Equipment purchasing strategy (beginner)

[Ebla]

I know you guys get a lot of similar questions, but after a search I did not find what I was looking for. I would like to avoid buyers remorse by getting equipment which ends up collecting dust, or buying the wrong lenses. I find the choices before me mind boggling. I realize that no matter what purchasing choices I make I have a lot to learn. I currently only have a point and shoot so I am starting from scratch. I definitely want to eventually be doing macro shoots especially of small insects (I may have to wait until the budget allows).

Experience: None except with point and shoot type

Budget: immediate $800-$1,000 and then another $1,500 in the next 12 months

Interests: Nature, wildlife (especially birds), landscapes, flowers and insects. Some of the subject matter will be disease and insect damage of plants so I need to be able to take clear, up close shots.

Preference: I don't have a preference for manufacturer, but I would rather wait and acquire the right equipment slowly as my budget allows rather than buy something now which later disappoints.

So what lenses would cover the above interests? I am thinking once I figure out the lens question it becomes easier to figure out which camera body. Is that the correct approach?

Thank you for your insights!

 

[goodguy]

I think starting with a Nikon D5300 with the Nikon 18-55mm and Nikon 55-200mm (or Nikon 55-300mm) lenses is a good start.
To that you can add a Nikon 50mm 1.8G for low light and maybe some portrait.
Since you plan on going to do insects macro photography then you can get a third party macro lens.
Nikons Macro lens the 105mm 2.8G Micro is a great lens but a bit expensive, I have the Nikon 60mm 2.8G which is a good general MAcro lens but in case you do mostly insects then you will want to get something like 90mm Macro or bigger.
If you can afford the Nikon 105mm then do it, if not then there are third party good lenses which I am sure people here will be able to recommend.

The Nikon D5300 is a very good camera to start with, excellent low light performance, wonderful dynamic range and lack of AA filter means cleaner images that other competitors cant achieve.

 

[fotomonkey]

Having recently purchased a D5300 and subsequently replacing it with a D7000 I'd suggest the 7000. The 5300 is a fine camera but it feels too small and chintzy. It's all plastic which contributes to that, of course, compared with the magnesium alloy. The 7000 just feels better and the control-driven body is more (imho) intuitive than the 5300's menu-driven concept.

The prices on the 7000 have dropped so much you could pick up the 50/1.8 and probably a decent macro lens while still staying within your budget. For nature/wildlife you'll need to drop more bucks (not the deer variety) for a 70-200 at a minimum. That might be next year's purchase.

 

[jaomul]

Goodguys advice is sound but just a few other things to consider.

1. When you photograph birds and wildlife are they stationary or do toy need to get them in motion?

2. Most of what you are interested is outdoor, do you need to be able to do this in the rain?

3. do you like editing or are you hoping to get things straight out of camera?

 

[Ebla]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

1. When you photograph birds and wildlife are they stationary or do toy need to get them in motion?

I think I will prefer to stay as unobtrusive to wildlife as possible. This is sort of secondary to the insect photography

2. Most of what you are interested is outdoor, do you need to be able to do this in the rain?

hmmm I haven't even thought about this. Kind of an astonishing thing for me not to not think of it, but that is the truth.

3. do you like editing or are you hoping to get things straight out of camera?

I am just starting out, so it is all learn as I go. At the beginning most of the photos I use will be posted on a gardening website I am starting. The photos will be used to illustrate articles, and provide interest to webpages. Any editing would also be learn as I go.

Thanks again everyone.

 

[Overread18 6]

Few thoughts:

1) Go Canon. No no I'm not saying that because I shoot Canon - I'm saying that because they've got several bonuses for what you're after including:

a) The 7D camera body - which since it recently got a new MII version is now going very cheap second hand. It's a high end midrange body with fantastic autofocus control. I'd honestly say a second hand 7D would suit you very well at present for what you need in macro and wildlife. It's got good weather sealing - great AF - a good usable ISO range - high quality build and is easy to pick up.
The only thing you'd miss is that it has no "portrait - landscape - macro" scene modes; however a bit of reading on the subject and you can quickly surpass using any of those modes very fast (and they are only present on the rebel/entry level series bodies anyway).

b) You like macro and you're also looking at things like disease - this suggests to me tiny things. Canon has a macro lens that will do from 1:1 (which is what pretty much every other macro lens gets to at best) to 5:1. It's hard to use and chances are you won't own it early on (its a very hard lens to use); but its there as an option. By all means I strongly and fully support getting a regular macro lens first and foremost.

c) A large range of 300mm and 400mm lenses in the affordable hobby price ranges. Options like the 400mm f5.6 L are very popular with bird photographers (coupled with a 7D that makes for a fantastic birding combo).

