# Cameras?!?!



## [email protected] (Dec 19, 2009)

Ok, here is the story. I am clueless when it comes to cameras I went on the net searched for a camera and was over whelmed. I think it time for a new camera my old one is just a little thing i got a few years ago and it upgrade season. So I turn to you in my moment of peril cause all of these amazing photographer on here surly know a tun!!

Thanks,

Chase


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 19, 2009)

You looking for a dslr or another point and shoot (assuming thats what you have/had)?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 19, 2009)

Well i did have a point and shoot, but i think i would like to change it up. What's a dslr? I think i want one with lenses that change cause i would like to take scenery photos and photos of my bugs.

Thanks


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 20, 2009)

You want a DSLR than  

Well ultimately you buy the camera body for the lenses, so first figure out what lenses you want (if you want to be able to take pictures of your mantids you will need a dedicated macro lens which cost around $400 from the third party variety) and a budget for both the camera and lens/lenses. There are alternatives to macro lenses (raynox 150/250.... cheapo telephoto lenses with faux macro setting, etc.) but in my humble oppinion you can't beat a macro lens in macro photography for ease of use and magnification. Likewise they double as a high quality mid telephoto lens.

Brand wise i'd say:

Nikon = most expensive, but better than canon (lenses/bodies) IMHO.... decent backwards compatability with old lenses but you need the nicer bodies to take advantage of this

canon = cheaper than nikon overall but im not a fan of their camera bodies in general and their lenses can be a hit or a miss

Pentax = what I use.... Quite a bit Cheaper than both nikon and canon overall if you consider you can buy lenses from the early film days and use them on your modern camera (instead of paying the minimum $400 for a macro lens you can get a manual focus one from the early days that takes pictures just as good or even better than their modern counterparts for ~$100). I don't want to sound like a fanboy so......  

olympus = Honestly I know very little about them

Sony = Expensive lenses but fairly cheap bodies. IMO they are still playing catchup


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 20, 2009)

To get an idea of what is out there Chase, and some of the terms involved, try http://www.firstglimpsemag.com/Editorial/a...0B6E073EA0044DF

The major issue for most of us is price. For a DSLR with a "normal" lens and say, a fair closeup lens, you'll be lucky to get away with $1500. For that, you can buy a low mileage Yamaha 600, build a computer with a terrabyte HDD and a decent graphics card, buy 75 10mgm Percodan (oxycodone) tabs in the Phoenix area or enough crystal meth to rot both yr upper and lower front teeth in the Yuma area. YEMV.

I would strongly suggest that you check out a "prosumer" or "bridge"camera with as many manual controls as possible. You can get one with a very long zoom lens and plenty of flexibility for $400-$600.

Good luck, and let us know what you decide!


----------



## kamakiri (Dec 20, 2009)

First DSLR = digital single lens reflex. In a nutshell it is a digital camera that uses a prism and/or mirror(s) to allow the viewfinder to see through the same lens that the sensor takes pictures with.

Well, I'm going to go out on a limb and say most shooters who are serious about macro currently shoot Canon  

Yeatzee is also missing my second platform from his list: Sigma...even though he uses one of their lenses   ...also missing the fact that I can mount almost any brand of manual lenses on my Canons  

Anyway, before I'd attempt to suggest a platform for you...a working budget might help.


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 20, 2009)

kamakiri said:


> First DSLR = digital single lens reflex. In a nutshell it is a digital camera that uses a prism and/or mirror(s) to allow the viewfinder to see through the same lens that the sensor takes pictures with.Well, I'm going to go out on a limb and say most shooters who are serious about macro currently shoot Canon
> 
> Yeatzee is also missing my second platform from his list: Sigma...even though he uses one of their lenses   ...also missing the fact that I can mount almost any brand of manual lenses on my Canons
> 
> Anyway, before I'd attempt to suggest a platform for you...a working budget might help.


Your the only person I've ever heard of that shoots sigma lol

Oh, and yes you are correct there are a lot who go for canon with the MPE-65, but quite a few get that type of magnification much cheaper. I know a couple that make money off their shots and they use very humble setups (bellows for example). Likewise, the holy grail of 1:1 macro lenses many consider is the Pentax FA* 200mm..... just saying  

Define "almost any brand of manual lenses".... do you mean like manual as in modern manual focus lenses such as voigtlander?


