But it was a 3-4 year old camera in it's original box and was absolutely perfect.

It now has over 20,000 actuations on the shutter now

Personally, I would happily buy and use any of the lower end Canon stuff (XTi/400D, XS/450D, XSi/500D) in a heartbeat, especially the lower two.

The reason I went with a s/h XTi to replace my dead XTi rather than upgrade to a newer body is because I wanted a wide angle zoom lens. No good having a flashy body if you want to shoot at 11mm.

Forget the "get a high quality lens beginner" stuff, the next lens choice should cater for the photography that you are interested in, and where your photography is leading you.

Don't buy a UWA lens because everyone says you need one, buy it because you feel thats what you need, and likewise with a nice telephoto.

Don't worry about buying expensive either. Unless you are selling your work, or enlarging it up to half the side of a building, L lenses and the like are really not needed until much later in your photography.

Frankly, the 18-55mm kit lens will be a perfectly acceptable partner in the medium term. Anyone who thinks different is just being a snob.

Finally, biggest thing - get yourself on a composition course one evening. Photography isn't about buying the best and greatest kit with the biggest megapixels, it's about taking a decent shot in the first place. My photography went further with a $30 course one evening than with a $800 lens.

At the end of the day, my little sister is winning photography competitions with a 10MP compact camera.

Great advice thanks! Camera came yesterday and 50m f1.8 lens came today!

 

[Ryan1524]

50mm f1.8 is an excellent lens for a beginner.

My 35mm f2 lives on my D70s most of the time. No reason to use a wide-angle or a tele unless you know you need it. And you can zoom with your legs.

Happy Shooting.

 

[Rowbear]

Camera came yesterday and 50m f1.8 lens came today!

Awesome Welcome aboard the dSLR train

 

[tinman0]

Great advice thanks! Camera came yesterday and 50m f1.8 lens came today!

Excellent. Did you get the 18-55 kit lens as well?

 

[tinman0]

Oh, and if anyone wants to get all snobby that you only have a low end body with 'only' 10MP, then show them some of these. All taken last weekend, a little bit of processing to bring the colours up. Shot with a Tokina 11-16mm (although this could easily be done on the kit lens):


Untitled by Tinman00, on Flickr


Untitled by Tinman00, on Flickr

 

[SkippyScud]

Fantastic thread. I'll be picking up all the books mentioned in here. It's great to have a community so in tune with my interests as well. I've been reading and reading, but as a COMPLETE novice I have trouble pulling the trigger on such an investment.

So I bring to you what I think is a deal at my local wholesale club, a $799 package. I wanted some opinions on if anyone else would consider this a deal and me, who's most advance camera is a Canon SD300.

• Canon EOS Rebel T3
• EF-S 18mm-55mm f/3.5-56 IS II Lens
• EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens
• Rebel Gadget Bag
• 4GB SDHC Class 6 Memory Card

 

[tinman0]

Fantastic thread. I'll be picking up all the books mentioned in here. It's great to have a community so in tune with my interests as well. I've been reading and reading, but as a COMPLETE novice I have trouble pulling the trigger on such an investment.

So I bring to you what I think is a deal at my local wholesale club, a $799 package. I wanted some opinions on if anyone else would consider this a deal and me, who's most advance camera is a Canon SD300.

Compare it against any new deal you can find on Ebay.

Chances are though that there isn't much difference between that deal and anything on Ebay - reason being is that margins are very low and dealers have very little room to cut each other.

The deal itself looks great and it'll cover everything you need from the word go.

Not sure if I saw it, but the only two things missing are a couple of optical lens caps. Look on Ebay for cheap UV filter, Skylight filter, etc. Essentially, it's cheaper to bust a $5 filter than the front of the lens.

And before anyone says different (eg "it harms the picture quality etc"), I dropped a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 lens last year. Caught it on the tip of my finger where it landed, which not only fractured the end of my finger, but smashed up its optical filter.

Despite using pliers to get the remains of the filter off, there is not a scratch of damage to the lens. Unlike the painkillers for the next few days for my finger

 

[h1r0ll3r]

Compare it against any new deal you can find on Ebay.

Chances are though that there isn't much difference between that deal and anything on Ebay - reason being is that margins are very low and dealers have very little room to cut each other.

The deal itself looks great and it'll cover everything you need from the word go.

Agreed. I just paid ~$150 just for the 55-250 lens and that's on top of the T3i I just got. Looks like a pretty nice deal for a newbie. I'd say go for it.

 

[SkippyScud]

Compare it against any new deal you can find on Ebay.

Chances are though that there isn't much difference between that deal and anything on Ebay - reason being is that margins are very low and dealers have very little room to cut each other.

The deal itself looks great and it'll cover everything you need from the word go.

Not sure if I saw it, but the only two things missing are a couple of optical lens caps. Look on Ebay for cheap UV filter, Skylight filter, etc. Essentially, it's cheaper to bust a $5 filter than the front of the lens.

And before anyone says different (eg "it harms the picture quality etc"), I dropped a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 lens last year. Caught it on the tip of my finger where it landed, which not only fractured the end of my finger, but smashed up its optical filter.

Despite using pliers to get the remains of the filter off, there is not a scratch of damage to the lens. Unlike the painkillers for the next few days for my finger

Agreed. I just paid ~$150 just for the 55-250 lens and that's on top of the T3i I just got. Looks like a pretty nice deal for a newbie. I'd say go for it.

Thank you for the feedback guys. I know nothing of lenses or how they really affect the picture, I've so much to learn. I just picked up a couple beginner books and will be going through that. My wife but a kibosh on me getting that bundle though. But time to learn it is good and fool around with my current camera a bit more with tips from the books. Plus another deal will come along.

 

[darrinaw]

Update from the OP

Hey Guys,

We welcomed our daughter on July 3rd and couldn't be happier with the camera configuration that I purchased. Thanks again!

-darrinaw

 

[runlsd]

Get a Canon and get the most megapixels you can afford, the more the better. There's no such thing as too many megapixels, you can never have too much detail.

More megamixels won't necessarily result in better photos. Sensors with greater resolving power will reveal the faults in the lenses better as well. The more megapixels the better is sometimes just a marketing strategy.

Agree with Paul's statement below.

Actually, I disagree with this- more megapixels shows poor lenses, diffraction effects and poor technique more easily than fewer megapixels. There's nothing size-wise that you can't do with an image from any modern DSLR- the only reason for going with high MP is (a) ultra-large detailed prints (20x24 or larger) or heavy (50% or more of the frame) cropping.

Paul

 

[Cheffy Dave]

I bought my Daughter a NIKON D 3100, prior to her recent trip to England,
She took over 650 pictures, most of which were of stunning quality.Now I realize a photo is only as good as the eye of the Photographer, but she found it so easy to use, as well a light, she had it with her everywhere.This was her first DSLR, she absolutely loves it, and it has fired a new desire in photography for her.I really think it is an amazing camera, and in the hands of someone with an eye for a shot, the results are visually stunning

 

[fireman32]

Hey Guys,

We welcomed our daughter on July 3rd and couldn't be happier with the camera configuration that I purchased. Thanks again!

-darrinaw

Congrats!! Now you need to post some pictures of the new baby.