Camera hunting beginner here

[fedfireman]

Hello all,

I have been creeping for a while and I love to take pictures of sexy women.




















J/K!

Ok sorry had to do that, I am a hobbyist at best and am currently looking to buy a DSLR. I have an old Canon AE-1 program that has a busted lens (aperature won't budge anymore) and am going to make the move to digital. I have done extensive research and have a budget of around $1200.

Types of photography I enjoy/want to get into are:

Modeling (fashion, glamour, pin-up, portraiture, etc.)
Cars (glamour shots mostly, the kind of stuff you see in car & driver. Not that interested in race, action, sports, etc.)
Street
Urban landscape? (I like taking pictures of random things ie. cracked brick veneers, wrought iron, doorways, sidewalks, etc.)
Graphic design? (LOVE instagram, snapseed, etc. on my iPhone. Enjoy making random things look interesting with filters and what not.)

My goals for my photography are:

I would love to have my pictures featured in car magazines and would also love to do stock photography. My wife is an up and coming alt model and I would love to eventually get her and others into industry magazines.

My experience is:

I have little to no technical experience when it comes to photography. What I do have though, is a very creative mind/eye. I have always been good at coming up with cool/fun/interesting ideas. I sew, I diy with paracord, I hand cut vinyl decals, I paint and pinstripe, and I modify cars. I can't draw my way out of a wet paper bag, but I have been told I can pose a model and choose compositions like no other. I have a very vivid imagination and love to come up with ideas. I accompany my wife on all of her shoots and usually end up directing them. I have made a few new friends who I help out on their other shoots now. BUT I am still very ignorant to the technicalities, and fundamentals. I have a very loose understanding of angles, curves, and space when it comes to perfecting poses. And I my knowledge of car photography consists of the 3 sided view, not shooting from eye level, and putting a good background behind them.

The camera I think I want is:

A Pentax k-5. I have researched and done TONS of side by side comparisons and believe the k-5 will offer me the best bang for my buck. I love manual focus and the k-5 lets me stabilize with vintage lenses. Plus 35mm SLR bundles with several lenses go for less than $200 on ebay quite often. Those lenses should hold me over till I can afford to buy good, newer lenses (I think/hope).

BUT... I see a lot of photographs that I consider awesome being shot with much less camera.

So... the only real reason I don't want a canon or nikon is because the comparable models are MUCH more expensive. But if I don't need that much camera and could do fine with a cheaper used camera or something I would consider it. I just can't bring myself to spend my k-5 budget on something that is completely out-classed by one.

Sorry for the long post, thank you in advance for any input.

 

[swiftparkour94]

I've seen a Canon XSi with battery grip and kit lens being sold on craigslist for $200. Not sure what the shutter count was but it seemed like a great deal. I'd be more worried about lenses. Spend more on an all around great prime lens that's more costy than the camera body, so just try to get the body alone for much cheaper. If you were to get a camera like the XSi, I'd recommend a good Sigma 50mm, can't remember which ones they have since I've hardly looked at them but I hear some are as good or sharper than Canon's. Don't use kit lenses...just saying. Wish you the best

 

[Derrel]

I actually think a used Canon 5D "classic" for $750 or so would be the BEST, affordable "people camera" for glamour/nudes/moel pics. Plenty of lenses can be easily adapted to EOS....m42 thread mount being perhaps the "handiest"...but also, Nikon F mount, leica R mount, Olympus OM mount...all very good, low-cost lenses...PLUS all the Canon EOS lenses. Good image quality, ESPECIALLY with electronic flash studio lighting. BIG viewfinder, easy to compose with. To me, the FF sensor and the way it leverages the 24,35,50,and 85mm lens focal lengths is the true strength of FF over APS-C.

And 85mm on FF is a LOT different than a 50mm on 1.5x...not even close...the FF is better in the "real world" and handier in "the studio" or "the boudoir".