----------



## beckyl92 (Dec 20, 2009)

i use a fuji finepix S5700. got it for £90 2nd hand  

you can't chnage the lense on the camera but the one it has is great for taking pics of mantids.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 20, 2009)

Ok, those other things Phil mentioned are real tempting but i think i will stay on the camera path. :blink: Is there a good forum/website that has reliable information? I am trying to make an educated decision and have looked at a few of those brands websites but am lost to say the least. Thanks, chase


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 20, 2009)

Keep bias in mind Chase when searching forums  

My suggestion is go to a local camera store.... hold everything they've got and see what you like best and go from there. Don't forget to ask a bunch of questions!


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 20, 2009)

O.K. Chase, you're probably wise. Did you study that article I pointed you at? Forums and such mostly attract folks who already have a camera, but this will help you if you read it carefully and you might want to check the magazine out at the supermarket: http://www.digitalslrphoto.com/ There is also a useful introductory book for under $20 from P.C. Magazine:

_PC Magazine Guide to Digital Photography _ It's a few years old, but the section on choosing a digital camera still applies.

I would most definitely advise you _not_ to buy a DSLR at this stage. When you have spent your $1500 on a so-so set up, you will still need a light source, a tripod, the list goes on, and every magazine that you look at will be urging you to buy more.

Moreover, buying a DSLR will not make you a better photographer. Manufacturers of photo gear want to sell you professional grade gear. They don't care whether you need it or know how to use it. Buy a prosumer camera like a Panasonic Lumix, which has lots of manual controls, and teach yourself photography. Going out and buying a DSLR as a first "serious" camera is a bit like making yr first car a Ferrari!


----------



## sbugir (Dec 20, 2009)

Phil, my first car was a Ferrari.


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 20, 2009)

lemmiwinks said:


> Phil, my first car was a Ferrari.


But did that make you a better photographer?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 20, 2009)

I will keep in mind most people out there on either camera websites or stores will be bias. I do have a friend i plan on kayaking with over this break that know some about all of this so i think i will pick her brain and see if she could give me a local insight on stores and what not. Will keep my eyes open for that magazine and anything else helpful. Thanks everyone will keep you all posted, Chase

P.S. keep all of this helpful info coming!


----------



## sbugir (Dec 20, 2009)

PhilinYuma said:


> But did that make you a better photographer?


Haha, good one.


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 20, 2009)

PhilinYuma said:


> I would most definitely advise you _not_ to buy a DSLR at this stage. When you have spent your $1500 on a so-so set up, you will still need a light source, a tripod, the list goes on, and every magazine that you look at will be urging you to buy more. Moreover, buying a DSLR will not make you a better photographer. Manufacturers of photo gear want to sell you professional grade gear. They don't care whether you need it or know how to use it. Buy a prosumer camera like a Panasonic Lumix, which has lots of manual controls, and teach yourself photography. Going out and buying a DSLR as a first "serious" camera is a bit like making yr first car a Ferrari!


I respectively disagree. lets consider my macro setup which was all bought without any magical deals.

Camera: Pentax K200d w/ kit lens- cost me $500 new and has since been discontinued and can be had for much less

Lens: Sigma 105mm - cost me $380... worth every cent

Tripod: Dont use for macro photography. It limits me way to much and is to cumbersome.

Flash: Pentax AF360GHZ - cost me $130 used

Other: extension tubes - cost me $20 used

Now the above totals to : $1030

The above setup is still way to much for me and I will probably never tap its full potential. I would definitely not call it a so so setup in the right hands......

Note: The flash IS NOT NECCESARY when only using the macro lens. In other words you do not need a flash if you plan on only using your macro lens without any extension tubes. This is because extension tubes drastically reduce the amount of light reaching the camera's sensor meaning the sun is no longer enough. W/out the extension tubes and flash which you will not need unless you plan on doing very specific pictures (i.e. very small insects) the total is: $880!!!

I could have gotten an old pentax macro lens for a little over $100, but I didn't know this at the time i bought the sigma.

-----------------------------------

Now I do definitely agree that it is not the camera but the photographer. Buying a fender strat played by Mr. Hendrix will not make you magically become a god at guitar. It takes hours and hours of practice with lots of screw ups along the way. (  )

---------------------------------------------

I started taking simple macro pictures with my sisters pathetic point and shoot with zero manual controls. From there I tried a neighbors DSLR and had my heart set on getting one. I ended up buying pentax's mid level (at the time) dslr and Im so glad I didn't waste the money on a camera that could bridge my journey from P&amp;S to DSLR's. I say buy an entry level DSLR so you have an upgrade path if you want to in the future. These entry level dslr's have plenty of auto modes that will help you learn how your camera works as you shoot. The key is take a thousand pictures changing the settings as you go and noticing what changes in the picture.

