PLEASE Help a Student Out!

First of, my apologies for what I am sure is a redundant question. However with a little advice I can get shooting straight away and hopefully become part of this photography community.

I am a student who is going to begin courses in Photography with in this year. A digital SLR is required I have began to seriously think of photography as a career. I will be trying out many different styles and disciplines, photojournalism, fine art, portrait, commercial and weddings. With my main focus being in Photojournalism specifically Sports, Football and Mixed Martial Arts. I will be looking for a camera which would fit into a students budget with the quality of pictures that I could

a) Submit to the local Newspapers and magazines
b) Photograph some local high school football games and sell prints from my website
c) Be able to handle private modeling..etc
d) Not be too totally confusing me as it will be a learn as I go type of venture and I would like to have started on my portfolio before I start school.

I am a student so I don't have the megabucks but I have thought about this seriously enough to empty out my wallet for.

I have been looking at these various models

Sony Alpha DSLR A230
Canon EOS Rebel T1i
Canon EOS 40D (w/ 28mm-135mm lens)

However I am quite lost, please help! Any of your expertise and advice will be greatly appreciated,

I apologize once again for a question that I am sure is asked and answered every day, please see it inside of you to help out this eager student!

Thanks,
- OL

Nice post, well laid out, no spelling mistakes. Pity you're not considering Nikon. I don't know any of the cameras you mention, but one thing catches the eye:

- the 28-135 is an old lens designed for a film camera. It doesn't have a wide-angle setting on the 40D. You really need an 18-something.
- avoid the 18-55 Canon unless it's the latest IS version. It got really poor reviews

If you are looking to get into this professionally - then definitely look into a pro-grade body. As such, the 40D is the easy pick of those 3.

The 40D will have the more rugged and durable body, as well as a more comprehensive and responsive controls. It has 2 control dials, so manual mode has a dedicated aperture/shutter switch, as opposed to a button combo switch. And thats just a drop in the bucket, the whole interface is built much better for full manual control.

Getting correct exposures is a critical skill to develop for photography, kick auto stuff out the door, you don't learn from auto. Of the 3 cameras you mentioned, I think the 40D is the best one to learn on, and to rely on as well.

Dont forget though - the lens is more important than the body. Lens' are also super expensive, so with a limited budget (yeah me too), a lens assortment is something that you'll build up over time. Get yourself at least the nifty fifty (50mm f/1.8), and start looking into other primes or f/2.8 zooms.

From those 3 I agree with Anbesol the 40D is the one to go, just keep in mind that is heavier than the others ones...so if you want something lighter think on the T1i.
Now since budget is something to look for I might suggest that you take a peek on the Canon XSi it is more affordable than the other canons listed and quality wise it is excellent, though the 40D will perform a little better in higher ISOs but not by much IMO.

I would pick a cheaper body (XSi) and put the rest of the money on some nice lens or lenses as suggested above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franglais

Nice post, well laid out, no spelling mistakes. Pity you're not considering Nikon.

---

Thanks you. If you have a Nikon to recommend I am all ears!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anbesol

If you are looking to get into this professionally - then definitely look into a pro-grade body. As such, the 40D is the easy pick of those 3.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueRob

I would pick a cheaper body (XSi) and put the rest of the money on some nice lens or lenses as suggested above

---

Does the XSI have enough quality for me to submit pictures I take on it to the local newspaper? I also have a connection at the SportingNews who would gladly look at any pictures I send him and consider them for print. Would buying an XSI hurt me down the road when I really need to upgrade? What would be best for sports events and lower light music events? If I get the XSI what are some lenses I should start looking at straight away.

Sorry for the numerous questions, please answer!

Thank you
- O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Does the XSI have enough quality for me to submit pictures I take on it to the local newspaper? I also have a connection at the SportingNews who would gladly look at any pictures I send him and consider them for print. Would buying an XSI hurt me down the road when I really need to upgrade? What would be best for sports events and lower light music events? If I get the XSI what are some lenses I should start looking at straight away.

Sorry for the numerous questions, please answer!

Thank you
- O

---

Quality? Oh yes! the XSi is some cases deliver better pixel per pixel detail than the newer T1i and has plenty 12 megapixel resolution which is more than enough for magazine size shots and medium format prints...
The 40D is a very popular model with great quality and its a more "pro" body. I chose the XSi since its cheaper and lighter but the D40 delivers greater quality (not much IMO considering the price difference) and has some oriented "pro features". Buying a camera depends much on budget and the truth is that if you are considering photography as a career I´m sure you will want to change the body in a mid term no matter which one you choose right now from these 2 options, that is why I suggested to go for a cheaper and "entry" level SLR...the XSi. The lenses you will buy will work on your next body when you upgrade, that if you dont go full frame (big bucks).

