Do you think I should get it??? Need advice.

Blossom101 · Sep 23, 2009

I have been wanting a Digital SLR Camera for a long long time. I would like to start taking pictures of people professionally. My dream is to be a child photographer. I have been saving up to buy a "professional camera", but with all the lenses and accessories that you need, it is going to take forever before I can afford what I want. I have the opportunity to purchase the following items for $1,300.00 from a photographer who is upgrading.

EOS 40D SLR Camera
Screen protectors
EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus lens
EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 Autofocus Lens
EF 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 III Lens
4GB Flash memory card
Rapid Fire Charger
Tripod
Digital Slave Flash
Lowepro SLR/Notebook Case
Heavy Duty Aluminum hard Case
Compact Flash USB Memory Car Reader CR-10M (What is this?)

Please tell me if this is a good deal and if you think this camera would do well taking pictures primarily of people. (on a professional level).

I'm really scared to buy this, because 1,300.00 is a lot of money to me and the camera is used(He said he has had it for only 8 months), but I'm really scared to not buy it, because I don't think a deal like this comes around often.

Please give me any advice you will.
I know this camera has 10.1 Megapixels. Should I be looking into a camera with higher megapixels or do you think 10.1 is enough for what I'll be using it for?

Thank you so so much for your help!

robdavis305 · Sep 23, 2009

I shoot a Nikon so dont know much about the camera but its more about the sencor than the megapixels. The fact that its 8 months old really dont matter if its only clicked about 100 shots. Sorry but thats all I can help you with.

Big Mike · Sep 23, 2009

You can probably get a better deal on a similar camera and while some of that other stuff sounds OK, you don't need all that. The 40D is a fine camera, not worries there...but those lenses are near the bottom of the scale in terms of quality in the Canon line up.

Professional photography isn't about having/using a 'professional' camera. It's much more about how the photographer uses their camera, along with their skill and creativity to create images. Being a successful professional photographer is more about doing business than it is about being a fantastic photographer.

What is you knowledge/education level in terms of photography? If you still have a lot to learn, you may be better off with a cheaper camera like one of the Rebel series. The savings could be put towards a better lens, books or classes on photography & business.

Blossom101 · Sep 23, 2009

I really appreciate your advice!

I have no education in photography, but I definitely have a love for it and a talent, because everyone loves the pictures I take with my old trusty Canon Sure shot P&S. I would just rather go ahead and get the camera and lens that I need and then buy books and to learn and of course practice, practice, practice. If you were in my situation and your budget was around $1,500.00 ( but less is always better) and you would primarily want to take pictures of people. What camera and lens would you purchase? It doesn't matter if it is a Canon or nikon.

Thanks again.

Big Mike · Sep 23, 2009

New Camera:Canon | EOS Rebel XSi Digital Camera (a.k.a. 450D) | 2756B001
Or a used 40D or 50D.
Tamron | 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Lens for Can | AF016C700

Blossom101 · Sep 23, 2009

Thank you so much!

So, do you think it is better to buy just the camera body and then a nice lens seperately?

What is the difference in this Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD LENS and a standard lens that would come with a camera?

I assume that it wouldn't zoom way in on something. But .. it would be perfect to capture a clear focused picture of a person. Am I right?

I know I sound like an idiot...but you gotta start somewhere, right?

I do appreciate your help... It is nice to talk to someone who knows something about this.

Blossom101 · Sep 23, 2009

Oh... another question....

Would this Tamron lens that we are talking about fit most canon cameras if I were to upgrade again... say to the Canon 5D Mark II?

Derrel · Sep 23, 2009

The simplest advice on buying a brand new d-slr is to go to a large web site like B&H Photo or Adorama,and find out the current prices from two high-volume, established companies. Currently, Canon has some large rebate packages, $300 to $400 as I recall, when a printer is purchased with a camera.

The places that try and sell you a complete package are often,shall we say, somewhat less reputable companies, that sell the accessories at huge markups, like 600 to 1000 percent over wholesale prices.

Like, the aluminum hard case for example--do you really need one of those things? Check around and see what $1,300 will buy you.

PhotoXopher · Sep 23, 2009

$1300 could probably get you a Nikon D90 with a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens, to me that would be pretty well suited for what your goals are.

B&H's pricing:
Nikon D90 Body: $891
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8: $380

Total: $1271

Enough left over for a nice memory card.

Or:

Nikon D90 Body: $891
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 $449

Total: $1340

Big Mike · Sep 23, 2009

So, do you think it is better to buy just the camera body and then a nice lens seperately?

Yes, because the 'kit' lens that they usually package with the entry level cameras is not the best quality lens. It's made to be cheap and light. The kit lenses are good for getting started, but since you have professional aspirations, you might as well get a better lens from the start. You might also consider a 'prime' (non-zoom) lens. The usual recommendation is the EF 50mm F1.8 (mostly because it's cheap) but there are better (and more expensive) options for professional use.

