Need Advice re: Beginner Equipment

[tyler_nelson]

I want to get into photography (not digital) with a particular focus on photojournalism/documentary work. I would

appreciate any advice from experienced photographers regarding good (but affordable) cameras and equipment for a

beginner. Are there certain cameras which are better suited for documentary or street photography? I'm looking for

something versatile yet relatively simple to operate.

 

Thank you for your help!!

 

-Tyler

[fotografya]

I offer, basic SLRs like Canon AE-1 , Nikon F series, Pentax ME super; all with standart 50mm fast lens, 28mm wide angle lens and 80-100 mm relatively fast lens for street portraiture. Pentax ME super is a good option (Av mode, manual settings etc.), you can find many K mount lenses for a reasonable price.

[Carl Stone]

Since you said " photojournalism/documentary work", are you aware that many publications have moved away from from

film, and are strictly digital now?

[fullmetalphotograper]

If you are looking at photojournalism in terms of being published then you will need to be digital. If you are just thinking of it

as a style then I would look at the Nikon F5 film camera with a 28-70mm lens. The Nikon F5 runs about $500 and is built

like a tank but incredibly versatile camera, with a great metering system.

[darko1]

If you really want to take film street photos then do not go out with "tank", some rangefinders will be very fine, you will be fast, react in a fraction of second...no mirror (SLR) camera, they are noisy and you can not take sharp handhelded images below 1/60...rangefinders would be my first choice (Leica, Bessa, or take a look for some compact (Yashica, Minolta, Leica CL)...

 

--darko

[Spearhead]

Most photojournalists I know and see around San Francisco are using "tanks," I use a 1DMk3. There are a number of reasons for this, but it's not a problem if you know how to work in crowds, at events, on the street, etc.

 

The problem here is that without knowing what you want to do, it's hard to tell you anything, as Ralph Berrett points out above. If you're looking to get into this professionally, you're going to have to get a digital camera. At the low end, there are Canons and Nikons that are fine. You can use the same lenses when you can afford the more expensive bodies. If you're just looking to shoot and don't care about selling or a career in pj work, then almost anything will be fine.

[darko1]

I agree with Jeff, you just have to know what you want to do, if it is professional documentary photojournalisam you will need digital SLR, if you want to explore street artistic way I suggest film and rangefinders, you`ll be happy !!! and you will be close to the subject-object ;-))

 

--darko

[jay a. frew]

Man, I wish digital was around when I was starting out. Digital can really speed the learning process along.

Here are some points off the top of my head (there are probably many more):

 

- One of the best ways to learn, is to SHOOT A LOT while paying attention to your results and making adjustments

to your technique. Digital is much more efficient, and cheaper than "film + processing", for this approach

 

- Digital gives you instant feedback so you can learn from mistakes - or things you did well - while

everything is fresh in your mind. You can then shoot the same scene, over and over again, while the light etc is

still relatively the same.

 

- Digital allows you to change ISO (equates to "film speed" - another exposure adjustment) and Color Balance for

each image. With film, color balance is "locked-in" to the film when it is made (so you need filters to change

the color balance). ISO can be changed on film, but only once per roll of film (unless you are processing your

own film...even then it is complicated)

 

- When I was starting-out, I would shoot 1/2 doz rolls of film in a day and (try) to accurately record what I was

doing in a notepad. Then, after getting my film back (days later) I could review my results and try to make

sense out of my notes in order to make adjustments to my technique. Just trying to keep many exposed rolls of

film sorted (so I would know which was which when I got them back from the lab) was a challenge. I started using

the first frame of each roll to record a sequence number and location data (took a picture of a card)

 

- Digital cameras record all your exposure data, which is often useful when you review your photos. Some film

cameras will record limited exposure data on the film

 

- I had a tough time reading negative film (I still do) and it always seemed like a hassle trying to get the lab

to print my film the way I wanted it. I switched to transparency film (slides) to eliminate some of that (it is

positive film, so I could easily see how it turned-out without printing it), but, I still had trouble getting the

lab to print the way I liked. If you do choose the film route, I recommend that you shoot transparency film

while you are learning. Keep in mind though that transparency film is less forgiving of exposure errors than

negative film

 

- Unless you are willing to fork-out serious money, your film images will loose quality (sometime a lot) when

they are scanned. In my opinion, "Minilabs" (most "non-custom" film processors) do not get the best out of my

film when they scan + print it.

 

- Processing your own images can also add value to learning about photography. Digital processing (desktop pc +

software) can give more repeatable results, for the novice, than processing film in a wet darkroom. The "digital

darkroom has a steep learning curve, so, you have to work at it

 

You don't have to invest in an SLR system to get going in digital. In fact, I would not recommend investing in

an SLR system until you know more about photography (so you are able to make informed choices about this

expensive equipment). For instance, if you truly want to shoot film, you may discover that 35mm is not the best

format to use these days (larger formats keep more detail etc when they are scanned). You will also learn, if

you haven't already, that having the correct lens for the task is often more important than having a particular

camera (or

camera brand).

 

If I was starting over I would get a decent digicam with exposure controls (Manual mode, Aperture Priority mode

and Shutter Priority mode).

Capability for external flash is also very useful. You can learn a lot about light, in your living room, with a

cheap manual flash connected by wire to a digicam. Have a look at this site - http://strobist.blogspot.com/ -

it has some very good tutorials about flash. You can learn a lot about light from these

 

Have a look at the used digicams at some of the more reliable online retailers like B&H, Adorama and KEH.

dpreview.com has a Buyers Guide (see the links on the left side of their page) that will let you compare

models/features

 

Spend WAY MORE time taking pictures than reading about photography on the internet...and...have fun.

 

Cheers! Jay

 

 

[tyler_nelson]

Thank you all for the generous advice. I was leaning toward the idea of starting out with an SLR while learning the principals of photography, then investing in digital once my knowledge is somewhat developed (lame photo pun). Your advice has been extremely helpful.

 

-Peace

[Brad_]

Jay makes great points...

 

Start with digital, take lots of photos, learn to post process (equally important to capture), and learn to edit. The taking lots

of photos (and examining your results) is far more important than anything else.

 

Today I'd start with an entry level dSLR. In fact, I bought one recently even after shooting for some years.

[Carl Stone]

You'll find it easier to learn those principles using a DSLR, than by using film. Digital gives you instant results. You'll be

ahead to ask in these forums about any particular choice that you might want to make, as folks here can give you the pros

and cons of such a choice.

[fullmetalphotograper]

The student camera to this date that I worked with was the Pentax K1000, with a 50mm lens. This is a mechanical

camera no auto anything. You can keep shooting even without batteries. I would even suggest using a handheld meter.

If you really want to understand exposure depth of field composition that is the way to go. I shot that camera through

high school. When I went to college I shot the the Nikon F2 with motor drive. Latter FE-2 and FM-2. The last film

cameras I bought was two Nikon F5 cameras. For me they were the lightest most versatile cameras I used for about 5

years as a photojournalist. I know use the Nikon D2x and D3 for my work, but I still use the basic principles I learn with

the Pentax K1000.

 

The other thing I recommend trying if you get a chance is to shoot a Graphflex 4X5 for street photography and

environmental portraits. It is a blast to work with and really focus on the moment and the exposure of the image. I used

one of those for about a year or two for fun and the experience at my first job.

[vibin247]

Going digital is a smarter investment, since most publications will require digital material and not having to scan the film means you can get it out faster. Start with a budget that's affordable, and buying used will save you money. Also consider getting insurance for your equipment, since everything happens in the field and your bound to break something at one time or another.

[oscar_h.]

Tyler, I suggest that before anything, a beginner must learn to "see" with a camera. What better way than with a

variable focal length digital point and shoot? The immediacy of being able to acess the results is the best thing

going!! Learning the difference between what the eye sees from how the camera captured said image is the most

vital aspect to learning. I'm surprised that it was omitted here. Don't get caught up on gear yet. You will learn how to

see really quick, you'll also learn different approaches in getting images without the constraints and delay working

with film. Delay of results is the second most vital element. Digital is immediate and allows for reshooting and

correction of your subject matter. Too many people knock at point and shoots as being a drag. I will guarantee you

that you won't find a quicker and cheaper method of learning to see with the camera! You'd be surprised at how

many working shooters practice their chops using point and shoot gear!! Photography is all about seeing with a

camera and nothing short of it! As you advance you'll establish a characteristic (style) of how you see with a camera

and eventually tailor a recipie of gear based on how you see with a camera. Learn to see with a camera and then hit

the mechanics on exposure, etc. That's the beauty about digital, it allows you to put the cart before the horse. In the

olden days of analog image capturing devices (film) one had to learn the mechanics of operating a camera before he

or she could learn to see what a camera sees. I know of a ton of shooters who have learned to see with a point and

shoot and do all their personal work on film! I wish I could have learned this way!!Check out my other responses on

this subject, there might be a piece of advice you could use. Good luck in your endeavors!!

[bangengeman]

Everyone just made really great points with starting with a digital camera instead of film. To add to that, I

suggest trying one of the mega-zoom cameras. I don't want to recommend brands, but for what it's worth, you can't

go wrong with Nikon or Canon. Panasonic also makes highly acclaimed mega-zooms. I learned a lot of techniques

using a mega-zoom, like knowing when it's *really necessary* to up the ISO, proper metering, proper use of flash,

and using full manual controls. One big negative however, is that once you move up to SLRs from a mega-zoom,

you're going to want a 28-400mm lens that can do macro at 0cm from the lens.

 

If you start out with SLRs, you *might* get confused with all the features, you might end up just using full-auto

(not really a bad idea, but...). And with mega-zooms, since there's such a wide focal coverage, you'll end up

knowing what you need, and how to use it.

 

For what it's worth, I started with a Canon S2 IS. Tilting screen, can focus to 0cm away from the lens, takes

decent videos, somehow shaped like an SLR, has image stabilization and uses AA batteries. In fact, I still bring

it along with me, even though own a DSLR; mainly to take images at hard to reach angles (that tilting LCD really

comes in handy for quick self-portraits).

 

However, if you really want to start out with SLRs, make sure to read the manual, keep a spare battery and memory

card. Good luck!