Advice wanted for extreme novice

[h._masini]

<p>Hello! :)<br>

I am an amateur at best when it comes to photography. Still I've always had a sincere appreciation for the art and an extreme desire to learn! I currently own your everyday digital "point-and-shoot" camera (which I've never once read the manual on!) and now I feel I'm ready for a dSLR! I have a <strong>budget of $2,000 </strong>(for hopefully, the body and a lens or two?). I am not looking for the "most basic" or "cheapest" camera instead I'd prefer to invest in something that I can grow with in say the next five years or so. Of course thats if my budget is realistic enough?? Also what other <strong>accessories</strong> should I consider purchasing and that you'd consider a necessity for a beginner? </p>

<p>I've looked at a few cameras, however I really dont know what to look for or what I'm looking at--which make an indecisive buyer and a frustrated salesman?! When I read the specs sometimes its like reading a foreign language?? Still I am more than willing to learn so if you can recommend any <strong>books</strong> I'd appreciate it. </p>

<p>Listed are the cameras I <em>"think"</em> I'm interested in and this is based purely on brand reputation, customer reviews and price. Yet, again I am all ears to any advice!</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>Canon EOS 50D 15.1MP w/28-135mm lens @ $1,399.96</strong></li>

<li><strong>Canon EOS 7D 18MP @ $1,739.96</strong></li>

<li><strong>Canon 3814B004 EOS 7D 18MP @ $1,935.96</strong></li>

<li><strong>Nikon D5000 12.3MP @ $749.99</strong></li>

<li><strong>Nikon D3100 14.2MP @ $699.99</strong></li>

</ul>

<p>As far as my "<strong>use</strong>", I'm thinking anything and everything! I have a toddler and dogs that I love to photograph, I travel a lot- so something for scenery, nature, etc., and my mother owns a gift/bakery shop which she'd like to photograph products from to sell online. </p>

<p>Sorry for the 'short-story' (its kind of a habit), but I'd really, really appreciate your help... <strong>THANKS SO MUCH</strong>!!!</p>

 

[charlesheckel]

<p>When you don't really know where your interests lie, it may be a good idea to stick with your point-and-shoot for a while, or to get a good one with a wide zoom range. Go to dpreview.com and read up on the models you mentioned. You should be able to find manuals for most of them online--read those, too.<br>

The most significant accessory is probably your image editing software. The gold standard is Adobe Photoshop, which is expensive but can be purchased at a substantial educational discount if you're a teacher or full-time student. Be warned--the learning curve is steep. Alternatively Photoshop Elements is available for a great deal less, and has most of the useful features of Photoshop.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>The most useful book on photography I have ever read is Bryan Peterson's <em>Understanding Exposure.</em></p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>Harriet, I think you should first read the manual of the camera you already have and then learn to use it well. That is the only way to find out if you actually <strong>need</strong> (as opposed to <em>want</em>) something more capable. $2,000 can bring many goodies and bones for toddlers and dogs respectively.</p>

[ken_l2]

<p>Is there a reason why your Canon selections are in the $1400 to $2000 price range, while your Nikon choices are in the $700 to $750 range? I'm not very familiar with the Canon models you've listed, but I think they are mid-range model cameras, while the Nikons you have listed are entry-level models. Nikons in the mid-range would be the D90 (being discontinued, but a fantastic camera,) the D7000, or the D300s.</p>

<p>As you want something to grow into, I'd recommend starting with a mid-range model. While the entry-level cameras are very good cameras, they will lack some features and capabilities of the more expensive models. As for Nikon vs. Canon, try out each model in your local camera store and see which seems more comfortable for you - size, weight, control layout, the general 'feel.' Nikon and Canon are extremely competitive, and at any given price point, the features and quality of their cameras will be very similar.</p>

<p>As for books I'd recommend, one of the first ones to buy is a guide for the particular camera model you end up with. The owners manuals do explain the features of the camera and how to use it; but can be obscure as to what exactly these features do - especially for someone new to a DSLR. Once you buy your camera, you can check on the Nikon or Canon forums here for a specific guide book recommendation - as well as find a lot of people willing to answer any specific questions you may have. </p>

