Ive been wondering what it would cost to get into photography? Like i want to travel and pinstripe, and i could photograph cars and the like while i do that, what would be the best stuff to buy, what would it cost, whats best camera brand to buy, and the like. For Now 1 shot
you can spend more money than you have on equipment, but you can do what you need pretty reasonable. are you looking into film or digital? and what will the photos be used for? info like that would help others help you....
I agree with thre squirrel. I shoot Canon. I'm into my 35MM equipment for right at a grand but for photo quality pics the digital I need is right @ a grand for just the body then you'll need a photo quality printer etc. To shoot film quality pics digital gets real expensive real fast.
I got almost $2000 into my Canon digital equipment and it is still not the best out there. i have the flash, extra telephoto lenses. I picked up a Canon Rebel with the standard lens and warranty for $1200. 8bills in misc equip. Pro Software for this also is expensive and takes time to learn. If I was to make a suggestion look into the Canon Xti at $799.00. My freind at work does magazine layouts and has suggested this for the price and the professional quality it delivers. It rivals the Canon 10 and 20D. Amazon has field guide books on all Canon cameras to learn.. I just bought mine for family photos and car show photos for my own collection. Good Luck..
I'm also in the Canon camp. I have about $6000 in film equipment and am just now switching over to digital with a 30D. Try and decide what you are going to do with it. Are these going to be photos for yourself, for a website or are you going to try and sell them for print. For car shows I would suggest a short zoom lens, like a 24mm to 70mm, the faster the better (lower f number) for a film camera or a full frame digital SLR. Most entry level digital SLRs have a less than full frame sensor so the lenses are essentially longer. In that case a good short zoom for car shows would be about 17mm to 40mm. There is lots of info out there, read, read, read. My advice is get a decent body, and save money for top quality lenses. The lens technology changes far slower that the body technology so you won't get behind the curve so quickly. Cheers, Kurt (still working on scanning my 20,000+ slides of cars)
Just looking at a Canon Rebel also, the new 10.2mp one can be had for around $1000 with a lens or sometimes 2.... www.buydig.com has some smokin' deals.
Well, you are going to get more opinions than you could have possibly hoped for. Asking a photog which camera system is best is kinda like asking which is better, Ford or Chevy. It also depends allot on your budget, how many pics you will be taking per year (if you are doing this as either a business or hobby it will come into play) and what you want to do with them once you take them. For a decent digital rig: Camera body – $1200 Lenses – $1200-2500 Software – $1000 Total start-up for a basic digital rig – $3400 - 4400 (most pros I know have hundreds of thousands in gear) Plus the constant merry-go-round of built in consumerism of any electronic item as well as the skyrocketing costs of ink and paper, though I would advise against printing allot at home. Just get the images printed at your local lab or 1hr photo place. They will look better and cost less than doing it at home. Now if you want the most bang for your buck, you can't beat film, no matter what the guy behind the photo counter will say. You can pick up 35mm and Medium Format cameras for pennies on the dollar, lenses are cheap and plentiful and if you hunt around enough you can find processing for next to nothing in allot of major cities, you just need to look to find the best deal (like any businessman would). Now I am a professional photog who shoots allot of digital AND allot of film, if I where just starting out again, I would start with film. Plus you will find that when you are paying money every time you press the shutter, you put a little more thought into the composition and the subject ; ) Well, that's my little elevator speech on the subject, good luck with whatever you decide and I hope I helped a little.
I am also a cannon guy and right rown cannon's put out the rebel xti which is great for someone just getting into digital photography. When i started i was in about 2600 including the labtop if you want to be mobile.
Just bought a Canon XTi... seems to be a good camera.. (not great but good enough). I would plan on $3000 min that is starting with a $900 camera.. you will need more lens, flashes, larger battery packs plus a number of other items. plus the time to learn to use the equipment propertly, sure you can point and shot but that does not get the good shots. as for getting work published. its not easy and does not pay that much. (expect a payback in about 10 yrs.. but you will have to upgrade the equipment once or twice by then). So do it because you love it.. not as a business.. I would suggest buying a good camera and starting a website (like a few of us have on here) to see how much work goes into shooting the pic. (shooting an event and pinstriping does not allow you much time for stripping..). Taking the pic is only part of it.. there is alot of work behind the scene once you get home. I know when I am at an event shooting pictures, its an all day thing, just ask anyone who tries to find me.. never at my car.. always out looking for the right cars, right light and waiting for little to no people standing in the way. Link, tells it right, using film initially really helps you figure out what to shoot (as it cost you money) and what not to shoot. I have a collection of over 15,000 car show film photos from the last 15 yrs.. you learn how to shoot and not waste.. but that is not what you want. you can start digital and go from there.
