Professional digital SLR camera?

greybeard · Mar 20, 2012

At this point, you can't afford professional equipment so you are going to have to make due with entry level stuff. Most professionals started with entry level equipment and worked their way up to the pro series equipment. Buy what you can afford and start taking pictures...............lots of pictures.

Star_Climber · Mar 21, 2012

What do u guys think about Canon EOS D500?

TheBiles · Mar 21, 2012

Star_Climber said:
What do u guys think about Canon EOS D500?

It will serve you well while you learn how to use it.

KmH · Mar 21, 2012

Canon makes a EOS 500D, but no D500. Here in the US it's known as a T1i and in Japan it's the EOS Kiss X3

It is a decent entry-level camera though it has been discontinued for some time now by Canon.

The 550D was launched February 8, 2010, and the 600D was launched February 7, 2011.

Many neophytes think any DSLR is a 'pro' camera, but most DSLR's aren't.

Canon's least expensive professional grade camera is the $5000 EOS-1D Mark IV.

cgipson1 · Mar 21, 2012

Alex_B said:
I have seen people using a Rebel for paid work .. producing good images.

I have seen many more that were using a Rebel (or equivalent) that did NOT produce good images! lol! (but it wasn't the camera's fault!)

Village Idiot · Mar 22, 2012

Star_Climber said:
Hello
I am planning to buy my first professional SLR camera and i need your advice?
So my absolute dream is "fashion photography",so with my potential new camera i want to be able to shoot quality shoots of people, models...portraits,beauty shoots etc.
can you give me any advice?

Here's why you're getting the snarky remarks: a professional level camera will run you about $3,000-$8,000 new.

First off, I have to ask if you know anything about photography? It seems like you have very little experience. Fashion and glamour is all about the lighting. You could seriously get away with a used entry level camera and several primes, just stick with Canon or Nikon if you ever plan to upgrade to higher end cameras. Other than that, spend the money on one or two primes that have an effective field of view of around 24mm and 75-100mm. The rest of your cash should go into learning about light, purchasing lighting equipment, and learning about photography.

Just seriously look up any of your favorite fashion photographers and see if you can find behind the scenes videos of them working. Sure, they'll probably be using some crazy ass expensive camera, but it's the lights that make the photo.

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html

Village Idiot · Mar 22, 2012

KmH said:
Canon makes a EOS 500D, but no D500. Here in the US it's known as a T1i and in Japan it's the EOS Kiss X3

It is a decent entry-level camera though it has been discontinued for some time now by Canon.

The 550D was launched February 8, 2010, and the 600D was launched February 7, 2011.

Many neophytes think any DSLR is a 'pro' camera, but most DSLR's aren't.

Canon's least expensive professional grade camera is the $5000 EOS-1D Mark IV.

I hate rebels. It's not that they're not good cameras, I just personally hate the control scheme. Even on my Olympus E-P3, it has two separate controls for shutter speed and aperture. I suggest to the OP that if they're looking at Canon to skip the entry level cameras and go with an XXD series. A 30D with grip can be bought for about $300USD now. It's still a capable camera even though it's only 8mp. A 40D would be an even better option. That gives them a good base to work with and more of their budget to spend on the things they'll actually need to do successful portrait work.

Alex_B · Mar 22, 2012

cgipson1 said:
Alex_B said:

I have seen people using a Rebel for paid work .. producing good images.

Click to expand...

I have seen many more that were using a Rebel (or equivalent) that did NOT produce good images! lol! (but it wasn't the camera's fault!)

I would not oppose that either

... also you sometimes see the technical geek with the pro camera shooting very blunt images as well

... again, not the camera's fault.

Village Idiot · Mar 22, 2012

Alex_B said:
cgipson1 said:

Alex_B said:

I have seen people using a Rebel for paid work .. producing good images.

Click to expand...

I have seen many more that were using a Rebel (or equivalent) that did NOT produce good images! lol! (but it wasn't the camera's fault!)

Click to expand...

I would not oppose that either ... also you sometimes see the technical geek with the pro camera shooting very blunt images as well ... again, not the camera's fault.

But they shoot macro, so that's ok.

cgipson1 · Mar 22, 2012

Village Idiot said:
But they shoot macro, so that's ok.

Meaning?

Overread · Mar 22, 2012

cgipson1 said:
Village Idiot said:

But they shoot macro, so that's ok.

Click to expand...

Meaning?

Meaning macro shooters are the most technically proficient users out there of course

Some of us even go all arty too!

remembering that art is based on technical rules/guidelines/theories too

RED · Mar 22, 2012

I for one have NEVER been paid (cash or otherwise) to take pictures. I'm pretty sure it's not because of my gear. My collection of lenses and camera bodies is ,to me, quite large. Many when first released were considered to be, I'm sure, of professional grade (Nikon F, Leica, Minolta 9000),but the tech part keeps moving on. I like good solid gear! That said, used gear may be had as some must always buy the newest of anything. I know little of this new gear but I do know there's some terrific used gear out there so the best advice I've read here so far is do your research, buy the best you can afford, and then know that if your talent and luck hold out, well another, better camera-lens-tripod-computer will be out there for you Best of luck with your path. :mrgreen:

chuasam · Mar 22, 2012

My favourite fashion photographer of ALL time used a Contax T3 for the first few years of her professional work.

Village Idiot · Mar 22, 2012

cgipson1 said:
Village Idiot said:

But they shoot macro, so that's ok.

Click to expand...

Meaning?

I friend of mine worked in a lab where they did real chemistry and stuff. He was all about how he could stack tubes and use backwards lenses and do 10 focal plane macros. I was like, "Uh, moar beer?!"

Overread · Mar 22, 2012

Village Idiot said:
I friend of mine worked in a lab where they did real chemistry and stuff. He was all about how he could stack tubes and use backwards lenses and do 10 focal plane macros. I was like, "Uh, moar beer?!"

I always find it interesting that my two main areas of interest, wildlife and macro, have two startling different average kinds of photographer. The wildlife lot generally know what direction to point the camera, how to go where they need to but often have very little technical understanding of what they are doing (or technical confidence) - there are a lot more gut feelings and people that know how to do something but not really how to tell others.
Flip to macro and most of them can talk your arm, leg and most of your other leg off with technical details about what they are doing, how they are doing it, why, what the theories are etc.....

It's two very different mindsets and approaches and yet the results from either camp can be just as outstanding as each other.