New to pro photography

[tchan03]

HI I am new to pro photography I never used SLR before
But with a brief research on Google. Now i am thinking about buying Canon Rebel XTi 10.01 MP, with Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens.

My main purpose is to take photos of babies(1 year old) , both indoor and outdoor. Pls tell me if i should use a cheaper or more expensive len .
Of course i try to use as little as equipment but you think i really should buy lighting equipment, pls let me know.

Generally how long should i expect to learn to be quite good at it?

Thanks very much


TC

 

[jann1033]

i am guessing you mean you want to take photos of your baby rather than becoming a pro photographer.
there was a thread not long ago on how some claimed to be pro photographers but only used the auto setting. using the auto on the xti is basically like using a point and shoot as far as needing to understand exposure etc. so that shouldn't take long.

but how long it takes to get really good at photography? most photographers whose work i personally drool over have been doing it for many decades. since you are at square one, you probably could become proficient enough to know how to use your camera ( ie not in auto)in 6 months to a yr if you practice and read a lot but to become really "good" would take a whole lot longer

imo you should always buy the best lens you can afford. personally i look for at least in the 9.5 ratings on something like fred miranda. anything less i'm never happy with and wish i'd saved my money but some of that depends on what you expect from the lens. i drives me nuts when it's not sharp since imo it ruins the photo and nothing you can do about it. even excellent technique and post processing for hours isn't going to consistently give you a good photo from a lousy lens.
i don't have personal experience with that lens but a couple reviews i read mentioned it's really sharpest around f8. if so i would think you would need lighting for indoors for sure

 

[wdwwishes]

I had a film SLR eons ago. My first digitla was a Canon Power Shot G5 but I got tired of it quickly and got the Rebel xTi in 2004. After 5 years of using it, I'm getting ready to move on to the EOS 5D (way excited about that!). I think you'll like the xTi. You can get great shots with the auto settings while you learn about the camera. Canon has some great on line photography info. Do a google search for Enjoy! Digital SLR Camera and it should take you there. Very basic, easy to understand info. Congrats on your purchase and have fun with the camera.

 

[tchan03]

Let me clarify further. I didnt buy SLR yet, but there is Canon Rebel XTi camera (Body only) on sale. Since i knpw nothing about SLR, as a beginner, i have no idea what Canon Lens to buy to complement this Xti body. I am looking at mid-range one maybe Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens( not too pricey, not the very low-end either)

I currently use Canon SD1100IS point and shoot camera, but at times still have problem taking clear photos of my active baby.

 

[Master Mason]

Let me clarify further. I didnt buy SLR yet, but there is Canon Rebel XTi camera (Body only) on sale. Since i knpw nothing about SLR, as a beginner, i have no idea what Canon Lens to buy to complement this Xti body. I am looking at mid-range one maybe Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens( not too pricey, not the very low-end either)

I currently use Canon SD1100IS point and shoot camera, but at times still have problem taking clear photos of my active baby.

there are soooo many things that go into taking a picture, especially of a fast moving kid. The lens your looking for is not particularly fast, if your lighting isn't good, that could cause issues, also the XTi is about 3 generations ago, so while it is a good camera and very capable, it is also not the latest and greatest so there are better cameras available as well.

 

[PhotobearSam]

Have you thought about getting the Canon Xs or the Xsi?


and enroll in a class for beginners or join a Photo club where you can get some insight. It's the only way to truly improve your shooting. An understanding of the basics is necessary. You could have the "Best" camera in the world with the best lenses but without knowledge they are not worth it at all.

I would join the photo club even before I would buy the Camera. They could teach you a ton about your Point and shoot that may change your mind.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Tuffcookie]

tchan03, Are you the one that had the beautiful wedding at WDW?

If so, I LOVED your pictures!

TC

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I've put my thoughts in red.

HI I am new to pro photography I never used SLR before
But with a brief research on Google. Now i am thinking about buying Canon Rebel XTi 10.01 MP, with Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens.
It behooves you to do more than brief research before buying your system. It took me months of study before making a decision, YMMV. You should also go into the stores and try to hold your choices and see if the controls feel intuitive, etc. Ideally, you want to make the right decision from the outset.