Oh and if you have any *specific questions* feel free to ask


----------



## kamakiri (Dec 20, 2009)

PhilinYuma said:


> Going out and buying a DSLR as a first "serious" camera is a bit like making yr first car a Ferrari!


False. This is what the 'macro' mode is for. Macro photography is relatively easy to get started on a DSLR. Or it's not any harder than a point n shoot.



yeatzee said:


> Your the only person I've ever heard of that shoots sigma lolOh, and yes you are correct there are a lot who go for canon with the MPE-65, but quite a few get that type of magnification much cheaper. I know a couple that make money off their shots and they use very humble setups (bellows for example). Likewise, the holy grail of 1:1 macro lenses many consider is the Pentax FA* 200mm..... just saying
> 
> Define "almost any brand of manual lenses".... do you mean like manual as in modern manual focus lenses such as voigtlander?


Sigma has a unique sensor that is arguably the best at providing per pixel detail. *50mm macro, 105mm macro, 150mm macro*

For expansion of the system, Canon currently also has the best options and accessories: *ring lite, twin lite, extension tubes*, 180L macro, *100L IS macro 100/2.8 USM macro*, 50mm macro, 'life size converter', 60mm EF-S macro, and of course the *65mm MP-E (1x-5x)*.

The only other more comprehensive macro system that I know of is from the old Olympus OM system. *20/2 macro (roughly 3x to 15x), 38/2.8 macro, 50/3.5 macro, extension tube 65-112mm, auto bellows*...and so much more that I don't care to list.

...and to me the 'holy grail lenses at 1:1 are either the *C/Y zeiss 100/2.8* or the Leica R 100mm macro...

Bolded items are items I have or have used.

As for the other brands that I've mounted on Canon EOS:

Olympus OM (as in bolded above) via adapter

Leica R - via adapter

Pentax K (as I mentioned before)

C/Y Mount Zeiss

Hasselblad C mount (also Zeiss via Zork shift adapter)

Sigma (of course)

Zeiss ZE mount

Contax (adapted to EOS mount by conurus)

...and I'm probably forgetting something  

Back to Chase's question...sort of at least.

Canon used bodies can be had for cheeeeap. I just bought an original Digital Rebel for $190 (used of course). Paired with a used Sigma 105mm($400) or 50mm (~$300 new) and a set of kenko extension tubes ($130)...a very flexible macro kit can be put together for about $600...less than that if all pieces are used. In Canon mount, all of these items are easy to get used in excellent condition.

Chase, I guess it all depends how far you want to go...


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 20, 2009)

Kamakiri:

False? Who me, lol! When making the comparison with a Ferrari, I was referring to the cost, not the ease of use!  I bought my first used Canon bodies further back than I care to remember, but I would not recommend that any neophyte buy used cameras, except from a trusted friend, since they are most unlikerly to be covered by an adequate warranty, and parts are already wearing out. I remember that way back when, most used digital cameras had a problem with 1/1000sec and even 1/500 sec speeds if they hadn't been used regularly by the previous owner. I knew how to test that, of course, but a neophyte wouldn't know that there was a problem, let alone how to test for it. Why did the previous owner get rid of this camera? Maybe he just upgraded or maybe there is an intermnirttent problem with the lens extending mechanism, a common aging problem. Who can tell?

The big attraction for the DSLR for mantid keepers (or at least me!) is that you can get good pix with a real close-up lens, which is not possible with a prosumer camera. I think that somewhere back in June, Grant, you said that the only macro lens for a Canon was the 100mm Canon lens, no? However, for anyone, especially a teen, who is not sure that he will be interested in mantids or cameras for long enough to justify the cost of a DSLR and who lacks Yeatzee's patience and skill in lugging a set of tubes around, look at Drizzt's photographs; he started posting again recently. He uses a Sony DSC H something, I believe, which will cost you a cupla hundred brand new, and one of those clip on macro thingies, the Raynox DCR-250, available at Amazon for a few bucks (O.K. I just checked. $56 new and $45 used). You might want to try and reach his level before investing in more expensive stuff. Sure, such a setup won't make superior 11"x14" prints after the frame has been cropped, but how many of us are doing that?


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 21, 2009)

Kamakiri was it you who had the Raynox also?

