RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
In canon world.

www.bhphotovideo.com

canon rebel xsi 631.95 comes with 18-55
sigma 70-300mm 209.


For 850 that is a nice setup that would last a while.
That's pretty much the set up I shoot my stills with. My digital video is also Canon.

Image


Baby "Moose" the day I picked him up at the airport in Houston. Age 8 weeks.

Evan
 
KEH.COM has a lot of great deals on used cameras. As a professional photographer I would use them all of the time.

If you are looking for a great deal on a Nikon, send me a private message. I have a lightly used D70 that takes great pictures with three batteries and a memory card. You would have enough to buy two lenses.

I no longer photograph full time and it was my back up camera, which I never used.

If I had only one lens, a Nikon 18-200dx lens would be my ideal setup with Nikon digital.

Loren
www.lorencrannell.com
 
I have a digital Panasonic DMC FZ20PP Lumix with a 12 time optical zoom I dont know anything about cameras except it takes beautiful pictures and is very easy to use.
 
Lots of good advice. One thing to keep in mind is not only the focal length (ie 300mm), but the f-stop range. The more "powerful" lenses cut down on light, and the lower fstops will allow more light, and faster shutter speeds. (to stop action) You will quickly notice you can get many high-power zoom lenses relatively inexpensive, but try finding the lower fstops, and the price skyrockets. There's a good reason. Quality glass (or most any glass) in the bigger diameter get expensive quick. You can get a very good Nikon 70-300 zoom for around 500, at f4.5. Want a f2.8 and you're gonna pay around 5000 for a 300mm!

The lower fstops are often referred to "fast glass" because with their superior light-gathering, they allow for much faster shutter speeds. The "long-fast glass" like you see on Nat Geo shoots often run as much as a decked-out Gator XUV.

One BIG, no HUGE advantage of D-SLR cameras over the point-n-shoots are the shutter lag times. I love my Canon shur-shot, and it takes fantastic pictures....of anything that's not moving! You push the shutter, then wait up to a couple of seconds for the camera to expose. By then fido is out of sight and you have a picture of his footprints. The DSLRs will reconstitute much faster also, so you don't have to wait for the second shot.

All said and done, you should be able to get a good kit camera from Canon or Nikon with a decent zoom lens in the "prosumer" range for around 1000. Used would probably put you in the 800 range. Canon vs Nikon is like Ford versus GMC. (with Nikon being comparable to the vastly superior GMC!) :p

www. nikonian.org has more info and helpful amateurs and pros than you can imagine. And they don't have a POTUS room to suck you into!:rolleyes:

Good luck, but be careful, photography can become an all-consuming passion, just like dogs,

Dave
 
I love all the great suggestions on what type of camera & lens to get for the average hobby photographer. That is what I would like, however, then where do I start. I have never used anything other than a point & shoot. Where do I go to find out how to get started. There is no where close that would give classes. Is there a website or book that would help? If I had instructions on how to use the equipment, I would pick out a camera & "good" lens & practice, practice, practice.
GS
 
I love all the great suggestions on what type of camera & lens to get for the average hobby photographer. That is what I would like, however, then where do I start. I have never used anything other than a point & shoot. Where do I go to find out how to get started. There is no where close that would give classes. Is there a website or book that would help? If I had instructions on how to use the equipment, I would pick out a camera & "good" lens & practice, practice, practice.
GS

I bet Isaac could teach you a bunch! He and I chatted in Texas last winter about photgraphy. He has an awesome set up!
 
You are right, Mike. Problem is, training seems to be a priority with time when we are with Isaac. You get what you pay for & even I know training comes first. I will, however enlist his help over the winter if I get my hobby started. For now, I do not see him much.
 
Where's Yardley??
Good question. Jeff is very knowledgeable about this topic. It shows in his work. I'm sure he has some good suggestions. I would love to have a sit-down with him about it sometime.

Evan
 
Buying the best lens will always yield better pictures than a top of the line camera with cheap glass.

I don't think most people need f/2.8 lenses, except for a 50mm lens. I have a 28-70 f/2.8, 15-35mm f/2.8, and a 70-200mm f/2.8. Along with my two pro bodies, flashes, and it will weight around 35 pounds.

I have had great great results with a Nikon 28-105mm 3.5-5.6 lens that had a macro feature. At the time it was about $350 dollars and it sure beats the $7k I have invested in all of my lenses. On a family trip or adventerous vacation I will take 2 cameras and the 28-105mm lens and be done with it.

