Can anyone teach me about them? Like what camera's to buy the different lenses and such. I've always had an artistic side and i wanna start persuing it.
Photography cameras vs what cameras? I assume you mean DSLR's, correct?
Yes digital slr's. Can anyone help me price a good one around $200-$400?ghettoperson wrote:
Photography cameras vs what cameras? I assume you mean DSLR's, correct?
Any of the Nikon D40's or the Canon EOS's. You might have to up your price range though if you want a good zoom and high resolution.NeXuS4909 wrote:
Yes digital slr's. Can anyone help me price a good one around $200-$400?ghettoperson wrote:
Photography cameras vs what cameras? I assume you mean DSLR's, correct?
ill sell you a nice canon rebel for tha lo
Pix?i g wrote:
ill sell you a nice canon rebel for tha lo
well I think my step dad had a Canon D82 I think it is it takes !^@#ing amazing Pictures unfortunetly it cost like $600 bucks or so
Last edited by GR34 (2008-08-27 17:15:55)
Yeah, should be able to get a D40 for $400.
if you're going to be getting into DSLRs you need to pick your body very wisely. i shoot canon, you may want to shoot nikon. i'd stay away from pretty much all other manufacturers because they have shitty glass.
most (if not all) camera companies don't use the same lens mount system, so you need to be looking above and beyond the camera you're purchasing now. if you decide to upgrade in the future you obviously want to make sure the company you're buying from makes good prosumer DSLRs (i'm assuming you're getting a consumer one, like a d40 or d80 or rebel XTi or STi) because once you're invested far into your camera its devastating to your wallet to switch companies, again because of the whole lens mount issue.
by far the most important thing is your lenses. you can go out and buy an 80 dollar 70-300mm zoom lens but you're gonna have more difficulty working with it than a 500 dollar one. essentially, don't skimp on your glass. start with a cheap body and good glass rather than a good body and shitty glass. the sensors in the camera body all work the same and record the same quality of picture, whereas the glass in a cheap lens doesn't provide the same quality as that in a good lens.
cheap lenses have three basic problems: distortion, lens flare, and nonstandard base apertures. a cheap telephoto lens will tend to barrel the shot, making it look really rounded at the longest length, like this:
i've never had that problem with my telephoto, but i spent 500 dollars on it.
really shitty glass tends to handle direct light very poorly.
see the weird hexagons?
as a side note, the number of aperture blades determines the shape of the flare.
better glass tends to not do this.
the worst thing with cheap glass though, has to do with your apterture, which controls the amount of light let in. a good lens will have a bottom number (say, F/2.8) that it can hold across all zooms. a shitty lens will typically go from 3.0 to 5.6 from the bottom zoom to the upper zoom. its not that big of a deal if you do all your shooting in daylight, but if you're shooting an action shot in low light and your aperture slips from 3 to 5.6 when you zoom say goodbye to your shot. it can also limit your available zooms, as you can't get enough light on the sensor before your shot ends.
if you have other questions feel free to ask. i'll be here all night.
edit: you'll never be able to find a new DSLR for 2-400 dollars. you can get a film camera for that range though. i think a canon k-2 goes for around 150.
most (if not all) camera companies don't use the same lens mount system, so you need to be looking above and beyond the camera you're purchasing now. if you decide to upgrade in the future you obviously want to make sure the company you're buying from makes good prosumer DSLRs (i'm assuming you're getting a consumer one, like a d40 or d80 or rebel XTi or STi) because once you're invested far into your camera its devastating to your wallet to switch companies, again because of the whole lens mount issue.
by far the most important thing is your lenses. you can go out and buy an 80 dollar 70-300mm zoom lens but you're gonna have more difficulty working with it than a 500 dollar one. essentially, don't skimp on your glass. start with a cheap body and good glass rather than a good body and shitty glass. the sensors in the camera body all work the same and record the same quality of picture, whereas the glass in a cheap lens doesn't provide the same quality as that in a good lens.
cheap lenses have three basic problems: distortion, lens flare, and nonstandard base apertures. a cheap telephoto lens will tend to barrel the shot, making it look really rounded at the longest length, like this:
i've never had that problem with my telephoto, but i spent 500 dollars on it.
really shitty glass tends to handle direct light very poorly.
see the weird hexagons?
as a side note, the number of aperture blades determines the shape of the flare.
better glass tends to not do this.
the worst thing with cheap glass though, has to do with your apterture, which controls the amount of light let in. a good lens will have a bottom number (say, F/2.8) that it can hold across all zooms. a shitty lens will typically go from 3.0 to 5.6 from the bottom zoom to the upper zoom. its not that big of a deal if you do all your shooting in daylight, but if you're shooting an action shot in low light and your aperture slips from 3 to 5.6 when you zoom say goodbye to your shot. it can also limit your available zooms, as you can't get enough light on the sensor before your shot ends.
if you have other questions feel free to ask. i'll be here all night.
edit: you'll never be able to find a new DSLR for 2-400 dollars. you can get a film camera for that range though. i think a canon k-2 goes for around 150.
Last edited by Ender2309 (2008-08-27 17:23:09)
You could get a D40 for that I think. At least, in the UK you can get them for $500, so you should find them cheaper in the US. Stock Nikon lenses tend to be a lot better quality that Canon, so I'd go with them.
thats a good point, and nikon was ranked higher this year than canon, although i do believe canon professional glass is better than nikons.ghettoperson wrote:
You could get a D40 for that I think. At least, in the UK you can get them for $500, so you should find them cheaper in the US. Stock Nikon lenses tend to be a lot better quality that Canon, so I'd go with them.
this be my camera, just need to get myself a zoom lens
good camera though.
inb4 minty
Yep
A camera isn't just the camera, it is the lenses that go with it. There are specific lenses for close, at a distance, very far away etc. My brother has a Nikon D50, you can see some of the results on his flickr
A camera isn't just the camera, it is the lenses that go with it. There are specific lenses for close, at a distance, very far away etc. My brother has a Nikon D50, you can see some of the results on his flickr
Last edited by kylef (2008-08-28 08:55:07)
350D is a nice little play around SLR.
If you want it more serious, i also recommend the 2D and 5D.
Canon <3
If you want it more serious, i also recommend the 2D and 5D.
Canon <3
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
Not true. For $500 you can get a great camera base and for another $500 you can get 1-2 or maybe 3 (at a push) decent lensesRyan wrote:
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
You can get a good camera for a lot less than that. You're probably going to spend more money on the glass for it.Ryan wrote:
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
Xbone Stormsurgezz
like the 1 I have in my household?Ryan wrote:
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
My SLR was like £300, extra lenses should I want to acquire them are like 500 and upKmarion wrote:
You can get a good camera for a lot less than that. You're probably going to spend more money on the glass for it.Ryan wrote:
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
My uncle has a good SLR camera, and he paid about $2200 for it. I've seen cheaper cameras, but I still wouldn't be able to afford it.
if you're getting more than 1 lens at that cost you're not spending enough. glass is an investment that should be taken very seriously because once you get deep into photography you're just going to go out and replace those lenses anyways. because they suck.kylef wrote:
Not true. For $500 you can get a great camera base and for another $500 you can get 1-2 or maybe 3 (at a push) decent lensesRyan wrote:
I wish I had a DSLR, I want to get into photography. The good camera's are like $3000, and then lenses are an extra $2000
if you're deep into photography you're going to spend at least 1000 on a body. for a beginner spending more than 5-800 is stupid.
Getting my Canon 400D tomorrow