Camera Advice

[Snowflake]

Okay, I do not know what I am thinking of this except I do want to do more photography and I want to improve my lousy camera skills.

Anyone have a recomendation for a starter SLR camera (or kit) that will not break the piggy bank? I honestly do not know where to start.

Since I've never taken a photography course, I think maybe I should invest some time and $$ for this as well, if I am serious about learning more about photography. Anyone else even done this?

[Ghoulish Delight]

You'll find advocates for all of the entry level dSLRs out there. They're all good quality. Several of us on the board have Nikons and love them, you can find great deals on the older D40 line. One drawback to the entry level Nikons vs. some of the other brands is that the Nikons don't have an autofocus motor in the camera itself, so if you want autofocus it limits your lens selection to more expensive lenses that have the focus motor built in. Personally I never plan to collect a large # of lenses so it's not an issue for me.

[Not Afraid]

Costco often has some great deals on the Nikon D's. I love my D 60. The additional lens that I currently covet is the 18-300 VR.

[Ghoulish Delight]

The additional lens that I currently covet is the 18-300 VR.
You and me both, babe.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

There's also the issue of image stabilization, either in the body of the camera or in the lenses you buy...

[Ghoulish Delight]

Nikon calls it "VR" (vibration reduction). Plenty of affordable kits out there that come with VR lenses, but if it's a matter of saving money it's not an absolute necessity. I got along just fine for a while without a VR lens. It matters more on longer lenses (55mm and above), so if you can find a kit with a non-stabilized wide lens and a stabilized long lens that'd be a good balance of cost and features.

[alphabassettgrrl]

I haven't researched DSLRs but I'm sure whatever you get will be fine.

Definitely take a photography class- you'll learn a lot about composition and taking good pictures. Maybe some bits about editing. Once you learn the basics, it's a matter of patience and taking a lot of pictures, then evaluating what you took and what could make it better next time.

Beaches, parks, zoos- great places to take pictures and practice. Digital definitely makes it easier: not only can you delete anything that you don't like, but the feedback is instant or nearly so.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I keep intending to take a class myself, mostly to learn to make better use of all the things an SLR can do over a point and shoot besides take photos faster (in and of itself a beautiful thing). I have figured out about 3 or 4 settings that understand well enough to tweak and get predictable results, but I know I'm under utilizing the camera's abilities. I'm more interested in that than composition and such since, while good to know, in the end it's subjective anyway. I'd save the "how to take good photos" class for after the "how to use the camera" class.

[Snowflake]

I keep intending to take a class myself, mostly to learn to make better use of all the things an SLR can do over a point and shoot besides take photos faster (in and of itself a beautiful thing). I have figured out about 3 or 4 settings that understand well enough to tweak and get predictable results, but I know I'm under utilizing the camera's abilities. I'm more interested in that than composition and such since, while good to know, in the end it's subjective anyway. I'd save the "how to take good photos" class for after the "how to use the camera" class.

Yeah, that is wise advice! Realizing my total inexperience with anything other than a point-and-shoot, this will be optimal use of my brainage.

I will check out costco for cameras, too, thanks NA.

Right now we're in fantasy, but I might have a little money to play with and I can either take a fast trip someplace, or buy a new toy.

[Alex]

The camera isn't that important. Great photographers take great photographs with disposable cameras. Crappy photographers take crappy photographs with high end cameras.

If you have a camera of any type I'd say focus on that first. The joy of photography is (mostly) in the picture not the technology. If this is just a potential hobby, get the most out of what you have and learn how to take the best pictures possible in terms of composition and whatnot then let that naturally take you on to the next steps as you skill up. And if it turns out you're not really that interested you aren't out the hundreds of dollars for equipment you'll not use much.

So my recommendation would be to take a fast trip someplace with your current camera and do the best you can with it versus buying a fancy camera and using it at home.

[DisneyDaniel]

Very well said, Alex! :snap:

The general population is overrun with consumers who buy DSLR cameras, but have no idea how to use it and simply keep it on "Automatic" settings. So, it becomes nothing more than a bigger, more expensive point-and-shoot.

A retail store such as Calumet San Francisco (http://www.calumetphoto.com/ctl?ac.ui.pn=compinfo.CompStoreLocDetail&ac.comp.locID=SF) would be a good place to start if you want to visit a real camera store, versus a Costco or Wal-mart, etc. A camera store will have more models available for you to see, try, hold in your hands, and ask for buying advice from a hopefully knowledgeable person.

