I want to take photography to the next level... - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Cowperson · 12-13-2007, 08:34 AM

I'll just chime in to agree with the need to eventually put up the dough to get lower f-stop lenses.

In the end, you're really photographing light and giving yourself a greater ability to manage light will make the rest of your world go round.

Also, as I said in another thread on this topic, you can throw all the money in the world at a camera but if you can't compose a picture it won't make any difference. Alternatively, a great challenge to enjoy periodically is taking an inexpensive pocket-sized digital and spinning gold out of hay.

I have a Nikon D-80 but I prefer leaving it in the hotel in favour of the anonymity of stuffing a Sony Cybershot in my pocket when walking around strange, foreign cities. Love the Nikon on our wilderness forays and other tasks.

Cowperson

Table 5 · 12-13-2007, 08:48 AM

I love digital cameras, but if someone really wants to learn photography, the first camera i would suggest is a simple manual film SLR. My 30 year old Nikon FE is about as basic as it gets, but produces some amazing stuff. Sure you have to pay for film...but if you want to learn about photography, you have to try film. Plus since there are no techy feature to get in the way, just basic camera skills, it forces you to learn all sort of wonderful photo techniques (techniques that can be applied to your digital as well).

Also, in case anyone is interested in the next level above SLR's, medium format's are dirt cheap these days....You can get a used Hassleblad body for 5-600 bucks now...something that would have cost thousands a few years ago. Mamiya's are even cheaper. Everybody is going digital, but no digital camera out there can top the quality of these things (well, maybe a $30K Hassleblad digital back).

firebug · 12-13-2007, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

I love digital cameras, but if someone really wants to learn photography, the first camera i would suggest is a simple manual film SLR. My 30 year old Nikon FE is about as basic as it gets, but produces some amazing stuff. Sure you have to pay for film...but if you want to learn about photography, you have to try film. Plus since there are no techy feature to get in the way, just basic camera skills, it forces you to learn all sort of wonderful photo techniques (techniques that can be applied to your digital as well).

Also, in case anyone is interested in the next level above SLR's, medium format's are dirt cheap these days....You can get a used Hassleblad body for 5-600 bucks now...something that would have cost thousands a few years ago. Mamiya's are even cheaper. Everybody is going digital, but no digital camera out there can top the quality of these things (well, maybe a $30K Hassleblad digital back).

Agreed. I have nearly a dozen old mechanical Nikon's and if you truly want to understand photography, nothing beats shooting chromes from a mechanical camera.

Digital is great too, and I have had a couple of digital point and shoot camera's, but you end up getting great 'snapshots' rather than 'photographs'. Digital SLR's are tempting, and take beautiful pictures, but they are worthless within a year or two. Better to spend the money IMHO on good glass (that can migrate to a DSLR) and an inexpensive used body. Film is cheap!

Speaking of MF, recently picked up a Mamiya TLR. Something magical about viewing 2x2's on the light box.

~firebug

Beefcake · 12-13-2007, 09:32 AM

I spent about 3 months over-reasearching SLRs last summer. The XTi is a good camera, and the price on it has really come down since I was looking. However, if you can up your budget just a little bit to get the 8.0MP EOS D30, I think you'd be a lot happier. Definitely try both out before buying. And while the guys at Vistek are very knowledgeable, I've found their prices to always be quite a bit higher than at the Camera Store (http://www.thecamerastore.com/) or even Saneal Cameras.

If you chose to go with a Nikon, take a look at their 18-200 lense for a great wide/zoom all-in-one lense.

Burninator · 12-13-2007, 01:14 PM

I've recently bought a Nikon D40 w/18-55 lens and it's my first dSLR, so I'm a complete amateur. So keep in mind that anything I say is coming from a complete lack of experience, but I am an SLR noob like yourself. That package is at such a good price these days ($520) it's an ideal camera for a beginner. If it ends up sitting at the bottom of your closet you won't feel so bad about wasting the money as opposed to if you spent $1200. It does have some limitations in which lenses you can buy. But I doubt it'll ever be an issue for myself.

From my perspective I would absolutely NOT go with a film camera. Digital has so many more advantages over film in the realm of SLR that there is no reason to go with film over digital other than reasons of nostalgia. Anyways that's a whole another debate and I doubt your considering film anyways.

I highly recommend this book as well. It gives a good run down of photography techniques and really just a good overview of everything photography. The author has a quirky sense of humour but keeps things simple and easy to understand. I bought the book before I bought my camera. I found it helped me decide that I don't need a fancy camera to take great pictures, but I do need good techniques and the technical know how.