Lenses, well since you want to shoot a broad range of stuff is hard to mention specifics...I`ll give you some "budget" options....the 50mm f1.8, great prime for 100 bucks or so, the 17-85 better than the kit lens, the 70-300 good entry telefoto with IS....there a a good bunch of Canon lenses for tastes and applications, some cheap other not so much.
Other members with more canon background might mention other options.

If you want to investigate Nikon, look at D90 or D300. If you got real bucks then go with D700 which is a full frame camera. D90 least expensive but excellent. D700 most expensive.
You can use almost any digital camera for newspaper shots. The images in newspapers aren't exactly high quality. The important part for newspapers is getting the shot.

ill second that frog.
i got my D90 a week ago and im really impressed and love it!
carrying it around everywhere! great starter DSLR!

If I was Nikon Marketing I would say you should buy a Nikon D90. Here is my reasoning:

1. You are starting a system which will grow with your professional career. The only two manufacturers that count are Canon and Nikon. Sony are trying to break into the professional market, they make some nice cameras but I would go with the crowd.

2. Choose a camera which works the same way as the professional models, has much the same logic and controls, etc. This eliminates the consumer models like the Nikon D3000, D5000 and the Canon Ti1. It leaves you with the Canon 40D and Nikon D90

3. Video. Ugh. Real photographers don't care about video. However local newspapers and web sites may need it when you cover an event. You can't ignore it. This eliminates the Canon 40D

4. Your budget. What you really want is the Nikon D300s with the 16-85VR but it's too expensive. The 18-105VR kit lens is plastic but good and Nikon almost give it away in a kit with the D90. It's a good start.

Thank you all for your replies. I went browsing today and I may of stumbled upon quite the bargain

Canon 50D with 28 - 235mm Lens + 70 - 300mm IS telephoto lens
+ backpack carry case all for 1859.97
Is this a good deal and will those two lenses be enough for my two main focuses (Photojournalism/sports) and portrait modeling. Would I still need the "Nifty 50 lens"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Thank you all for your replies. I went browsing today and I may of stumbled upon quite the bargain

Canon 50D with 28 - 235mm Lens + 70 - 300mm IS telephoto lens
+ backpack carry case all for 1859.97
Is this a good deal and will those two lenses be enough for my two main focuses (Photojournalism/sports) and portrait modeling. Would I still need the "Nifty 50 lens"

---

just to clarify, its the 50D with a 28-235mm? i have not heard of this lens before.
are you sure its not the 28-135mm lens?
i think you need a lens at 18mm personally, but i like my wide angles.
also the nifty fifty is a barging and will still come in useful for low light! i have an 18-105 and 70-300 and i will still get the 50mm for low light use.

Just a note, the 50D is a crop sensor. If you think you may need wide angle shots (inside events in close quarters pop into mind), 28mm will not be wide enough.

The nifty fifty is just a great little lens for the money. If you're doing indoor shoots, bear in mind you may need to invest in a better flash than the pop up that comes with the camera.

Also, be sure to check the recommended sites and sites to avoid thread. Grandpaw does a good job of keeping it up to date.

http://forums.photographyreview.com/...ad.php?t=37380

You have to watch out for those deals

Ok I just talked to someone at the school and they said a 40D might be a little much right now for someone starting out and lower models offer enough quality to put together a good portfolio and have submissions accepted in newspapers. With that said I think I am going to go for

Canon EOS Rebel XSi Digital SLR Camera (Body only)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
and...
This is where I ask of your assistance again, someone please suggest the final lens I need for shooting sports mainly Football/Mixed Martial Arts events. Please help me find the last piece of this puzzle as I am eager to get snapping away!

Im sure someone will come in with better advice but I would look at a 70-200mm IS lens, they tend to be expensive lenses, but they are worth it!
The Canon 70-200mm f/4L should do the trick if you can afford it, f/2.8 is even better, but more expensive.
hope this helps a little

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Ok I just talked to someone at the school and they said a 40D might be a little much right now for someone starting out and lower models offer enough quality to put together a good portfolio and have submissions accepted in newspapers. With that said I think I am going to go for

Canon EOS Rebel XSi Digital SLR Camera (Body only)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
and...
This is where I ask of your assistance again, someone please suggest the final lens I need for shooting sports mainly Football/Mixed Martial Arts events. Please help me find the last piece of this puzzle as I am eager to get snapping away!