All Calumet Photo locations periodically hold events/workshops on various photography topics, such as "Understanding Your DSLR" which cost $50.

But the first step in learning how to use ANY camera is to READ THE MANUAL and then learn by trial and error. It's a basic concept, but most people never even bother.

I have strictly been using Canon cameras, since the days of film, so I usually recommend Canon-brand cameras, since it's what I know and I've owned and used numerous Canon-camera models over the years.

Canon's entry-level DSLR models are the Canon Digital Rebel. You can find older models for less money, but the retail price of a new EOS Rebel XS kit (which comes with a 18-55mm Image Stabilizer lens) costs $599.99.

For a lot of people, the SIZE and WEIGHT of a camera does matter. Some people are more likely to regularly use and carry around a small, light point-and-shoot camera. A DSLR model is potentially a better camera, but will you actually use it frequently if it does not easily fit in a pocket/small bag?

Again, I would go with Alex's advice and try to learn how to use your existing camera to its maximum abilities first, if money is a factor. Also, many point-and-shoot models actually have "Manual" settings if you want to learn by trial-and-error on our own, before investing in a DSLR.

[Snowflake]

Okay, let me ask another question. Is it possible to to do timed night exposures with point and shoot? I do not have my manual handy for the canon SD900 I currently own to check here. But this is something I am interested in playing around with, with my camera on a tripod. If I can do timed exposures with the P&S, I can play before making another investment.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Some yes some no, you'd have to check the manual.

Advancded User Guide (http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/0900001465/PSSD900IXUS900TiCUGad-EN.pdf) should have it.

[DisneyDaniel]

GD beat me to it!

I think Page 55 "Shooting in Long Shutter Mode" in the Advanced Manual would tell you how to adjust it, so the answer is probably "yes."

And you can also download the Basic Manual and other manuals for the Canon PowerShot SD900 at this Canon Website LINK (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&tabact=DownloadDetailTabAct&fcategoryid=323&modelid=14220).

[Snowflake]

O-kay, thanks, I knew I was asking at the right place. I will save my $$ for now and experiment with my point and shoot. I do want to become a better photographer and I already know from experience, shoot 100 pics and you're lucky if you get 5-10 great ones. Look for some experiements soon!

[alphabassettgrrl]

I've used longer-exposure modes on my camera to take night shots. One thing I've learned is to use the timer (shortest on mine is 2seconds) and a tripod, so that pushing the shutter button doesn't blur the photo. Night shots can be a lot of fun.

[innerSpaceman]

The reason I dropped having a camera soon after the digital age arrived is that I'm a nutjob for compositions, odd ones usually, and I take forever to "snap" a photo. Well, what my companions invariably deem "forever" when we're out on adventures worth photographing.

All that careful camera work also takes me out of the adventuring a bit ... but mostly it was because people complained about me taking photographs so slowly.

So once photos became so completely shareable, I let others to the snapping ... and I stayed more in-the-moment of the adventures and fun which rightly inspired photography.


I finally got back into it ... no SLR, though. Just a point-and-shoot for now. Because I doubt I'll ever get back into photography in the same vein as I did in the days of film.

I've barely used my camera. I try to remember to take it places, but I'm not having too much success with that. I'm glad I didn't go all out on a really expensive unit till I can figure out if I can catch the photo bug once more.

[alphabassettgrrl]

I'm trying to balance snapshots with composed photos, and photos of places with photos of people.

Good composition often does take patience and time. If I'm trying to compose good shots, I'd prefer to go where I'm going alone, or with someone who understands.

[innerSpaceman]

One of the things I used to love about film is I'd have to put the photos in albums, which I would be very creative with .... and use albums with wide format pages. That way, I could have a creative layout with Places photos and People photos in the same spread. People are drawn to People photos, and too many gorgeous Places photos seem dry at first glance.

Giving viewers the option to see both kinds at once, and then zero-in on individual shots of either People or Places at their option was a wonderful thing that is pretty much lost in the digital age.

Now we share photos one and a time. Rarely do I ever print any out. If I want to get creative with them, I'll make a slide-slow with music and intricate timing. Music is a fantastic element that was not available with film photos displayed in the real world. But it's rare that more than one image at a time is displayed in the digital world.


A creative trade-off. But the fact remains, people are far more drawn to People photos than Places photos. I miss displaying them together in cool layouts.

[Kevy Baby]

Funny timing on the discussion: Susan just found and dragged out some of my prints from when I took photography classes in college.