STeeLy · 12-13-2007, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burninator

From my perspective I would absolutely NOT go with a film camera. Digital has so many more advantages over film in the realm of SLR that there is no reason to go with film over digital other than reasons of nostalgia. Anyways that's a whole another debate and I doubt your considering film anyways.

Film camera is a pretty good way to learn how to take good photos because you have to make every shot count since u can't just wipe off the film and take another one.

Burninator · 12-13-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STeeLy

Film camera is a pretty good way to learn how to take good photos because you have to make every shot count since u can't just wipe off the film and take another one.

Ah but with digital you can take 10 times as many pictures of the same scene for no cost. More practise and you can review your results much faster. I can understand where you guys are coming from with films cameras in terms of understanding how a camera works, but digital has so many more advantages over film and in my own opinion there is no contest between the two anymore.

Table 5 · 12-13-2007, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burninator

Ah but with digital you can take 10 times as many pictures of the same scene for no cost. More practise and you can review your results much faster. I can understand where you guys are coming from with films cameras in terms of understanding how a camera works, but digital has so many more advantages over film and in my own opinion there is no contest between the two anymore.

Don't get me wrong, digital is GREAT. But there is something to be said for taking the time and effort to get a good shot, and not just blindly shooting off a few dozen shots and hoping for a fluke.

I'm an art director at a magazine, and hire photographers as part of my job. There is no doubt about it in my mind...virtually always, the photographers who use film cameras have consistently better results than those who use digital. Even good photographers who switch to digital, Ive noticed a drop in their quality. It's almost too easy...

300spartans · 12-13-2007, 02:22 PM

Lots of good advice in this thread so I will add something I find important.

Sometimes you can pick your system (Nikon, Canon, Pentax etc..) based on people you know and what system they shoot with.

For example, I chose Nikon because I have a friend who shoots with it and this way we can swap and borrow lenses. I don't have to buy a macro lens because he has one that I can borrow. At the same time, he doesn't need a telephoto lens because I have one. Since then more of my friends have ended up with Nikon so now we have a good collective of lenses, flashes, and cameras.

Of course it really depends on the people and your own personality.

browna · 12-14-2007, 11:44 PM

Been doing a bit more looking around and research.

Anyone have any experience with Olympus EVolt?

Generally the features are the same, picture quality and features are the same...prices are lower then Canon/Nikon, the reviews seem favourable (especially the E510). The big thing, no probably huge thing, for the wife is the live view screen, where, like a P&S, the screen can act as a viewfinder.

I prefer not to sway from the Canon line, because of the quality I've gotten already, and the countless options for lenses if we go DSLR, but the only model with the live view screen is the EOS40d at double the price of an Olympus E510.

On the other side of the spectrum, played again with a Powershot G9, and was impressed. Light but substaintial, and a really good feature set. Was told by a birdie that its likey to drop below $400 in the new year though from its current $520.

For those interested, Blacks, although not the best prices initally, has price protection for 60 days, and a return policy that is extended until Jan 13 for the holidays. Plus a 1h tutorial on how to use your camera (which we'd take up, in addition to picking up some books, if we went the SLR route).

Cowperson · 12-15-2007, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

Don't get me wrong, digital is GREAT. But there is something to be said for taking the time and effort to get a good shot, and not just blindly shooting off a few dozen shots and hoping for a fluke.

I'm an art director at a magazine, and hire photographers as part of my job. There is no doubt about it in my mind...virtually always, the photographers who use film cameras have consistently better results than those who use digital. Even good photographers who switch to digital, Ive noticed a drop in their quality. It's almost too easy...

You're speaking from the point of view of a professional looking for professional quality results. In your shoes, I understand the point.

However, film is NOT a cheap venue for the duffer building his knowledge base and experimenting.

There's no doubt that digital is the way to go for that particular person, a format where he/she might generate tens of thousands of images - all of them "carefully contemplated" if one wishes - at a cost of virtually zero in comparison.

In that situation, the duffer can both "take the time" to set up a good shot or blindly blaze away - and there's nothing wrong with that either in the spot news area - as part of his/her experimentation. One should learn his/her equipment sufficiently to think quickly so a crucial moment doesn't pass unrecorded.

Sorry, for a duffer, I'd have to disagree with going the film route. I would only agree that film, because of its cost, does force you be judicious before you push the button. But that qualification could also be considered debilitating to the overall accumulation of experience.