<p>For general photography books, there are quite a few. "Understanding Exposure" and "Learning to See Creatively" by Bryan Peterson are excellent books. I've also heard good things about Michael Freeman's books. </p>

<p>From what I've seen in the bookstores, I'd stay away from books that are titled "Digital Photography for Beginners" and the like. It seems that many of these are 1/3 photography, and 2/3 image editing. Look for a book where the emphasis is on photography, and the image editing part is just enough to give you a general idea.</p>

<p>You're better off learning some basics about composition, lighting, exposure, shutter speed, aperture, etc. first. These basics will help you learn to take the pictures that <em>you</em> want to <em>make</em>, instead of 'taking pictures.' When you do want to learn more about image editing, you're better off getting a book that is specific to the image editing program that you have, rather than the generic info in the "Beginner" books. </p>

<p> </p>

[john_tran14]

<p>In my opinion, your first two decisions are important and they are good decisions:</p>

<p>#1 DSLR<br>

#2 A budget around $2000</p>

<p>You should be prepared that two situations most likely to come are:</p>

<p>#1 You find out later that it's not really for you, you can sell it back and lose about half the money (if you buy new now)<br>

#2 You will like it more and more and keep upgrading the camera and add more lenses</p>

<p>Of course there are other situations too, but those two are most common</p>

<p>The next decisions you must make are:</p>

<p>#1. Buy new or used<br>

#2 Full frame or not<br>

#3 Which brand?</p>

<p>If I were in your position now I would choose: #1. Buy new, #2 Not Full frame, #3 Canon<br>

so your first choice looks good to me. Good luck with your decision</p>

[h._masini]

<p>Cool, I didnt expect to see responses so soon, let alone five! Thanks for your replies Charles, Mark, Mukul, Ken & John!!</p>

<p>Okay so I might've overexaggerated on my experience as I'm not that extreme of a novice--I'm more of a casual photographer, but a definite stranger to an SLR. And I might've skimmed through my manual once or twice, but never really, REALLY read it.... I'm impatient & much more of a hands on learner and was just trying to be funny, but I guess not? ;-)p </p>

<p>Anyway my point-and-shoot is a Kodak Z740, I got it as a gift. Before that I purchased my very, first digital in '06, a Canon SD600. My $2000 budget comes from what I've saved to go towards my "to-me-from-me-30th-bday-gift" a.k.a. "new camera". <em>[Although point well taken @ Mukul D., on the "goodies and bones".... hehehe]</em>. Also I've been told by many that not only is an SLR expensive, but the accessories are almost a necessity and just as costly--so I assumed I'd need a budget in the 1,000s??</p>

<p>As for my prospective cameras, I am deciding between these Canons because I'd prefer a Canon and a mid-range one to grow with. They were all highly recommended over any others at the stores/sites I visited. The Nikons were suggested by a friend of mine who recently purchased the D3100 over the D5000 which were both recommended by her instructor (she took a photog course with).</p>

<p>And though I dont care to read manuals [of really any kind] I have read a few of the basic "beginner" photog books. I will be sure to look for the Bryan Petersen and Michael Freeman books, too! Thanks again everyone for your feedback!!! :)</p>

[drjoder]

<p>I'm a Nikon person, with a D70 and a D90, and have been very happy with both cameras. On your budget, you could probably pick up a lightly used D90 with kit lens now (since the newer D7000 is about to come out) and spend the rest on a good tripod, a spare battery, a couple of memory cards, and an additional lens (say, the Nikkor 70-300 VR). Check Adorama or B&H over the next few weeks. That would be a great setup that will keep you learning for the next few years.</p>

[johnw63]

<p>"And though I dont care to read manuals [of really any kind]..."</p>

<p>This will end up biting you. Any DSLR will have a LOT of features and menus and sub-menus and buttons and dials. Your learning curve will be MUCH longer and your frustration level MUCH higher, if you just try to figure it out on your own. That being said , I would get a third party book on what ever camera you choose. I think engineers write the users guides from the manufactures and well informed photographers write the other books.</p>

