Much help needed for first DSLR system

[alyssa_markey]

<p>

<p>I'm on the hunt for my first digital SLR, and after doing some research on what is out there I hope to get some more tailored recommendations. I've only ever used a point-and-shoot, but I'm not afraid to invest some time to learn the ropes and get experimenting. Since it's a hobby I don't want to break the bank as a beginner (budget <strong>preferably under $2000 and definately under $2500</strong>), but I want to have lots of options in case I want to branch out from the basics. </p>

<p>What I'd use it for? I imagine taking a lot of <strong>portraits</strong> that are mostly indoors. I'm also a freelance makeup artist, and it's important that I capture vivid colours and close-up shots. I want to know what would be the best way of <strong>smoothing skin but keeping eyes and lips crisp and vivid</strong>. I'll be taking a few <strong>interior design photos</strong>, lots of <strong>pet photos</strong>, but mostly something versatile I can carry around so I can discover what I like taking pictures of.</p>

<p>The Canon 500D, Nikon D5000 and Olympus E-620 (and possibly the new Pentax K-x) look within my budget. I've played around with all three cameras in person, and they all feel very comfortable and solid to me (I couldn't distinguish them on feel alone). But <strong>I want to invest in good lenses</strong> (obviously my budget is a big limitation, but I want to start out with something as good as I can afford to meet my needs and then expand on it).</p>

<p>I like the swivel screen on the Nikon D5000 - I'd imagine taking a few <strong>self-portraits</strong> and that'd be useful for composition. But I don't hear as many recommendations of it as much as the Canon 500D (and 450D and 400D). I know the D5000 is limited by the lack of in-built AF motor - is this a big disadvantage in terms of the lenses I'd want to get? Is there something better I could get with my budget?</p>

<p>I'm mostly looking for the<strong> best lens recommendations</strong> for my needs and hope to base my camera purchase on that. I hope I haven't asked too many newbie questions. Just want to make sure I get all the advice I can to get off to the best start. Thanks for the help!</p>

<p>- Alyssa</p>

</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Alyssa, Canon's fast EF L primes (35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 135/2) are superb lenses for the kind of shallow DOF portraiture you're interested in doing. Canon's best zoom for this purpose is probably the 24-70/2.8 L. Also, full frame bodies such as the 5D Mark II also give you shallow DOF. But, alas, these options are all beyond your budget at this time.</p>

<p>So what I would recommend is a used 5D body, and a couple of the better non-L primes such as the 50/1.4 and the 85/1.8. That way, you'll stay within your budget and have a excellent kit for indoor portaiture. The 5D will give you clean results at relatively high ISO's. And I've taken some of my best available light portraits with my EF 50/1.4. </p>

[steven_p]

<p>Alyssa,<br>

Welcome to photo.net. (The best place for honest opinions.)<br>

The Canon or Nikon guys will usually claim their own is best. I suggest that you hang out, read both forums, and search for what you don't happen to see right away.</p>

<p>There is a ton of information here.</p>

<p>Regards,<br>

Steve</p>

 

[bill_tuthill]

Alyssa, of the DSLR systems you looked at, the $790 Pentax 50-135/2.8 seems the best value for a portrait lens and flexible all-around lens. In the Canon and Nikon lineups, the classic portrait lens is the $1900 70-200/2.8 - very big and heavy, and longer than you need on a 500D or D5000. The Canon lenses that Mark mentioned do not have image stabilization, though they are good lenses. The new Nikon 50/1.4 is head and shoulders above the Canon 50/1.4.

 

That said, Panasonic seems to be the only vendor with a Soft Skin portrait mode. The G1 and GH1 have swivel screen LCD. You can use Photoshop for "smoothing skin but keeping eyes and lips crisp and vivid" but it is a huge PITA and very time-consuming. I would definitely try out the Soft Skin mode to see if it works for you. Panasonic has new lenses in their upcoming roadmap, but the 14-45 is a fine starter lens.

[ted_raper1]

<p>Brand of equipment nonwithstanding, if I had $2500 to spend on a new camera today, I'd probably budget $1000 for the body, and $1500 for an image stabilized 2.8 zoom lens, in whatever focal length you like best.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>I would take a very hard look at the Pentax DSLR's. They have in body image stabilization(any lens you can use on it has image stabilization) and the DA Limited primes are compact and excellent. You may want to check out a K20 or K7 with the 18-55 weather resistant kit lens. After you use the kit lens for a while you will have a good idea which focal lengths you use most often and base other lens purchases accordingly. This is one of the better kit lenses too. Do a lot of research and try to handle whichever camera you decide on B4 you buy.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>For a first DSLR you would be hard pressed to do better than this..a K10D for $399.<br /><a href="http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9348761&type=product&id=1218089166763">http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9348761&type=product&id=1218089166763</a><br>

You can get the kit lens here.<br /><a href="http://www.adorama.com/PX1855AFD2.html?searchinfo=pentax+18-55">http://www.adorama.com/PX1855AFD2.html?searchinfo=pentax+18-55</a><br>

Even if you decided you want another make of camera after a year or so this would still be a great way to get started with a quality DSLR with out breaking the bank. Think of it a 'training wheels'. :-)</p>

[bill_tuthill]

A refurbished K10D is a smokin' deal for $399! The Pentax 18-55/3.5-5.6, while a bargain for optics and build quality at $99, is not going to get it done for portraiture. The lens I recommended, or the Pentax 17-70/4, or the Tamron 28-75/2.8, are almost as good as it gets for much less than Canon and Nikon charge. See photozone.de for lens reviews.

