Advice/Questions on buying Cameras & Accessories. **Please read OP first**

CabanSail

Jim wrote: »

Looking to get a wide prime on a crop sensor for street photography. Anyone have any recommendations?

I'm looking at the Canon 24mm, 28mm and 35mm but not sure what separates them other than price. Would the 24mm be better than the 35mm due to the crop?

None of these lenses will be particularly wide on a 1.6 Canon cropped body. The widest here will be about 39mm full frame equivalent, which would be barely wider than normal.

What you will be needing is something which is about 15mm and not a Fisheye, unless you're seeking that distortion.

.Longshanks.

Jim wrote: »

Looking to get a wide prime on a crop sensor for street photography. Anyone have any recommendations?

I'm looking at the Canon 24mm, 28mm and 35mm but not sure what separates them other than price. Would the 24mm be better than the 35mm due to the crop?

Have you considered a sigma 30mm ƒ1.4? I bought one last summer and its far and away the lens I use the most
Example of street photography taken 10 mins after buying it:

Sigma 30mm ƒ1.4 test

CabanSail

It's a nice "normal" lens but not a wide lens.

Jim

CabanSail wrote: »

None of these lenses will be particularly wide on a 1.6 Canon cropped body. The widest here will be about 39mm full frame equivalent, which would be barely wider than normal.

What you will be needing is something which is about 15mm and not a Fisheye, unless you're seeking that distortion.

Yea, that's kinda what I thought. The crop really kills it. Maybe I'll just save up for a 5D MkII. I should have enough in about 6 months

CabanSail

What are you wanting to shoot with the wide lens?

I shoot a lot with the Sigma 10-20mm zoom. I know it's not a prime and not that fast, but it is a very useful and affordable piece of glass. There is also a Tamron lens which is similar and as has good reports.

buzz11

I currently have a panasonic TZ-7 which has a brilliant zoom lens but shutter delay is an issue and causing me to miss some great shots.

So I'm considering changing for one of the following;
-Casio EX-H30
-Panasonic TZ-22 (or TZ20)
-Canon SX-220HS

I can't seem to find any mention in the spec's of shutter delay so will I get any improvement at all?

Jim

Candid shots of people on the street, getting close to the subject. Hence the prime. Just want something small and discrete. If I wasn't looking to get a prime I'd be aiming for the 24-70, so €300-€400 is definitely affordable for me (means I might be able to eat next month!)

5uspect

Jim wrote: »

Candid shots of people on the street, getting close to the subject. Hence the prime. Just want something small and discrete. If I wasn't looking to get a prime I'd be aiming for the 24-70, so €300-€400 is definitely affordable for me (means I might be able to eat next month!)

Getting close to the subject with a wide angle (~10mm) will require you to get very close indeed and may result in unflattering distortion.

Are you sure a wide lens is what you want? Are you thinking of a moderate focal length like 35mm rather that a wide angle? What do you currently have? Is it wide enough or just not discrete? If you're considering a 24-70L bear in mind it's far from small and discrete.

Jim

5uspect wrote: »

Getting close to the subject with a wide angle (~10mm) will require you to get very close indeed and may result in unflattering distortion.

Are you sure a wide lens is what you want? Are you thinking of a moderate focal length like 35mm rather that a wide angle? What do you currently have? Is it wide enough or just not discrete? If you're considering a 24-70L bear in mind it's far from small and discrete.

Yes, perhaps a more moderate length is what I really need. I think around 35mm is what I was aiming for (trying to get a good approx to that with the crop sensor).

I know the 24-70 isn't discrete at all, that's why I'm aiming for a small prime atm instead. Right now I'm using a 17 - 85mm f4.

CabanSail

Maybe you should think about a good bridge camera if you want to be discreet. Something like a G11 or G12 could fit the bill.

PCPhoto

theres also primes like the 20mm ...or if you get the chance ...a fisheye (15mm) or 14mm

you could pick up a decent secondhand fisheye (15mm) for your budget.

fox007

Quick question I have just got a Nikon D3000 as a present ", I have several af lens I know they work but can they auto focus canone tell me?

Jim

PCPhoto wrote: »

theres also primes like the 20mm ...or if you get the chance ...a fisheye (15mm) or 14mm

you could pick up a decent secondhand fisheye (15mm) for your budget.

Yea, I was originally looking at the 20mm, but I think it's a bit more than I am willing to pay.
Is there really that much of a difference between it and the much cheaper 24mm or 28mm?

Magill

Donno if this is the place for camcorders.. but im clueless when it comes to it so maybe some of you guys have a better idea... anyway i've to sort one as a present, so just looking for any recommendations.. (Budget is 260euro).

Jim

http://www.connscameras.ie/canon-ef-24mm-f2-8-lens/102827pd.html

Am I crazy? €300 on Conns, but everywhere else I looked it's anywhere from €400-€500.