It all depends on what you want to do. If you want to make snapshots of your artwork for the web or to print out as a 4x6, then you don't need much. A decent digital point and shoot will get you there. If you want to get serious, there is no limit to how much you can invest. I figure I could have built my dragster by now with what I have invested in camera equipment. Although I have been shooting since the sixties and learned on film with manual exposure, I think you should start out digital these days unless you just want to use film for artistic reasons.
My 2 cents... You can buy a Canon 10D for about $350.00. For the most part it is more about image clearity and quality, not mega-pixels. Spend the money on a quality lens instead. The trap most people fall into is that they think the high dollar gear will make them a better photographer and it is not true. Check the lens reviews. Price alone won't tell you the story. A 24mm may be really close to a 20mm and the price may be more on the 20mm, but the quality may be much better on the cheaper 24mm. Stick with new primes and you will be good... Go with "L" series canon lenses and you will be set for life. Hyfire
My $.02. I'm a professional who has thousands in digital and lots of film stuff collecting dust. If you just want to do***ent your travels and pinstipping then you don't need the quality equipment that you do if you want to sell your photography product. When you do your pinstripe work...do you use a 2" brush from K-mart or a special brush for pinstipe work? ...same with cameras. digital is harder to get "correct" exposure and it is less forgiving than film but it's nice to be able to see what you have composition wise without having to wait an hour for processing of film. Plus now you can upload your images to Wal-Mart or a ton of other places and get photos printed in an hour and at less colst than printing them yourself. As Link said above, as a pro I am forever getting new editions of my equipment and then the older (1 year) stuff goes on Ebay so you can find some bargains out there if you decide what you want to do.
unless you have a darkroom digital is the only way to go. then you get yourself some photo editing software and enhance your pics on the computer. get the best shortest lens you can afford. if you are taking pics at a car show everybody and thier brother will want to walk in front of you. the closer you are to the car the better it will be. photography is more about having a good eye and knowing about what your camera can do than big dollar equipment. up until 1990 (?) when I bought my Canon EOS 650 (film) camara I used a Lordox fully manual camera my uncle bought back around 1960, along with a light meter of the same vintage. one thing I have heard from many people over the years when looking at my car show pics is "that camera takes good pictures". that always gives me a chuckle. I take good pictures.. not the camera. I have a canon digital rebel now. 8 megapixel. could have spent a bunch less and other than a 20 x 30 print the resuts would be pretty much the same
The Canon 20 D has served me well for over two years, I spent maybe two grand on the equipment, (body, lens, filter, batteries and memory cards). I also use a Pelican case to protect everything, those cases are crucial when travelling you can't break them and they are water tight and float. Canon all the way.
Digital, and the purpouse, would be for professional photographing, I want it to look like it does in the magazines and stuff.
I personally don't like any of the digital SLRs I can afford, so I've stuck with 35mm for years. You can get an EXCELLENT 35mm camera that will put a corresponding digital camera to shame it features and flexibility. I learned shooting film cameras and greatly prefer them to digital, I have a better handle on exposure settings and tricks. I used to do lots of high speed photography as well, and at least last time I looked at digital bodies, none except the super pricy ones even came close to the frames/sec rate of my 35mm's, even my old one. You can get excellent, nice condition used 35mm equipment for a song now that so many people think they are "upgrading" to digital. A good beginning setup would be a good 35mm body of the manufacturer of your choice (this is a very personal decision, they all have the same BASIC features, but certain brands lend themselves better to the user than others), a nice fixed focal length lens or 2 (a good 50mm lens is a GREAT cheap investment). Fixed focal length lens almost ALWAYS have lower numeric f-stops which will let you get by without a flash more often, which would be very benefical to someone taking up-close pictures of shiney pinstriping. A nice zoom is always handy to have, as well as a good flash. I personally carry in my bag a Canon A2E, a Canon A2, and a motor-driven Canon A1. The older manual focus cameras are built like brick-****houses and may be a good option for someone using it in normal situations, there are HUGE numbers of lenses available for almost nothing, and they're optical quality is just as good as any modern piece. The lenses I carry are (IIRC), for the EOS's, a 50mm f/1.4 fixed length and a 20-something to like 90 zoomer. For my A1 I have a 50mm f/1.4, a 24mm f/2.something, a 70-210 telephoto, and a 35-105 zoom (great lens, btw, probably my favorite for any camera). I love having my A1 still, it's a great camera that is still extremely capable, and could be tossed off a building and still used, as well as the lens. Something like my A2s may be a good choice for you, they have a 5 point focus system (the E in the A2E means eye, it focus at whichever you are looking at, a feature works great and I LOVE!). It also has a blistering max shutter speed, fast film advance, and a true spot meter (you can make it meter based on a very small fraction of the view, like 1 or 2% in the center). They're built well, easy to find, cheap, and are a very solid feeling camera (I have vertical grips on both mine, which is WELL worth it, and the ones for the A2 pretty much allow full shooting control when