Canon XSi....good enough to start out with?

[dogbert]

<p>Best investment is to get a book that explains SLR photography. Preferably one that concentrates on technique and lighting and less on gear. The biggest mistake beginners make is thinking it is all about the gear.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<p>@Brad</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I tried the new kit lens and was disappointed</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Did you try the 'kit lens' when you had already tried more expensive lenses, or on you first camera? Stephen is a <em>complete </em>beginner - he may not even enjoy the hobby and all this expensive glass sits in a cupboard 50 weeks of the year.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and am not in the camp that enthusiastic beginners need to somehow be protected</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am not either. But I want to give him advice that can save him hundreds of dollars. The kit lens is ridiculously cheap when bundled with the camera and the quality is decent - no-one has said he is going to be printing in National Geographic with this lens, just that for the money it is decent. In my view, once Stephen decides what type of photography he wants to do then he can spend a shed load of money on a lens to suit. Without knowing his preference you could argue he should get the XSi with 17-552.8 IS and the 70-200f4L so he has all angles covered. Hell of a layout for a complete beginner!<br>

I know someone who concentrates on wildlife and spends all his money on lenses for that; and for walk-around he has a 18-55 IS kit lens because for those pictures are for memories and he wants good, but not the not necessarily the very best, quality. That seems a sensible measured decision to me.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>This all reminds me of agonizing over whether my first motorcycle should be a Honda 250. A half mile down the road on the first ride I knew that I wanted something bigger and better: my knees hit the handlebars on the first turn. Then I went with a Yamaha 650, which screamed at high RPMs trying to haul my carcass down the road at sixty mph. Finally I got myself a 1984 1300 cc Kawasaki and was finally at home on the open highway. I went through two bikes (and far too much time and money) before I finally got what I should have gotten in the first place.</p>

<p>If he doesn't like the better outfit he can sell it. I suspect that there is greater chance of wasting more money if one buys too far on the low end--but I admit that that is pure speculation when recommending something for someone else. Maybe he can rent something before he buys.</p>

<p>If one knows that one has a passion for photography, I say buy the best that one can buy up front and save oneself some money. Does he know if he has that passion?</p>

<p>I have no idea.</p>

<p>At least no one is recommending the 5D II with the 70-200 2.8 IS as a starter system. Good glass is the real issue here.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Check out this woman's biography--and she shoots professionally with this system:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=3931932</p>

<p>(If I am not mistaken, the sensor in the XTi is the same as that in the 40D. The XSi has more pixels, of course.)</p>

<p>It's about glass--but also about skill. She uses the kit lens for everything but the long stuff, and then she goes directly to one of the big zooms. (I belatedly see that she also shoots the 50.)</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[michael s.]

<p>Apart from any camera/lens you select, Stephen, I have another suggestion, based upon my experience:</p>

<p><strong>The</strong> most important $$ I spent on photography was the $80 or $85 I spent for an Intro class at a community college campus near where I live. The class consisted of 3 Friday night classroom sessions and 2 Saturday a.m. "field trips."</p>

<p>Might check to see whether such a class is available to you.</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Brad replied to my post thusly,</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>>>> Again, for a complete beginner do NOT stay away from the kit lens. The true beginner does not yet know which directions his/her photographic might interests might take.<br>

I strongly disagree. Without the opportunity you never get a chance to explore the potential - and am not in the camp that enthusiastic beginners need to somehow be protected - especially one that does not want to go the point-n-shoot route. I tried the new kit lens and was disappointed. That's the beauty of starting with a body that's inexpensive; you have more money to consider lenses that will make a difference.</p>

</blockquote>

Brad, a few thoughts on your reply.