<p>Try to compare equivalent cameras. Don't compare a $1200 Canon to a $600 Nikon. Of COURSE the more expensive one will seem better !</p>

<p>Investments in the lenses will often out last the camera by a long ways. You could go through 3 cameras and still have the same lenses. It would be better to have a lesser camera and better glass, than the other way around. Cheap lenses will make a good camera not look so good. Good lenses will make any camera look it's best.<br>

If I had $2000 to spend, and nothing already, I wouldn't spend more than half on the camera. That leaves $1000 for a couple of good lenses , a starter tripod, and camera bag and stuff. Some may say that just ONE really good lens will cost more than $1000. Look at the used market for the lenses, if you need to. KEH would be a good place to start.</p>

<p>Think about the "other" stuff.</p>

<p>A good flash unit could run you several hundred dollars. A tripod will be $100-> a lot more. A camera bag Could be $100 to hold that camera and a few good lenses. That means you may only have $500 to spend on lenses. See how it all adds up ?</p>

<p> </p>

[philip_tam]

<p>If you like Canon, buy Canon. If you like Nikon, buy Nikon. You really can't lose with either one. The caveat is that the budget Nikon's with no autofocus motors (D3000, D3100, D5000) will have a somewhat more limited lens selection, since older Nikon lenses won't have autofocus motors built in. Canon doesn't have this problem (all their EF/EF-S lenses have motors built in, simply speaking). Once you get into mid-range (D90, D7000, 60D, etc.) the cameras are roughly equivelant.</p>

<p>If you want to learn, you have to read. I don't think you have to read the manual, but you have to read *something* to know basic concepts. I never read the manual. The camera makers make the menus really intuitive...</p>

<p>You have to budget for lenses though. It is completely pointless to buy a $1800 camera and a $200 lens.</p>

<p>A good place to start would be to buy a camera body, a kit zoom, and a prime lens, with about $1500'ish and get busy snapping pics. Then spend the remaining $500'ish on lenses/acessories that you feel you need after you get into photography. If you dump $2000 in one sitting you might be buying a lot of gear that you have no idea if it's necessary or not. Regardless of how you split it... keep in mind that you should put some money in lenses.... not just the camera.</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Agree that if you like Canon you should get Canon, but only if you know <em>why</em> you prefer it.... Handling of DSLRs is the biggest difference between brands, and some people feel a Canon fits their "hands" better, others Nikon, others Olympus and so on. Another thing: do not rule out Pentax, Sony, Olympus yet. Yes, Canon and Nikon are the biggest, but the others have their place and distinct advantages. So, go to a store with several brands and try some cameras that fit your budget and see how they feel for you, whether button lay-out makes sense to you etc.</p>

<p>If your budget is $2000, then by all means forget about $1850 bodies. It leaves far too little money for all the other essentials. The Nikons you list make much more sense given your budget than the Canons. So, for Canon, think EOS550D (T2i I think in the US). The 50D (or new 60D) is interesting, but the quoted 28-135 lens would not be my choice (not very useful range).<br>

First, get an idea of which kind of lenses you want/need. Think the lenses first. Then the body, next, check for a good bag, possibly a flashlight etc.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<p>As Philips says, Canon or Nikon does not really matter unless you are after specific features (for instance, what many see as Nikon's superior flash set-up) but that only comes with experience.<br>

I would say go to a shop and handle the 50D (or any others on your list) - it is an excellent camera, but it is very large compared to the SD600. Get the shop to mount the 28-135 then get what I would consider a set of realistic add-ons such as a 50mm f1.8, polarising filter, spare battery, spare card and lens tissues and put them all in a bag. Compared to the SD600 is this too large for you? And the questions John Tran posted will be a factor here - the more serious you are about this, the more often you will carry it.<br>