---

I already gave you some hints but bare in mind that there are a quite a few options out there and that makes it harder to give you specifics but if you want to and pick the best lens your money can buy and that suits your needs you might want to take a peek in here and make the call on your own....lots of Canon lenses reviewed and compared, there is also a section with this guy`s suggestions according to specific needs, like travel, wedding, etc.
Hope this helps.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franglais

If I was Nikon Marketing I would say you should buy a Nikon D90. Here is my reasoning:

1. You are starting a system which will grow with your professional career. The only two manufacturers that count are Canon and Nikon. Sony are trying to break into the professional market, they make some nice cameras but I would go with the crowd.

---

Sorry Charlie. Im sure you've heard that expression plenty, my name is Charlie too, everybody thinks they are the first to say it to me. Hyuck hyuck.

I have to strongly disagree with your reasoning here. To throw a blind eye to canon and nikons competitors simply for their *present* market control. I remember a few years back when Canon was dominating all by itself..

We need to feed on the competition of the industry, so they keep feeding us with excellent technological advancement.

OLC37 - Tamrons 70-200 f/2.8 is probably the best deal out there on an f/2.8 telephoto zoom. Canons 70-200 f/2.8L IS is better, especially as far as build quality and the benefit of IS. But for a budget, that Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is excellent.

"If I was Nikon Marketing I would say you should buy a Nikon D90. Here is my reasoning:"

IF????

"1. You are starting a system which will grow with your professional career. The only two manufacturers that count are Canon and Nikon. Sony are trying to break into the professional market, they make some nice cameras but I would go with the crowd."

A lot of non-Canikon pros are going to be real surprised to hear this.

I'm going to stop typing now.

TF

Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is excellent will this fit on a Canon camera?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is excellent will this fit on a Canon camera?

---

Yes it will it as long as you buy the Canon mount version obviously.

Now for the Sony fans : I have the impression that professional photography can be fiercely competetive. Everybody tends to use the same material which the buzz says is the best. Anybody using other material might be looked down upon. The guy using brand X may find he's reduced his competivity.

So tell me I'm wrong and life's not like that.

BTW I got this impression from watching discussions on other sites, where people are much less polite than here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franglais

BTW I got this impression from watching discussions on other sites, where people are much less polite than here.

---

Yes, those sights attract that type. I would really hate to see that here. - TF

Ok guys this is what I decided on due to me being relativley green and budget.

Canon EOS Rebel XSI Digital Camera
ef 50MM F/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM Autofocus Lens

I believe those should suffice yes? The reviews for that Zoom Telephoto said it does the job in regards to sports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Ok guys this is what I decided on due to me being relativley green and budget.

Canon EOS Rebel XSI Digital Camera
ef 50MM F/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM Autofocus Lens

I believe those should suffice yes? The reviews for that Zoom Telephoto said it does the job in regards to sports.

---

Were your reviews for the IS or the non-IS version of the 75-300?

I've yet to read a good review for the non IS version of the 75-300mm. The IS version has gotten decent reviews. I believe, though, the 75-300 was discontinued and replaced by the 70-300, which is an altogether better lens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaraRose

Were your reviews for the IS or the non-IS version of the 75-300?

I've yet to read a good review for the non IS version of the 75-300mm. The IS version has gotten decent reviews. I believe, though, the 75-300 was discontinued and replaced by the 70-300, which is an altogether better lens.

---

The reviews on BH were for the non I.S version. Located Here
Should I steer clear of this lens altogether? Is their any I.S or better alternatives close to that price range instead of this 75-300 USM non IS?

Here's one of the reviews I read for that lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

The EF-S 55-250mm IS is about $255 retail. I can speak personally as I own it, and while it doesn't compare to high end canon lenses, it's a nice lens that takes decent shots. You will lose the 50mm of range on the telephoto range though.

A review for the 55-250 from the same site, a bit more favorable than the 75-300:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

The 70-300 IS is definitely better than both of them. But I believe it runs in the $500+ range. I think used you might be able to get it for around $400.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaraRose

Here's one of the reviews I read for that lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

The EF-S 55-250mm IS is about $255 retail. I can speak personally as I own it, and while it doesn't compare to high end canon lenses, it's a nice lens that takes decent shots. You will lose the 50mm of range on the telephoto range though.