<ol>

<li>If a new shooter is not able to get good results from the current IS kit lens (given its focal length range, etc.) then the odds are very strong - almost certain, actually - that the issue is not the lens but technique. I'm absolutely confident that I could go out with one of the digital rebels and the kit lens and come back with excellent photographs that would look great as 12 x 18 prints. Yes, I've used it.</li>

<li>The issue is not exactly about "protecting" enthusiastic users from good equipment or suggesting that they "go the point and shoot route." It is a bit more complex than that. In general, among the "enthusiastic beginner" group - a group I enjoy a lot, by the way - there is a very large range of people. </li>

</ol>

<ul>

<li>The majority of them will end up never needing or wanting anything more than the kit lens. (If you don't agree, look around the next time you visit a tourist spot and see what most DSLR shooters are using.) So for them, the less expensive but capable kit lens is a great choice.</li>

<li>A smaller number who find that the kit lens produces fine quality for what they have in mind - probably photos shared online and perhaps an occasional print on a letter size printer - will eventually want to add another lens of similar quality such as the EFS 55-250 lens.</li>

<li>A smaller group still (though they may seem like a larger group if you only read photo forums like this one) will become more "serious" about their photography and begin to understand how specific lens features contribute to their ability to more effectively create the kinds of photographs that attract them - in other words, they may begin to outgrow the inexpensive kit lens. Such photographers might wish that they had gotten a "better" lens initially, but they may also realize that they had no idea what that "better" lens might have been - and in the end there is no single "better" lens that would be right for all such folks. Basically, by the time you understand what you need, you are fairly likely to find that you did not get the optimal lens by "buying up" before you understood what you would need. We've all made that mistake, sold a lens or two, and finally settled on the right lenses only later after experience taught us what such a lens might be. </li>

</ul>

 

I guess we're in "half agreement." We both agree that starting with one of the current inexpensive but fine bodies is the best option. I would extend that same logic to the lens for the beginner as well - these lenses are fine, can produce quite good photographs, and are a <em>very worthwhile investment</em> during the starting phase.

<br />

<br />

Take care,

<br />

Dan<br />

 

 

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Let me add one thing. I've had the opportunity to use both the old and new kit lenses and to extensively use the EFS 17-85mm lens.</p>

<p>The new IS version of the 18-55 is a much different lens in optical terms than the original non-IS 18-55. THe EFS 17-85 is much more expensive than the EFS 18-55mm IS kit lens and adds little beyond a bit of longer focal length - and this at the expense of image quality that is no better than that of the IS kit lens and arguably a bit poorer in several ways.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>The new IS version of the 18-55 is a much different lens in optical terms than the original non-IS 18-55.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I stand corrected, too, Dan.</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Just a knee-jerk reaction to discussion of my beloved 17-85mm IS. In terms of focal length this is absolutely the handiest lens made for Canon APS-C cameras. It is the APS-C version of the classic 28-135mm IS for 35mm-sensor cameras. I appreciate the quality of my 24-105mm, and like the wide end at 24mm on a 35mm-sensor camera, but I miss that extra 30mm on the long end in all round shooting.</p>

<p>Optically in terms of sharpness the 17-85 is very good indeed. Its flaws are distortion at the wide end, but typical for long zooms, and some chromatic aberration. Both are easily fixed in software, but neither are much noticeable in real-world shots. Brick walls, sure.</p>

<p>If you use filters, the feature that the front does not rotate in focusing is very important, and the ability to manually focus to "touch up" focus without having to turn off the AF is another major feature if you are a serious shooter.</p>

<p>I'm not pushing this for the OP, although he could do a lot worse. I agree that the new "kit" is a superb first lens for a start, and it will remain a wonderful light kit lens even if one upgrades later.</p>

[b_a10]

<p>XSI. for that matter, any of the entry level DSLRs are a great tool to get into serious photography. For the last 3 years I have been shooting with a rebel XT, and its performance still keeps me happy. I have invested in some good lenses, which help me grow as a photographer as I start learning different kinds of techniques. I am almost tempted to suggest that you go with a cheap Rebel XT and get a good walk around lens (maybe an L). The reason being that if you get into photography, you will only end up upgrading your camera body and stick with the lens, or if you decide its not the hobby for you, you will be able to get a good price back for your equipment as good lenses hold their value.<br>

Here is a good article about whether you really need the most expensive DSLR equipment<br>

<a href="http://blog.pholistic.com/?p=49">http://blog.pholistic.com/?p=49</a></p>

[vancouverphotographer]

<p>Knowing what I know now and picturing myself starting out with my first digitall camera I think I would have liked if someone told me to grab and XSi body and a Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens. Lately I been using this lens as just a walkaround lens on my cropped sensor Sony body (should be similar on the Canon) and it's been working well and I have even started using it at more challenging low light concerts. I think this lens will serve you well as you explore and get a feel for what other focal lengths you would like but I believe this lens will always get use on a cropped sensor body like the XSi. In terms of lower end bodies like the XSi, I think it's more than adequate - I have been using low end digital bodies for over 2 years and gotten by (sometimes shooting challenging things). One thing to note, check that the 30mm isn't backfocussing - mine did but I had it shipped back to get fixed under warranty and it works fine now.</p>

[stephen_sturdevant]

<p>Thank you guys! I wasnt intending to make this so long haha, but anyways thank you.</p>

[kevin_b.2]

<p>My only concern with that camera is the 15.1 megapixels is borderline pushing it on that sensor size and it uses SD media. Most of canon's cameras use compact flash (inlcluding the spendy ones). So just don't spend $300 on a SD card then upgrade your camera in a few months to one that has CF. </p>

[stephen_sturdevant]

<p>Kevin, Not to be rude...but the Rebel XSi has only 12.2MP<br>

The T1i has 15.1MP...</p>

[bonyari]

<p>There are always debates about the resolutions and so on (and I don't think it will be resolved in any satisfactory way), I don't think such issues are important (if relevant at all) for a beginner. <br>

If you can afford a T1i, I think you're better off with a Canon 20D (a used one is going around for cheap these days). Even a used 40D is cheaper than a T1i. You can look for one on keh.com. The xxD's (20, 30, 40D...) are older, but ergonomic, functionality,... are better than the xxxD line. I had a Rebel XT for 2+ years and had a few chances to use my brother's 20D, I just loved it. And it fits my hands better (and I'm a small guy). <br>

The newer T1i may have newer technologies, but if your focus is photography, you can't go wrong with a xxD model. <br>

Whatever camera you'll end up getting, start saving! lol... good lenses are expensive.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> I would extend that same logic to the lens for the beginner as well - these lenses are fine, can produce quite good

photographs, and are a very worthwhile investment during the starting phase.

 

The kit lens is OK with respect to value (I had the new one, the quality was mediocre and I returned it). However, what you end

up with is a camera body and lens that pretty much keeps one in the realm of mid-aperture point-n-shoot type photography that's

seen so much on photo sites; never getting to explore the creative aspects of photography.

 

Suggesting others must first "learn the ropes" first is constricting and is a real disservice. Especially for someone who is

enthusiastic, curious, and seeking information. Would be a fine course of action for someone walking off the street into a Ritz.

 

Despite your bulleted speculations as to what the market make-up is and how the members behave, for an enthusiastic

beginner, I would recommend a larger aperture lens to fully enjoy the creative side of photography (similar to the direction

employed in beginning photography classes), rather than the standard kit lens and using the combo like a point-n-

shoot on steroids.

[Brad_]

>>> I would extend that same logic to the lens for the beginner as well - these lenses are fine, can produce quite good

photographs, and are a very worthwhile investment during the starting phase.

 

The kit lens is OK with respect to value (I had the new one, the quality was mediocre and I returned it). However, what you end

up with is a camera body and lens that pretty much keeps one in the realm of mid-aperture point-n-shoot type photography that's

seen so much on photo sites; never getting to explore the creative aspects of photography.

 

Suggesting others must first "learn the ropes" is constricting and is a real disservice. Especially for someone who is

enthusiastic, curious, and seeking information. Would be a fine course of action for someone walking off the street into a Ritz.