I ask this from my own experience because I have the 30D which I think is an excellent camera and am willing to lug it around. But sometimes I have to think 'do I want to take it' and I long for the more compact size of my old Pentax film camera. I have the S90 I can just put in my pocket but I have been thinking of getting a Panasonic Lumix G2 as an intermediate for more casual days such as wandering around town or country fairs etc with a smaller, less bulky kit.</p>

<p>Is there a reason you are not considering the Rebel series? They are excellent cameras, are smaller in size and a lot of the time give pictures indistinguishable from the X0 series (when writing articles, reviewers are deliberately looking for differences so these are sometimes magnified in importance). I prefer certain features of the X0 series such as the the control layout and the top-plate LCD so that how I made my decision.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>As far as my "<strong>use</strong>", I'm thinking anything and everything! I have a toddler and dogs that I love to photograph, I travel a lot- so something for scenery, nature, etc., and my mother owns a gift/bakery shop which she'd like to photograph products from to sell online.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Boy, that is a wide range of subjects. The 28-135 will do for the toddler and dogs.<br>

For scenery and bakery I would suggest the relatively cheap (and excellent) 18-55 IS (make sure it is the IS model).<br>

If you can afford add it on I would also suggest the highly regarded 50mm f1.8 at about 100 bucks and this will enable you to take pictures in lower light and it will be excellent quality for product shots.<br>

I understand that kits can include the 18-55 IS or the 28-135. Check out the price of second hand lenses (KEH, BH etc) because there are many 18-55 that were removed from kits because the purchaser did not want them so choosing the kit lens and buying the other second hand could save some money.<br>

But you do need to factor in costs for 2-3 cards, a spare battery and a camera bag. And maybe a photo editing program (such as Photoshop Elements)? For product shots you may need a tripod - if this will be for purely indoor shots a relatively cheap one will do, but if you will use it for outdoors scenics as well then you need to spend a bit more.<br>

For outdoor shots you will benefit from lens hoods (there are some good third-party ones available such as Marumi) and maybe a polarising filter.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I've looked at a few cameras, however I really dont know what to look for or what I'm looking at--which make an indecisive buyer and a frustrated salesman?!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't worry! It is why salesmen are there - to help you, that is, not to be frustrated. As long as it is clear you are serious about your purchase and ask sensible questions they should not mind. The beauty of going to a shop as opposed to doing it online is you can handle the camera (too big, too small, too heavy), look at the features and have a better idea of what it is you are getting.</p>

 

[mariosforsos]

<p>You can buy a brand new Hasselblad and still end up being a novice photographer if you insist on refusing to read the manuals and literally hundreds of books and articles. You can take a billion images - if you do not know how to improve them (and you can ALWAYS improve them) and how you can coax the most out of your camera, then the billionth-and-one shot will be equally amateurish as the first.</p>

<p>As for WHICH camera you should choose, it really, REALLY does not matter. Even a rather old D50 would be more than you can handle at this stage anyway and will REMAIN so unless you read. Can I stress this enough? I would honestly advise you to spend 300 on the camera and 1700 on books and courses rather than the other way around...!</p>

<p>So, I'll second the approach of staying with what you have UNTIL you reach its limits, until you cannot take the majority of images you WANT or NEED to take with that one. By that time, assuming you've heeded even an iota of the advice offered here, you will have read enough to enable you to (a) compare like cameras, (b) know which features are importand and how their implementation across cameras differs and © how each SET of features can help you get to where you want to.</p>

[dlw]

<p>H, I hear and understand your desire to purchase a new camera. Been there, done that. Before you buy a new camera though, I think previous posters who suggested you get to really know the one you have are giving you good advise. I see you have a Kodak Z740. I have a very similar Z710. I think the only difference between the two is yours has image stablization whereas mine does not. Sure, these cameras have their limitations. The biggest ones are: small sensor. on-camera flash only, and auto focus only, but they also have a lot on the plus side. Besides full program mode, yours has aperature, shutter and full manual modes quite like proper SLR's. If you spend the time to read the manual and explore these exposure modes, you will be more prepared when your ready to pick your DSLR. Granted with the small sensor, exploring depth of field can be more difficult, but certainly not impossible. You should be able to reliably control motion and DOF while maintaining good exposure before you step up to whatever DSLR you choose. What you have now is a very good learning platform, and you would be wise to take full advantage. </p>

