Photography Noob here! Advice Needed

J

jbrown7815

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
206
Ok so I got around to playing with my Buddies older Rebel XT, and fell in love. (with the camera :p)

So I have decided to get rid of my SD 700 IS, and go with a Rebel XT or XTI.

I was looking into buying a XT off of Craigslist locally, but Brinnutz helped me realize I was getting ripped off, and showed me POTN forums.


Now what's the advantage of going with XTI rather than XT?

I plan on shooting anything/everything.

From Nature, to Airplanes, Cars, People...


Thanks in advance for all help!


I'd like to buy the camera pretty soon.


:)

Jesse
 
First letgs get one thing straight, both the XT and XTI are capable of taking awesome pictures. Even my 300D (model before the XT) could take awesome pictures much better than P&S.

Now, good place to start is a good side by side:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...&cameras=canon_eos400d,canon_eos350d&show=all

The main differences are going to be:
XTI has a larger 2.5" LCD vs. the 1.8" on the XT
XTI has a couple more MP (10.1 vs. 8)
XTI has slightly faster burst mode (3 vs. 2.8)
XTI has a 9 point AF system vs. the 7 point on the XT

For me, the main things are the 9 Point Autofocus and larger LCD (just makes it nicer to review images and settings), mostly the better AF though. The MP are negligable and the faster burst mode is also not that big of a deal.
 
I have the XT and love it! Its a great camera for the money, and I have seen some good deals floating around the net.

make sure you save some money to spend on lenses, you probably won't need "L" series lenses right away, but you will want some variety.

A good starter kit is the following
Rebel XT
18-55mm IS (Or save the money and skip on the Image stabilization if you don't think you will need it)
75-300 f/4-5.6
50mm f/1.8 II
 
Don't forget...if IIRC, the XTi has the Auto Sensor cleaning and the XT doesn't.

If you have a Meijer around you, I just saw the Rebel XT kit on clearance for $385.

If not, I can pick it up for you if you want me to.

Oh, and I have the 75-300 f/4-5.6 III lens for sale.
 
jbrown7815 said:
Around 500 I'm thinking.


I'm just gonna use Kit Lens at first.


I dont understand the differeces b/t all the lenses etc.


Some are so expensive...
Click to expand...

That's a good idea, as you want to become accustomed to the camera and the limitations of the lens before you start spending the big bucks on better lenses. The more expensive lenses will generally give you one or more of the following advantages:

- sharper pictures, due to better glass
- improved shooting in low light or fast movement situations, due to a higher maximum aperture
- ultra-sonic motors, which allow faster, quieter auto-focusing that doesn't extend the front element of the lens
- image stabilization, which will allow you to take handheld shots at lower shutter speeds
- sturdier construction
 
jbrown7815 said:
Around 500 I'm thinking.


I'm just gonna use Kit Lens at first.


I dont understand the differeces b/t all the lenses etc.


Some are so expensive...
Click to expand...

For $500 you can't get much more than the kit lens. I'd try to save a bit more. ~$800 gets you a RebelXT + Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 lens, which will let you take sharper pictures in lower light.

In general it's a pretty expensive hobby, and the actual camera body represents only a small fraction of what you can spend on lenses, lighting, and other accessories like tripods.
 
Auric said:
That's a good idea, as you want to become accustomed to the camera and the limitations of the lens before you start spending the big bucks on better lenses. The more expensive lenses will generally give you one or more of the following advantages:

- sharper pictures, due to better glass
- improved shooting in low light or fast movement situations, due to a higher maximum aperture
- ultra-sonic motors, which allow faster, quieter auto-focusing that doesn't extend the front element of the lens
- image stabilization, which will allow you to take handheld shots at lower shutter speeds
- sturdier construction
Click to expand...

I see, I could see low light being a reason to get a better lens for sure.

fugu said:
For $500 you can't get much more than the kit lens. I'd try to save a bit more. ~$800 gets you a RebelXT + Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 lens, which will let you take sharper pictures in lower light.

In general it's a pretty expensive hobby, and the actual camera body represents only a small fraction of what you can spend on lenses, lighting, and other accessories like tripods.
Click to expand...

I think once I realize I want more, I will get a new lens.
 
jbrown7815 said:
I see, I could see low light being a reason to get a better lens for sure.



I think once I realize I want more, I will get a new lens.
Click to expand...

Just seems like a waste of money to buy the kit lens only to upgrade it once you realize its weaknesses. Also, it's easier to learn good technique with a good lens because you can eliminate your gear as a source of error.

Speaking from experience, I lost a couple hundred dollars buying a 17-85 and a 50 1.8 only to turn around and sell them a few months later. If you're on a limited budget, buy used equipment; you can sell it for the price you paid, and you won't be tempted to try to buy new gear to fix problems with your photography.
 