 

Despite your bulleted speculations as to what the market make-up is and how its members behave, for an enthusiastic

beginner, I would recommend a larger aperture lens to fully enjoy the creative side of photography (similar to the direction

employed in beginning photography classes), rather than the standard kit lens and using the combo like a point-n-

shoot on steroids.

[mdc002]

<p>The XSI is a fine enough camera for a professional. The primary difference between it and a multi-thousand dollar camera is the amount of abuse they will take. Spend more on the lens and worry less about the body.</p>

[alan_cox3]

<p>Stephen, the answer is yes. It's a fine camera and the IS kit lens is a fine lens. But IT won't take great pictures -- YOU will. As you get started you'll need to avoid the temptation to think it's about the hardware. (Keep your camera out and your plastic in your pocket.)</p>

[markonestudios]

It's a good camera. Use it and start to make great pictures. Take some classes and attend some seminars whenever you can...

[g dan mitchell]

<p>To add one point of information, I have sold 16" x 24" prints of photographs made with the 8MP XT.</p>

<p>About "using the lens like a P&S," that is not quite the case. Certainly one could use the kit lens like a P&S if that is what one wants the P&S would be a better choice - for one thing it is difficult if not impossible to find a single DSLR lens that covers the same angle-of-view range that is available from the P&S bodies. Also, just by using the larger sensor of the cropped sensor DSLR, the image quality potential with the kit lens is much better than that on most P&S models. Sure, you might argue about this relative to something like the G10, but in that case our user should just get a G10.</p>

<p>Again, my idea about the kit lens being ideal for starting is that:</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Its cost is extremely low, the coverage is quite decent, the IS is advantageous, and the image quality is fine for letter size and considerably larger prints.</li>

<li>While it is true that other lenses are "better" by a range of standards, the betterness will not likely make a difference to the beginner, and...</li>

<li>... by shooting a few thousand frames with this fine little inexpensive lens the beginner will soon discover which of the alternative and more expensive lens options will be the best choice for him/her, something that the beginner has no way of knowing at first. Until the shooter develops some experience-based opinions, choosing a lens that someone else recommends is not wise - because one could easily end up thinking that that "best" main lens is...</li>

<li>perhaps a 30mm f/1.4 prime. Or maybe a 18-200mm telephoto. Or pehaps a couple primes. Or maybe the EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Or perhaps a 24-70 f/2.8 L. Or maybe a 24-105mm f/4 L IS. Or possibly the EFS 17-85mm IS. And on an on. Being able to acquire experience that will make and intelligent choice about this is worth the small cost of the kit lens.</li>

</ol>

<p>Take care,</p>

<p>Dan</p>

 

[philip_wilson]

<p>Stephen - to echo others the XSi will work fine. Up to a certain point the secret of photography is not the lens but the time and thought put into the image. One of the things I have noticed is the trend to buy equipment to solve technique issues. I would not worry about megapixels or the lens for now. You have plenty of megapixels for reasonable sized enlargements and the kit lens is a real bargain. You should really focus on the images - one thing with digital and zooms is that they make it very easy to take lots of shots and use the zoom rather than your legs. One of the things that many of us old film photographers learnt was to move around to get the shot (pre-zoom era) and to really think before we pressed the shutter button (cost of film and processing). If you use the camera in this way (but take lots of shots so you can see the effects of different settings) you can get great images. I subscribe to the UK magazine Amateur Photographer (probably the best publication either side of the Atlantic) and I often notice how many of their top Photographer of the year images (they show the top 30) are made with beginner bodies and kit lenses.<br>

If you want to add to the experience a tripod, remote release and a 50mm F1.8 would be my suggestions. The 50mm F1.8 is the other great bargain lens as it used to be the kit lens. It gives you a very fast lens (low F number) that allows a shallow depth of field and is effectively an 80mm lens on the XSi due to the crop sensor. This lens is a great portrait lens - especially considering the price.</p>