[James G. Dainis]

What makes a good photo is composition and lighting. I'm sure most of the responders here could take better pictures with the Kodak Z740 in AUTO than you could take with any of the DSLR cameras you are looking at. With the DSLR in AUTO, the exposures will be mostly okay but if you don't understand composition, your photos will be bad to indifferent. Having a "real'" camera may make you a better photographer in that it will, hopefully, encourage you to learn what makes a good photo.

 

Here is a start;

 

http://www.amateursnapper.com/photography/10-top-photography-composition-rules

[jaydesi]

<p>I definitely recommend going to a local camera shop and seeing how the cameras feel in your hands. Ergonomics are important! If you find the camera uncomfortable and it just sits in the bag in the closet, it's not going to take any pictures!</p>

<p>However, I've noticed that my local camera shop's prices are substantially higher than Adorama and B&H, so I recommend actually making your purchase from either of these websites.</p>

<p>I'll relay my experience, but keep in mind, you may find yourself going a different route. I started with an entry level consumer camera, the Canon T1i, with much the same inspiration as you...new child, dogs, scenery, etc. I picked Canon because I had a Canon film SLR and figured that I'd just use the lens I had for that on my new camera. My T1i came with the kit lens, and I ended up using that, since it was a better lens than the one I had before. As I read more, especially here, I found more interesting ideas for photography, and ran up against the limitations of the kit lens pretty quickly...no telephoto, too slow. I also found myself limited by the design of the camera, and how difficult it was to change settings without two dials.</p>

<p>So I sold my gear (since purchased new, at a loss), and invested in a 7D. The better AF points (and AF system), along with the ergonomics and ease of use with two dials, was a huge improvement over the T1i. As my budget allowed, I added a few high-quality lenses and a flash to replace the kit lenses I had from the T1i.</p>

<p>I've not looked back since. Most of my lens purchases were made for a specific reason, not "just to have" and I've done well in that regard, mostly. I regularly use most of my lenses as the need for them arises.</p>

<p>So I suppose the point of my story is that if you see yourself using the camera on something other than Auto, and actually learning about photography and how to exploit your DSLR's features that make it more than a glorified point-and-shoot, then it's probably wise to consider the prosumer level of camera over the entry level right off, and buy a flash. The Canon 50D or 60D are fine, and the 7D is a bit better than them, but with a heftier price tag. The kit lens with a better flash (580EX II, great choice) will allow you to take indoor shots without being overly limited by your kit lens, and down the road you can decide if you want to invest in top quality lenses at a slower rate of purchase (tip: buy used; the deals are great and you can always resell for close to what you paid for it) or if you prefer just getting the low-to-mid range lenses and being satisfied with them.</p>

 

[wogears]

<blockquote>

<p>I definitely recommend going to a local camera shop and seeing how the cameras feel in your hands. Ergonomics are important! If you find the camera uncomfortable and it just sits in the bag in the closet, it's not going to take any pictures!<br>

However, I've noticed that my local camera shop's prices are substantially higher than Adorama and B&H, so I recommend actually making your purchase from either of these websites.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You know, if we keep doing this, there won't BE local camera stores for people like the OP to visit. She will need help. A good camera store can provide that; a website will not. I do second the suggestion for the OP to read and look at images. That is how you will grow, not by buying gear.</p>

[scott_page2]

<p>Buy the best glass you can. A do not recommend the kit lens. Generally they are pretty bad. If you REALLY want to learn photography, take a black and white film-based class at your local college. But regarding digital, I recommend that you get just one lens to start. Make it a manual focus, single focal length lens. Perhaps a 50mm. Sharp, low cost, fast glass. Learn to compose by moving your feet. After 6 months of using that lens, then get another that meets your interests, a 100 macro, a wide angle, or maybe a zoom. By starting with that single lens, you will really learn photography, selective depth of field, use of the DOF scale, composition, etc. My first 3 years of photography was with just a 50mm lens. Too many lenses will just confuse you and starting with a zoom will turn you into a lazy photographer. </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"...starting with a zoom will turn you into a lazy photographer."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Or give a new photographer more options and help them learn and grow more quickly and efficiently.</p>