My main purpose is to take photos of babies(1 year old) , both indoor and outdoor. Pls tell me if i should use a cheaper or more expensive len .
Of course i try to use as little as equipment but you think i really should buy lighting equipment, pls let me know.
At some point an external flash comes in quite handy. But as for lenses, most feel that that's where your money should "really" be spent. A lens with a large aperture, ie a "fast" lens, will allow you to take better pictures in low light without a flash, and of moving subjects, like children. (Of course, a large part of that is technique, also.) These can be quite expensive. A "kit lens" will get you started and learning, but at some point you'll probably want a faster lens. Question is if it makes more sense to just get that in the first place. (Most probably get the kits.)

Lenses come in differing focal lengths so if you're only going to get one, it's good if it covers a good range. Most people wind up getting a few for different purposes. Also be aware that entry level Canon bodies do not have Image Stabilization in the camera body, so you should consider buying image stabilized lenses. These cost more than non IS lenses.

Generally how long should i expect to learn to be quite good at it?
This is the burning question, LOL. It depends how much time you put into it but I agree that anywhere from six to eighteen months should get you to a pretty good place if you continue to study and practice a lot. Of course, as mentioned before, some people keep it in auto, don't study at all, and are happy with that. It depends what you want to get out of it and what you want your pictures to look like two years from now.

I'll link a thread you may find helpful. http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1794070&referrerid=70088

 

[jann1033]

one thing, image stabilization only helps if you move the camera, it won't help if the child/subject is moving. IS is mostly beneficially in that it lets you use a slower shutter speed without having your photos look blurry. slower the shutter speed = longer the shutter is actually open so more you will notice blur from your hand shaking holding the camera. normally you use a shutter speed at least equal to the length of your lens ie 200mm lens =200 shutter speed to help prevent that( shutter speed is how long the shutter stays open, actually a fraction so 1/200 of a second = the shutter is open 1/200 of a sec. but it could be shown as "200" in your camera)

to stop the "child movement" you usually need about 500 shutter speed(1/500 of a second rule of thumb, actually varies) which is where the low light lens helps, the more you can open the aperture of the lens( the "hole " that lets the light in) the faster a shutter speed you can use (very very very simply put, proper exposure is determined by how much light comes into the camera so bigger hole lets light in faster hence you can let the shutter open for a shorter time,voila, (since it's a fraction remember), faster shutter speed)

a inexpensive decent low light lens for some portraits ( not really close, more full body for a baby i think) would be the canon 50mm f1.8 . it's not IS but if you don't get one with an auto focus problem it's really sharp ( mine doesn't autofocus well at f1.8 to about f4 or so . i would take the camera body to a local camera store and take some shots with the lens you are going to purchase to make sure it auto focuses right. otherwise the photos for low light will not be sharp unless you manual focus which is a pain with a moving baby)
some really like the new canon 50-250 f4-5.6 IS, at around $250 or the 70-300 is f4-5.6 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx( in the $400s i think) lens is supposed to be really good so if you used that in conjunction with the 50mm f1.8 you'd have a nice zoom plus decent lower light. or the tamron 28-75 f2.8 is about $350 and you'd have low light, just not much zoom but the 70 would probably be plenty for baby faces.http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-28-75mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-Lens-Review.aspx with a crop camera like the canon eos system, you get a little more appearance of distance ie, a 200mm lens looks like a 320 mm ( sort of, won't have all the detail a normal 320mm would have) ( same site as linked would have reviews for the other two probably

course now to really confuse you, the f stop( size of the aperture) is a fraction too so the bigger the number the smaller the actual opening...so you want a lens with a small f stop( 1.8 to 4 ish) for a lens that is good in low light ie a "fast lens"

 

[tchan03]

tchan03, Are you the one that had the beautiful wedding at WDW?

If so, I LOVED your pictures!

TC

Wow I haven't posted much lately. You still remember me!! haha

I want to capture more valuable moments of my child .

 

[DizzyV6P]

Canon forum: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/
That will give you everything you need to know about lenses.
That being said.

You want something with decent low-light. That means something w/ a lower f #. The lower the number, the wider the lens opens up.

As mentioned by jann, the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 ($350) is good.
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 ($400) is also good. It gives you a wider look at the expense of distance. Those are the two decenly reasonably priced "low-light" lenses.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is also good. At $80-$90 per lens, its a bargain and almost everyone who owns a Canon SLR has one in their bag.

If you have $900, Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS (image stablization) is the king of the hill.

Decisions, decisions

 

[tchan03]

In my city, there's a good deal on "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP DSLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit "

It includes a len : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II <--Would that be good enough for beginner?

 

[DesertBell]

I started out with that kit (except I have the XSI), and I found that the lens was fine except that it didn't zoom in enough for me. It's a great little camera, and if you like how it feels in your hands I say, go for it. Just be prepared for the possibility of investing a LOT more on camera equipment in the future.

 

[handicap18]

In my city, there's a good deal on "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP DSLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit "

It includes a len : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II <--Would that be good enough for beginner?

For a beginner, yes. But I would bet that you'd soon want more lenses. This set up will do better than PnS camera's in lower light, but you can do even better. That 18-55mm is a basic kit lens. For its price range/class it is good. It will get you started. It doesn't have a long reach, but will do for most everyday stuff.

Many people will combine this with a telephoto lens like a 50-200mm or 70-300mm lens. So would also recommend the 50mm f/1.8 lens for low light stuff and will do excellent for portraits combined with a good speedlight flash. That 50mm lens is very affordable (in lens world) at about $85.

After that, well, there are hundreds if not thousands of lens options based on your skill, budget and shooting style. Its almost endless.

 

[PhotobearSam]

In my city, there's a good deal on "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP DSLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit "

It includes a len : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II <--Would that be good enough for beginner?

That and a 50MM 1.8 would be a good start....

See how much the XSi is compared to the XS.

 

[boBQuincy]

In my city, there's a good deal on "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP DSLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit "

It includes a len : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II <--Would that be good enough for beginner?

Canon's Xs (and Xsi) are entry-level cameras but are still very capable. The 18-55 is a good lens for what it is (a kit lens) but it is not at it's best in low light and is also slow focusing. For indoor work the 50 f/1.8 is much better, for rapid focusing any of the lenses with "ring-USM" will help in following a fast moving child.

The Xsi offers some nice features over the Xs and if the price is almost the same it is a better deal.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page2.asp

 

[mainstreet1997]

If youre interested in portraits look into the 50mm f/1.8. It runs about 90 bucks

 

[ilovehuhu]

In my city, there's a good deal on "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP DSLR Camera With 18-55mm IS Lens Kit "

It includes a len : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II <--Would that be good enough for beginner?

I find a decent deal for Canon EOS Rebel XS 10.1-MegaPixel Digital SLR Camera with 18 mm - 55 mm - f/3.5-5.6 Canon EF-S Lens ..you can have a look at it..

 

[PhotobearSam]

sorry...wrong thread....

 

[Liljam]

I love my Canon XS. Being a new mom who gave up most of my income to be with my boy, I didn't buy an expensive telephoto lens when I felt the need to get something more to feed this addiction! Is amateur photography an addiction? I got a Sigma lens 17mm-300mm after the kit and I'm getting the 50mm Canon next. The sigma does fine for me for learning. Sure, I wish I could have gotten the 300 or 400 dollar lens, but it was unrealistic for me to spend that much money. The camera was a gift for my birthday because my DH knows I love photography. I agree about taking some classes or at least buy some books and educate!!! Your camera is only as good as you are! I can now go back to my little $120 P&S and take a better photo on manual because I have learned more about settings, but I'm still so far away from where I want to be with the SLR. I know photoshop well, but that means nothing to me. A friend of mine told me to shoot as if I don't even have a computer to post process with. He also shoots full manual focus (which is fun learning, but tough accomplishing at least for me!)

Sorry to go on and on, but I do love my Rebel XS for what I intend to do with it (take family photos, learn to do more photography, amateur stuff) I'd get the body with kit lens, telephoto lens now or later, the $90 50mm lens, a nice bag, a flash and a tripod if you don't have one already as well as some classes or books, lots of spare time and a smiling baby to photograph!