What is the difference in this Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD LENS and a standard lens that would come with a camera?

The biggest difference is that the Tamron lens I linked to has a large maximum aperture throughout the zoom range. It's maximum aperture is F2.8 (smaller F numbers means a larger aperture). The kit lens has a variable max aperture of F3.5 to F5.6 (smaller than F2.8). A larger aperture is a benefit for many reasons.

I assume that it wouldn't zoom way in on something. But .. it would be perfect to capture a clear focused picture of a person. Am I right?

Yes, it wouldn't zoom way in on something...but it does have the ability to give you great image quality for a decent price.

I know I sound like an idiot...but you gotta start somewhere, right?

We all have to start somewhere, that's right. At least you are asking the questions before buying....many people buy first and then come here to ask if they made a good decision.

Would this Tamron lens that we are talking about fit most canon cameras if I were to upgrade again... say to the Canon 5D Mark II?

Ah...here is the catch. That particular lens will not work with the 5D II.

Most DSLR cameras have what we call a 'crop' or 'APS-S' sensor. This just means that the image sensor is smaller than a frame of 35mm film. (since 35mm film was the prevailing standard, we compare everything to that). Camera and lens companies have started making lenses that are make specifically for these smaller sensors. These lenses tend to be smaller and less expensive, but the downside is that they are not compatible with 35mm film SLR cameras, or 'Full Frame' DSLR cameras like the 5D. All Canon EF-S lenses fall into this category as well.

If you do have plans to someday upgrade to a full frame camera like the 5D series...then it might be a good idea to buy a lens that will be compatible with it. It will probably cost you more though.
Some options would be;
the EF 17-40mm F4 L (a great lens but only has a max aperture of F4)
the EF 16-35mm F2.8 L (very expensive)
the EF 24-70mm F2.8 L (very large and expensive)

There are many other options, so it's worth doing some research. Keep in mind that high quality lenses are a great investment. They will probably be with you longer than any one camera and they hold their value pretty well if you decide to sell them in the future.

Blossom101 · Sep 23, 2009

So what is the difference between the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and the Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8 lenses?

I actually feel like I'm learning something thanks to all of you!

PhotoXopher · Sep 23, 2009

Different range...

The 17-50 is much wider (more in the picture), while the 28-75 has more zoom and overall range.

Big Mike · Sep 23, 2009

So what is the difference between the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and the Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8 lenses?

They both have a max aperture of F2.8...which is good.
The obvious difference is the focal length. 17mm is shorter than 28mm....which will therefore give you a wider angle of view.

Personally, I wouldn't like having a 28-75mm lens on a crop camera...it just wouldn't be wide enough for me. However, it's usually better to shoot people at longer focal lengths, so if you can live without the wide view, then the longer lens might be a better option.

The lens I use most for portraits is my 70-200mm lens...but I need a lot of room to back up when shooting with it.

NateS · Sep 23, 2009

None of the above. In your price range, buying a camera with basically the sole purpose of doing portrait photography, I'd recommend.......

Fujifilm S5pro. It has unmatched dynamic range in a DSLR and if you are shooting portraits of somebody on a bright day with shadows, etc...this could be a big help Granted, you'll probably be using some off camera flash as well, the extra dynamic range will be really useful. Some of my favorite photos I've seen have been with the s5pro. The plus side is that since it's basically a Nikon D200 with different guts, you can use all the Nikon lenses with it.

I'd get a S5pro, Sigma 50mm f1.4 HSM, and an Nikon SB-600 if I was in your boat....or I'd at least be seriously considering it as a contentder.

I forgot to mention that the S5pro has CLS so you'll be able to fire the flash wirelessly with retaining TTL just like all the mid level and up nikon's.

RyanLilly · Sep 23, 2009

Your money can go a lot farther than the original list you posted. the 18-55mm canon lens is not very good, I have one collecting dust somewhere, If I ever find it I might sell it for maybe $50. The 50mm 1.8 is a nice lens but its flimsy, noisy, and the focus is a bit slow. It has great optical quality, especially for a $100 lens, but for professional use the 1.4 is much better even at 4 times the price. And I tell you this from experience, as I own one of each.

So from your list there,

Canon 40D- $789 from KEH.com
50mm 1.8- $109 from B&H.com NEW
18-55mm- $50 from somwhere in my basement.
The rest of the stuff in your list really isn't worth anything, it sounds like the junk that they add on to ebay packages.
So really its only about $948 worth of stuff, even is you tack on another $100 for the extra junk, its still overpriced by $250.

So, I'm with mike on this, go for a lesser body, and the Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens. This in my main lens and the quality is great all around I also still shoot with 8 mp 20D cameras and they are still serving me well even on large prints at high iso.

Dont worry about the camera body, especially just starting out. As you grow in photography you may want to upgrade, and thats good. Then you original becomes your backup camera(all pros should have back up gear). As for lenses; Buy good glass and keep it forever, just keep adding to the collection.