I am looking to take up photography as a hobby. The inspiration came from you guys. I currently own a Canon A80 point and shoot camera. I am interested in getting a DSLR. I used to own a Canon Rebel SLR but it broke a while ago. Although I might not know or use all functions of the DSLR, I still would like to start on it so I know the camera. I think it is very important to know your equipment so one doesn’t lose a key shot. I don’t expect to upgrade the camera body until it breaks. I do take care of my equipment so I don’t expect it to break anytime soon.

The Canon 400D (xti) has peeked my interest, but the 899 price for body plus kit lens is no small change. I know I want to go with Canon. I am just not sure if I want to buy the xti or the xt. The price difference should be between 300 – 400. That is a good amount of money which I could spend on accessories like tripod/case/alternate lens.

What do you guys suggest I do?

Can you add to the following list of things you need to start off your photography hobby:

Camera (DSLR or PS)
Lens (kit lens should be fine for starters)
Tripod (for night / slow SS shots)
Case (to keep the goods protected)
Storage (flash or micro drives)
And lots of Time

 

I don't know nothing about taking picture but I do know that the Olympus E500 with lens is $600 buck. A better P&S nowaday costs around $400-500. So, the Olympus is a bargain!

I think the E300 is even cheaper around $400.

 

ooops. posted this to the wrong thread...


The Nikon D50 with lens is $599 from Ritz.
Wow this thing is getting cheaper and cheaper.

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/SLR1133.htm

 

The Rebel XT is a fantastic camera and if you can find one for $300 off the cost of an XTi, jump on that deal. The best thing about buying used camera gear is you can sell it for nearly exactly what you paid for it if you want to upgrade.

Your list looks good. Start with the kit lens and add a lens down the road once you figure out your shooting style is. If you shoot a lot of portraits, there are good lenses for that. If you shoot a lot of sports, there are lenses for that. And so on...

You definitely want to shoot with flash memory instead of microdrives. You'll want 2GB with either the XT or XTi.

A tripod is only good if you take it with you. Either get a good one that you'll use, or spend the money elsewhere.

Happy shooting!

 

A small, relatively inexpensive item I'd add to that list is a simple UV filter to cover your lens. It's a lot easier to replace a filter than a lens if it gets scratched.

I bought the XT about a month ago. I've already had the opportunity to do quite a bit of shooting with it and have been very impressed.

 

I'm not a fan of UV filters. They were originally designed to block UV rays from improperly exposing film, which causes a hazy image. This isn't a problem with digital sensors.

My opinion is anything you put between your lens and the subject will degrade image quality. I've experienced ghosting, flare, and softness with even the best B+W and Hoya HMC UV filters. If you're shooting in conditions where you might encouter salt spray or blowing sand, then a UV filter might be worth the quality hit. Otherwise, if you're just worried about scratches, use a lens hood.

 

I more or less agree with Dan and learned the lesson the hard way when some of my best images from a photo trip were ruined by aberrations caused by the protective filter I had on. I still generally leave a protective filter on, but I always remove it now if the Sun is anywhere in proximity to my frame or I'm really serious about the shot.

FWIW - All three of the professional photographers in the workshop I attended stated that they used no protective filters. As one of them told me "That's what lens caps and lens hoods are for."

 

Can someone tell me what the difference between an EF and a EF-S lens is?

All I know is the EF-S lens is meant to fit on the digital rebel series because they have a 1.6x crop from a FF sensor.

Also, can the EF lens fit directly on the xti?

 

The digital rebel series can take both EF-S and EF lenses. The 20D and 30D are also compatible with EF-S or EF, but the 5D and 1-series can only use EF.

 

This image shows the actual difference...pictures always help.

 

So I am assuming, and correct me if I am wrong, that the focal lengths on the EF lenses will not be the correct ones on a 1.6x body like the xti. However, the focal lengths on the EF-S lenses will be accurate on the xti.

 

The focal length needs to be multiplied by 1.6 for all lenses, EF and EF-S. So the 17-85 EF-S lens is really ~ 28-135

 

The focal length never changes, but the field of view will. If you have a Rebel then a 10mm lens has roughly the same field of view as a 16mm on a 35mm full frame body.

Don't bother to convert in your head, just know that:
10-12mm is really wide
30-35mm is a normal length (closest to the same FOV as the human eye)
50mm is a nice portait lens
Anything above 65mm is a telephoto

Anyone who uses medium or large format would find the 35mm lenses just as strange as someone going from 35mm full frame to APS-C. A 150mm lens is considered a normal lens on 4x5 large format.

 

The other thing to keep in mind if you're comparing a 35mm body to a cropped body is cropped bodies have greater depth of field.

