Canon 350D vs. Olympus E500

[shawn_hinskey]

I am new to the whole SLR thing. I have messed around with some Nikon D1 and

D2X but never anything else. The place I worked had the Nikons. I am looking

for a good camera with an affordable price tag to do some weddings, and

possibly to start doing some studio portriats. I also like to do alot of nature

shots as well as live concert photography. From what research I have done it

seems as if the Canon 350D and the Olympus E500 are probably my best two

options. Am I corect? Ive been told that the Nikon accesories can get

expensive. And this is part of what I am looking to take into consideration. Is

there aftermarket products (lens,flash, etc)regularly available for the camera

I am going to get. Also I have talked to a person or two about lenses and I

have been told the lenses the E500 comes with are little too wide to use for

wedding photography. The E500 comes with the 14-45 and the 40-150 lens...the

Canon I am looking at would come with a 28-80 and a 75-300 lens. Like I said,

Im all new to this, and any advice would be great. Im still new to the

technology, terms, and mechanics of photography. But thats why Im looking for a

starter not a D1, or D2...lol. Thanks.

[leopoldstotch]

The 350D would be the better option (Though I am biased), mainly because of the great system its affiliated with. The olympus 4/3 system is still very young, and not matured, plus the extremely small sensor of the Oly may bother you later on. As for your lenses, avoid both of the ones you mentioned. Neither are good quality, and especially unsuited for weddings and studio portraits. And yes, there are plenty of aftermarket accesories available for the 350D. I suggest more research before you make your final decision. Good luck.

[phoneguy]

All of the entry level Dslr's are decent cameras. The kit lenses that come with any of them, are slow, and of mediocre quality. None of which will be fast enough for weddings. Camera's that come with lenses are considered "KitS" and in most cases the kit lenses are lame.

 

It would cost you thousands to get even close to haveing an acceptable wedding setup, let alone a back up set.

 

I'm a Canon guy, so I would recomend a Rebel XT/XTi, or 20/30D depending on what your budget is. Nikon has comparable cameras in the D40, D80 range.

 

Fast lenses are expensive. Anything slower than an f/2.8 isn't going to cut it in a low light wedding environement.

 

For the interests you have, I would invest in an entry level body $500-$700, a 50mm f/1.8 $80, and a flash $250.

 

As far as the cost of Nikons accessories, being expensive, they are comparable to any other major brand. Good equipment is expensive, and unfortunately, to shoot well in low light, you need good equipment.

[shambrick007]

"to do some weddings, and possibly to start doing some studio portriats." Don't mess around w/the 4/3rds. Bite the bullet - get a 5D, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 (the IS version if you can afford it). <p>"with an affordable price tag" If you must then, the 350 or 400.

[gdanmitchell]

I've used a 350D for two years and it is a fine camera that will work with all of the

excellent Canon lenses that folks use for wedding photograhy. You can take excellent

photographs with it that will hold up to significant enlargement.

 

The 4/3 system is an interesting concept, but I'm not aware of people using it for

professional work of the type you describe. (It wouldn't surprise me to hear that someone

uses it this way, but they are certainly in the minority.) Issues with the smaller sensor

include greater sensitivity to noise at higher ISOs and need to to a larger percentage

enlargement to get a print of a given size. Both of those seem significant for wedding

photography.

 

You might consider the 350D or 400D with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS EF-S lens. It will provide

about the same field of view range on the crop sensor body that pros using full frame get

when they use the 24-70mm, plus you'll get image stabilization - which is probably a

good thing.

 

Dan

[dogbert]

I hate to pour cold water on you, but one just doesn't start doing weddings after buying their first SLR. Weddings are one of the most demanding gigs a photographer can do and your clients won't thank you if you produce unprofessional results.

 

Further getting professional results is about 98 per cent to do with the photographers skill and experience and not the camera. To do any profession well you have to be prepared to learn over a period of years, just owning "professional tools" won't cut it.

 

You should look at getting into a system rather than just a camera, and Canon and Nikon are probably the best. Nikon's flash system I think is better than Canon's but the Canon 5D probably has the best absolute image quality and the large viewfinder will be very useful.

 

I get by with a 350D as it suits my needs (I don't do weddings, at least not professionally) but I think Sheldon is right. If I were doing weddings seriously I would go for the 5D and 24-70/f2.8.

[steve torelli]

Geoff's advice is spot on. You should read it twice. Good luck.

[shawn_hinskey]

Well, the bride and groom are on a serious budget and cant afford a "professional" photographer. I mean, seriously anyone on a budget cant afford that. In our area the cheapest quote they got was about $900+ Im looking to get started and need some practice and they know this. They are willing to let me give it a try since without me they were just going to have nothing anyways. I understand its not something that will be learned over night, but you have to start somewhere. I am very ambitious, have some camera usage experience. I just dont know alot of the technical stuff, and that is what I am trying to learn. I have a very good "slr type" (minolta Z6) camera that I am used to, but I figured I could get alot better images out of an SLR. That is why I am looking to speed up my purchase of an SLR system. But like I said...they are broke, its me or nothing...and I have to start somewhere, sometime. So any advice or help is appreciated. Wish me luck.

[dogbert]

Here is some advice in no particular order:

 

The main advantages of a DSLR are reduced shutter lag, the ability to use bounce flash, and lower noise at higher ISO. If these are not going to be issues for you it may be better to work with a camera that you know than buy a whole new dslr and work with a camera that you do not know.

 

As for doing wedding photos, check out the venue beforehand and work out where the best spots are for photos. If possible visit at the same time of day as the wedding will be to check out the light and potential problem areas. Understanding light is one of the most important things to getting good photos and you ideally want low contrast light. Outdoors on a cloudy day would be good, if not try and stay in the shade.

 

If the bride is wearing white, expose the histogram so that her dress is just below clipping. This may involve giving around half stop or more of over exposure from the meter as metering of the dress may tend to underexpose making the dress look gray. Shoot RAW if you are familiar with RAW processing. Always check you histogram.

 

If shooting JPEG set the parameters to fairly nuetral levels - don't bump up the saturation or contrast. This can be done later if necessary. You may want to use a warming filter if shooting JPEG and it is cloudy - probably an 81A filter.

 

Use a combination of fill flash and natural light outdoors, depending on lighting conditions. The more contrasty the light, the more you will want to use fill flash. Avoid situations of strong back or frontlighting (which can produce dark shadows on faces).

 

In terms of focus, it is best to focus on the eyes - they are the most important thing to be sharp.

 

If indoors, bounced flash can be useful provided the ceiling is white or cream. Mix it up between bounced and direct flash. Always check your histogram.

 

Canon is the biggest dslr maker in the market and probably has the widest and most commonly available range of accessories. That said the D80 has a better viewfinder and IMO Nikon has a better flash system.

 

Ideally you will need fast lenses - both in terms of aperture and focussing speed - this means ideally f2.8 or faster lenses and ring USM motors. If choosing Canon and your budget can handle it the 30D, 430 EX with stoffen omnni bounce and 17-55/f2.8 IS USM would be a good starter system. The 5D, 24-70/f2.8 L USM and 430EX would be better, mainly for the viewfinder.

 

Lenses are important - best not to skimp on them.

 

Get a couple of 1-2 Gig CF cards. Shoot freely but always check what you are doing. Don't work on the basis that just becuase you have shot a lot some will turn out good.

 

Photoshop is you friend. Learn how to use it to fix minor exposure issues.

 

Also pick up some photography books that deal with lighting, shooting people, etc hopefully with lots of pictures. Try to work out how they were shot and then try to emulate. It is easiest to learn by copying others until you develop your own style.

[mark u]

I suggest you have a good browse through the Beginner threads in the Wedding Forum:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a?topic_id=2021&category=First+Timer+and+Newcomers+to+Wedding+Photog%2e

 

It will help to give you an idea of what is invovlved. Bear in mind that you will need quite other lenses for nature photography (expensive long telephotos) and a significant investment in studio lighting and other equipment for doing portraits. You will need to have very fast lenses (f/2 or faster) for concert work, but perhaps you will double these up for wedding use.

[KenPapai]

Shawn, you MUST have two cameras if you are the photographer at a wedding. You also need good flash; so spring for a 430EX or the 580EX. Again, a backup flash is highly recommended.

 

Have a wide angle zoom lens (not a cheap plastic kit lens) on one body and a medium tele (85mm 1/8 perhaps) on the other. If you cannot afford that then you have no place shooting a wedding for money.

 

All the others' advice above is SOUND.

[geoff_foale]

Hello Shawn. Firstly, let me admit that I avoid weddings like the plague. However, if you are going to attempt one with a new camera with which you have little experience I would suggest getting some back up cover, even if it is just a friend with a half decent point & shoot. That way your friends are covered if you make a total hash of it and it will take some of the pressure off yourself.

 

Geoff.

[nolefan32]

I have to echo those who said that you really need to look at systems, not just bodies. After all, once you start in a system, it becomes an investment and there's little chance you'll want to jump to something else later on.

 

That said, as has been noted, Canon and Nikon offer the two best systems out there, with the most choice in lenses, flash units, accessories, etc. And an equivalent outfit in either system will probably run you about the same amount. I prefer Canon for digital systems, but I've had great experience with Nikon in film and work with people who shoot digital Nikons with great results.

 

There are some differences between Canon and Nikon, as has been noted. A lot of people prefer Nikon's flash metering system over Canon; Canon is the only DSLR maker with any full-frame bodies in their lineup (not much of a concern as a beginner, but as you upgrade later, it might become a selling point).

 

Really, I think your best bet is to go to a camera store and handle bodies from both systems, see which feels right to you. You might want to seriously consider an entry-level Nikon body, like the D40 or D50, or even the slight upgrade D70 or D80, for the simple reason that since you've already got some experience with Nikon bodies, even though you aren't ready to invest in something the level of the D2Xs, I just have a feeling that you'll probably be more comfortable working with a body from the same lineup that you've already got some familiarity.

[shawn_hinskey]

Thanks for the great advice everyone. What you say makes alot of sense David. Although it has been a little while since working with the D1H and all, Im sure the use of and fimiliarity of Nikon might help in learning. If thats the case, it poses another question. Is there really that big of a difference between the 8mp of the 350D and the 6.1 of the D40 or D50? Or shall I even mention the possability of getting a Nikon D1x at 5.3mp? Like I said, Im still learning all the technical stuff, but the familiarity from a D1H to a D1X would be very nice. I just dont want to limit myself with the 5.3 vs. 8 if it makes a large difference in enlarging photographs. But with the D1x all I can find is used, and I know thats a whole new touchy subject...some people dont mind it, and others are 100% against it. Let me know what you think about that.

[nolefan32]

Megapixels really only come into play depending on how large you think you'll want to enlarge your prints, or if you will be cropping back hard. A 4MP camera can actually give you good uncropped 8x10 enlargements, though if you want to go larger than 8x10 (or want to crop the shot before enlarging to 8x10), then you'll probably want a 6MP camera or more. Of course, the more megapixels you have, the larger you can enlarge, but in the end it's like owning a Porsche that can go 200 mph, sounds great when they're trying to sell the car but doesn't really mean that much if you can't go more than 60 mph on most roads.

 

What will make a noticeable difference at any print size is the quality of lenses you're able to invest in. Every camera company makes cheap lenses and they make more expensive ones (and various points in between), and as rule, the more you can spend on the lens, the sharper it will be. No matter what camera you attach it to the front of.

 

As for buying used, that, my friend, would depend on who you plan to buy used from. Like any other piece of high-tech electronic gear, it's very possible to have a digital camera that looks pristine on the outside but is totally worthless on the inside. We've got one old Nikon Coolpix in my office that looks like it just came out of the box, but it's inards are scrambled to the point that any image it tries to take only translates to a garbled series of lines, nothing even resembling a useable image. I guess someone at some point dropped it hard enough to scramble it. Thus I personally would never buy a digital camera over eBay or through a classified ad, etc. Though I would consider it through someone like Adorama or B&H, someone who has a reputation of standing behind the items they sell and who I know how to locate a week after the sale if it turns out I got a lemon.

[sau kian chuan]

i want to ask for answer actualy, i still dun know to choose between 350D, D50 and E500. and i like to shot landscape, seascape, jungle, tree, sky, river, mountain, blue sky and sunset(light and rays) it more to outdoor shooting so anybody can give answer.