A review for the 55-250 from the same site, a bit more favorable than the 75-300:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

The 70-300 IS is definitely better than both of them. But I believe it runs in the $500+ range. I think used you might be able to get it for around $400.

---

Yeah I did read that one review that bashed the lens, but it seems a lot of customers on the BH site were very happy with it. All those reviews seemed very positve.

Now the one you suggested (EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Autofocus Lens for Select Digital SLR Cameras) has I.S but not USM.. One person recommended I get USM and your recommending I.S

Can someone break down what USM is and what I.S is?

And you think I shouldn't bother with the 70 - 300usm at all? As in it will be a waste of money. I know that one website ripped it to pieces but like I said.. I've read a lot of favorable reviews too.

I just did the math and I could definitely purchase the 55-250mm I.S with out breaking the bank. Should I go for it over the 70-300usm? With the 55-250mm I wont need a tripod due to the image stabalization, yes? Where as the 70 - 300mm I would almost certainly need one?
Remember I will be shooting sports Mixed Martial Arts Cage-fighting from beside the cage and football games from the sidelines. I will be also shooting portraits but I'm sure the 50mm should handle that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OLC37

Can someone break down what USM is and what I.S is?

I just did the math and I could definitely purchase the 55-250mm I.S with out breaking the bank. Should I go for it over the 70-300usm? With the 55-250mm I wont need a tripod due to the image stabalization, yes? Where as the 70 - 300mm I would almost certainly need one?
Remember I will be shooting sports Mixed Martial Arts Cage-fighting from beside the cage and football games from the sidelines. I will be also shooting portraits but I'm sure the 50mm should handle that

---

You mean the 75-300, there, right? The 70-300 is more expensive.

USM part of the AF system design, it's the newer motor design. I believe Sigma's HSM is a similar motor. It's quieter, faster, and more efficient than the older motor design.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...d=7337&id=2648

IS stands for Image Stabilization. IS compensates for hand shake and allows you to hand hold at slower shutter speeds, and get sharper photos at telephoto ranges without the need of a tripod.

Every brand has their own trademark term for it. Sigma uses Optical Stabilization (OS) and Tamron uses Vibration Control (VC).

Personally, at 300mm I always had trouble hand-holding and getting good shots without IS. But if you have steady hands and arms and good technique, you may have better luck than me.

I've never used the 75-300 so I can't say anything from personal experience. I've just always heard image quality is very poor on it.

For football, you may have trouble catching action on the opposite end of the field. And remember that you don't have a great aperture on either lens fully extended. This means you need slower shutter speeds (less ability to stop action and more hand shake if you are IS-less). If you have good light, this will be less of a problem. If you got bad light.. well, then you have problems.

You'll also not be able to crop as deep with either lens. I do like the 55-250, but there was always a big limit on how far I could crop without losing sharpness. I expect similar limitations from the 75-300. These are low end consumer lenses, and you do get what you pay for when it comes to glass.

MMA-- is this inside or out? You'll need to use a flash for indoor use. Neither of them are fast lenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaraRose

MMA-- is this inside or out? You'll need to use a flash for indoor use. Neither of them are fast lenses.

---

MMA is inside, I will be located right next to the cage where the two competitors fight. A flash would be a big no no as it would distract/temporary blind the fighters. Your telling me those two lenses will be obsolete for capturing the action with out a flash?

damn.. :mad2:

Pretty much... unless there is very really good lighting. Even then... it's hard to say if you'd get much. The 70-300 is the same boat on that. That's a pure aperture problem. The lenses aren't nearly wide enough to get enough light.

Shooting ISO 800 at 3.5 or 4 (so fully zoomed out on either)... maybe, but wouldn't be stop action. You'd be shooting at low shutter speeds. You can go to ISO1600, but Canon doesn't produce very good images at 1600 (IMHO)... tons of noise.

You might be able to use the 50mm if you're close enough to the action. 1.8 at iso 800... you might be able to pull it off. If you're right next to the fighters the long lenses might actually be too close to frame a shot well.

fwiw, I fight in amateur MMA matches and the lights tend to be rather strong. They typically have a large flood light on each corner of the cage, so you are looking at 6-8 lights covering the area (the rest of the place is typically dark)
Now i dont know if that helps you or not, but one of our guys also takes pictures and video with his T1i during those fightnights, from the top of the cage. I will ask him how they come out and post his opinion. Keep in my he is not a pro by any means, but his opinion may help a little.