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/91642/art/canon/ef-24mm-f-2-8.html
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00005KHRZ/ref=s9_simh_gw_p23_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0F07S7F30XE21HS89P6R&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=467128533&pf_rd_i=468294

hbr

Jim wrote: »

http://www.connscameras.ie/canon-ef-24mm-f2-8-lens/102827pd.html

Am I crazy? €300 on Conns, but everywhere else I looked it's anywhere from €400-€500.

It is in the used equipment section.

Jim

hbr wrote: »

It is in the used equipment section.

This is why I always ask!

shayser

I have never used a DSLR before. I want the camera for use in a theatre, so it must be good in very low light. Would I need a longer lens than the standard lens to take photos of the stage from the back of the theatre, including close-ups of the performers? And would I need to buy a stronger flash for this low light/distance situation?

I was thinking about the Nikon 3000 or 3100 as these have the on-screen step-by-step feature for beginners and seem to be good value for a first camera.

The photos will be used for the web and some print like A3/A2 posters and probably not high-quality glossy-magazine type jobs.

Thanks.

PCPhoto

shayser wrote: »

I have never used a DSLR before. I want the camera for use in a theatre, so it must be good in very low light. Would I need a longer lens than the standard lens to take photos of the stage from the back of the theatre, including close-ups of the performers? And would I need to buy a stronger flash for this low light/distance situation?

I was thinking about the Nikon 3000 or 3100 as these have the on-screen step-by-step feature for beginners and seem to be good value for a first camera.

The photos will be used for the web and some print like A3/A2 posters and probably not high-quality glossy-magazine type jobs.

Thanks.

you want professional results - you need a combination of photography knowledge and quality equipment.

there are loads of things to find out before any recommendations can be given.... are you looking to take photos during a performance ? (stage lighting) .... are you going to be allowed to take photos during a performance - plenty of theater's do not permit photography during a performance.

as regards lenses - it depends on the size of the theatre, it is more than likely you will require a longer lens than the kit lens so you can get pics from of the actors from the back of the theater.

if money is not an issue - Canon 1D mkIV, Canon 5D mkII, 70-200mm f2.8 IS mkII, 300mm f2.8 IS, 14mm f2.8 MkII, 24-70mm f2.8 and maybe 16-35mm f2.8.
(I cant suggest Nikon equipment but I hear the latest camera is excellent for low light situations)

Other things to consider - if you are permitted to take images during dress rehersals - a decent good quality tripod and remote release....a joby gorillapod, some remote triggers and a number of flashes (580EX MkII)

EDIT: if you have not ever used a DSLR - do you understand the basic concepts and terms of photography ?, aperture, shutter speeds, ISO/ASA, composition, learning these will help you to understand where you will make errors and its more than likely you will make errors (Photography is a lot of trial and error)

CabanSail

shayser wrote: »

I have never used a DSLR before. I want the camera for use in a theatre, so it must be good in very low light. Would I need a longer lens than the standard lens to take photos of the stage from the back of the theatre, including close-ups of the performers? And would I need to buy a stronger flash for this low light/distance situation?

I was thinking about the Nikon 3000 or 3100 as these have the on-screen step-by-step feature for beginners and seem to be good value for a first camera.

The photos will be used for the web and some print like A3/A2 posters and probably not high-quality glossy-magazine type jobs.

Thanks.

Wow! This is a bit like asking "I'm going to learn to drive soon. Can anyone advise me what car I need to drive in a Formula 1 race?"

To get good results in this area the top quality equipment will be useful. That can be bought if you have the budget. What can't be bought is the years of experience that is required to get the quality results you will require.

shayser

Thanks for the reply, PCPhoto, very informative. Sorry if the questions are naive, as I said I'm a beginner, or even a pre-beginner .

I am allowed to photograph the performance and in fact I did once before using a Canon EOS350D but the results were terrible. Afterwards the person I borrowed it from said I should have used a bigger flash. I guessed myself also that I should have used a longer lens.

I don't know the size of the theatre. The picture shows 16 rows plus a bit of space. I took the photos from the red X marks.



On Amazon the user reviews for the Canon 3000 and 3100 are very good and they are among the cheapest DSLRs so I was hoping they would do.

I will do a lot of reading over the next few days.