Loren
 
I am looking for a camera that would take some good action photos. I have seen several great photos on this form so I know you guys have a good idea about cameras. Does anyone have any suggestions?

What I am looking for is a camera that will zoom a good distance, take action photos(dog splasing in the water and kids softball games), and the price is not too high.


Some friends have suggested the Nikon D70?

Also what kind of lens do you suggest

Thanks Guys and Gals
Check out the digital grin forum.There is alot of good camera info there.While you're there,check out our GoodDawgs site on SmugMug.We use a Canon EOS30D.I mostly use a 28-135 lens but sometimes use a 70-300 zoom.

http://www.dgrin.com/
http://www.smugmug.com/
 
Scott Kelby writes some extremely wonderful books on digital photography. You can find them on Amazon or Barnes & Noble. The first two volumes are awesome and will help you tremendously to get the most out of your digital camera -- particularly if you buy Canon or Nikon which he covers in detail. His approach is one of teaching you like a friend standing next to you would teach you -- like how to do use your camera's features to get specific effects or types of shots.

If you buy a nice camera setup, you will probably want to use photoshop (or elements) or Adobe Lightroom to maintain your photo library and edit. I use lightroom for the the filing system (library) and most editing but send edit in photoshop (elements) if I need to do anything special (usually removing a utility pole or other unwanted image). If you use Lightroom, changes you make to your photo are not overwriting the original which is a big deal, I learned the hard way -- as each time you edit a photo (crop, change contrast, sharpen, resize, etc) then save it, you degrade the image. Some of my older images are basically unusable because of this.

There are great tutorial books available on using these programs as well.

There are also great books on most of the pro-sumer Nikon and Canon cameras which has helped me tremendously to get more out of my camera (Nikon D80) and helped me decide what accessories to buy.
 
Where's Yardley??
Puppy duty. A day late but just perfect. My girl went into labor yesterday morning and began popping out new mouths at 2:20 in the afternoon. It took a while, but the final count was 12! Not bad for a girl who normally weighs in at 58-59 pounds.

The advice has been great on lenses. However, I wouldn't discount the body too much. It's important to have a body that will achieve focus quickly and allow you to take a picture as soon as you press the button. That knocks out all but the better digital bodies. The one advantage to getting a new body, as opposed to a used, is that the new processors support much higher "film" speeds with very little noise. That is particularly useful for action shots where you may want shutter speeds of 1/1000 second. If you have the opportunity to test the body and lens together, try focusing on the license plates of moving cars to see how well you can get clear shots.

Spend the time to learn to use RAW files. Too many people spend the money to get a great set up only to throw away much of that quality by using JPEG image files.
 
Tell me more, Jeff. I'm an old film guy, so digital is new ground for me. I'm stuck in jpeg's. They're nice, but I really don't fully understand RAW files.

Image


Mike Castelli and "Haley" (2 Qual wins)

I know this could be better looking with the camera I have. I just don't quite know where to go from here.

Evan
 
Tell me more, Jeff. I'm an old film guy, so digital is new ground for me. I'm stuck in jpeg's. They're nice, but I really don't fully understand RAW files.

Image


Mike Castelli and "Haley" (2 Qual wins)

I know this could be better looking with the camera I have. I just don't quite know where to go from here.

Evan
If you think of it, when you are setting the ISO (film speed) or the white balance on the camera, you are actually only making a software adjustment in how the camera interprets what is being transmitted by the sensor. In a JPEG file you are only saving that interpreted version of what the sensor recorded. In addition, JPEG's use a "lossy" file compression technique, which means that you are losing detail every time you save the file (sort of like photocopying photocopies). The first loss occurs in the camera. By the time you have opened and edited the file for printing you are already working with a second generation file with a noticeable loss of detail and color depth.

In a RAW file you are saving all the data captured by the sensor in a non-losdsy format. As a consequence, when you load the RAW file in your image editing software (I use Photoshop, but you can get the same effects from Photoshop Elements, Nikon NX, etc.), you can dynamically set these adjustments by modifying the white balance, adjusting the exposure by +/- 2-3 f/stops, etc. Because you are working with all the information captured by the sensor, these adjustments have few negative consequences in image quality that you would experience by trying the same thing with a JPEG file.

The downside of working with RAW images is that they are larger -- 13 megabytes in my camera vs. half that for JPEG's -- and require more specialized software to process with drivers specific to your camera since each sensor records information in a slightly different way.

