Looking to go digital - what should I get?

butterflygirl · Feb 21, 2007

Hello!

I currently have a film EOS Canon Rebel but hope to go digital. What camera would you recommend. I'd like to stay with a Canon, but am not sure what's good. What type of flash would you recommend as well? Right now I have a Pro Master 5500 flash. I already have 75-300 mm lens and the 28-90 mm lens.

I'm hoping to get into wedding photography/studio work. But as you can probably tell, I'm just getting started. I'm thinking I'll spend $500 to $1,000 - I hope. And I want a DSLR.

Any suggestions? I was thinking maybe the Canon 30d? Yes/no?

Thanks!

ericande · Feb 21, 2007

30d is a great camera. You may want to either buy a wider-angle lens, or get a 17-70 lens and sell the 28-90. With the crop factor of the 30d your 28-90 will behave more like a 44mm on the wide end.

Stevedevil · Feb 21, 2007

The flash for a 30d could cost you as much as the camera, being Canon, I use the Canon 430EX on my EOS 350D, this can act as a slave too, but this is the cheaper flash, the new 400D is a nice camera, but again this will eat up the $1000 I think ( Im from UK and they are aroud £500 )

Big Mike · Feb 21, 2007

The Canon Rebel XT (350D) (discontinued) and the Rebel XTi (400D) would be very similar to your film camera. They are very good cameras and would be a good starting point. The 30D is the next step up in the Canon line...although, the XTi is a newer camera than the 30D. The 30D is bigger and the body is stronger. The controls and displays are laid out differently and the features are slightly different. The 30D is a fair bit more expensive as well. Which is best for you? That's for you to decide. I suggest holding both of them. The Rebels are small and light...too small and light for some. I've got a couple of 20Ds (the model before the 30D) and I love them.

The 30D would already blow your budget and leave you no room for a flash or an upgraded lens. The lens that usually comes with either of these cameras is the EF-S 18-55. It's an OK lens...but I wouldn't dare shoot a wedding professionally with it. It might be a good lens to start with though.

If you do plan on doing this professionally...then you will need to consider your long term budget and investment. For weddings, you will need two cameras, two flash units and two lenses that would work. Having good quality lenses will also be very beneficial...and those can cost as much or more than the camera. Then there are all the other things like batteries, memory etc....the list goes on and on. Not that you need all that stuff now...but it's something to think about.

I'm not sure if your Promaster flash will work with a new digital camera. Is in an auto flash? The best flash for theses cameras is the Canon 580EX which isn't as much as the camera...but it's still fairly expensive. The 430EX is still pretty good but cheaper.

Anyway...if you want to get into weddings sooner...then you will probably have to increase your budget. If you just want to start by moving to digital for now...then you should be OK with the XTi or the 30D.

Also, there will be a big international camera show coming up in March. There may be new models released and/or the price of existing models may drop. So you may want to hold off for a few weeks.

butterflygirl · Feb 21, 2007

Thanks so much!

I'm not looking to get into weddings immediately. I'm actually interning under someone right now. I just want to get started. So I guess it's a good idea! There's so much to think about.

Does anyone know if my Rebel lens will fit the 30d or Xti? Just wondering...

Also Big Mike, do you know when that show is going to take place?

Thanks!

Big Mike · Feb 21, 2007

The PMA Show

Does anyone know if my Rebel lens will fit the 30d or Xti? Just wondering...

Yes, absolutely it will. However, the sensor in these DSLR cameras in question...is smaller than 35mm film, which the lens was designed for. So imagine the circle that the lens projects into the camera...just covering the film. Now imagine the sensor, it's slightly smaller than the film. The projected image is the same size...but the sensor only sees the middle part. Thus the image is 'cropped'. We call this the 'crop factor'...and if you search this forum, or the internet in general...you can read about 'crop factor' till the show in March

.

So what does that mean to you? The crop factor on these cameras is 1.6...which will make your lenses 'feel' like they are 1.6 time longer, when used on the digital body. So your 28-90mm lens...will 'feel' like what a 45-145mm would be on a film camera. This is good for the telephoto (long) end...but it makes it hard to get a wide angle view. That's why the kit lens is 18-55mm. 18mm would be ultra wide on your film camera...but on the digital body...it will be just about the same as your 28mm on your film camera.

Stevedevil · Feb 21, 2007

But also beware of the Digital Range offered by stockists, as they will only fit "cropped cameras "

The Sigma 10-20mm will only suit digi ( at 16 - 32 )

So I dont know why they dont say 16 - 32

Keep Smiling

Sorry thats for 1.6 crop

dinodan · Feb 21, 2007

Stevedevil said:
So I dont know why they dont say 16 - 32

Because the focal length is 10-20mm. It's the camera that's "seeing" it differently than 35mm. (as Big Mike described so well in his post).

By the way, I have one of those Sigma 10-20 lenses. I really like it!

Nikon always give a 1.5 conversion factor. Is that just their way of rounding off (easier to calculate), or are Canon sensors slightly smaller?

Big Mike · Feb 21, 2007

or are Canon sensors slightly smaller?

That's it.

Big Mike · Feb 21, 2007

So I dont know why they dont say 16 - 32

:roll: Not this again.

Dinodan is right...it says 10 to 20mm because it is 10 to 20mm. It's the camera that is different.

EOS_JD · Feb 21, 2007

Stevedevil said:
But also beware of the Digital Range offered by stockists, as they will only fit "cropped cameras "

The Sigma 10-20mm will only suit digi ( at 16 - 32 )

So I dont know why they dont say 16 - 32

Keep Smiling

Sorry thats for 1.6 crop

I have the Canon 10-22 and it is indeed that focal length although acts more like a 16-35 on a 20D or other 1.6x camera. THe fact that this lens only fits 1.6x cameras does make it sound odd Steve but if you could amend (which I believe some have done) it will act like a 10mm lens on a FF camera (although it will be a small image circle).

So your Sigma is indeed a 10-20mm lens.

neea · Feb 21, 2007

I think I have finally decided on how exactly I will convert to digital.
I have a Canon Rebel 2000 35mm.
I've decided on the XTi. For lenses I'm probably going to go with Tamron 70-300 with a 1.4x teleconverter. I'm not worried about losing the wide angle because I've been using 28-80mm for a couple years now and want to get into longer lenses.

I've done hours and hours of extensive research online.
I've decided to buy the camera from adorama I think.
B&H camera is $739.95 + $33.00 S&H ($772.95)
adorama is $679.95 + $57.50 S&H ($737.45)

The lens I'll get from B&H ($189.99 + 22.25) (adorama $163.95 + $52.00)
And the teleconverter from B&H as well.

The XTi is 10.1 MP and is cheaper than the... 30D (I think) which is 8 MP I believe.
I imagine the 30d is a bit heavier and sturdier but I like light weight for when I'm hiking and stuff.

Big Mike · Feb 22, 2007

I have the Canon 10-22 and it is indeed that focal length although acts more like a 16-35 on a 20D or other 1.6x camera.

That's true...but it only 'acts' more like a 16-35 if the person using it, is used to lenses on a 35mm film SLR. If a person has only ever used a 20D or other 1.6x camera...then a 10-22mm lens will act exactly like they would expect a 10-22mm lens to act. I think this is a point that many new users miss out on. They read all about the 'Crop Factor'...and try to figure it out. It's only a comparison factor that is used because 35mm film has been the standard for so long.

Neea,
You will probably love the XTi.

About the teleconvertor...do you know that if used on that 70-300 lens, it will probably render the auto focus useless? Here's the deal on that...cameras need at least a max aperture of F5.6 to get enough light to make the AF work (well, that camera anyway). Then you put a TC on, it robs some light...the 1.4 will steal about one to one & a half stops of light. So all of a sudden, the camera is only getting as much light into it...as if the lens had a maximum aperture of F8 or smaller....which is too little for the AF.
You can still manually focus the lens...but that loss of light will also cause you to need a faster shutter speed.
There there is the image quality issue. A TC is another (or a couple more) piece of glass for the light to go through...so it will most likely cause a few image quality problems. You may be better off, just shooting with the 70-300 lens and cropping the image later. I've been meaning to do some tests with my 75-300 lens...with and without my 2X TC...so see if the image is better with or without.

And make sure you get a Sigma or Tamron teleconvertor...I think that the Canon one is only compatible with a small handful of very expensive Canon lenses.

sothoth · Feb 22, 2007

Big Mike said:
It's only a comparison factor that is used because 35mm film has been the standard for so long.

Hmm, reading this thread has made my head sore.

The sigma 10-20 is designed for an EF-S sensor, so if you use the lens on an EF-S camera, you'll truly be looking at 10-20, right? The images should have the same angle of view as a full sized sensor will have if they use an non EF 10-20mm lens (that's designed for a full size sensor). Is that not correct? The Canon 10-22 is also an EF-S lens, so it should give 10-22 on an EF-S camera and vignette on an EF camera. Right? But, if you put an EF lens on an EF-S camera, then you'd have to account for the crop factor, right?

Big Mike · Feb 22, 2007

The sigma 10-20 is designed for an EF-S sensor, so if you use the lens on an EF-S camera, you'll truly be looking at 10-20, right? The images should have the same angle of view as a full sized sensor will have if they use an non EF 10-20mm lens (that's designed for a full size sensor). Is that not correct? The Canon 10-22 is also an EF-S lens, so it should give 10-22 on an EF-S camera and vignette on an EF camera. Right? But, if you put an EF lens on an EF-S camera, then you'd have to account for the crop factor, right?

:roll: Not quite.

EF-S just means that the image circle of the lens is smaller because it doesn't have to be big. The focal length is always the actual focal length. It doesn't matter if you put the lens on a APS-C camera (please don't say EF-S camera), a full frame digital, a film SLR or on the smelly end of a donkey...the focal length of the lens is the same...and that's what you see.

The difference is that these cameras with APS-C sized sensors...create a narrower field of view than 35mm film SLR cameras. That's the only difference that you need to be worried about. The field of view is different than a film SLR.