The Pentax K-5...yes...seems to be a very good APS-C format camera, and it has in-body stabilization AND can accept a lot of older, low-cost lenses, yes. Pentax also has some say the BEST LENS LINEUP for APS-C format d-slr....excellent primes, and good zooms, reasonably priced.

 

[Overread]

Have you considered a used Canon 5D? I'm not sure how it stands up to the Pentax, however its an affordable fullframe (35mm) camera body that would still leave you with some budget free for a decent lens. Otherwise I don't think Nikon has a 35mm that would easily fit your budget and leave room for other items (though I don't know the Nikon range all that well)



Also you might want to avoid stock photography - the market in that is rather dead. It's flooded with photos and photographers whilst many of the contracts are also not paying very much per use (esp if you ever consider micro stock where things sell for pennies). Most photographers find that if they want to work for stock they've got to shoot masses of high grade photos just to make a small profit if any. Plus many of the bigger stock companies will want medium format sized photos - which means you'd need a med-format digital setup or have to upscale your 35mm shots. It's very demanding for what is potentially very little return.

 

[fedfireman]

I had looked at the 5DmkII because I found one for $1100 on CL but thought FF was more than I needed. I don't fully understand the reason to go FF but thought it was reserved for a much more descerning photographer than myself.

That said, I did some research on the 5D classic and from what I can find it would only benefit me if I needed to print large or wanted to go super wide angle. Are there any other reasons I should consider going FF as a hobbyist hoping to go pro-"ish" one day?

I should also mention that one of my new photographer buddies let me use his k-7 for a couple hours on a shoot and it felt great. I used another's canon D90 and it didn't feel nearly as intuitive to me. I'm sure given a month or so on either I would even out but I definitely felt more comfortable on the Pentax.

So is it safe to assume you guys wouldn't recommend I get a lower class camera, say a used t3i or D5100? I keep getting this nagging feeling that I don't need as much camera as I'm looking for.

 

[fedfireman]

And thank you for the advice on stock photography, I did not know that. I guess I can just take my random shots for fun.

 

[Overread]

"fullframe" essentially means that the sensor is the same size as 35mm film, this is as opposed to cropped DSLRs which use smaller sensors. Now a smaller sensor means that less of the image circle made by a lens is captured and the result is that "crop" DSLRs give a different angle of view (for the same focal length in mm) to that of the 35mm film.

The result is that you appear to get a focal length increase with a cropped sensor (ie smaller film size), which is great if you do sports or wildlife of any other area where getting more "reach" is important.

However in fields where you're working closer to the subject it can be a problem because suddenly you've got to stand further back to get the shot framed right. This can be a big problem if shooting in a studio or indoors where you might not always have the space to backup.

You also can't just use a wider lens on the crop sensor cameras because as you leave telephoto focal lengths and enter wide angle focal lengths (50mm is around where this divide occurs) you introduce perspective distortion with the wide angle lenses. This means areas closer to the lens get enlarged over those further away - things like oversized noses and hands become a problem. Whilst some of this can be software corrected it saps the overall quality from the shot.

Thus for portraiture and many other areas of photography the 35mm film (ie fullframe DSLR) remains superior over the crop sensor options on the market.

 

[fedfireman]

I see. So for the money K-5 vs. 5D classic, brand name withstanding, the 5D is the way to go for what I'm interested in?

I know this is a very subjective question but, would the benefits of a FF sensor outweigh the shortfalls of the 5D classic? ie. shutter lag, AF speed, other things I don't understand like EV and ISO boost, etc..

Snapsort and DXO both put the K-5 ahead of the 5DmkII. Are they unreliable or tested in a way I would not benefit from their illustrated advantages? I'm sorry if I'm asking the same few questions in several different ways, I just want to make sure the canikon machine isn't at work here. I completely understand brand loyalty and do not for a second think you are the typical fanboy. I have just seen a TON of claims at canikon having a huge lens selection and that's why you shouldn't buy Pentax. Everyone seems to default to lens selection and personally, I don't have a million dollars to buy all the lenses available. As long as I can get the few lenses that I will need/can make work I'm good.

But again Overread, I am NOT assuming you don't know every bit of what you are talking about.

 

[fedfireman]

Footnote- I have found a bundle for $75+12.99 shipping that comes with the following:

Pentax PZ-70, Flash (unknown brand), tripod mount, lights, bag, and 9 lenses.

1rst lens is a SMC PENTAX-M 1:1.7 50mm - 2nd lens is a SEARS 1:3.5-4.5 28-70 mm
- 3rd lens is a AETNA ROKUNAR 1:2.8 135mm
- 4rth lens is a FIVE STAR 1:4.5 75-200mm
- 5th lens is a TAMRON 1: 3.4-4.5 28-50 mm
- 6th lens is a SUPER ALBINAR 1:2.8 135mm'
- 7th lens is a SIGMA 1:2.8 35-70mm
- 8th lens is a SIGMA 1:3.8-5.6 28-200mm
- 9th lens is a VIVITAR 1:3.5 180 mm

I may be wrong but even at $20 a piece for those lenses it's a steal right?

 

[Designer]

Footnote- I have found a bundle for $75+12.99 shipping that comes with the following:

Pentax PZ-70, Flash (unknown brand), tripod mount, lights, bag, and 9 lenses.

1rst lens is a SMC PENTAX-M 1:1.7 50mm - 2nd lens is a SEARS 1:3.5-4.5 28-70 mm
- 3rd lens is a AETNA ROKUNAR 1:2.8 135mm
- 4rth lens is a FIVE STAR 1:4.5 75-200mm
- 5th lens is a TAMRON 1: 3.4-4.5 28-50 mm
- 6th lens is a SUPER ALBINAR 1:2.8 135mm'
- 7th lens is a SIGMA 1:2.8 35-70mm
- 8th lens is a SIGMA 1:3.8-5.6 28-200mm
- 9th lens is a VIVITAR 1:3.5 180 mm

I may be wrong but even at $20 a piece for those lenses it's a steal right?

At that price, it would be fun just to open the box and see what all is inside, and what condition it is in. Like Christmas.

Of course, it could all be fairly trashed. Good luck!

 

[Overread]

Well shutter lag isn't really a problem on the 5D (or indeed any modern DSLRs unless you're doing some very highspeed work which would require a more specialist setup).
The AF speed isn't the greatest, but its good enough for the subjects that you're working with which typically won't be moving all that fast like tracking sports or wildlife.
The ISO on the 5D is already very good and whilstit might not be able to boost to as high a value as some newer cameras, again, you shouldn't really be stretching it that far. Most of the subjects you're working with (at least from your list of interests) are going to be either outside in semi-good lighting or you'll be inside/outside with the ability to control the lighting for the scene.

The 5D is a classic studio camera and for that kind of work its a fantastic model. Yes newer bodies are a bit better and in tech tests they might win out; however the advantages of being able to work with the 35mm sensor will be far and above more advantageous. Also remember that the 5D was used for pro work for a good number of years and thus is more than capable of producing good quality prints and photos if used correctly and with the right lens and lighting (indeed lens and lighting are most often the most critical parts regarding overall technical quality of photos).



As for the deal youv'e found - eh its cheap stuff. One or two might be decent, but a good few are simply cheap options. You've also a lot of repeat lenses in that bag so you're buying a fair amount of repeat options.

Honestly I wouldn't go for it. Instead I'd go for a good camera body and save the £75 to put toward a good lens and flash setup for that camera. There's a good chance that the old flash in that deal is from the film era (along with the rest of the gear) and many older flashes from them can't be used with modern DSLRs (they send too much charge through the coupling when firing and can damage your DSLR as a result).

 

[fedfireman]

I see, I had been thinking that while cameras are advancing in leaps and bounds, photos really arent. I think I will start looking for a good deal on a 5D or something comparable. I am also going to start paying more attention to the cameras I put my hands on. Thank you for the advice.