Which camera to get?

Hello,

 

I am new to photo.net and new to Digital photography, although I've already

picked up a lot of great tips from here :)

 

I studied and practiced film (strictly) photography for 11 years and loved every

minute of it, but that was 5 years ago! Now I am getting back into professional

photography and starting a business. I am planning on doing mainly Weddings, but

also head shots/portraits, children, music/band, maybe even some landscape.

 

regarding Equipment: I'm drawn to Canon since that's what I grew up on, but I'm

still open to some other options. Budget is pretty low to start with (Less than

$1000 TOTAL)

 

What would you recommend? So far I'm torn between:

* XTi

* XSi

* EOS-30D (used or older body, but spend money on nicer lenses.)

* Or... ?

 

I haven't shot any weddings yet, so it's kinda tough for me to determine what

kind of lenses I would need. In everyday/just for fun photos I really enjoy

close ups/macro/depth of field use, obviously that's not going to be enough for

weddings. any recommendations for lenses too?

 

I know you can't know what's the best fit for me, I'm just looking for advice

and a place to start looking. I have checked out the XTi at the store and like

it ok, just wondering what else is good. :)

 

Any advice on starting the business too would be awesome! but you'll hear from

me again in the business forum.

 

Thank you in advance, I'm very excited and terrified! :)

 

Bassma.

If you are planning on shooting weddings as a business, your budget is unrealistic.

 

However, I'll answer your question as-is. You'll likely find that you're always needing more light. So, don't buy a lens slower than f/2.8. Under $1000, I'm going to say Digital Rebel XT, EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, and EF 50mm f/1.8. If you can afford it, add the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM. A zoom lens that you can afford will not be fast enough, and long telephoto lenses are wholly out of your budget.

A lil unrealistic but, I`d suggest a refurbished 30d + 35f2 +50 1.8 + EX430 flash to start of. Most businesses fail in the 1st 6 months, least that was the specs here, look at local colledges to see if they have basic starter business courses. There are many types of taxes forms, types of business and marketing ways to know and help. Some folks here (in oz) find with low income from photography it best to keep it as a hobby. Your Accountant will (or should) advise the best way. Just do the homework up front

 

Good luck :)

Oh yeah, if you still have film equipment resurrect it for backup :-)

BTW not knowing where you are I did not cost anything, the 28 2.8 will bring it down a bit, I know 30 $650..

I'd suggest posting a similar question in the wedding forum.

If you are planning to do weddings, I really wouldn't suggest considering it with anything less than a 30D, and either a couple of good primes (30 2.0, 50 1.4, 85 1.8) or something like a 17-55 f2.8 or a 24-70L, and you will definitely want to get a flash (580EX). You 'can' shoot weddings with a rebel... heck, all the aunts and uncles probably will be too ;)

 

M barbu is right...you're budget is pretty unrealistic... $2500 is an absolute minimum, $5,000 gives you more room, and it goes up from there.

 

What equipment do you already have? You will definitely need a backup camera. I think anyone who shoots weddings without a backup is asking for trouble.

30d used, tamron 28-75 f2.8 zoom or the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, and the tamron 15-50 f/2.8

quote:[ (30 2.0, 50 1.4, 85 1.8) or something like a 17-55 f2.8 or a 24-70L] Well I look at it this way if your going to get the 17-55mm F-2.8 you do not need the 30mm/2.0 just an extra lens to carry around the 50mm F-1.4 is a must 85 or 90 or 105 mm lens would be my other choices and if you need to do candid fotos a 70-200mm will get those hiden shots that are lost when you get close up:

Consider that much of wedding work is group shots. All the the best (and most expensive zooms) have noticeable barrel ditortion at the edges of the frame. The bride is not gonna be pleased at Uncle George's lopsided head. Stick with primes. Choose a prime that crops to at least a moderate wide angle, like 24 or 20mm. You're gonna have very little working space in some situations. Wide coverage is a must. If you use a zoom, don't max out at the widest focal length; narrow down a tad.

Two XTi $1040 (minimum), Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 $460, Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 $350, Canon 85mm 1.8 $340, 580EX II with Stofen Diffuser $460, 6 4g CF cards $300(minimum), extra batteries etc $125 (= $2615). You could shave this down to $2k or up to as was said $5k. But this is just about minimum to get started in wedding/commercial work. http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/ http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment To paraphrase; everybody wants to learn but not everybody will pay the price. Would you want your maybe once in a lifetime event photographed by a somebody with a $1k equipment budget. Save your money, take it slow, work with someone who knows what they are doing, pay the price in effort and expenditure and if you have the talent and patience and ability maybe you'll get to where you want to be. Good luck!

<p><i>Consider that much of wedding work is group shots. </i></p><p>It doesn't have to be; depends on the photographic style desired.</p>

Thank you everyone, I guess I am a little over my head. But to clarify, My starting budget is very low because I'm still practicing and learning... and because I had to buy a laptop, software and am currently unemployed. :/

 

I am planning on taking it slow and working my way up to more equipment and a higher budget... just wanted to spend the money I had wisely.