2) Lens wise can be a tricky question and there are several ways to approach it; depending how keen/rich you are.

a) Get a body and a kit lens along with a cheap 70-300mm (The Sigma APO macro version is a good affordable choice). From there you experiment with the two lenses and come to understand the camera, the hobby and also your limitations and needs with the setup. From there it makes choosing higher end lenses easier since you'll have experience to give you an idea of what and why certain properties might be desirable (eg wider apertures - different focal lengths etc...)

b) If you're more certain on going high end to start with consider getting some lenses from a local store - that way you can head down and try them out to get a feel for them before making teh final choice. A local camera club might also be suitable for trying out some lenses (members are generally happy to show and share).



From what you've written it sounds like you're keen to jump in the deep end so I'd suggest your shoppinglist should contain (I'm not 100% sure on USA prices so you might have to juggle thing a bit).

1) Canon 7D - new or second hand.
2) Canon 400mm f5.6 L - second hand or new (good second hand lenses are basically good as new in most cases barring a few scratches on the barrel)
3) A flash - a 430EX2 would be an affordable option or you've got the 580EX2 if you can afford it (second hand only the last one). The flash will help with macro and birding.
4) Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson - good introductory book into exposure and camera control. You might also find "The Digital Photography books 1-4 series by Scot Kelby" to be of value as well for entry level.
5) Something in the rough 18-something mm range focal length lens - a kit lens for the shorter close up ranges. You could also go for a 50mm f1.8 if you want to keep costs really down.
6) A macro lens. Pretty much any macro prime lens of at least 60mm or longer and I'd honestly say Tamron 90mm should be the shortest you consider at this stage based on what you're after*
Tokina - Tamron - Sigma and Canon all make great options. The optical quality in prime (single focal length) macro lenses is very high and whilst there is some variation its in general minor. The AF speed is generally the best in the Canon own brand, but still slower than regular lenses. If you want more working distance there is the Sigma 150mm and 180mm macro lenses to consider.



*focal length won't affect macro magnification; but will affect the working distance (distance form lens to subject - as oppose to minimum focusing distance which is from the sensor/film to the subject) as a longer focal length gives a greater minimum focusing distance. In addition 90mm is about as short as you want to start - but anything 60mm or over is very usable (once you go below 60mm the working distance becomes increasingly difficult to work with).

 

[Ebla]

@Overread Thank you for your very detail response. It has given me a lot to think about and research further.

 

[sashbar]

Bryan Peterson also has a book "Understanding Close-Up Photography". It is about macro photography with both macro and conventional lenses. You will find lots of advice regarding the equipment and shooting technique. I would suggest start with the book, it would be a good strategy.

 

[JacaRanda]

One of our forum members has fantastic macro work and shares his and others macro rigs here.

My Macro Rig - Then and Now | Up Close with Nature

In the right column, click on 'More Macro Rigs' to see macro rigs from some of his friends.

Search Orion Mystery here in the forum to see some of his work.

 

[jaomul]

Now you have a few recommendations I'll suggest another option. If you are shooting mostly static subjects the Olympus EM5 with kit lens 12-50mm is going very cheap now. This combo is weather sealed, has 16mp with great image quality. There is an Olympus 60mm macro lens and a panasonic 100-300 telephoto available in this m4/3 system with its biggest bonus being it's very compact. Google will allow you compare the various suggested models

 

[Microbois]

While you've got tons of very good advices, I think trying to figure out which DSLR camera, and ultimately which system to adopt, is the wrong way to look at it. First, you say you are a beginner, but do you understand the basics of photography, and do you have the advanced knowledge to use a macro lens and a long reach telephoto? I don't mean to discourage you, but macro photography and wildlife will make you spend more than your actual 2 years budget in order to get some decent lenses. This is aside all the money you'll plunk on a sturdy tripod that can shoot from couple inches off the ground, and some good flashes and softboxes to get good results.

If I were you, I would try first to hang out with people doing this type of photography and see what it involves, both financially on the equipment side, but also to figure out the knowledge you're missing before making an informed decision. Just remember that those crisp macro shots and those beautiful flying birds that make it on magazines covers are shot by experienced photographers with a lot more than 1K$ worth of equipment...

I know I'll get flamed for having said that, but if you are a beginner, my only advice to you is to make sure you don't buy any equipment on the belief that it will deliver the pictures you are expecting. Make sure you buy the right equipment because you know exactly what to expect from it.

 

[Ebla]

I know I'll get flamed for having said that, but if you are a beginner, my only advice to you is to make sure you don't buy any equipment on the belief that it will deliver the pictures you are expecting. Make sure you buy the right equipment because you know exactly what to expect from it.

You certainly won't get flamed from me. I appreciate tough well meaning advice. Thanks.

 

[Didereaux]

Canon 7D (not the II) they are a bargain right now. Then save for a Canon 100-400mm L IS USM. Always check for refurbs at B-H, or Canon. This will give you a very FINE wildlife, sports, and events set up. ID you can get on sBay and buy a Canon 55oEX flsh (under $100 and are full ettl). Others may differ, but I actually use this set up. As well as a 6D and a 70-200mm. I shoot a LOT of bird and wildlife (and not in some zoo either).