Camera suggestions Photo
- Started
- Last post
- 72 Responses
- vaxorcist0
K3 looks Interesting... but there's always another camera! .... and wait a few months, there will be another one!
For the op, he has a bunch of Canon .... and doesn't so much shoot in low, low, low light it seems....
but here's a comparison... Pentax K3 vs Canon and Nikon:
- vaxorcist0
I'd get a 50mm 1.8, learn to love primes and zoom with your feet
https://www.flickr.com/groups/99…You can shoot at a lower ISO with the 1.8 than you can at F3.5-5.6 and you will have much more creative control over depth of field, but less control (none) over zooming....
Prime lenses are very rewarding as long as you don't photograph things like corporate events, where you are restricted in your movements, where you can stand,etc..
- the Canon 50mm 1.8 is called the "plastic fantastic lover", it's plastic, but optics are goodvaxorcist
- i'll vouch for that cheap 50 1.8johnny_wobble
- nb0
^ You can't zoom with your feet. Moving closer or further from your subject produces a different effect than zooming. Camera distance and focal length should be thought of independently.
But, vaxoricst is correct in saying that prime lenses are very rewarding. You'll learn so much more about depth, dimension and composing.
- benfal990
- i got a used one for $75johnny_wobble
- did the used lens wobble?vaxorcist
- i think i paid $60 for minesomg
- only wobbles after drinkingjohnny_wobble
- shit lens thocolin_s
- benfal990
when you say prime lense, you're talking about the one with a red ring, right?
- prime means no zoom, in other words fixed focal lengthjohnny_wobble
- red ring means an L lensjohnny_wobble
- Continuity0
Akrok, my dear boy, the _only_ reason you're recommending a Sony DSLR is because you work for Sony. Doesn't actually mean they're any good. :)
- benfal990
and whats the PROS of getting prime lenses again?
- they're usually fast. like 1.4 or 1.8
so good for low light and beautiful bokehjohnny_wobble - sharper. less parts/glass moving aroundaliastime
- good points!benfal99
- they're usually fast. like 1.4 or 1.8
- benfal990
- manual only! you will learn how stuff works, and learn how to bounce and block and diffuse...vaxorcist
- You get what you pay for. I use the remote control on my Nikon flashes all the time.formed
- I also use the TTL all the time as well...just stuff to be aware offormed
- once you understand manual flash, TTL makes a lot more sense, and you have backups...vaxorcist
- and if you ever use studio lights, monolights/pack-head... you will learn much faster...vaxorcist
- nb0
Primes (fixed) are:
- sharper
- more f-stops available (aka faster or brighter)
- smaller, lighterThe only downside is that you need to take a moment to switch lenses when you want a different focal length. However, if you are learning, this tends to be a huge benefit. If you need to take a moment to switch the lens, you'll naturally spend a moment thinking about why you're switching. It helps.
- benfal990
and there's always post-prod to crop the pictures
- benfal990
I think the Canon 6D would be a good camera for my needs. Its full frame and since its dated from 2012, the prices are interesting. I can find reburbished from Canon for 1500$
- And it leaves you some extra dosh for good glass.Continuity
- formed0
Not sure I completely agree about primes. I love my 50 1.4 and drool over a 85 1.4 (I rent that one), but I would never rely on those as primary lenses, just too limiting.
I use a Nikkor 24-70 2.8 as my primary lens, some of my friends use 70-200 2.8. The only people I know that rely on primes are fashion photogs that know their studio setup well in advance.
(not trying to downplay how great some are, just that it is a really experienced/specific person that shoots only primes)
Not sure about the sharpness, I've never had any problems with my Nikkor 24-70 or my Tamron 28-74 2.8 before that. Not any noticeable difference imho.
My advice: buy a versatile lens and when you know/understand more, then buy the primes you know you want. Just too limiting otherwise. Its about capturing the photo more than the lens, don't limit yourself from the get go.
As for 'better in low light', they are 'faster', but that also means your depth of field changes, which can be good or bad, but it changes the photo (not just letting more light in). Again, aim for flexibility as you learn, once you know what you want, then go specific.
- good points too! now iam all mixed up and i dont know who iam anymore! :Pbenfal99
- formed0
Sony A7! Sony A7!!
- "The Sony A7R is the most significant new camera launch of 2013. There, we said it" - digitalcameraworld.c...akrok
- I had a play, the shutter is clunky and loud, and it feels very "sony" computer like. Not for me.inteliboy
- It is loud, but I don't think I've ever, ever payed attention when shootingformed
- vaxorcist0
6D would be nice.. but spending time making a great portfolio is better than spending time and $$ reading and lusting after gear all day long....
- i wont buy something like this in 2min. You need info before making a choice.benfal99
- but i see what you mean. but you know.benfal99
- +1 vax.
Go out, shoot, shoot and shoot some more.Continuity
- vaxorcist0
true.... but if it's bang for the buck, a $120 prime competes with a $1200 F2.8 zoom for images quality, though of course the prime is very, very limited.
Yes, primes are good if you control the situation, whereas if the situation controls you (like a wedding or photojournalism, or event) then you should of course keep a zoom or two in the bag.
ALSO note that sharpness depends less on lens than you think... most lenses are pretty sharp if carefully focussed at F8 or F7.1 and 100 ISO and a tripod, but that's not too convenient for many people in some situations....
learning how to use bounce flash or diffused flash is a great thing, as careful use of flash can light things so they don't look like flash, and your flash tends to contribute to "apparent sharpness", as the flash duration is 1/500th or higher usually, and things like hair or eyebrows can look really sharp with strobe, even if it's bounced or diffused....
But, in general, for "run-and-gun" photography, the $$$ 24-70/24-105 L zooms can give you nice results with less careful technique than what you may have to do to get great image sharpness out of a cheaper zoom that's F4-5.6 like that long tamron zoom.
- vaxorcist0
The technical side is a "common denominator" that may be a shared set of skills and understandings of the physics of light, whereas the visual/art side of photography is really up to you, and subjective...
After you've tested systematically and learned a fair bit of technique, you stop having to think about it and you almost instinctively know what to do with your camera settings/lens choice/etc in order to get a certain look in a certain situation....
I teach advanced digital photography at a local arts center, and I encourage my students to practice photography like a cello player might practice the cello, i.e. some excercises are more like "playing scales" than "creating art" and that's fine.... when you've practiced a lot, you can "play" more effortlessly....