newb here

[mxracer32]

hello all!

i started to gain an interest in photography about a year ago. I went on a photoshoot\ bike test and was able to use a Canon MarkIIn that the photographer had. since then its just snowballed and ive become more and more intrigued by photograpghy. I have been using my point and shoot for a while now, (canon a75) but i really want a dslr. I race motocross and this is where most of my pictures will be. at a track, outside, fast paced type stuff. Like everyone else, im on a budget. in reality though, im a beginner so something that is top of the line would just be a waste since i wouldnt be able to use it to its full potential. im just now doing that with my p.a.s!

the rebel XTi got my attention, but mainly because its the only camera that is "mainstream" in the stores around here. the photographer i work with said a 30d would be more up my alley then an XTi. i looked at the 20d and liked the 5fps continous drive\shots. the XTi is only around 3 i believe.

what are some of your suggestions? also, is there a place where i can read the differences between the canon series dslrs? (5d, 10d, 20d, 30d, ect) i assume the lower the # the better the camera?

i will probably end up looking for a used body\kit for my first, and possible try to save some cash for some glass since, from what i've read, makes more of a difference.

in short, i need something with a good fps for the continous shooting in mx, and decent mp since i may (later on) want to put some of the pictures on posters or blow them up and frame them.

-thanks!

 

[julie32]

hi mxracer,

Welcome to the Forum. This place is awesome and people are super nice. Here is a link where you can read about canon cameras. http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=111

Even though the 5D is "better" than the other D series cameras, it doesn't go in #'d order. The 40D is the newest that came out a little while ago. The 30 before that, the 20 before that, etc... The 40D has a live preview which is fun and is a lot quieter...
As a new photographer, and strictly in my opinion, I'd say get the 30 or 40D. They're professional cameras, while still having the automatic options (portrait, landscape, action, night etc..) if you want to use them in the beginning. They're very user friendly cameras, again in my opinion. The manual, on the other hand, not so friendly. But if you go to a local book store there are a number of manuals written specifically for these cameras that are extremely helpful, I happen to like Magic Lantern.

Please let me know if I can help with other questions.
Good luck,
julie

 

[Mav]

Definitely stick with Canon. The lightning quick AF on many of their lenses will come in handy for this sort of work. Any particular budget you're trying to stay within? Where would you be shooting from? Right on the edge almost in the rider's faces or off in the distance a bit more? Day shoots, or would you be doing nighttime also? It depends on your budget of course, but given what you're mentioning I'd lean towards a cheaper body but a nice FAST lens. You'd probably get better results that way than with a more expensive body but a cheaper/slower lens.

 

[mxracer32]

thanks julie32 for the info, i'll be sure to start reading up on that stuff.​

i saw a review on the new 40d compared to the XTi. seems like a world of difference in fps (sounds like a machine gun!)​

Mav- no particular budget yet. waiting for some bills to go away thanks to xmas :lmao:. i know i saw on amazon the XTi with a ef-s 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens is $600 new. Seems like the cheapest route for me to get a dslr so thats what ive come to accept, BUT, im a bargain hunter. If i found a clean used one and could save some cash, i definetley would if the opportunity presents itself. with that being said, if i could spend the same amount on a new XTi, as i would say a slightly used and\or an older model (i guess i.e. the 30d now that the 40d is out) but it being more of what i would need, id rather jump on that. i guess it all depends on what i get for my money and being so new at this, i have a lot of reading\research to do to find out exactly what i'll need, and what i wont need(until its time)​

i cant say i want to take this kind of picture or that, i think it will be a good mix of different shots both close ups, and some far away. mostly all will be daytime\outside shots. sometimes i like to fill the frame with just the bike\rider, other times i like to get a comparison of bike to jump, to show size\distance of it.​

 

[julie32]

If you check on ebay, they have new 20D cameras with a kit lens for about $500. The body used to be $1300 only 3 years ago. It's a great camera. BUT, you may be just as happy with an xti. I know a few people who have it, and they like it a lot. There's nothing wrong with that camera.

-J

 

[jstuedle]

Welcome to the forum mxracer32. As a Nikon shooter, I need to add Nikon has a well deserved reputation with their pro and simi-pro cameras. Actually, the full line of cameras from both manufacturers are fully capable of great work. The more you spend, the more you get in features. But they are all very capable. I always advise new shooters to go to a shop, hold and fiddle with as many as you can get your hands on and see what brand "feels" right. Then research the models and features. Remember, you are not buying a camera, but buying into a system. The more you acquire, the more expensive to change brands down the line.

 

[Mav]

Based on what you're saying, here's what I'd probably do.

The 18-55 kit lens is great for just walkaround daily photography, but it'll probably be fairly useless for filling the frame with a bike unless it's practically right on top of you. So you're gonna want a longer lens for sure. I'd start with the lens first, and then buy the body based on whatever you have left in your budget.

Canon's USA Telephoto Zoom lineup

These range in price from around $200 to nearly $2000. Personally I'd lean towards the $500 70-200mm f/4L non-IS. For $1000, the "IS" stabilized version might make it easier to get slower shutter speed panning action shots of one of these guys flying through the air. This lens won't quite have the reach of the 300mm lenses, but it'll be a lot faster in real use. It's sharp wide-open at f/4 whereas a lot of the 70-300mm zooms out there need to be stopped down from f/5.6 to at least f/8 for optimum sharpness. f/4 vs f/8 is a 2-stop difference in speed. If you don't have the best light (overcast) or you're shooting among trees in shaded areas, that extra speed will make a big difference since it'll let you maintain faster shutter speeds to freeze action in marginal light, or shoot at a lower ISO which will give cleaner images. The f/4 aperture at 200mm will give a tighter depth of field than f/5.6 will as well, which will help give your photos a little more "pop" from the better subject isolation. If your budget turns out less than expected, you could always start with the EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM lens which I think is about $200 which is enough for a beginner, but you'd probably want something better eventually anyways. I've seen some jaw dropping shots from even the cheapo lenses.

 

[itrush07]

Welcome maxracer32

 

[mxracer32]

wow! thanks for all the information. i probably wont single out just one camera over another, i will more then likely look around and see what i can get the best deal on.

off to do some reading!!