Haven been through many sSLRs and lenses, my advice is to get the cheapest possible body (XT) if you cant find used good stuff, and get some nicer lenses, or just one to start with. Should you decide on moving on with photography, you can get a better body later on and have the benefit of time passing as technologies improve. In the case you lose interest, you wont lose as much money selling good lenses as a more expensive body, since they keep their value much better than the body.

A $500 budget is a little hard to work with IMO for getting started with dSLR photography. You need at least twice to get started with say a Canon 28mm f/2.8 and a Canon 50mm f/1.4 (a lens that will make your future EOS 5D happy as well). Both lenses I have and recommend, the 28mm not for corner sharpness, but for beautiful bokeh and a great indoor or landscape lens for low light situations as well.

I completely agree with fugu that kit lenses are a waste of money. With some luck you can locate a used 30D (which is a very nice semi pro body), heck try to see if you can find a used 40D (truly amazing camera, owned both),it has much better colours and speed than the 30D. Pair that with the 50mm and you can have a blast learning for quite some time until you can expand your lens collection and move to a wide angle. In general stay away from zoom lenses unless they are L class (the pro line..expensive), and even these are not as good as primes. So I suggest you wait a little longer, or work more and make that extra money, to get something that will last you a good while and not start annoying you as soon as your eyes really open to the world of cameras, lenses and photography, which I am sure the consumer range dSLR will at some point.
 
The 18-55 IS is not a bad starter lens. If you are going with the 50mm get the Sigma 30mm (50mmish perspective). Get the XTi, in the end you will be happier with it.
 
Ok so people I bought a camera, I went with a older Rebel XT, it also came with a EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM lens.


Seems to zoom ok.

What a good setting to leave it on when general shooting?

Oh I have so much to learn :)
 
If you dont want to mess with anything...Green Box mode.

But as you learn, move into the Tv, Av, and then M modes ;)
 
Green Box = the Green Box. Everything is automatic like a point and shoot camera.

Tv = Shutter Priority. You pick the shutter speed, ISO, camera picks the Aperture
Av = Aperture Priority. You pick the aperture, ISO, camera picks the shutter speed
M = Full Manual. You pick the aperture, ISO, shutter speed.
 
Another piece of advice, one I have yet to take is to read the book titled "Understanding Exposure," by Bryan Peterson (pretty sure).
 
Yes but go look at it in a book store first if you can (most like Barnes and Noble, etc. have it).

Everyone recommends it, but I found for me it was not much help. Many gain a lot of good knowledge out of it though ;)
 
But as you learn, move into the Tv, Av, and then M modes
Click to expand...

No need to waste time on Tv and Av modes, not to mention P and AUTO. Just start using M, you are not shooting film, its free and you get instant feedback. It´s not rocket science :D

Before you do though, make sure you understand what and aperture is, how it works in relation to light and do the same with the shutter mechanism. This should not take you more than an hour max.

Basically:

Shutter speed = the time in which you let in light to hit the CMOS. It will blur your images to have a long exposure time! Exposure time for sharp images should be "similar" to your focal lenght: 50mm lens 1/50 second, if you have a steady hand and shooting from a good position. Double it if in doubt.

Aperture: The amount of area you let light in through your lens. Usually circular, multi blade mechanisms. High apeture = less light and HIGH depth of field. Low apeture (2.8 for instance) = shallow depth of field (for instance the background in a portrait becomes blurry). The plane of focus is parallel to the sensor, meaning tilting the camera on subjects with low aperture can result in interesting focus points. ..Like this one:

2389119011_9e7ecdd814.jpg


From then on JUST EXPERIMENT (and think of what you want). Remember photography is a mix of exact science and totally non exact science, there really is no recipe! Books are great (for basic understandings and if you want to conform as an artist.. the good artist always steps outside the rule book), but learn to rely on your own eyes and feel for it. The photgraphic scene is littered with photographers, who have taken "the book path" or the "strictly technical path", and it always shows zzZz. Photography is like life: balance, planning, knowledge and intuition.. and more.

Shooting lots and lots, and then reflcting on your work when you return for careful inspection and sorting on your monitor, is what will move your skillset and artistry the most.

Enjoy! We want to see some shots! :)

Here is one of mine from the abstract realm of flowers:
2468758879_f77f3ab984_o.jpg


And one from the more concrete:
2411103709_d834241945_b.jpg


And human:
297815976_99a13d0c59.jpg
 
My pleasure :) ..I will do what I can to prevent more "pet" photographers and "sunset" freaks from arising out of the dSLR revolution. Been shooting avidly since 1995.. had to write everything down in books back then, wait a few days and look at my notebook and try to make sense of the settings used relating to each frame. Oh the fun.. took an eternity to get good lol (damn I must be old!) :p

...in the end you wont need to use the lightmeter anymore. I still do, but its more to be absolutely certain within 1/3 f-stop.

By the way, very important. Try to measure the light on something mid tone´ish, then do your settings manually. Like the pavement, or green grass, a good colour clothing object and so on.

One last thing before I need to go back to Lightroom and stare at pictures from China, turn on histogram for your camera when you preview. It needs to lean to the right, more than lean to the left in most cases. This means as much exposure without clipping the highlights. Reasons for this is the digital sensors, they produce much less noise in light areas, so even though its going to look a little overexposed on your monitor, you just bring it down an f-stop or half with an image editing program, and in the process totally minimizing noise issues.
 
hehe, soon histogram won´t sound that alien..

luminous-landscape.com have some good understanding series.. but don´t overdose! ;)
 
Ya, see M is not the answer to everything. I still use Tv and Av even though I am completely comfortable with M...

There are times that M is not the appropriate choice.
 
I agree. I shoot 95% of my photos in aperture priority, as the camera's metering generally picks a shutter speed within a stop of the ideal exposure. I can then make minor adjustments with exposure compensation much faster than I could select the correct shutter speed in manual mode, and I have a little leeway to adjust the exposure in post, since I shoot RAW.

I usually only switch to manual if I'm doing long exposures, bracketing, or using the flash.
 
Why does it limit my shutter speed when I turn flash on?

I always just get ALL BLACK when I shoot at super high speeds.
 
I see.

One more noob question :)

What is the cap that covers the body "lens hole"

And where can I get one?
 
Are you talking about covering the opening when you take the lens off the body? I think it's called a body cap, B&H should have them for Canon, or you could go to a local camera store.
 
Well it´s fine to use Tv and Av modes if you want less control. No serious photographers would rely on having half your variables controlled by the camera. At least I don´t know any who would. I am just trying to emphasize the fact that, it can be definitly enhance a learning experience and the speed at which you build an understanding. And of course if you are working on being the master of your camera and art, it´s the only way to go :)
 
nakedhand said:
Well it´s fine to use Tv and Av modes if you want less control. No serious photographers would rely on having half your variables controlled by the camera. At least I don´t know any who would. I am just trying to emphasize the fact that, it can be definitly enhance a learning experience and the speed at which you build an understanding. And of course if you are working on being the master of your camera and art, it´s the only way to go :)
Click to expand...

So do you turn off the autofocus too? If you understand how your camera meters and are aware of its limitations, shutter or aperture priority can be pretty useful, especially if you're in a situation where your lighting conditions and subject are changing quickly. A "serious photographer" is someone who knows his equipment and uses it in whatever ways allow him to capture the images he wants to present.
 
nakedhand said:
Well it´s fine to use Tv and Av modes if you want less control. No serious photographers would rely on having half your variables controlled by the camera. At least I don´t know any who would. I am just trying to emphasize the fact that, it can be definitly enhance a learning experience and the speed at which you build an understanding. And of course if you are working on being the master of your camera and art, it´s the only way to go :)
Click to expand...

You are incorrect.

Many pros use Av and Tv modes. In fact they are still on the Pro 1D bodies for that reason. They are predicatable and still put you in very much control. Having the camera decide shutter or aperture depending on the situation is no issue many times. Particularly, Av is very nice to use as usually it picks the shutter speed you would pick anyways in M mode...Most of the time unless you are using lights and such, the camera metering is what you will go off of anyways in M mode. There also are many circumstances where you cannot meter as fast as the camera can (such as panning, sports, etc.) and thus many times the camera controling one of those variables will give you better shots.

They are in the zone where you still control pretty much everything on the camera (unlike the other modes with green box, macro, sports, etc.).

As I said, I am fully comfortable in M mode, and yet I still mainly use Av. For me I can be just as creative as I know how my camera will react and as such can get the results I want. In most cases using M or Av/Tv will equate to the same thing since you will either be concerned with shutter speed or aperture and then end up using the cameras meter to adjust it to the proper exposure anyways in M mode.
 
You are incorrect.
Click to expand...

:)

Well I must admit I don´t know one single sports photographer :) I see your point with fast autofire photography. 10 fps, 56 autofocus points and Av, its just another style and another way to work. Surely its necessary in certain speedy events, or when Britney shoots out of her car with open legs.

The photo journalists I know are using their cameras manually, its very fast and predictable for the person with routine and I am sure they could get equally fine results with Tv and Av, I understand you know this, just want to emphasize. For me and for many other´s its about having total control over your camera. it´s all I am saying.

But in the end its up the individual and what really matters is the outcome. Religious discussions about what method is superior, to crop or not to crop and so forth, gets really boring in the long run. Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top