used vertically). The eye control is great feature though, my fiance uses the A2 mostly where I use the A2E; she let typically leaves it set so it decides where to focus, I use the eye control, and mine typically come out better because of it. When buying zoom lenses, make SURE you get lenses that DON'T rotate the lens when you adjust the zoom. Those are cheap lenses that I HATE! You can't use a polarizing filter effectively on them, unless you adjust it after you adjust the zoom, and when doing outdoor photography I almost always use a polarizer. With Canons, make sure to spring for the Ultrasonic focus motors too, they're heads and shoulders a better lens that the cheap ones that typically come in the kits. Make EBay your friend and you can get a GREAT 35mm setup with QUALITY pieces for less than a grand. I know alot of guys would disagree, but I would stay away from the Rebels and whatever the other brands equivilant are, as you mature with your camera use you will find that they aren't nearly as versitile and will limit what you can ultimately do. Not to mention they don't have alot of features that I look for in a camera, they're essentially a point and shoot SLR.
Ah great thanks allot! Can you get the same quality pics out of a film camera that you can a digital camera?
Comparing film and digital is like comparing Oil and Water color, they both capture an image but in 2 totally different ways and niether better than the other. So without trying to start a film vs. digital debate... Yes and allot of times they come out better. Film is still the standard by which ALL digital cameras area compared. Peroid. If you want to compare megapixels, an 35mm piece of film when scanned corectly (i.e. on a dedicated film scanner, not by the 18 year old kid at the walmart with a ****py Fuji Frontier) it will yield about 12 MP, a piece of medium format film will generally yield about 40 MP of info. Also as stated many digital cameras use what is called an "APS" sized sensor. Meaning that the sensor in the camera is the size of a piece of Kodak APS film frame or roughly 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame. Remember that is all photography wether it is film or digital the bigger the sensor or piece of film recording the image the better. This means that if you want to go big, you better be packing the resolution to do it with. Also the one major factor that keeps me using film for allot of things is that I can always re-scan at a larger scale with correct resolution and push it to a larger scale with better results than with digital. Digital is always restricted to the format that it was nativley captured in. Meaning a 8 MP image will ALWAYS be an 8MP image, where as a piece of film can be scanned and digitally printed with far better results than a re-sampled digital image. Don't get me wrong, I like digital allot, but a 30 year old film camera can still whip the snot out of most sub $2k DSLRs out of the box. I could go on a huge diatribe about the strenghths and short commings of both. But it comes down to what is right for you. Both film and digital photography can yield wonderful images. It just comes down to prefernce and budget.
I would stay away from Ebay for your camera, as you may get a overseas unit. B&H camera is one of the cheaper camera shops. they do sell on ebay and online
I wouldn't buy anything on eBay unless it was under $50 (my mad money limit). Buying a quality camera on eBay is like buying a diamond ring at a swap meet... I shoot a lot of cars at rod runs and car shows. This has to be the most difficult lighting challenge there is. Cars under trees, half-shaded, out in the sun, etc. The little instant digital cameras run out of horsepower in this environment, so a SLR is the way to go. I run a Canon 20D. Nikons SLR's are just as good, so use whatever your comfortable with. The reason SLR's are desireable is that you need to add filters and effects to the front of the lens. The only two I use now are the circular polarizer, and the star effect filter. The reason for the circular polorizer is to get rid of reflections in the car paint, and the windows. This is very handy when cars are all parked next to each other close. The star filter is dramatic in the early morning, evening, and night lights. Another important thing to consider is ISO speed. The Canon I use makes daytime out of night, and I can run without flash at hard lighted car shows (ISO 1600 and 3200 for example). Finally, many photo's are taken at human eye level. This get's boring after about 5 shots. I like to do cat eye level, dog eye level, and bird level to vary the shots. None of this is original, it's all been done a million times by a million photographers. Just start taking pictures and study the result when you get home. The lens I use exclusively anymore, is my Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8 lens. That ****er is wide, and you can really get close to your models and subjects. "Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect" -- Edsel Ford
I would first start with a lessor quality (read less $$) digital SLR (Nikon D70s, Canon Rebel XTi) both of these can be had with a 18-70 or an 18-55 zoom lens, a dedicated flash (don't rely on the built in ones) You should be able to get one of the above kits for under 2K. Then start taking images. Get so you like what you see on the screen when you upload your images. Ask your buddies to let you take pictures of their cars in a park and offer them copies for your cost plus a little extra (don't be greedy with friends and while learning.) After a while as your skills progress, others will start to notice and start asking you to take pictures for them...you are on your way. After a while you will start to say..."I wish I had this lens etc." In about a year a new version of your camera will come out...then buy the next higher level that has the options you need...if you stay in the same family you will still be able to use your lenses and flash. Keep the old body for a back up and keep expanding your camera bag as your skills and your needs increase.