 

Thank you!

The point people are trying to make is that your limited budget does not allow enough equipment for you to do professional-level work for wedding photography.

 

As a wedding photographer, you will be required to make great pictures under the most impossible conditions. Group shots, close ups, dance and action pictures, still life and product. All those can be and are part of wedding photography. And nothing in your budget prepares you for any part of that.

 

Spend you thousand bucks on an XT body and the rest on as good of lenses as you can find. Then find yourself a job as a second shooter and shoot a couple of dozen weddings, indoor and out, night and day, rain (yes rain) and shine. Then you will begin to know what you do not know.

 

<Chas>

The idea of doing any professional assignment (let alone a wedding) with one camera body

is a recipe for disaster. Any professional should have major redundancy and back ups at

his disposal (bodies, lenses, batteries, cards, card readers - anything essential). Whatever

can happen, will happen - electrical errors, drops, accidents, water damage and a host of

other things can render your camera useless, if you only have one body you are screwed

(as is your reputation and credibility).

 

Ideally you should have at least three camera bodies, maybe complimentary (ie. full frame

and crop sensor) but certainly your back up should not be a "second best" option. In other

words if you wouldn't have originally done the job on 35mm film, then that shouldn't be

your fall back option... your client should not be getting second best just because you had

a break down.

 

This is not meant to put you off at all, just take your time, do your research and build up

your equipment. I wouldn't risk starting off with a potential disaster just because you

jumped in a little too early.

Thank you for your good advice, it's a good dose of reality, however, I am not about to jump into shooting a wedding tomorrow! This is the start of a lot of research. I will definitely have a backup camera, practice a lot of events, work as a second shooter if possible and etc... having been an amateur photographer for 11 years in the past I have shot under some variable conditions and have learned the hard way to make due with what I have the best way I can.

 

My main question was how to best spend this first $1000 on a camera and lens that I won't regret later (will eventually be one of my back up cameras). Yes I know it's very low and unrealistic for a professional wedding set up, but I have to start somewhere and have some kind of equipment to practice with until I officially star the business and start charging for a wedding.

 

Thanks again.

You really should read this first.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/go-pro.htm

Bassma, I would go for an XTi with the new 18-55 IS (image stabilised) lens and add a 50 f/1.8 then practice and do as many weddings as possible, working as a second shooter. This would be of twofold benefit:

<p>1. You'll figure out what focal lengths suit your style

<br>2. You'll get a reality check on what shooting weddings is REALLY like ;)

<p>I try NEVER to discourage anyone from wanting to shoot weddings. When I started out, I HAD to shoot weddings in order to make ends meet and I only had, at the time, a Rebel G film camera, a 28-105 lens and a dedicated flash (Yin Yan). I shot dozens of weddings with just that kit before I finally managed to get a backup system. That work got me noticed and I eventually managed to upgrade my kit from the earnings. Now my film SLR is my backup for my Rebel XTi. (I plan on going full-frame dSLR with the XTi as backup)

<p>Get lots of practice, spend time in the annals of photo.net and don't be afraid to ask questions. That's what these forums are for (you may also email me if you wish).

<p>Don't be discouraged by the often daunting prospect of spending '000s of dollars on 'professional' kit. Many posters here are seasoned pros, and they know only too well the perils of the business, which is why some might come down a bit hard on posters who say they want to start shooting weddings ;) But as you said, you have to start <i>somewhere</i>, and I reckon you won't go far wrong as a start with the kit I've suggested.

For a total newcomer to digital SLRs, I would say to look at Nikon and Canon and to be totally open to both systems. The D40x, D80, D300, D2Hs, and D3 are a heck of an offering. For digital, Canon has Xsi, 40D, 5D, 1D, and 1Ds. Also a great offering. The Canon and Nikon models sort of fall in between each other as far as price and features. The two brands don't really have any exactly direct equivalents, except perhaps the Rebel vs. the D40x. In that case, I think the Nikon wins due to first gen. F lens compatibility. (However, that is just me. I know that most people do not have original Nikon F lenses sitting around that they are dying to use on digital sans adapter.)

 

If you already have some good EOS lenses, look at Canon. In the end, it all comes down to your glass. That's what will cost you the most, and also what will last you the longest and have the most effect on the technical aspects of your pix.

 

However, if I was a newcomer to digital coming from film TODAY (as opposed to two years ago when I did so), the D300, and a D3 as a future hopeful, would definitely grab my attention more than the Canon body at a similar price (5D). I used my friend's D300 for a few minutes, and I think it is the perfect DSLR for me.

 

If you like FAST autofocus fixed-length lenses, Canon is your ONLY choice. If you use all zooms, I would say to pick whichever brand has the bodies that you find the most easy to control.

