Advice please

[darren_corrao]

Hello all-

 

Up until now I've only ever used point-and-shoot cameras. I had a

photography class in high school, but am limited in my knowledge.

My teachers tell me I show a lot of potential, and honestly, I'm

pleased with how I'm progressing and of course I'm having lots of

fun doing it. I'd really like to get a new system but have no idea

where to start. I've read the camera choosing guides on this site,

but I'm still a bit confused...

 

My main focus is on nature landscapes, but I love taking portraits

as well (both with and without environment) and college is just the

perfect place for it!

 

So I'd like some advice on a body and lens (or lenses?)

 

I seem to be getting a lot of recommendations for the canon rebel

gII, but a lot of people are also telling me how it isn't good and

the flash is just ridiculous...

 

As for lenses, I'm not sure what seems right for what I want to do.

I'm assuming to get a 50/1.8 maybe a 1.4, and a telephoto for the

portraits? Will I be good with this?

 

Anyways, as you can tell I'm pretty clueless, but I'd really

appreciate some help. Thanks in advance!

[joshchapman]

You might consider an older manual focus model if your interests are in portaits and landscapes... neither of which require the speed of auto-focus. And as an added bonus for a college student (which I am myself) your camera outfit will cost you much less. Plus you get a bit more hands on experience with the camera controls as opposed to letting modern auto-everything cameras do everything for you.

 

You've got the right idea, though: the lens is the important part of the equation, and a 50mm isn't a bad place to start.

[darren_corrao]

Another camera I've been recommended is the Canon Elan 7N... what are the differences between this and the G2??

[jbq]

I'll second the advice that you received about the GII. Get a Ti instead, which has a much better auto-focus and metering system (but don't bother getting any higher, keep the money for the optics). With a 50/1.8 it'll cost you $230 new. Add a 135/2.8 for tight portraits and you'll have a killer combo (two focal lengths that are often said to be hard to use, but that both produce excellent results when used properly; and two of the cheap-but-good lenses in Canon's current lineup, along with the 28/2.8 which would be an interesting solution for wide landscapes).

 

Yes, there are cheaper solutions if you want a second-tier manual-focus body with a 50mm lens, but you'll need to expect to spend time on eBay to find lenses beyond that.

 

Most built-in camera flashes are not good for much - they're too small and too close ot the lens to use them as a primary light source (night or indoors), and not powerful enough to a strong daylight fill. There's little substitute for a serious shoe-mounted flash.

 

One big problem with your question is... what is your equipment budget?

[jbq]

The 7N (compared to the Ti) is slightly faster, a bit more silent, a bit better built, black, with two command wheels (more convenient when shooting in full-manual mode).

 

For the price difference between the Ti and the 7N (which have essentially the same metering and auto-focus) you can pretty much buy a 28/2.8, and better glass will have a much bigger impact on your pictures than a "better" body.

[darren_corrao]

Hmmm budget... well I'm a college student. Does that give you any idea?

 

So I'm looking at the GII and the Ti, could you go more into the differences for me? Again, I'm a beginner and I'd really like to understand what all of this means.

 

So you recommend a 50mm/1.8 over 50mm/1.4? What's the difference there?

 

I understand that a 135/2.8 will let me get in tight, but is a wide angle really necessary seeing as I'm on a budget. I'm assuming that I could still get some great shots if I played around with the 50.

 

Thanks for the help so far... I'm really appreciating it.

[jbq]

Yes, I get an idea about your budget.

 

Besides the size, the two relevant differences between the Ti and G2 are the AF and metering systems.

 

The G2 uses older technologies for those.

 

On the auto-focus side, it only uses 3 focusing points, which means that there are fewer cases where the subject is exactly under one of the focusing points, forcing to use "focus-and-recompose" techniques. Personally, I find that having more focusing points makes it easier to move away from awful "dead center" compositions.

 

On the metering side, the G2 takes 6 different light measurements in the frame when trying to guess what the best exposure will be for the frame. The Ti takes 35 measurements, and is therefore a lot more capable to detect very dark or very bright areas in the frame and to take them into account.

 

So, in a very tight budget, I'd look at a G2 if you must have a new camera, but in that case there are probably some opportunities to find used bodies for cheaper that will have similar capabilities.

 

 

On a tight budget, I'll most definitely recommend a 50/1.8 over a 50/1.4. The 50/1.4 is a bit more silent when focusing, gives a slightly brighter image in the viewfinder, gives a few more low-light abilities, but honestly for the price difference you could either buy an extra lens or a shoe-mounted flash, which in my opinion will have a much greater impact on your pictures than the upgrade to the f/1.4.

 

The reason why I suggested a wide angle was your mention of "nature landcapes". In many cases a 50mm lens can fail to show, well, wide angles (though on the other hand photography is about keeping as many things out of the frame as possible, and a wide angle tends to include just about everything). It's hard to justify not buying a 50mm anyway, and experience with it will tell you whether you need something wider.

 

Some will argue (and they have a good point) that you should go for a zoom instead of trying to target prime lenses. You may end up with a slightly lower image quality or less low-light ability, but more framing options (as long as you don't fall into the trap of composing everything by zooming). At $230, Canon's 28-105/3.5-4.5 (NOT the 4-5.6 version) is a good buy which will cover focal lengths from landscape to portrait for less cost).

 

If by chance you're in the San Francisco area, we could try to meet so that you can get a better idea of what kind of perspective to expect from various lenses (I have quite a sample).

[darren_corrao]

Well I'm definitely leaning towards the Ti, but honestly I'm lost at the moment for what I want to do with lenses. I want to try so much from star trails to landscapes and there are a couple options I can see for my budget:

 

28-105mm 3.5-4.5

or

50mm 1.4

or

50mm 1.8 and 135mm 2.8

 

later on probably look at wide angles...

 

Another question I have is if I'm going to have a greater range with the 50mm 1.4 compared to the 1.8

 

I'm at college in Wisconsin so I don't think I'll be anywhere near you, but again, you're really helping me out. Thanks

[runkel]

Interesting that only Canon has been mentioned. I'm sure there's no reason for this except that it's the only brand you named in the original post. I agree with Josh that you should look at manual focus options--for landscape and portraits, AF likely will just get in the way. AF won't help you focus on a static landscape, and won't "know" to focus on the eyes of a portrait subject. Keep in mind that it is generally much easier to focus manually using manual focus bodies because their viewfinders were created with manual focusing in mind.

 

Besides Canon, I would look at Nikon and Pentax options. Unlike Canon, both of these manufacturers have kept the same basic lens mount for decades, so a lot of older glass is available. Consider the Nikon FM2n, a great fully-manual camera. The Nikon 105mm f/2.5 is a legendary portrait lens and one of the real bargains in the Nikon line. This makes a nice combination with a 50 and a 24, or with just a 35. I know less about Pentax, but the Super Program (a.k.a. Super A) has a great reputation and goes for a song (KEH.com has a Super Program in excellent condition for $109 right now).

 

A 50 will be a good place to start. Some even like it as a portrait lens. As a general rule, a 1.8 lens will equal or outperform a 1.4 lens of the same focal length over the apertures they share, because of the optical compromises inherent in making a 1.4 lens. And the 1.4 will cost a lot more. You will likely shoot the great majority of landscapes at smaller apertures than f/1.8. The 1.4 will let you shoot in a few more situations than the 1.8, such as in very dim light or when you need a faster shutter speed, but 1.8 is already a pretty fast lens.

 

I like the idea of starting with a manual body and prime lenses to force yourself to learn the fundamentals (check the archives for threads about this). Yes, a very disciplined person can turn off a camera's automated features, but I doubt most people have that level of discipline. Primes encourage you to work a bit for your compositions. I suspect that those who start out with a zoom tend to stay in one place and compose by zooming without varying perspective (i.e., location of the camera relative to the subject). Also, zooms are larger and slower than primes and often won't match their image quality.

 

Be sure to budget for a solid tripod and tripod head. You will want a tripod for landscape. The general view in the archives here is that you can either buy a succession of unsatisfactory camera supports or start with a good one and consider it a lifetime investment.

[rob_murray]

I second the Rebel TI, plenty of features for you.

Get the 50mm F1.8 lens first. It is cheap,fast and sharp.

You can use it for lots of stuff. Here is what I use:

Rebel TI

Canon 22-55mm USM (discontinued, but check Ebay $100 or so!)

Canon 75-300mm USM ($175)

Canon 50mm F1.8 ($70)

Vivitar 283 flash (Cheap $70,powerful,very accurate.

For most things you dont need Canons $350 flash)

Bogen Digi series tripod w/ball head $100

[jbq]

The difference in "range" between the 1.4 and the 1.8 won't be significant. Most 50mm lenses are visibly less sharp below f/2.8 (one notable exception would be Leica's 50/2, which is absolutely good at f/2). If you find that you're often right at the limit of hand-holding at f/1.8 and think that you'd want the f/1.4 version, what you really want is a tripod (or a monopod).

 

That's not to say that the 50/1.4 is a bad lens. But I'd say that it's as better than then 50/1.8 as then 7N would be better than the Ti: it is a bit bigger, a bit better built, a bit more silent, but at the end of the day it brings home essentially the same pictures.

 

Like Matthew said, you could look at other brands too. Let me advise you against the Nikon "compatibility" Kool-Aid, because that compatibility is often limited to being able to physically mount the lens on the camera (and even that is not always guaranteed). Trying to learn which Nikon lens can be used with which Nikon camera and which features are available with which combo is an exercise in frustration.

[panos_voudouris]

For camera, I would get a 2nd hand Elan7. But a second hand Rebel 2000 would be even cheaper and you wouldn't be missing anything. Make sure the camera you get has a depth-of-field preview (these two do).

 

For landscapes you can get a 28/2.8 for nothing on ebay 2nd hand. Very sharp, very light, virtually no distortion! If you really want portraits, I would skip the 50 and get either of:

 

Canon EF 135/2.8: I love this lens, very sharp, great background blur and the soft-focus effect can be useful. You can probably find a 2nd hand cheaply. It is excellent for outdoors portraits but indoors it can be very long (min focusing is 1.3m).

 

Tamron 90/2.8 Macro. This is probably my favourite lens. It has a great background blur and makes a great portrait and macro lens. The manual focusing ring is brilliant and the macro capability just lets you experiment not just with people but with anything else. Think of eye close-ups, part of faces, still life details...

 

Canon EF 85/1.8 USM. This is considered the classic Canon portrait lens. I was between that and the Tamron 90 and opted for the Tamron for the reasons described above.

 

If I were to pick two lenses, I'd say get the Tamron for your portraits and most things and the 28 for your wide angles. You might also consider the 35/2 instead of the 28/2.8 as it will be more useful for environmental portraits.

 

If I were to get just one and did portraits, I'd go for the Tamron.

 

If you want a zoom, a Tamron 28-75/2.8 is a good fast lens I hear, but do not have one.

 

Finally, for portraits, you'd be better off with an off-camera flash than the little pop-ups. If you do want to use the camera pop-up flash you really need a Elan7 as it at least allows you to reduce the output. My Rebel 2000 pop-up flash will usually overexpose and get everyone within a radius of 2m glowing white. No such problems with the Elan7 where I can use the pop-up and you won't even notice.

[darren_corrao]

I realize that I only mentioned Canon, just because for some reason it's my preference. I think I'm going to go with the Ti, the 55mm/1.8 and the 135mm/2.8

 

Now I just need a tripod, a bag, batteries, and film! Which of course, is partially confusing me, especially looking for a tripod.

 

Oh and what are uv-filters all about?

[richard_oleson]

(Old Codger Alert):

 

Get a Nikkormat FTN (an FT2 is even better). It'll cost you all of a hundred bucks with a 50mm lens on it, and it can accept all manual focus Nikkor lenses (the ones with the "fork" attached to the aperture ring), giving you a vast array of world class optics at bargain prices (because you can use the "Non-AI" lenses that later models can't).

 

The quality of construction of the camera is several orders of magnitude above the Rebel, and perhaps one or two orders of magnitude above the Elan... and of course the optics take a back seat to no one.

 

The benefit of the FT2 is that it uses a silver cell instead of a mercury cell for its meter; but this is a fairly easy problem to work around with the FTN.

 

:)=

[rob_murray]

I see some folks have urged you to get an older camera...

Dont get me wrong since I collect and repair and use old cameras.

But you can expect to pay at least $100 additional to get an older

camera back up to specs..Light seals go bad, prisms get full of

dust, mechanical parts need new lube, meter may not work right, etc...Stick with a new one to start with. At least you get a warranty and an instruction book to get you going...

[bob_bell]

maybe this is only my point of view but I think you should buy components that will last a long time or will let you transition easier. I don't know if there is anything wrong with the Ti but I know the older elan 7 is a heck of a camera and is very similar to other better SLR's and mid range DSLRs from Canon.

 

As far as lenses. I recommend not getting caught up covering ranges. I recommend that you buy a single lens and learn everything about it and what you feel you are missing that cant be accomplished by taking a few steps forward or back. With that said I would go with the elan 7 and the 50/1.8. That is a really nice starting point and the lens offers high image quality compared to its $70 price tag. That would put your kit at around $300 from Keh.com

[ed_bae]

One of the follow up questions was on UV filters. UV(0), UV(1), and Skylight filters are mainly used to protect the front element of your lens from scratches. This should only minimally affect the quality of your images while preserving the longevity of the lens and any coating that may be on the front element...

 

One of the bigger ways this will affect your image is by potential vignetting due to the filter ring. There are some articles on this site on how to check for vignetting.

 

Seems like your mind is set already, but I'll make one more pitch. A more manual older camera may better serve your needs. I found that learning on a fully manual camera with aperature rings and shutter speed dials helped me understand photography better than the menu driven LCD style cameras. As mentioned by previous posters, you can get a reliable system for ~300 bucks.

[darren_corrao]

I understand the experience that an older, completely manual camera will give me... because I've used one before. When I was in my photography class I had my PS and I had also borrowed a family friend's camera.

 

I think my mind is pretty much made up, but I still can't decide. When I look at specs and features, both the Elan 7 and the Rebel Ti look great. I see your point about wanting something that is going to be a longer lasting, high quality piece of equiptment. So once again I'm going to ask for your expertise and hope that someone can do a thorough comparison for me between the Elan 7ne and the Rebel Ti... please? :)

[nilantha]

Darren

I would second what Bob recomended Elan 7/50 mm 1.8 system and try to get a used one from keh.com. Other than Elan 7 you may also lok at Elan II. Elan 7 is known for to have a low light focusing problems and IMHO the only advantage over Elan II is dedicated DOF button. Also elan 7 is slightly smaller. BTW if you care about how the camera body looks, Elan 7 is black body while Elan II is silver and black.

[panos_voudouris]

I started with a Rebel 2000 (I think the previous model from the Ti) and moved to the

Elan 7. The differences that count for me:

 

1) Rear dial for easy exposure compensation.

 

2) I can now select myself the metering mode (the Ti does that for you)

 

3) 4fps

 

4) Selectable focusing mode (continuous/single)

 

5) Eye focus (I love it)

 

6) Mirror lock-up

 

7) Far less noisier shutter and faster mirror return (less black-out between shots)

 

8) Less vibration from the mirror slap.

 

9) Flash exposure compensation. This is a must if you are only using the internal flash

or any Canon flash smaller than the 550/580EX (eg 420EX).

 

10) 2nd curtain sync for the flash

 

11) And finally but most important of all bigger and brighter viewfinder. Not that the

Ti is that bad but once you look through the 7's viewfinder you'll never want to go

back.

 

Your lens choices are great! The 50 and 135 are fantastic lenses. If you add the 35 or

28 later on you'll have a fantastic quality set and they all use the same filter size

(52mm). UV filters: I usually don't like them as they introduce flare. As for protection,

the 50 front element is recessed enough by itself. Get a cheap rubber hood and you're

done (don't get the crappy Canon one). For the 135 get the Canon hood. It is huge and

will do

more to protect the lens than any little filter, plus it does a great job for flare

protection and as an added bonus the 85/1.8, 100/2 and 135/2.8 share the same

hood (if you ever buy the other two lenses).

[joshchapman]

I know I said manual focus earlier, but since you're set on AF and I do have an elan 7, here's what sold me on it instead of the Ti:

 

Brighter viewfinder - the elan 7 uses a pentaprism instead of a pentamirror. FAR better, brighter viewfinder with a little bit more weight.

 

Faster FPS and AF

 

No film prewind, and midroll rewind with the option of keeping the film leader out (to finish the roll later).

 

Flash exposure compensation

 

Faster max shutter speed and synch speed... okay, not a huge difference there, but I use a lot of high speed film so I find it useful.

 

Custom functions (mirror lock up, second curtain flash synch, cfn 4, leaving the film leader out, control of the AF assist light on the camera and the flash).

 

Control of the AF mode and metering mode

 

The quick control dial is handy.

 

Quieter film advance.

 

It's black.

 

Hope this helps - Josh

[darren_corrao]

Again, everyone thanks for the help...

 

The other issue I read about was that the 7 has big problems in low light situations. Any insight on that matter?

[phyrpowr]

Darren,

 

I'll simply ditto getting a used Elan II, had one and liked it a lot, almost any camera store in your area probably has one or two. Whatever you get, try to get a model with mirror lockup and depth of field preview. Get the cable release to go with it.

 

Camera bag: anything will do right now, don't spend any serious $$ on it. Even a cheap generic non-camera bag with some foam to "make" compartments.

 

On the other hand, get your second tripod first. By this I mean get one that is a little heavier and taller, with better flexibility than you think you'll need. Don't skimp and get a WalMart $40 model, you'll outgrow it in a month, get, e.g., a Bogen 3001 and a medium ball head.

[darren_corrao]

Film?

[darren_corrao]

Reasonable priced but smooth tripod?