<p>Depends on your perspective.</p>

[wogears]

<blockquote>

<p> do not recommend the kit lens. Generally they are pretty bad.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The 18-70mm that came with my D70 was an excellent lens. Sharp, low-distortion and fast autofocus (for its time). My stepson has now inherited the camera, and just had his first picture published in a local newspaper.</p>

[scott_page2]

<p>In my university classes I see first hand the picts from students with cheap kit zoom lenses. When compared to my Canon L glass, the images the kit lenses produce are dull and lifeless and very unsharp. When compared to my Zeiss prime lens, it is like comparing a home made pinhole camera image to an image by a modern camera. I stand by what I said, the kit zooms are cheap for a reason. Sure if you only shoot them at f/5.6 or f/8 then they "may" produce a decent image. But try shooting them wide open to get selective focus and a nice background blur. Sorry, but they do not compare favorably to fast and expensive glass. </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Scott, it's just as likely the reason photos from students appear dull, lifeless and unsharp is because they're students. They don't yet have the experience to know how to optimize in camera settings for JPEGs that are ready to print or display online without further tweaking; or how to adjust raw files for optimal results. They may not yet know how to reliably and consistently get accurate exposures, accurate focus, or hold the camera steadily enough to consistently get sharp handheld photos without motion blur.</p>

<p>I've used everything from top notch primes to kit zooms like the 18-70 DX Nikkor. The differences are often insignificant and would be noticed only by expert photographers or in extreme examples such as making large prints. If the differences are readily apparent to any ordinary viewer, it's almost certainly due to lack of expertise: either the in-camera JPEG settings or indifferent post processing. There's certainly nowhere near a pinhole-to-magic-Zeiss-lens difference in photos that's attributable to anything other than technique.</p>

[wogears]

<p>This was taken with the 18-70. Even has nice blur.<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2693579-lg.jpg" alt="" width="528" height="800" /></p>

<p>This was done with the 14-45 Panasonic kit lens. <br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10938899-lg.jpg" alt="" width="560" height="700" /></p>

[randy_johnson5]

<p>Since it's a special B'day I would buy new. Be aware that the new Canon 60D should be available in Oct. That will, no doubt, depress the 50Ds selling price. It has an LED screen that articulates and is smaller and does HD video too. It's worth a look, at least. I would be tempted to just buy a kit since you save a bit. My Canon 40D kit came with a flash and bag from Costco. I like my 18-55mm kit lens. It's a good place to start.</p>

[debra_martin]

<p>I have exactly the same experience, except that my new camera was a gift . . . and an unexpected one at that! I've always enjoyed photography and have a job that allows me to travel internationally, so I've dreamed about being able and knowing how to take great photos in the interesting places that I visit. Last Christmas I was gifted with a Nikon D90, which I absolutely LOVE. Since then, I've taken a couple of online classes, have been reading forums like this and listening to photography podcasts, and I'm now enrolled in a full-semester digital photography class at a local college. I appreciate that my camera is one that I can grow into as my skills improve.<br>

Based on my experience, I would recommend NOT going crazy buying extra lenses, flashes, etc. right away. I just have the kit lens <strong>Nikon</strong> AF-S DX 18-105mm (about $1200) and the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF lens (about $150), and a UV filter and for me right now, that's plenty. I know that I'll eventually want a higher zoom lens, a flash, a tripod, etc., but I want to have a better feel for what I'm doing and how I'll use those things before I spend money on them. <br>

I do very highly recommend Michael Freeman's book "The Photographer's Eye." It's a wealth of information and so much more than just aperture, shutter speed and ISO.<br>

Hope this helps! Have fun with your new camera!</p>