 

For your budget:

 

1. For Canon: Used 20D (would suggest 10D, but I think having EFs compatibility would be a plus for you), 17-40 or 17-85 IS, Sunpak 383.

 

2. For Nikon: D40x, Sunpak 383, and however many NAI lenses you can get for the rest of your budget.

 

You have a really tough budget. There are way better options for not that much more $$$.

 

Keith

Oh...and be sure to have more than one camera...A used 10D can be had for under $300 these days. A used 1D for $500. It would be the first additional "thing" to get once you have your main kit together. I use mine for weddings a lot. It is MORE than fine to do professional-quality wedding work, IF you are technically skilled. When shooting digital only, I usually have it with a 50mm or an 85mm, and one or two 1D bodies, depending on the circumstances. Ultra wide on one (17-40, or 16-35 if I can borrow it that day), and whichever of the two primes is not on the 10D goes on the second 1D. The 10D with the 85 usually ends up shooting about 400 shots (LOVE that 135mm equiv!) and the 1D with the wide about 200-300; mostly on the dance floor. The third body maybe 100 pix. A lot of pix.....that's the thing about digital...at first you might spend just as much time editing as you did shooting.

 

Keith

Keith, funny thing we still shoot our weddings a bit like film, ol days 3~5 35mm 3 MF, lately done all weddings with 20d`s but generally shooting less than 200 shots just the pick the shot as usual. I hear of some shooting 1000+ now. Our main biz is restaurants & niteclubs, when coming across folks celebrating after a wedding, we ofteb get, not tonite thanks all flashed out from a wedding. I wonder how many shots does one need for just one album these days? :)

Yeah, I find using primes and multiple bodies easier for the most part (and much sharper). When using zooms, I rarely change the focal length anyhow. No need for all that weight from a zoom if you aren't going to change focal lengths! Last wedding, I had three bodies around my neck for 12 hours, and because they were light lenses, I could still walk the next day (1D w/ 17-40, 10D w/ 85, 1D w/ 50)! Would not be the case with L zooms.

 

I shoot a lot more than you, since I am going for candid, journalistic, often "crazy". Lots of hail Marys, etc. Keep prob. 1/3 of shots to deliver to bride and groom. Most is journalism. My partner (originally my "boss") shoots the portraits on a pair of 5Ds. When film is requested (rarely these days), it's 645 color neg., and for the portraits only. I have Mamiya 1000s if needed, she has Contax, which gets a full 16 shots per 120 roll.

 

Digital has not changed the way I shoot that much. It has made me a bit more willing to waste a shot, so I do shoot more. It is a great convenience. Great professional tool. But as long as there is film around, I will still shoot it and print it.

 

Keith

Bassma,

 

Here is an idea, for what it is worth, from someone who doesn't shoot weddings, but first a question. Do you still have your film old camera(s) and lens(es)? If so, have you considered bootstrapping your way into the business? By that I mean shoot your first few jobs on film. Then use the proceeds to buy something like an XTi, keeping your film camera(s) as backup. Then after a few more jobs use the proceeds to buy either a second XTi or a more expensive camera, keeping your first XTi as backup.

 

It seem to me that this would be a low risk strategy that would get you where you want to go.

 

As for lenses, if you still have some lenses from your film days first have a look at them to see if they might be suitable to start with, and then add lenses as needed as you figure out where the holes are in your arsenal.

A bit of followup: How about this for a hypothetical plan: (For all you pros, please feel free to shoot holes in it.)

 

Phase I:

 

Canon T2 Film body: ~$100 used, on ebay

 

28-135mm image stabilized lens: ~$400

 

Canon 50mm f/1.8 ~ $80

 

Sigma EF 530 Super flash ~$250

 

Camera bag ~ $50

 

Second T2 film body ~$100 for backup or two-lens shoot

 

(Total $980 and you are good to go.)

 

You might get these for a little less by careful bidding

 

 

Then

 

Phase II:

 

Canon Xti body ~ $500

 

18-55mm IS lens ~ $200

 

85mm f/1.8 lens ~ $350

 

sell one Ti body ~ -$50 or keep it for second backup

 

(total cost increment ~ $1000)

 

Then

 

Phase III

 

Canon 40D body ~$1000

 

17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens ~$1000

 

24-105mm f/4 IS lens ~$1000 or subst. 24-70mm f/2.8 lens

 

Canon 580EX flash ~ $400

 

sell 18-55mm lens ~-$150

 

sell 28-135mm lens ~-$300

 

sell sigma flash ~-$150 or keep it for backup

 

(total cost increment ~$2800)

 

Then

 

Phase III

 

second 40D body ~ $800 (assuming 50D is out)

 

sell XTi body ~-$200

 

(total cost increment ~ $600)

 

Somewhere along the way you might add a good tripod, cost ~$350.

Oops, the last phase in my posting above is phase IV, not phase III