EDIT: On your sample photo, the "problem" (not really but...) is that in exposing for the sky, you have blown out the white of the shirt. With RAW fils, you could actually convert the photo twice: once the way you have it here and once with the exposure set to retain detail in the shirt. By combining those two files in Photoshop you could create what is called a high dynamic range photo (HDR) where both the highlights and the shadows would be in better balance. In a photo like this I would also use a flash to brng out the light in both the handler's and dog's eyes.
 
Scott Kelby writes some extremely wonderful books on digital photography. You can find them on Amazon or Barnes & Noble. The first two volumes are awesome and will help you tremendously to get the most out of your digital camera -- particularly if you buy Canon or Nikon which he covers in detail. His approach is one of teaching you like a friend standing next to you would teach you -- like how to do use your camera's features to get specific effects or types of shots.

If you buy a nice camera setup, you will probably want to use photoshop (or elements) or Adobe Lightroom to maintain your photo library and edit. I use lightroom for the the filing system (library) and most editing but send edit in photoshop (elements) if I need to do anything special (usually removing a utility pole or other unwanted image). If you use Lightroom, changes you make to your photo are not overwriting the original which is a big deal, I learned the hard way -- as each time you edit a photo (crop, change contrast, sharpen, resize, etc) then save it, you degrade the image. Some of my older images are basically unusable because of this.

There are great tutorial books available on using these programs as well.

There are also great books on most of the pro-sumer Nikon and Canon cameras which has helped me tremendously to get more out of my camera (Nikon D80) and helped me decide what accessories to buy.
Thank you--I will look for these books today. Starting from the beginning, this all seems overwhelming for me, but I am going to give it a try.
 
I agree with the post regarding the choice of the body being important..within reason. As I get more adept with my Nikon D80, I sometimes wish I would have bought even more camera. I shoot a lot of continuous, and I would like to get more than 3 successive that my D80 provides (which is still wonderful), for example. Other things too.

But the BIGGEST reason to pay attention to your body decision is that the layout needs to be comfortable and make sense for you. You will probably start out with using your beautiful new camera as a point and shoot, but once you start learning and experimenting, you will quickly want to do things like varying aperture or shutter or ISO, changing the flash settings, etc. Some cameras, even within Nikon and Canon families, are hugely different in how intuitive (which is relative, I know) this stuff is. Frankly, the pocket point and shoots have many of these capabilities too, but they are so buried in menus that you are certain to miss the shot if you even attempt to change these things on the fly. My D80 is laid out nicely. There are many that are. But take the time to check this out, because it is a shame to spend a lot of money on a camera body that is so cumbersome to use that you have to use AUTO mode forever.
 
It sounds worse than it is.

But if you want to stop action at trials and take animal photos, you need a somewhat decent camera. There are probably some that are just as effective as Nikon and Canon but they are recognized as the big names if not the best (all the pros use one or the other). It sounds like the camera body you are looking at would be called the pro-sumer range. D70, D80, D90 which is the latest. The Rebel is a little below this and the D3xx range is above this. A great all round lens to start with is the 70-200mm VR. I think it is a 3.5 aperture (someone correct me) all the way through which makes it a pretty fast lens for the money. I think it can be had for under 1K now? but I think that is out of your intended budget for right now? The reason you want those little numbers for aperture is to shoot in low light. It is not possible to have those little numbers be too small .... and the smaller they are, the more expensive the lens is ... and I mean $$$$$. Some of the cheaper zooms (like my 300mm/$600) is 4.5 - 5.6 meaning the fastest is 4.5 (not all that fast) but when I am zoomed in tight, the lens lets in very little light (5.6) and I need BRIGHT light to get that kind of distance shooting. This is part of the reason why folks are advising -- strongly and correctly -- that the lens decisions are HUGE. They are. There is little you can do if there is not enough light for your lens except increase the ISO which works well to a point but introduces other problems (noise) into your photo.

If you stick with Nikon D- or Canon's equivalent range, you will have a wide range of published material written specifically to help you make the most out of your camera selection.

You can start out with a good body and a decent lens in the $800 range I think you mentioned. But the really good lenses will have to come a little later. And you won't touch anything at f2.8 or under in your budget yet. You are in good company, though -- many of us (including me) is still waiting for that lens (in one size or another)! You can shop online and get some great info at www.bhphoto.com.
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts