Basic Photographic Kit for Beginning Enthusiasts

skieur · Dec 18, 2011

One needs to understand that there are no cameras "for beginners". There are more expensive cameras and less expensive cameras and cameras with less features and cameras with more features. If you want to get equiped in such a manner that it will last you for a while, here is what you should buy:

1. A DSLR camera: Canon, Nikon, or Sony. There are newer models every 3 years, as well as new features and improvements in the sensor technology.

2. If you buy good lenses you will not have to replace them as fast as your camera. In the focal length department a f. 2.8 15mm to 50mm macro zoom (approximately) that goes from wide angle through normal to portraiture. Ideal for shooting in many situations inside and out.

3. A telephoto zoom of 70mm to 300mm for the long shots.

4. ND(neutral density) and polarizing filters for these 2 lenses. In a good camera store they will often show you 2 or 3 of the same filter at different prices. It is best not to get the cheapest because the cheapest could degrade rather than improve your photo. Using an ND filter can bring out detail in an extremely bright area of your scene. A polarizing filter used at a 90 degree angle to the light source will reduce glare and reflections and improve colour saturation.

5. A tripod or monopod, whichever you will be most comfortable using.

6. A flash unit that will work off camera.

7. Paintshop Pro Photo Ultimate X4 for postprocessing since it is cheaper than Photoshop which you should eventually purchase and better than Photoshop Elements.

When you discover what you like most to shoot, then you can expand on this basic equipment.

skieur

Overread · Dec 18, 2011

4 - I think you really need to expand this point. First up with some idea of just which ND to go for (there are many different powers) as well as pointers on avoiding the ultra cheap filters that will only harm their setup by degrading performance significantly. In addition what about pointing out stepping rings? Simple to point out and lets them save money by getting one good filter and some cheap rings as opposed to lots of filters of cheaper quality

7 - whilst I won't disagree that Paintshop is more feature rich I would say its better to go with Elements simply because its the similar working environment to the full Photoshop if they move up to it; and further because its easily compatible with free and paid 3rd party addons. In addition to which there is a larger body of tutorials that use the photoshop/elements interface. I would also mention GIMP as a free option for people to consider (whilst also pointing out the specific aspects of using GIMP).

ConradM · Dec 18, 2011

You mentioned Sony! I approve this message.

Maybe you can answer this for me since this is aimed at newbs like me... How do you set up a shoe flash to work off camera? Can you buy a flash that comes with everything you need or do you need something in addition to the flash?

skieur · Dec 19, 2011

Overread said:
-7 - whilst I won't disagree that Paintshop is more feature rich I would say its better to go with Elements simply because its the similar working environment to the full Photoshop if they move up to it; and further because its easily compatible with free and paid 3rd party addons. In addition to which there is a larger body of tutorials that use the photoshop/elements interface. I would also mention GIMP as a free option for people to consider (whilst also pointing out the specific aspects of using GIMP).

I have both Paintshop and Photoshop and I find that both have similar features and both are compatible with free and paid 3rd party add-ons. I use my add-ons on both programs. As for tutorials, Paintshop has a built-in Learning Centre which makes extra tutorials unnecessary.

Gimp is a free alternative but for beginners it has a steep learning curve. Paintshop Pro Photo X4 can be had for as low as $39 when it is on sale and this version includes the Nik Colour FX add-ons.

skieur

KmH · Dec 19, 2011

1. I would change obsolete to - there will be a newer model in 3 years.

o hey tyler · Dec 19, 2011

KmH said:
1. I would change obsolete to - there will be a newer model in 3 years.

This. ^

My camera was produced in 2006. It's not obsolete. It's actually quite good at making photos.

skieur · Dec 19, 2011

KmH said:
1. I would change obsolete to - there will be a newer model in 3 years.

Good idea. Done.

skieur

pgriz · Dec 19, 2011

ConradM said:
You mentioned Sony! I approve this message.

Maybe you can answer this for me since this is aimed at newbs like me... How do you set up a shoe flash to work off camera? Can you buy a flash that comes with everything you need or do you need something in addition to the flash?

You need either a connector cord which maintain ETTL functionality of the flash, and these cords typically don't extend past 2 feet.

Or

You need a Transmitter/receiver combination with ETTL functionality if you want the camera to control the flash at a distance,

Or

You need a simple sync cord or simple radio transmitter receiver that only send out a "fire" command, with you, the photographer, manually adjusting the power of the flash to suit the situation.

skieur · Dec 19, 2011

pgriz said:
ConradM said:

You mentioned Sony! I approve this message.

Maybe you can answer this for me since this is aimed at newbs like me... How do you set up a shoe flash to work off camera? Can you buy a flash that comes with everything you need or do you need something in addition to the flash?

Click to expand...

You need either a connector cord which maintain ETTL functionality of the flash, and these cords typically don't extend past 2 feet.

Or

You need a Transmitter/receiver combination with ETTL functionality if you want the camera to control the flash at a distance,

Or

You need a simple sync cord or simple radio transmitter receiver that only send out a "fire" command, with you, the photographer, manually adjusting the power of the flash to suit the situation.

Actually no. The built in flash on the Sony camera can be used to communicate with a flash that has ETTL functionality without any cord or transmitter.

skieur

Derrel · Dec 19, 2011

skieur said:
Actually no. The built in flash on the Sony camera can be used to communicate with a flash that has ETTL functionality without any cord or transmitter.

skieur

skieur, we have to forgive pgriz...he was born in Canon-ville...he's not used to thinking in terms of a camera that has a built-in, wireless, remote flash control and commander system built right into the camera, like uh....Nikon or Sony have in so,so many cameras...

ConradM · Dec 19, 2011

skieur said:
pgriz said:

ConradM said:

You mentioned Sony! I approve this message.

Maybe you can answer this for me since this is aimed at newbs like me... How do you set up a shoe flash to work off camera? Can you buy a flash that comes with everything you need or do you need something in addition to the flash?

Click to expand...

You need either a connector cord which maintain ETTL functionality of the flash, and these cords typically don't extend past 2 feet.

Or

You need a Transmitter/receiver combination with ETTL functionality if you want the camera to control the flash at a distance,

Or

You need a simple sync cord or simple radio transmitter receiver that only send out a "fire" command, with you, the photographer, manually adjusting the power of the flash to suit the situation.

Click to expand...

Actually no. The built in flash on the Sony camera can be used to communicate with a flash that has ETTL functionality without any cord or transmitter.

skieur

Derrel said:
skieur said:

Actually no. The built in flash on the Sony camera can be used to communicate with a flash that has ETTL functionality without any cord or transmitter.

skieur

Click to expand...

skieur, we have to forgive pgriz...he was born in Canon-ville...he's not used to thinking in terms of a camera that has a built-in, wireless, remote flash control and commander system built right into the camera, like uh....Nikon or Sony have in so,so many cameras...