- Status
E
endigo
Guest
It depends.
If you are not sure if this hobby is something that you want to spend thousands of dollars on, then the 600D is a fine camera and will take you a long way.
If you are serious about entering this hobby, and you are confident that you will continue to enjoy this hobby for a long time, then I recommend that you go down the list of Canon cameras (This is a Canon forum) and imagine buying each camera, when the price starts to hurt, buy that camera. Be sure to keep the box, and all of it's contents in good condition. If you later decide that the camera is just collecting dust, the upper end cameras do hold their value for several years.
If you are not sure if this hobby is something that you want to spend thousands of dollars on, then the 600D is a fine camera and will take you a long way.
If you are serious about entering this hobby, and you are confident that you will continue to enjoy this hobby for a long time, then I recommend that you go down the list of Canon cameras (This is a Canon forum) and imagine buying each camera, when the price starts to hurt, buy that camera. Be sure to keep the box, and all of it's contents in good condition. If you later decide that the camera is just collecting dust, the upper end cameras do hold their value for several years.
Upvote
0
Just went down this road for my niece...used XTi with kit lens $320. I've seen what that body can crank out with L glass and it is impressive. So if she shows promise I'll get her a couple of the well regarded non-L primes and she'll have no barrier due to equipment for a good while...and I'm not out much coin.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
endigo said:
Yes, if you go high enough. But that really means $2500 for the 5DII, which typically goes for $2000-2200 on the used market, meaning a depreciation of 12-20%. There are a few 7D's on my local Craigslist for $1000-1200 - that's a loss of 30-40%. And those are for current cameras - once a new version comes out, used prices drop. Sure, you can sell an original 5D for ~$1000, but when new that body was more expensive than the 5DII. That's a main reason the lower-end cameras don't hold value - new models come out much more frequently.
I think if you are unsure if this is the hobby for you, get a used dSLR - the 50D or even 40D would be a good choice there. Buy a good lens (or two).
Upvote
0
foto said:
Were you using the onboard flash? Photography is about light, so it is important to get the light right, and the camera will do a excellent job. Too little light usually results in the camera lowering the shutter speed, and getting a blur in the photos.
I can recommend this web site for training, its done by a pro who knows his stuff. It is not for total newbies, but you likely know enough. They have a 60D specific course. They also have a beginner course, but its a massive 11 session course.
You can see the indroduction online free. You can also download the course and save it to a DVD for future reference.
http://www.creativelive.com/courses/ $50.00
Upvote
0
As a beginner I was trying to get my head around this whole DSLR thing too and I found this set to be very good:
Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Boxed Set: v. 1, 2 & 3
His humour is sometimes a bit, well, dry but he explains things in a very understandably way without getting too technical. I then got a much more technical book to follow up, but what a great start. Now I know what aperture and shutter speed to use when, how I use my flash (430EX II) etc... Good stuff.
Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Boxed Set: v. 1, 2 & 3
His humour is sometimes a bit, well, dry but he explains things in a very understandably way without getting too technical. I then got a much more technical book to follow up, but what a great start. Now I know what aperture and shutter speed to use when, how I use my flash (430EX II) etc... Good stuff.
Upvote
0
Well, I started my exploration with Kelby's Digital Photography books too (I think it was volume 2).
It's good for people who wants to be spared of the basic "Intro to Photography 101" approach. There's some pretty direct concept in the book which I still use (for example, the three key factors of landscape photography - tripod, wired release, and mirror lockup). Of course, those concepts could found on other books, but I just like the way the author puts all of those in simple language and quickly accessible.
However, there's one drawback: he's a Nikon shooter! That's blasephemy!
It's good for people who wants to be spared of the basic "Intro to Photography 101" approach. There's some pretty direct concept in the book which I still use (for example, the three key factors of landscape photography - tripod, wired release, and mirror lockup). Of course, those concepts could found on other books, but I just like the way the author puts all of those in simple language and quickly accessible.
However, there's one drawback: he's a Nikon shooter! That's blasephemy!
Upvote
0
foto said:
I don't know much about using high end flashes, but you could probably use a faster lens. The 50mm 1.8 is a cheap fast lens that is relatively sharp and gets good reviews (though the build quality is cheap).
Having a faster lens will allow you to crank the ISO lower and get pictures that are less noisy. Additionally, shoot RAW and use a gray card. With the gray card you can get the white balance just right. There is no good way for the camera to detect WB, but it tries to guess. Under Tungsten lights, this can be problematic. If you don't have a gray card (or a pretty accurate gray object), just adjust the white balance on the computer until it looks better.
I need to get a gray card, but in the meantime, I have a Sketchers shoe box with a medium gray surface that works great.
Upvote
0
ronderick said:However, there's one drawback: he's a Nikon shooter! That's blasephemy!
I agree, that was the biggest letdown..
But, seriously... Good books, easily accessible. Just the other night I needed to quickly refresh what settings I needed to use when taking a shot of the moon and it took me less than a minute and I was ready. I did a comparison to one of the 500 page-monster books I have, took me about 10 minutes to find the location and the it rambled on about a bunch of technicalities, all I wanted was a suggested shutter and aperture. The monster-book is great in explaining the actual workings of stuff, but for quickly finding suggested settings it is not the right place.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:7enderbender said:
I'm not sure this matters, except that we often use FF equivalents for comparison purposes. In the film days, 'pros' used MF cameras, and numbers were 'off' for them. Ultimately, though, the principles of composition and light are still the most important.
On a related topic, do you advocate that beginners start their post-processing the way I learned it (and probably you as well)...when 'dodge' and 'burn' weren't tools you clicked in Photoshop, but were cards and wands waved around in a darkroom?
Good points. But in all seriousness, yes, I think the latter wouldn't be a bad way to understand things - and appreciate the good things about digital while also getting a feel for its limitations, perhaps?
Upvote
0
I can recommend a cheap, concise and GOOD book. "National Geographic Photographer's Field Guide". ($4.95, at least used to be). with pictures, examples etc. It is 120 pages, 4' X 8" fits into any coat pocket.K3nt said:ronderick said:However, there's one drawback: he's a Nikon shooter! That's blasephemy!
I agree, that was the biggest letdown..
The monster-book is great in explaining the actual workings of stuff, but for quickly finding suggested settings it is not the right place.
Upvote
0
Rocky said:I can recommend a cheap, concise and GOOD book. "National Geographic Photographer's Field Guide". ($4.95, at least used to be). with pictures, examples etc. It is 120 pages, 4' X 8" fits into any coat pocket.K3nt said:ronderick said:However, there's one drawback: he's a Nikon shooter! That's blasephemy!
I agree, that was the biggest letdown..
The monster-book is great in explaining the actual workings of stuff, but for quickly finding suggested settings it is not the right place.
There's usually some interesting things to be found poking around here as well: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/photography
Upvote
0
foto said:
Based on my very recent experiences with two different 60d bodies I'd recommend this (it's free):
http://focustestchart.com/focus21.pdf
The issue for me on both bodies was front focus with all lens. Outside in bright light, the lens will stop down (if using program modes) and give a large depth of field which masks the problem. Inside with low light, the lens opens up and the problem becomes more noticable. The faster the lens, the more the problem manifests (as apeture opens and DOF gets shallower).
Upvote
0
branden said:
Hey, it works for me when I was taking my first step into landscape photography. If I had to read an entire chapter on composition, I'd probably get through about 3 pages and call it quits. For a slow learner like me, it took a little while even to get these three things down correctly *shrug*
Complicated terms tend to scare newbies, and that's the reason why I like this series: short, terse, to the point, and relatively few complicated terminology.
Upvote
0
1. Begin at the beginning.
2. A journey of a thousand kilometers begins with a single step.
3. A picture is worth a thousand words.
4. Do not walk a mile for a Camel.
5. Every place is walking distance if you have the time.
2. A journey of a thousand kilometers begins with a single step.
3. A picture is worth a thousand words.
4. Do not walk a mile for a Camel.
5. Every place is walking distance if you have the time.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
I think you have to take enough time for the oceans to dry up so you can walk
Upvote
0
L
LFG530
Guest
Both Nikons will have way better Iso performance, canon will offer slightly better video and won't have af in video mode...
The d7000 really is a big step up from the 60d in my mind, altought I think starting out with the 5100 or 3100 would be the best since you could invest in better glass (more important than the body and keeps the value). Canon imo is out of the game since they try too hard to impress with the high megapixel count... The best thing you could do to start of with a limited amount of money is getting the 3100 or a used camera like the d90 or d5000 and get something like the 17-55 2.8 from nikon or the best you can afford that suits what you want to do...
Oh and don't listen to people that say the nikon glass is not as good as canon', both brands compete at a really high level, altought nikon is often a bit more expensive.
The d7000 really is a big step up from the 60d in my mind, altought I think starting out with the 5100 or 3100 would be the best since you could invest in better glass (more important than the body and keeps the value). Canon imo is out of the game since they try too hard to impress with the high megapixel count... The best thing you could do to start of with a limited amount of money is getting the 3100 or a used camera like the d90 or d5000 and get something like the 17-55 2.8 from nikon or the best you can afford that suits what you want to do...
Oh and don't listen to people that say the nikon glass is not as good as canon', both brands compete at a really high level, altought nikon is often a bit more expensive.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