PCPhoto wrote: »

you want professional results - you need a combination of photography knowledge and quality equipment.

there are loads of things to find out before any recommendations can be given.... are you looking to take photos during a performance ? (stage lighting) .... are you going to be allowed to take photos during a performance - plenty of theater's do not permit photography during a performance.

as regards lenses - it depends on the size of the theatre, it is more than likely you will require a longer lens than the kit lens so you can get pics from of the actors from the back of the theater.

if money is not an issue - Canon 1D mkIV, Canon 5D mkII, 70-200mm f2.8 IS mkII, 300mm f2.8 IS, 14mm f2.8 MkII, 24-70mm f2.8 and maybe 16-35mm f2.8.
(I cant suggest Nikon equipment but I hear the latest camera is excellent for low light situations)

Other things to consider - if you are permitted to take images during dress rehersals - a decent good quality tripod and remote release....a joby gorillapod, some remote triggers and a number of flashes (580EX MkII)

EDIT: if you have not ever used a DSLR - do you understand the basic concepts and terms of photography ?, aperture, shutter speeds, ISO/ASA, composition, learning these will help you to understand where you will make errors and its more than likely you will make errors (Photography is a lot of trial and error)

CabanSail

A long lens & remote flash or a powerful flash on camera would work, but you will still be lucky to get results which are ordinary. The reason is that a large part of the magic of the theatre is due to stage lighting. If you want to get results which represent what is happening on the stage you need to shoot with the available light. This then presents a whole load of problems you need to address.

Stage lighting is not generally very bright, so the equipment required is toward the upper end of the scale as you need to get good low light performance. Entry level DSLR's are fine in good light levels but you see where the money is spent when you get into low light. In the past a lot of theatre photography has been done in monochrome, this is because the B&W films had much better low light performance than colour films. Film still has a higher dynamic range (the difference between the dullest and brightest light that can be recorded) than digital sensors and using a film camera may be an option for you. You will still be needing some speciality high speed film to get good results. In DSLR's you would be advised to get a full frame body as they have a sensor the same size as 35mm film and so have very good low light performance. You will be looking at Nikon D700 or Canon 5DII if you want to blow images up to poster size. For general size prints you may get away with a prosumer body which has reasonable low light characteristics like the Nikon D90 or Canon equivalent (probably a 60D)

The next hurdle is the glass. A kit lens is not going to make the grade here. You will be looking at some fast glass. If you can get in close enough on a cropped body a 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 would be the cheapest you will get. If you are further away, like indicated on your plan, then something like a 70-200mm f2.8 lens would be the minimum.

You now have a body for low light & some good fast glass. The camera will need to be stable, so that will require a good tripod & suitable head. The budget for something stable will be about a third (or more) of the cost of an entry level DSLR.

We now have the gear required to enable you to get good results, the biggest challenge is how to use all this lovely technology. You will be shooting in low light but with a large dynamic range, which is an environment which will make a lot of the smart features not as useful as you would expect. The Auto Focus will probably struggle in these conditions so you will be focussing manually but you will have to be careful as the aperture will be wide open making the depth of field very narrow, especially at longer focal lengths. The auto exposure modes will also probably deliver less than optimum results, so you will probably be shooting manual and being guided with spot metering. These are all skills which require knowledge and experience.

The dynamic range is large in these conditions, so you will be shooting in RAW to allow you to maximise what you capture. So then will need some ability to process the images once you download them to your computer, and suitable software. This is yet another skill set which takes time and patience to master.

This is a very difficult area of photography to get good results and those which do so are highly skilled and would have invested in the best kit for this type of work. Having said that, a skilled photographer may still be able to get some acceptable results with entry level equipment. They will know how to work with the constraints of the gear. On the other hand an inexperienced photographer would probably still struggle even if they had all the best gear at their disposal.

shayser

Thanks a million CabanSail. Some great advice and information there for a beginner. I will take it on board

Michael..

Hi ladies and gents,

First of all I would like to apologies if this topic has been done a million times before...

Well, I'm pretty new to this forum and I'm looking for a bit of advice in order to purchase a new camera. I have always enjoyed and appreciated other people's work. Now I want to take the plunge in order to capture my own little pieces of art

I have about 700/800 hundred euro to spend. Will this be enough to purchase a good quality camera ?? What brand should I go for..?? What type of lens should I be looking to get ??


As you can probably tell I don't know a huge amount about cameras, so any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks !!

hbr

Michael.. wrote: »

Hi ladies and gents,

First of all I would like to apologies if this topic has been done a million times before...
!

It has

I have about 700/800 hundred euro to spend. Will this be enough to purchase a good quality camera ??

Yes. This depends on your definition of a good quality camera.
You can certainly get a decent DSLR with kit lens for €800.
The Pentax K-x is currently €406 from Argos.

What brand should I go for..??

All of the big brand cameras are fit-for-purpose, so you won't go
far wrong, even if you make a random choice.

Canon and Nikon are the popular choice, probably because they have
a greater range of lenses and accessories. AFAIK, all of the current
Sony, Pentax and Nikon DSLRs use image sensors made by Sony.
This means that all other things being equal, you can expect similar
image quality from all of them.

What type of lens should I be looking to get ??

This depends on what you will be shooting. The standard kit lens is
usually the safest and cheapest option. Most cameras come with an
18-55mm lens. This is a zoom range of about 3x.