Aint that the truth??? However, there are a couple decent sellers out there, there's quite a few photo stores that use Ebay to unload overstock or old stock. Ask around, do research. I've bought a lot of stuff from Adorama myself and get some good deals. All about shopping around. Get an idea what you want, then goto one of the price comparison sites, like pricegrabber.com or the like, and see who's got it for less. Always buy new when dealing with modern Digital equipment, you want that warranty, believe me! I'm just a serious hobbyist, so dont take my word as gold here, just givin a bit of my personal insight. I bought a Canon Digital Rebel XT when they hit the market and have been very happy with it. I found the lense it comes with (18-55mm) is a total pice of ****, so I picked up a Tameron 18-200mm zoom and have found I almost never change it out regardless of what I'm shooting. Add on a couple good Digital quality filters, like the aforementioned polarizer, and you're golden in the lense department. I bought a good flash with auto metering & zoom & after about a month of studies with 4 enginers and a circus midget I figgured out all of the controls on the camera and flash & am loving it. the down side? Cost!! An entry level pro camera setup is not cheap. Rebel XT: $1100 Tameron 18-200mm lense: $280 Metz auto flash unit: $600 And digital grade filters can go for anywhere from $40 to $90 a pop (for a pice of gl***!!). Cant forget software that can handle the load, Adobe PhotoShop is the **** for editing & fixing errors, the average user can get by great with PhotoShop Elements tho, no need to drop a paycheck on the full version. Adobe is working on a product at the moment called LightRoom that should be on the market soon. You can download the beta version now & play with the library/sorting features, awesome color tools, and basic editing capabilities, should retail for about $2-300. In the end it's up to what you want to do with it. To someone like me, that while I dont get paid for my work, but still take it very seriously, it's worth it to drop $2-3K. For the generic shutterbug that likes to take snapshots here & there,... Man, thats alot of car parts!!
ME TOO ME TOO! Well as an AMETUER I have lots of cameras. Most of what I show here is just a small 3mg digi, but I have learned to use it well. I use it for do***enting stuff and family snapshots. But my artistic stuff I use some old 35mm. I have 3 of them at $105 total invested. My best of these I got for free. I could probably get 2 more from my dad but my sister buried them in storage. Most of my 35mm stuff I stick with a 50mm lens, get some good close up detail with it. A few bucks at Walmart for development, and they charge less for prints than digi pics. Ask around maybe someone will just give you a 35mm camera.
**** digital...it costs me $5 to have a roll of film developed and put on a CD at wal-mart and i'm sure it's not much more at other places. i'm a fairly serious amateur photographer and i have a few cameras but my two favorites are the minolta XG-m and the nikon EM. they are both have full manual and auto settings and have both a microprism and split screen focal systems, which makes it really great for focusing fast and getting the right depth of field. they can be had relatively cheap on ebay and all over. i've played with a ton of cameras and i just haven't found many new ones that have the right feel like these do. kinda like the old cars accessories are still readily availble for both ch***is as well. just because everyone says you need to spend a good chunk of change on this ****, doesn't mean you have to...hell, everyone says hondas are good cars but we know better now!
Let me jump in and ask a question as I'm in the process of buying this type of camera. What is everyones input on pixels? I'm considering 2 cameras, one has 6.1mp(Nikon D70) and the other 8.2mp(Canon 20D). I'd like to take pictures that some day I can make into posters to possibly sell, this isn't my only purpose for a nice camera, $$ are a consideration and the Nikon is more in my price range, but I also don't want to have to upgrade in the near future because I didn't get enough camera. Now I know the more is better when you want to print large, but will I be able to print out very good quality poster sized pictures with a 6.1mp camera?
The Jalopy Journal
