looking to get a camera

well lets start off and say i know nothing about SLR's or anything of that nature.. I have a Hp camera with 6.2 megapixels.. lol..


i started looking into some SLR's.. I want to get a good camera.. i will be basically using it for when i go quadding.. How is the Canon Rebel XTI? What kind of lens would i want? I know they sell those big Flashes, but is the on that it comes with any good?

this is a pic that my friend took of me..

not sure what kind of camera he has tho... since the rebel xti is 700.00 alone, im looking to get a lens that is about 4-550.. thanks

If you're going to use it while going out and playing in the dirt, you might want something less than a DSLR. DSLR's are bigger, bulkier, and are a lot more expensive than a good point and shoot.

On the other hand, if you want the greatest flexibility and an ability to do things like control depth of field, get the fastest shutter speeds, etc., then a DSLR is a must-have.

To be brutally, painfully honest ... Mac-Forums.com is not the best place to find the best camera. I would start out at photography-on-the.net which is a mostly Canon-oriented site but also has some Nikon users. Which is ok, because cool people choose Canon.

Even for relatively slow motorsports like ATV, you'll want to compare things like autofocus speed and accuracy, burst rate (how many pictures can the camera take in a second), buffer size (how many total pictures can the camera take at that top speed before it needs to stop and do some computer processing to catch up), etc. You'll also need to determine if the weight (and cost) of a metal body is worth it compared to a cheaper, lighter, but less durable plastic body.

For a run-down on different Canon cameras and lenses, there is probably nothing better than www.the-digital-picture.com in their "Photography Equipment Reviews" section.

A great generic starter lens for a Canon DSLR is the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM (you can learn what all that means at either of the sites I mentioned above). You'll pay around $400 for it and it will do literally almost everything you need until you have the money and skill to start picking more specific-purpose lenses. I've taken two different photos using that lens (and an old Canon 10D) which have been used in glossy magazine advertisements.

If you will have to take most of your photos from a fair distance away (100' or more), you could either go with the less expensive (and less rugged) 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM II (which lacks image stabilization) or the more expensive (around $600)but infinitely better 70-200mm f/4.0L USM ... which also lacks image stabilization, though.

However, the 55-200 and definitely the 70-200 will make it difficult to do things like typical up-close portraiture, or group shots because the focal length is long (in layman's terms, they have a "lot of zoom").

There is also a 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM lens that runs less than $400 which is supposed to be ok, but I've never handled one.

Be careful stepping off this cliff, though. Digital photography can be an expensive habit. I don't think they make an Apple computer that costs as much as my photography equipment.

Good luck and feel free to PM me if you have any specific questions, especially about Canon stuff. If you decide to go Nikon -- which is fine, there is only so much room in heaven anyway -- I know at least a few people on these boards are skilled Nikon shooters.

thanks for the info man.

If you're looking for good unbiased reviews on camera models, you can check these sites out:

Digital Camera Resource Page

Digital Camera Reviews

Let's Go Digital

For lens reviews a great place to look is Fred Miranda.

You can find some general interest articles and reviews here, Petteri's Pontifications ( a bit weird to navigate but the guy makes it worth it, nifty stuff there).

The really cool people choose the camera of the year. That's right, boys and girls... not a Canon, not a Nikon... a Sony Alpha-100. That's how I roll...

It's cute you think so.

My kit:
Canon 1D Mk II N
50/1.4 USM.....16-35/2.8L USM ... 24-105/4L IS USM ... 70-200/2.8L IS USM

Though in all seriousness, I think the Sony buy-out of Konica-Minolta will be a good thing in the long run. My first SLR was an old Minolta 7xi (or something like that) and it did fine. The Alpha-100 sounds like it is a qualified competitor at the consumer level.

OMG.

ToddG you have a drool-worthy arsenal! And it costs a fortune!

I can only dream of those L series lenses.

ToddG said:

On the other hand, if you want the greatest flexibility and an ability to do things like control depth of field, get the fastest shutter speeds, etc., then a DSLR is a must-have.

Click to expand...

Not to mention the shutter lag on the point and shoot venue

ToddG said:

However, the 55-200 and definitely the 70-200 will make it difficult to do things like typical up-close portraiture, or group shots because the focal length is long (in layman's terms, they have a "lot of zoom").

Click to expand...

While I agree the 70-200 would not be a good choice for group portraits for individual portraits that focal length range works great.

ToddG said:

Be careful stepping off this cliff, though. Digital photography can be an expensive habit.

Click to expand...

AMEN to that

Nice stuff Todd.

The first thing you should do is go to a camera store and hold the cameras, make sure a lens your interested in holding is on it and see how it feels.

Dont forget your camera bag, extra battery, monopod, tripod, CF or other memory cards, lens brush/cloths, sensor cleaning kit, Photoshop/Elements/GIMP or other editing software...

Its a great hobby but it is not cheap.

my cousin was telling me that i would want to get a telephoto lens? .. is that true? .. and what about the flash.. is the one that comes with it any good? im going to be using it outside MOSt of the time..

I do wildlife photos and I bought the Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 IS USM and it got pretty decent reviews considering the price. It's not a series L lens but at that size a telephoto lens has to be equipped with Image Stabilizer unless you plan on using a tripod all the time or shooting at higher speeds than 1/200th of a second.

In my blog I posted afew pictures from tests I did after I bought it: entry here and here.

In my SmugMug account most photos of the last galleries are shot using this lens if you want to see how it handles itself.

Here is a Fred Miranda review on the Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 IS USM.

I'm going for the Nikon D80. Great camera as is and should serve you well when you want to spend extra on better lenses (Better than the kit lens that is).
I'd suggest learning how to use an SLR 1st though - Maybe get yourself a basic film SLR (I mean a cheap one as a learning tool, not best quality) and a book and see how it goes.
It may only be my opinion but if you get a DSLR and then wander around with it in Auto mode, you have wasted your money and would be better off with a decent fixed lens or point and shoot.

I have just started looking into a DSLR camera. I have found that the Cannon Digital Rebel seems to be the most bang for the buck. For the money, the specs seem to be better than Nikons. Cannon has a good selection of lenses too. That is one of the things that the Sony Alphas lack. I don't claim to know anything about taking pictures, but that's what I have seen from my research. The Digital Rebel also outsells Nikon DSLR's on Amazon (Not that most people buy their cameras on Amazon)

Jeff said:

I have found that the Cannon Digital Rebel seems to be the most bang for the buck. For the money, the specs seem to be better than Nikons.

Click to expand...

Which specs are those? Just wondering more specifics about your decision.

You can debate Nikon vs Canon all day, in the end either works well. Canon offers more tilt/shift lenses however most people would not even be interested in buying these. I think in general the Canon lenses are less expensive than Nikons, but have not done a cost comparison on all models but did look at a few of their higher end pieces when thinking about the 5D this past summer.

WhiteYfz said:

My cousin says I will want a telephoto, is that true?

Click to expand...

It is if you want to take photos that look closer than you really are.

A telephoto lens will give you a field of view that is closer too the subject than you really are. Think of it like this, any lens that makes looking through the camera viewfinder appear as though you are looking into binoculars (the subject gets closer) is a telephoto. If the subject looks as though they get further away its a wide angle....

Zoom lenses allow you to change the focal length of the lens. So if you get a 70-200mm then you have a zoom lens, but on a DSLR almost all the focal lengths on that lens are telephoto. If you get a 17-80 zoom lens, then the longer end of this is telephoto however the shorter end is wide angle.

Just wanting to help you understand the terms used.

As for flashes that come on cameras, my advise is to never use them or if you do learn how to turn them down. On camera flashes are what make most photographs look horrible...

Odin_aa said:

Which specs are those? Just wondering more specifics about your decision.

Click to expand...

When I was looking at DSLR's, I was looking at more entry level cameras. I wasn'l looking at the very bottom (Nikon D40, Cannon Digital Rebel XT), but a little bit better than that. I already have a decent Nikon point-and-shoot, so I decided that to justify buying a new camera, it was going to have to have at least 10 Effective Megapixels. The two models that I was comparing were the Digital Rebel XTi and the Nikon D80. I really don't know much about photography or where to shop for cameras, so the prices that I got may not be the best or most accurate.

Digital Rebel XTi- $830 with 18-55mm lens
D80- $999 (body only)
D80- $1299 with 28-200mm lens

Those are the prices I was basing my "bang for your buck" statement on.

Jeff,
Not picking on you..but that is shopping by price and mega pixel count which is not really the smart way to go.

First think about what you want to photograph, or what your main subject will be. If it will be something where speed matters then your auto focus system and frames per second will be important (as well as lens choice for fast aperture and focusing speed). If you will be shooting outdoors with much sun in the back of your subject spot metering will be important, both cameras you mention have spot meters but one is more precise than the other.
Will you need to use High or Lower ISO setting? If so which one offers the best for what you will shoot...for landscapes you want as low as you can go which for most DSLR's is 100 or 200 ISO if its low light (indoor sports, night) then you will need a camera that handles the higher ISO speeds with relatively low noise or manageable noise.

I do not own either camera, but am sure you can find write ups on these features. What you don't want to do is buy a camera at that price and then find out it does not have features you want/need.

If you are unsure which features you need to pay particular attention too, it would be good to ask the question specific to what your looking to shoot. These camera's will most likely be very close on all counts, but there may be just that one feature that you wanted...

EDITED TO ADD: The difference between 8 and 10 MP is negligible, would suggest looking at any camera in that range that falls within your price...dont get stuck looking just at those two.

WhiteYfx,

A good digital photography site is http://www.dpreview.com

Honestly, Odin_aa's opinion is true, professional, and unbias.

However, if you are not really into photography but still want to take some nice pictures, try not limit yourself to DSLR. It may be worthwhile to consider "SLR-like" camera, for example, Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50.

I do not own the camera, but I have a few co-workers really enjoy the camera.

Choosing photography equipment can be very personal. Again, Odin_aa's suggestion to go to a local professional camera store (no Bestbuy!) to test a few cameras can really help you to finalize your decision. The staff often provide great recommendation that will fit your purpose and skill level.

Odin_aa said:

Jeff,
Not picking on you..but that is shopping by price and mega pixel count which is not really the smart way to go.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

The megapixel myth

The megapixel myth is also prevalent because men always want a single number by which something's goodness can be judged.

Unfortunately, it's all a myth because the number of megapixels (MP) a camera has has very little to do with how the image looks. Even worse, plenty of lower MP cameras can make better images than poorer cameras with more MP.
...for an excellent 8x10 you need [8" x 300 DPI] x [10 x 300DPI] or 2,400 x 3,000 pixels, or 7,200,000 pixels, or 7.2 megapixels.

Click to expand...

You'll find some good reviews on a lot of cameras and equipment on that site too.

I agree you could save a bit of cash by going for the Canon but Odin_aa is right that you 1st need to decide what you are going to do with the camera. I've used Nikon in the past and have been very pleased so I'm sticking with them regardless of price.

Is there anyone in your area that allows you to rent cameras for the day? May be just an extra expense but will help you make the decision.

Fisrt of all, thank you Odin aa and Moss918. Like I said, I really don't know much about photography or cameras in general, but I'm still learning. As far as the features that I need in a camera, I really don't know. I use mine for all around shooting. Inside, outside, day, night, and whatever else. I'm working on reading as much as I can, and learning what all the features actually do, instead of comparing them solely by the numbers. Thanks for the links to the pages that let me learn what I might need though.

that was a great link moss918!

now i feel even better about my recent point and shoot purchase (a panasonic lumix 5MP 10X zoom - panasonic lumix DMC-TZ1K).

cheap, great optics, basically just to get my creative juices flowing again before dumping any amount of money into a DSLR. my only SLR now is a canon, about 35-37 years old, and in need of serious cleaning/maintenance. i need to get some pics of that beast up on smugmug!