After all, most SLR digitals these days record all of the information - apertature, etc - of each shot, letting the duffer go back to see what worked and didn't work with various situations.

And yes, I do have a 25 year-old Nikon film SLR I haul out every so often.

My two cents.

Cowperson

jayswin · 01-05-2008, 12:19 AM

A guy has a Canon Rebel 2000 for sale in the buy/sell forum.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=52184

Is this a good deal? The price seems great.

REDVAN · 01-05-2008, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flameswin

A guy has a Canon Rebel 2000 for sale in the buy/sell forum.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=52184

Is this a good deal? The price seems great.

I think it might be a good deal but I think it's film so be careful you want to go that route- I chose digital for learning because I need to be able to view my shots on the computer later and learn what I did and how to improve that way.

If you are comfortable with film and the cost of processing all the time then be my guest, Canon Rebel can do no wrong in my eyes!

Russic · 02-20-2009, 10:04 AM

I was going to start a "I need a new camera lens" thread but found this one to have so much great info that it would almost be criminal to not bump it for anybody who missed it last year.

I currently have a lens kit that was purchased with my Canon EOS XTI. Good lenses but quite standard, nothing to get excited over. My main focus is landscapes and general use (hikes, trips etc.). I'm not ready to break the bank, but am prepared to spend within the $600-$800 range. I'm heading off to Hawaii in April and am looking to use that trip as nothing more than a photography excursion (technically my cousin is getting married, but that's secondary).

Using the guidelines that so many of you were kind enough to lay out I'm gravitating towards this one from B&H:

What draws me to this one is the lower f-stop and the image stabilization. There were some with lower f-stops but they didn't have the image stabilization. Is 3.5 low enough or am I going to be kicking myself for not going lower? Going through the reviews on the site (link) it sounds like it's right up my alley.

As this will be my biggest photography purchase to date I'd like to consult the braintrust before moving on. Any comments you can make are greatly appreciated.

BlackEleven · 02-20-2009, 11:44 AM

A couple things to consider about the lens. First thing to note about that lens is its not f/3.5 all the way. It's f/5.6 at the long end of the zoom. The other thing is image stabilization is nice, but lower f-stop values will also allow you to compensate. Dropping the f-stop will allow more light, so you can increase the shutter speed and perhaps not need the IS. That said, IS is of course nice to have. Just a couple things to mull over. I haven't used that lens myself so I don't have any particular valuable feedback on it. Whatever you end up with, I hope you're happy with your purchase. And B&H is a great store, btw. I've been really happy with them.

Russic · 02-20-2009, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

A couple things to consider about the lens. First thing to note about that lens is its not f/3.5 all the way. It's f/5.6 at the long end of the zoom. The other thing is image stabilization is nice, but lower f-stop values will also allow you to compensate. Dropping the f-stop will allow more light, so you can increase the shutter speed and perhaps not need the IS. That said, IS is of course nice to have. Just a couple things to mull over. I haven't used that lens myself so I don't have any particular valuable feedback on it. Whatever you end up with, I hope you're happy with your purchase. And B&H is a great store, btw. I've been really happy with them.

Ahhhh thank you. I was wondering what the 2 f-stop values meant. That's good to know.

ricosuave · 02-22-2009, 04:05 PM

ff is selling his kit:
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=67633

Hemi-Cuda · 02-23-2009, 12:16 AM

wow, this is a thread title you should not glance at right before going to bed. i was left thinking "how would you take pornography to the next level?"

Russic · 02-23-2009, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

wow, this is a thread title you should not glance at right before going to bed. i was left thinking "how would you take pornography to the next level?"

Well the first thing you'd do is study the porno flow chart and then use it to create something creative and mind-blowing.

Thanks for the heads up on FF's gear ... not sure it's quite what I'm looking for but it did remind me that I need a lens hood.

The Ditch · 02-23-2009, 02:28 PM

I wouldn't suggest starting with an SLR just due to the fact it will be a big learning curve compared to an intro level DSLR because you will have to learn your white balances and exposures levels really well right away to get good shots, plus paying for all the film.

Either Canon or Nikon offers good intro cameras. One thing I don't particularly like about the Canon XTi series is that it doesn't have spot metering on it, I believe the XSi has it though. Other then that, once you start progressing you'll really see the difference a good lens can make, I've finally amassed a decent collection of good lenses but as someone who does this for fun it can really take a while because it is so cost intensive.