Once you have some experience, you will be in a better position to
decide whether you need other lenses.

As you can probably tell I don't know a huge amount about cameras, so any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks !

If you do decide to buy a DSLR, don't fall into the usual trap of buying
lenses you don't need. The current kit lenses from Canon and Nikon
are quite good. AFAIK, the Pentax ones were always good.

If you buy a Canon, don't go for the twin lens kit. The 75-300mm is
not a great lens. You can get better for the same price.

A brand new DSLR is only suitable for use in your own home or
garden. You won't be able to use it anywhere else because consumer
grade DSLRs are not very tolerant of dust, moisture or mechanical
shock. A good camera bag is an absolute necessity.

Because kit lenses are generally quite slow (small aperture), you
will probably find that a tripod is also a worthwhile investment.

Misticles

Hi guys!

I'm going on holidayto Florida next month and I want to invest in a better camera. The one I have now is a standard run of the mill digital. What annoys me the most about it is the delay in taking the photo sometimes, depending on the surrounding conditions.

I don't want to miss any moments on holiday because of this silly delay so I would love to get a camera that can take the photo instantly (if such a thing exists) and has good quality images.

Budget: around 200e

Thanks

Michael..

hbr wrote: »

It has



Yes. This depends on your definition of a good quality camera.
You can certainly get a decent DSLR with kit lens for €800.
The Pentax K-x is currently €406 from Argos.



All of the big brand cameras are fit-for-purpose, so you won't go
far wrong, even if you make a random choice.

Canon and Nikon are the popular choice, probably because they have
a greater range of lenses and accessories. AFAIK, all of the current
Sony, Pentax and Nikon DSLRs use image sensors made by Sony.
This means that all other things being equal, you can expect similar
image quality from all of them.



This depends on what you will be shooting. The standard kit lens is
usually the safest and cheapest option. Most cameras come with an
18-55mm lens. This is a zoom range of about 3x.

Once you have some experience, you will be in a better position to
decide whether you need other lenses.



If you do decide to buy a DSLR, don't fall into the usual trap of buying
lenses you don't need. The current kit lenses from Canon and Nikon
are quite good. AFAIK, the Pentax ones were always good.

If you buy a Canon, don't go for the twin lens kit. The 75-300mm is
not a great lens. You can get better for the same price.

A brand new DSLR is only suitable for use in your own home or
garden. You won't be able to use it anywhere else because consumer
grade DSLRs are not very tolerant of dust, moisture or mechanical
shock. A good camera bag is an absolute necessity.

Because kit lenses are generally quite slow (small aperture), you
will probably find that a tripod is also a worthwhile investment.

Thanks for the advice, I'll definitely take it on-board when purchasing my camera.

I was looking at the Canon 550D this morning, looks like a pretty good entry level camera. Have you any experience with it ??

I'm going to go into the city tomorrow anyway and check it out for myself. Looking at a picture of a camera just isn't the same

gnolan

Hi,

Like many people here i'm also looking at getting the D3100. I have some questions. Currently its around €490 on amazon. Is there a better camera around in this price range? I'm not sure what exactly i'm going to need to get with it, a bag, SD card, anything else? Tripod maybe?

This will be my first DSLR but learning new things like this wouldn't overwhelm me and i think i'll pick it up quite quickly. Will this camera be suitable for me?

If i was to upgrade in say 3-5 years time, what kind of resale value could i expect: body only, and body + 18-55mm lens?

Thanks a lot.

EDIT: I've read a lot about the Auto focus when shooting video; can i safely assume that there is the option of manual focus?

hbr

Michael.. wrote: »

I was looking at the Canon 550D this morning, looks like a pretty good entry level camera. Have you any experience with it ??

It is a fine camera and it probably offers the best bang for your buck in
this price range. It has a lot in common with the new 600D. They are
almost identical except for the tilt & swivel LCD.

I have a 500D which is also very similar to the 550D. It has
a 15MP sensor instead of the 18MP sensor in the 550.
Still image quality is very similar. The 550D is better for
video because it has an external microphone socket and
more video modes than the 500D.

I'm going to go into the city tomorrow anyway and check it out for myself. Looking at a picture of a camera just isn't the same

When there is little difference in image quality and price, the
look and feel of the camera is often the deciding factor.

Argos are doing the 550D with kit lens for €738. Have a look
in the city centre camera shops. I find Mc Sweeny's are
usually up for a bit of haggling. You may be able to get them
to match or beat the Argos price.

On-line prices are a bit lower, but you may end up buying the
Asian "Kiss" or American "Rebel" version which won't have
warranty support from Canon Europe.

samson09

Hi folks!

I need to find a camera that will allow me to take detailed photos of the human iris, something like this >>> http://www.alpenanow.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/iris-eye.jpg

Could anyone recommend a suitable camera or advise what type of set up I should be looking out for?

Thanks