Anyways they are extremely hard to use and I would not recomend them to starters. The DOF is so shallow on them.... its ridiculous :blink: 

(regarding the 250 version)

--------------------------------------

On another note that sounds pretty interesting (sigma bodies). You've peaked my curiousity, im gunna check them out :lol: 

(quick side note: I dont understand the cult status of Leica and CZ lenses..... I mean atleast the ones I've tried were nothing special. I tried a CZ 50mm against my 30+ year old humble $30 50mm and I prefered mine! I wanted to love the lens but it just didnt produce the results mine did. Call me crazy :lol: )

--------------------------------------

Oh and thanks for the honorable mention Phil  

I think im going to weigh and take a picture of my setup and post it here..... though I doubt it will compare to the brick that is the Canon 5d :lol: how about we all get a loved one to take a picture of us in action? Im up for it if you guys are  Im curious to see how large kamakiri's setup is and im sure I will learn a lot by just one simple pic.

Edit: Not fair Kamakiri! I thought we were going new not used


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 21, 2009)

yeatzee said:


> Kamakiri was it you who had the Raynox also?Anyways they are extremely hard to use and I would not recomend them to starters. The DOF is so shallow on them.... its ridiculous :blink:
> 
> (regarding the 250 version)
> 
> ...


I agree, Yeatzee, that the Raynox would cause a rank beginner problems, but prosumer cameras have a macro capability with which to start and often, an amazing telephoto. I would not recommend that a beginner with a SLR buy any special lens until they have have mastered what comes with the camera or say a 35-90mm lens to give mod WA and portrait capability. Of course the Raynox has a narrow depth of field; look at it's magnification! It does cause noticeable vignetting, though, so it is a good idea to take pix with the intention of cropping. It works well will a Canon S5, but I can't see anyone using it with the 5D! A $2,500 camera only speaks to a $500 lens

I'm not too proud to make two edits! If you buy a used SLR, do you know its (average) total shutter actuations (Ie, the average number of times that you can click the shutter before it fails)? And if so, have you any idea how many times the shutter on that pawn shop beauty has been actuated? If not, you might want to think twice about buying a used camera! I have heard that on a Rebel, it is something like 5,00 times! Click.


----------



## yeatzee (Dec 21, 2009)

Each shutter (i.e. pentax/canon/etc) is rated for a certain amount of actuations afaik. A free software (i think its called something like photome) will tell you the amount of shutter activations so you can check how honest that pawn shop employee was


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 21, 2009)

Yeah, I've used Exiftool, but the pawnshop guy neither knows nor cares about shutter activations, and most buyers, particularly Kamakiri's newbie used camera buyer will not know either. Why, I bet that there are at least a couple of members on here who don't know about it!


----------



## kamakiri (Dec 21, 2009)

Buying used consumer electronics is an art...but a seller on fleabay with good feedback shouldn't be a problem. But for used equipment I generally buy from other photographers. Many parts of my macro system are used. I think the only new pieces I bought aside from the bodies were the 100L and 100USM. I don't make money with my macro work, so used is okay with me!

Phil, I think you're mistaken about the 100USM being the only lens for Canon!  I believe it was an answer to a lens recommendation thread!

Yeatzee- yes, some of the CZ and alternative mounts are difficult to understand unless you've seen the good ones...That is those that will outresolve the high density 7D. Makes a difference when you pixel peep or really analyze the bokeh qualities.


----------



## PhilinYuma (Dec 21, 2009)

Chase said:


> I will keep in mind most people out there on either camera websites or stores will be bias. I do have a friend i plan on kayaking with over this break that know some about all of this so i think i will pick her brain and see if she could give me a local insight on stores and what not. Will keep my eyes open for that magazine and anything else helpful. Thanks everyone will keep you all posted, Chase P.S. keep all of this helpful info coming!


By all means, Chase, post some pix of the Girl in the Kayak!


----------



## yen_saw (Dec 21, 2009)

kamakiri said:


> Sigma has a unique sensor that is arguably the best at providing per pixel detail. *50mm macro, 105mm macro, 150mm macro*


 Grant you missed out 180 mm  great for 'macroing' bug from distance at field but heavy..... wanna trade the lens with me?  Chase, great info provided by Grant, Tanner, and Phil here! One other thing to add here is if you going for slr, a multi-purpose lens of different ranges like those 20-200mm would be handy from sceneray to portrait photos. Photography is so much easier now compare to the old negative film developing type but it does come with a price so discuss with your parents before getting one. All the best on your camera searching.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 21, 2009)

Thanks for all the info, talked with my friend (kayaking was canceled and changed to hiking, too cold 60's!!). She sad mostly the same things as all of you, she has a point and shoot, an nice one, but she is regretting not getting a DSLR she said that the technology is changing so fast that hers is getting "old" at 2.5 years of age…. I am still up in the air; I need to find a local camera store to go check a few out. Will keep everyone updated, thanks!


----------