This is usually good for macro photography and landscapes, but not so good for portraits. If you're familiar with the depth of field you'd get from a particular lens on a full-frame body and you want to know what it would be like on a cropped sensor, just multiply the depth of field by the crop factor to get a good idea. So if a particular lens at a certain aperture had 10 feet of DOF on a full frame body, it would be 16 feet on an APS-C body. You can see this effect on P&S cameras which appear to have practically infinite depth of field at any aperture because their sensors are so small.

There's a good article on DOF (including a calculator) here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...h-of-field.htm

 

^^ that's good to know. I like shallow DOF shots and always wondered why a point and shoot with a f stop of 2.8 couldn't really pull that off.

 

Personally, I recommend putting a UV filter on, to avoid the accidental fingerprint on the lens. Either by you, or more likely, someone else.

Sure, you could use a hood, but most people don't want to deal with that.

I don't see much in the XTi that is worth paying the premium over the XT.
I wouldn't bother with a tripod initially. There are other things you will use
more often.

I would consider getting the 17-85 kit lens, rather than the 18-55.

 

I am thinking about getting just the xti body with the lenses below:

Canon 50/1.8 EF II Standard Lens ~ 70
Canon 28-105/3.5-4.5 EF USM II Zoom Lens ~ 230

I will be looking for a wide angle lens also, but that will be in the future.

Can someone recommend this plan, or argue against it?

Thanks

 

It depends on what kind of pictures you like to take, but I think you'll really want something wider than 28mm.
If you're looking to spend ~$300 on lenses to begin with, I would get the 18-55mm kit lens and a 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM. That setup shouldn't be more than $260 to $280 and it covers a 16.6x zoom range.

 

I was going to suggest the 17-85 as a one lens solution, but your idea sounds good too.

 

The number one thing I would suggest once someone is even considering a move up to an SLR would be to take a Beginner's Photography Class. Buy a camera that will meet your beginner needs, and one that'll give you some room to grow into, but then go and LEARN at least the basics of your camera's ability, and some general photography tips.

To me, that makes all the more sense than spending a ton of money on a bunch of gear. Spend some of your budget on taking a class....Learn first, get the basic equipment to get your started, and play around with that. Invest in equipment once you understand the basics and are committed to the hobby.

 

Bigtime

 

If you would like to preview what the focal length of these lenses looks like, check out this neat simulator by Tamron: http://www.tamroneurope.com/flc.htm

 

The reason I mentioned the 28-105mm was because it has pretty good reviews, and it has a ring USM.

The 75-300 didn't do very well on FM reviews, plus I do not want that much range just yet. I am going to wait a while to purchase a tripod so I won't be able to use the max tele often.

I would like to start off with portrait photography. The 28-105mm should be a good candidate for that, and the 50mm f1.8 is so cheap, might as well have it in the bag.

I will be lacking a wide angle lense if I go with that setup. I may end up getting the kit lense just for this.

This photography business is very tough, and I don't even have a camera yet.

 

If portraits are your thing, then you should focus on faster lenses for better background blur. There's nothing wrong with the kit you have in mind now, but you might want to consider this setup:
18-55 kit lens - $100
85 f/1.8 - $330

The 18-55 is a very good walk-around/everyday lens and is actually pretty sharp. I have many samples I can share if you'd like to see.

The 85 f/1.8 is well renown for being one of the best portrait lenses in Canon's lineup. It has an equivalent FOV to a 135mm lens on a full frame body, so it would be ideal for head shots and closeups. The 50mm f/1.8 is a good compliment to this lens for head & shoulder shots if you have the budget for it.

I'd still recommend that you just start off with the kit lens and get a feel for what focal lengths you use the most. If you're pegged on the long end of that lens, then you know you'll need to get something longer to compliment it. It would suck to run out and buy a bunch of lenses only to find out they don't do what you want them to do.

 

I might just get the kit lens for now and based on the experience I get, I can consider other lens options.

Good advice Dan.

But I know for sure I want to get these lenses.

Canon 50/1.8 EF II Standard Lens ~ 70
Canon 28-105/3.5-4.5 EF USM II Zoom Lens ~ 230

The 50/1.8 because of the price and good reviews, and the 28-105 because of great reviews on FD and also because of the low price.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=27&page=2

Would it be bad if I have the three lenses above?

 

Sounds like a good setup. I really don't use my 24-70 very much and will likely sell it for a 17-55 so that's why I would recommend just starting with the kit lens, and maybe the 50 f/1.8 for now. If you find that you'd like a slightly longer zoom, then the 28-105 seems like a good choice.

 

Eventually I am going to get the 17-40L which I have heard nothing but great things about.
But with the price over 500 bucks, I have to wait a while to take that hit.

 

Just curious what it is about the 24-70 you don't like. I'm guessing because it's not wide enough on 1.6 cameras. Only asking because this lens is on my list. The 17-55 looks vey good too, and a heck of a lot lighter and more compact, albeit shorter.

 

One of the first images from the xti: