What would you do if starting over?

Seany · 03-02-2011 1:25pm #1

Hi guys (and gals),

Newbie to photography here. Just a quick question...

If you were starting out again, would you go out and buy the best DSLR camera you can afford or start with a more basic limited camera and trade up over time?

The reason I ask is that I am fairly new to photography world (but have been interested in it for years) and do know whether to jump staright in and maybe buy a new/used body with great specs and a a couple of lenses/accessories a year as I need them or buy a more basic camera to start.

The reason I ask is because I am looking at the Canon 7d and wondering is this too much too soon?

I would be looking to photography anything and everything to begin with and once camera is in hand I hope to enroll in a photography course to get some technicial direction on getting the best use of my camera too.

Ideally I would like to get into music photography and produce/edit short films (band interviews, live sessions, etc) as I am coming from music background myself.

Just looking for opinions based on your own experiences? If starting over, what would you do?

Thanks,
Sean

PCPhoto · 03-02-2011 1:32pm

maybe just get a "standard" DSLR camera and do a course or two, read some books and get out there taking pics.

if I was to start again I'd be more organised and learn about the business side of being a photographer - the taking photos part comes with time but the business side requires a lot more attention.

if I was to start again with the knowledge I have (and the ability to follow through with some of my ideas/concepts/plans) .... I'd be a multi millionaire....and probably have lost a fair chunk of it by now.

magicbastarder · 03-02-2011 1:48pm

i still have and use the same sort of camera i had when starting out, but that's a film camera so maybe not as applicable to your situation.

however, if you want to get into film making, is a DSLR a wise choice? choose the tool best suited to the purpose.

Seany · 03-02-2011 1:49pm

PCPhoto wrote: »

maybe just get a "standard" DSLR camera and do a course or two, read some books and get out there taking pics.

if I was to start again I'd be more organised and learn about the business side of being a photographer - the taking photos part comes with time but the business side requires a lot more attention.

if I was to start again with the knowledge I have (and the ability to follow through with some of my ideas/concepts/plans) .... I'd be a multi millionaire....and probably have lost a fair chunk of it by now.

Thanks for Reply and Advice PCPhoto.... I wouldnt really be looking to get involved on the business side of things...more of a hobby than anything else. I would just like the best possible results based on time I am putting in and also what I can afford (cameras around that budget).

I realise that its still possible to take bad pictures with a good camera which is why I would be looking to get out and do a course and take as many photos as possible. I was thinking a better camera combined with taking regular photos, getting involved in a course, and reading up as much as possible about different techniques would give me the best chance of achieving this??

Based on whast I am looking to do...would you suggest any camera in particular to get started?

Paulw · 03-02-2011 1:50pm

If starting over, I'd go to a lot more boards outings. The few I did attend taught me so much about photography.

Other than that, I'd save hard and buy quality lenses, rather than initially buying cheaper stuff that I could just afford.

The business side is definitely something I'd learn to help me start making money.

Seany · 03-02-2011 1:51pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i still have and use the same sort of camera i had when starting out, but that's a film camera so maybe not as applicable to your situation.

however, if you want to get into film making, is a DSLR a wise choice? choose the tool best suited to the purpose.

Yes I think I would prefare to tackle the digital side of photgraphy first!

The film making would be a very small part of what I am hoping to do...the priority would be live/stage and portrait shots.

Thanks,
Sean

Seany · 03-02-2011 1:56pm

Paulw wrote: »

If starting over, I'd go to a lot more boards outings. The few I did attend taught me so much about photography.

Other than that, I'd save hard and buy quality lenses, rather than initially buying cheaper stuff that I could just afford.

The business side is definitely something I'd learn to help me start making money.

Although Ive been on boards for years..I'm new to the photography section so I'll actually keep an eye out for any such outings.

Based on teh fact that I would be probably shooting in low light situations (stage photography) is there any lenses you would recommend that I save my pennies towards?.

Thanks,
Sean

Borderfox · 03-02-2011 2:03pm

Canon or Nikon Seany? for Canon the 35L /50mm f1.4

Seany · 03-02-2011 2:19pm

Borderfox wrote: »

Canon or Nikon Seany? for Canon the 35L /50mm f1.4

Im leaning towards Canon at the moment.

I think I will need to do a lot more research on lenses as I dont feel I know enough...especially if spending anywhere near that money for quality lens!

Thanks,
Sean

Paulw · 03-02-2011 2:49pm

You want f/2.8 or better lenses, especially for low light photography.

Canon -

70-200mm f/2.8
100mm f/2
135mm f/2
50mm f/1.4 and such.

I'm sure Nikon would have similar.

daycent · 03-02-2011 3:24pm

Hi Seany,

I would advise something cheaper to start with. I know it's the cliche.... you've got to pay your dues to the photography gods and all that crap (it upsets some people round here when newbies want to spend their own money on expensive gear...!). But, it takes time to get up to speed with new equipment (and if you're moving to a DSLR from say, a bridge camera, there is a steep learning curve), and while you're doing this you'd be just as well off with something more basic. By the time you have a better idea of what you're into photography wise, there will be newer cameras available, and maybe the 7D will be cheaper by then.

squareballoon · 03-02-2011 3:25pm

I'd go for the 70-200mm f/2.8L and a 50mm 1.4. The body's less important when you're starting off but buy good lenses and you won't have to change them. You could get a used body and then if you want to upgrade you can re-sell the old one or keep it as a backup.
Look after your kit well and you shouldn't have any problem selling it on.

Paulw · 03-02-2011 3:30pm

Also, always consider buying 2nd hand, especially lenses. If cared for, they are a great investment.

Buceph · 03-02-2011 4:03pm

Why not the 50mm 1.8? It's a hell of a lot cheaper, and still quite excellent for low light.

Thecageyone · 03-02-2011 4:17pm

90% of the gear I've bought to date I bought used. I've not had one major problem yet.

Though the 7D looks a super camera, in a recent mag they matched it up against Nikon's new D7000 and a bunch of others, the D7000 came out well on top in terms of overall bang for buck and especially on the high ISO front. It's a lot cheaper than a 7D too.

daycent · 03-02-2011 4:35pm

Buceph wrote: »

Why not the 50mm 1.8? It's a hell of a lot cheaper, and still quite excellent for low light.

The 1.8 is a great lens for the price no doubt. But if you think you're going to use a 50mm prime to any extent I'd still recommend the 1.4. It's still only about €300, and there definitely is a difference. Obviously, build quality is miles better, but there is a noticeable improvement in IQ, even to the naked eye (mine anyway). A 1.2 is the dream obviously but €1200-ish is hard to justify!

Borderfox · 03-02-2011 4:42pm

The Sigma 50mm f1.4 is meant to be nice too.

daycent · 03-02-2011 4:58pm

Borderfox wrote: »

The Sigma 50mm f1.4 is meant to be nice too.

Yeah, meant to be better than the Canon apparently. But I think around €100 dearer if I remember correctly.

Borderfox · 03-02-2011 5:12pm

daycent wrote: »

Yeah, meant to be better than the Canon apparently. But I think around €100 dearer if I remember correctly.

Hard to understand but the Canon is a 58mm diameter and the Sigma is 77mm diameter for the same fl and f1.4? somebody is wrong in the calculations

DaireQuinlan · 03-02-2011 5:16pm

Borderfox wrote: »

Hard to understand but the Canon is a 58mm diameter and the Sigma is 77mm diameter for the same fl and f1.4? somebody is wrong in the calculations

Nikon 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are both 52mm. You can make a fast lens quite a bit narrower if you tolerate a certain amount of mechanical vignetting and falloff from the lens barrel itself. The lenses are f/1.4 in the middle if you will.

Dodgykeeper · 03-02-2011 9:06pm

Paulw wrote: »

You want f/2.8 or better lenses, especially for low light photography.

Canon -

70-200mm f/2.8
100mm f/2
135mm f/2
50mm f/1.4 and such.

I'm sure Nikon would have simelar better.

Fixed that for you Paul!

Thecageyone · 03-02-2011 9:20pm

Coincidentally both a Canon 70-200 2.8 and a Nikon 70-200 2.8 have just gon up on adverts within the past hour!

Anyone got a loan of €1600?

03-02-2011 10:49pm

Seany wrote: »

Ideally I would like to get into music photography and produce/edit short films (band interviews, live sessions, etc) as I am coming from music background myself.

Just looking for opinions based on your own experiences? If starting over, what would you do?

Thanks,
Sean

There have been some excellent suggestions on lens etc but You mention the video side of things... Id suggest to you start off on the 550d. Its a substantially cheaper camera compared to the 7d. the 450d was my first dslr and I got great use out of it.

The xxxd series is a great place to start learning. And for video the 550d is an excellent camera. When you are looking to upgrade to a 5 or 7d you still will have an excellent B cam for video shoots that will match quite well (in fact they are almost comparable in video terms). The reason i mention 550d is that they have done wonders hacking the firmware (magic lantern). A lot more options now available as opposed to the 7d and the 60d (the hack for that is not as advanced).

You are also going to need to spend 500+ on periperals if you are looking to shoot video so thats something to keep in mind on top of nice lenses. One thing you need is an IS lense. I made the mistake of buying my new cam body only. Go with something that comes with the kit 18-55mm IS lens. The photographers here will crucify me as its not the greatest lens for photography but it works well for video and trust me image stabilization is essential.

What would you do if starting over?

Comments