[dbcooper]

<p>My $.02:<br>

Great first DSLR and and good kit lens: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/471716-REG/Nikon_25420_D40_SLR_Digital_Camera.html<br>

Excellent portrait lens for DX (APS-C sensor) format, will deliver great blurry background (if you want it...it's called 'bokeh') while the subject remains very sharp; excellent in low-light situations as well: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/585343-USA/Nikon_2180_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_f_1_4G.html<br>

And a decent flash: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/323882-USA/Nikon_4802_SB_600_Speedlight.html<br>

$1154.85 plus shipping (or $1404.85 if you get the D5000...$50 instant rebate at B&H). You'll have plenty of budget left over for post-processing software (a must - I'd recommend Adobe Photoshop Elements for what you'll be doing with the makeup shots, it's on sale for $79.99 at adobe.com) and some books about photography, lighting, and post-processing/retouching (highly recommended), with budget yet left over to buy other gear as you progress and determine what else you need.</p>

<p> </p>

[les_lammers]

<p>Bill,<br />She could get a Pentax 'A' 50mm f1.7 for portraits. I picked a mint one up for $59. I have the 17-70 Pentax but am letting it go...addicted to DA Limiteds. It is a very good lens though. :-) BTW, the Kit lens II is much better than the original. Pic attached was taken at the long end of the kit lens II.</p>

<p>Alyssa,<br />The main advantage with Pentax is that you can use any lens Pentax ever made. DSLR bodies are computers that hold the lens. They depreciate rapidly but I think you would lose little if you sold the K10 in a year. Elements is a good suggestion and there are excellent third party books to get you going.</p><div></div>

[alyssa_markey]

<p>Thanks for all your suggestions. I'm really grateful that you've all spent time helping a complete novice, and I'm taking it all under advisement. I'll do more research but I'm really eager to get something and just start playing. I've just got a few follow up questions if you'd keep indulging my silly questions.</p>

<p>Bill - I'm a little confused about what the ideal focal length range would be for portraits. Could you (or someone else) explain why 18-55mm is not enough for portraiture? I imagined that 35-50mm would be the 'standard' range for portraits (if there's such a thing as standard).</p>

<p>Thanks also for the Panasonic recommendation. I'll bring an SD card in-store and try out the Panasonic Soft Skin mode, it might just swing my choice of what to get. Shows that it pays to ask, even what seem like silly questions!</p>

<p>Thank you, Les, for the Pentax suggestions. Unfortunately, I'm not in the US (Aussie here) so I don't know if there are reliable second-hand sellers here, so my options are a bit more limited when it comes to finding less than latest models. Is Pentax the only brand that has in body image stabilisation?</p>

<p>D.B. Cooper - I've read a lot of recommendations for the Nikon D40. I'm quite surprised because isn't it an older model (and has been superseded)? In Australia, it's priced the same as the Canon 450D, and it's only $200 less than something newer like the D5000 and Canon 500D. Is there a positive association with the D40 in particular, like a tried and true model? Thanks.</p>

 

[les_lammers]

<p>Sony has in body IS too. That is a 'big deal' because it makes lenses much cheaper and in the long run that can add up to a lot of $$$. Some of their bodies are weather sealed too. *I* think that is important but you may not. </p>

[bill_tuthill]

The classic portrait lens ranges between 85mm and 135mm, based on 35mm film cameras. This is to prevent close perspective from making the subject's nose seem too large, etc. Although small-frame DSLR cameras often give crop-equivalent ranges, cropping does not change perspective. Noses can still look too big. The Canon system is 1.6x, so the crop-equivalent portrait range is 53-84. The Nikon and Pentax systems are 1.5x, so the crop-equivalent portrait range is 57-90. Another factor for outdoor portraits is background blur to isolate the subject. You're not going to get much of this at f/5.6.

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>I've read a lot of recommendations for the Nikon D40. I'm quite surprised because isn't it an older model (and has been superseded)?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It seems to have a sort of cult following, take the recommendations with a grain of salt, it's not a miracle box. (Nice little camera though). Those prices sound a bit absurd, I'd pay something like $300 max, last kits here in Finland (last year..?) sold for 400 euros and best offers even threw in SB400. D5000 is way ahead of it in resolution and high ISO performance.</p>

<p>D5000 is new stripped down D90 and still a tad expensive compared to the "real deal". D90 gives you 920k back display and big and bright prism viewfinder - two things that really help you see what you shoot, especially with fast lenses... I'd take a look, it's well within your budget. For example at b&h D5000 with kit lens costs the same as D90 body only! There's absolutely no question what I'd choose. It also features the focus motor so you don't need to worry about that either, every Nikon AF (and third party for that matter) lens just works.</p>

<p>As a make-up artist you're already quite a bit ahead of most aspiring portrait shooters. You just need to add some *lighting*. Camera and lenses, well, you figure out something, it's all good really, but the real thing comes from make-up and light, seriously. You can skip the quite normal blood out of stone approach where people try and try to make boring and ill lit shot look good in PS. So much wasted time.<br /> D90 + simple $100 50/1.8 and $200 35/1.8 go far and offer $1000+ zoom quality in a tidy package. For something longer Sigma 50-150/2.8 seems interesting, comparatively light and small and not horribly expensive (CaNikon 70-200/2.8 zooms come with Aaargh! price tag).</p>

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>I want to know what would be the best way of <strong>smoothing skin but keeping eyes and lips crisp and vivid</strong> . I'll be taking a few <strong>interior design photos</strong> , lots of <strong>pet photos</strong> , but mostly something versatile I can carry around so I can discover what I like taking pictures of.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You need to buy a couple of books and dig into editing. When composition and lights are good it just takes a bit of local tweaks to pop out the eyes, lashes and lips - that is, you can leave the skin unsharpened and sharpen eyes etc. Perhaps you can guess I'm not a huge fan of total make over editing but there are tutorials for that too.<br>

Carry-all discovery. Kit lenses are meant for that and they perform quite nicely. Also, almost free.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I like the swivel screen on the Nikon D5000 - I'd imagine taking a few <strong>self-portraits</strong> and that'd be useful for composition. But I don't hear as many recommendations of it as much as the Canon 500D (and 450D and 400D).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You don't hear much recommendations as the model is brand new. It certainly comes ahead of 400D.<br>

Swivel screen can be useful for macro and other not so ergonomical activity like shooting over a crowd but arranging a self portrait is really not that difficult without one. Compose the scene, focus (use a teddy bear or something if you need to) and hop in. You can even use a mirror near the camera, really a low cost option there. There's also the possibility to shoot tethered, plug the camera to a laptop, look at the screen and fire away.</p>

<p>If you don't mind more size and weight you could take a look at bit older more professional bodies. Canon 40D offers great price/performance, there should be some new ones left, and used Nikon D200 or Pentax K10/20D can be absolute steal. A lot of features that are hard to read from the specs sheet (and even less from colorful ads) but that really make working with them a pleasure. Even though you're a beginner it doesn't mean that you have to buy a "beginner" model. All of these bodies should be $500 max used, that leaves plenty for lenses, tripod, flashes, remote triggers...</p>

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>Bill - I'm a little confused about what the ideal focal length range would be for portraits. Could you (or someone else) explain why 18-55mm is not enough for portraiture? I imagined that 35-50mm would be the 'standard' range for portraits (if there's such a thing as standard).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Range is ok but the kit lens is "slow", that is, it has f3.5-5.6 aperture range. Constant f2.8 or in case of prime lenses 1.4-2.0 is preferable (even f0.95-1.2 for those with truck loads of extra $$$) when you need more control over depth of field. There's a huge difference between 50/5.6 and 50/2. Faster lenses also give you brighter viewfinder and autofocus works better.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Thanks also for the Panasonic recommendation. I'll bring an SD card in-store and try out the Panasonic Soft Skin mode, it might just swing my choice of what to get</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think that'll be mostly waste of time unless you really really need out-of-camera stuff, like you're at some event with your kit and a printer so that you can sell portraits on the go. You need to learn post editing anyway and you'll be way ahead of camera presets pretty soon.<br>

Panasonic models are really interesting but for other reasons and they come with pretty massive limitation in lens selection compared to more normal dslrs.</p>

[john_flores2]

<p>Hey Alyssa,<br>

Since you're just getting into cameras and, like you suggested, will find out what you like to shoot once you start shooting, I recommend that you don't spend your total budget just yet. Buy a basic camera and 1 or 2 kit lenses first and then spend a couple of months playing with them. You'll be able to take the kinds of shots that you describe and more. Not pro quality, but you're not a pro yet either, so that's ok. You and the camera can grow together.</p>

<p>At some point in time, you may say something like, "Hey I really like taking macro photos of flowers!" or, "I like waking up early to photograph the sun rise," or "I do like taking portraits." Each of those statements leads to a very different lens recommendations, and maybe even the kinds of lenses that you aren't thinking about right now.</p>

<p>With all of this said, you might want to look at the Pentax K-x with the two lens kit (18-55 and 50-200). The camera has recently been released and is highly-regarded, and the Pentax kit lenses are said to be among the best kit lenses. And you can get the camera in colors other than plain black! I don't know the price of the kit in Australia, but I'd imagine that you'd have well over $1000 left over, to spend more wisely a couple of months down the road when you yourself are wiser about what you want and need.</p>

<p>My $.02, non-refundable.<br>

john</p>