Best camera for going pro

[chrisnesss]

Recently I have been asked to sell photos, and do some portrait work. Right now I am shooting an Olympus E-520 but would like to upgrade. I prefer to shoot outdoors, shoot in cemeteries, public streets and some scenery. Would like to shoot more wildlife photography once I get a better zoom but am holding off till I get another body.

The question is-can I get by with my 520, or should I look at an E-3 or even a full frame from a different manufacturer? My budget is around 1,500 for the new body.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

[mjs1973]

I really don't know anything about Olympus cameras so I can't give you any specifics. My question to you is this. Is there something your E-520 isn't doing that you need it to do? If you're doing portrait work, either in a studio or with natural lighting, I would think that the 520 should be fine. It's not like you need to shoot portraits at really high ISO or at 10fps. You may want to invest in a fast lens to help blur the backgrounds but I would think for portrait work just about any DSLR on the market would work. Unless you are talking high end magazine or fashion work.

If people have seen your work and are asking for your services I would say you are already "going pro". It doesn't matter what you shoot with.

[chrisnesss]

The only problem I have with the 520 is in low light, the images come out grainy, even when the ISO is bumped up. And no I am not planning on working for a fashion magazine. . There were a few people that suggested I buy a full frame or an E-3 for better performance and maybe sharper clarity. I guess some people like to see the peach fuzz on their models. Not my in my taste, but whatever.

Thanks for the advice.

[drg]

The first thing every 'new pro' needs is a better lens. If you already have the top of the line lens for your primary use, that's the thing to buy first!

A good portrait lens will make the Oly 520 work better than it does now for producing a quality image.

If you need a second body, as in a backup, consider a used one to go along with your current glass.

It takes less time to learn to use the advantages provided by a better lens than it does a new/different body.

If you are needing a new camera body it is a simple equation for most pros or wannabe's: can I make enough more money with it to make it worthwhile and pay for itself?

Best wishes and Happy Holidays!

[Photo-John]

The E-620 is my favorite Olympus DSLR body. But I agree with everyone else here that a better lens is the best way for you to invest your money. What lenses do you have now? I'm also curious about what kind of situations you shoot in where the light is too low. Maybe some lighting would also be a good investment. And perhaps we could help you with some technique that would help you minimize noise. Are you using auto ISO or do you select the ISO yourself?

[chrisnesss]

I am using two kit lenses. The Olympus digital 14-42 mm f/3.5-5. and 40-150mm f/4-5.6. And the situations where I run into grain is indoors when I shoot soft light with heavy shadows. And I use the manual adjustment on the ISO, WB, aperture, exposure and sometimes on the focus.

My first thought honestly was to go to spend the money on better glass and maybe some lighting, but the bugs in my ear were pushing me to start with a better camera. I love the 520. And I get great shots with it.

As far as my shooting techniques I can't give you any "text book" examples. Lately I am shooting more for dramatic, contrasty images. Maybe a bit more harder than what I was shooting before. The subjects vary quite a bit. If that helps.

[calexp]

Had the E-520 with kit lens (14-42&40-150), sold the body keeping the lenses, got the E-3 but after testing, sold the lenses to get a better one, the 14-54 f2.8-3.5.
I agree with the others, get a new lens,14-54 or 12-60 for wideangle and portraits and 50-200 for wildlife (which is a bit expensive). They are far better in low light shooting. Also get a tripod if you shoot in very dark places.
E-520 does not have so many differences with the E-3. I got it mostly because of the weatherproofing , since i shoot mostly in rain and places with high moisture (like rainforests etc.).

[Photo-John]

I agree with calexp about the 12-60mm lens. I love the lens and I've done a bunch or portrait work with it. It's also my favorite all-purpose Olympus lens. It's just a great range and the fast aperture and optical quality are wonderful.

If you're shooting indoors and having trouble with light, more light might be a good investment. Shooting in ambient light is nice. But it can be really, really difficult. Using your own lights completely changes the game. You can model the light any way you want and always have enough to keep the ISO down. I just use hot lights and I can easily shoot at ISO 400. I can't do super fast shots of models. But they get the job done. You could also buy a couple of Olympus flashes and put them on stands with umbrellas or softboxes. That's an inexpensive and portable way to get started with lighting.

[Atomic2]

The 12-60 is the biggest reason I am still shooting with 4/3

and its the biggest reason by a WIDE margin. Every time I consider switching to another platform [which I do often, right now its Pentax] I consider if there is a lens even SIMILAR to the 12-60.... and there never is. It just cant be beat.

[chrisnesss]

Thanks everyone for your input. I checked out the 12-60 lens and like it, this will leave enough left over to get some lighting. Thanks again.

[Sushigaijin]

E-520 does not have so many differences with the E-3. I got it mostly because of the weatherproofing , since i shoot mostly in rain and places with high moisture (like rainforests etc.).

Ditto on this. Unless you're shooting in the rain (which I do frequently) the e520 should be plenty of camera. Go with some nice glass. If you need the extra wide range, the 12-60 is great. If you don't, a 14-54 is economical and is a great lens (i had one for a year). You'll see much more IQ improvement from lenses than bodies at this stage in the game.

[eharrim]

1500 as your pocketbook gives you a either or in what you get. If I wanted both wildlife and portrait then you keep the 520 and add to it the 14 54 for the first 350, get an EC 14 or 20 for the next 3 to 400, and pick up a good used 50 200 off ebay or elsewhere The 12 60 is more expensive and the 14 54 will work nicely until your pocketbook allows more. This will give you both worlds with good lenses which mean more than the body. If you're skipping wildlife for the time being you can get a good camera and the 14 54. As mentioned the lens is number one on the list. Don't rule out the 70 300 either, it is quite a lens for the price

[rubeel]

If you are going to do just portraits, then i would suggest get a 35-100 f2, this is purely for portraits, it is weather sealed and works nice inside outside but is very heavy but i like the idea by eharrim although i doubt you can get a 50-200 for less than 600$.

i have 14-54 and it is a great lens but for portraits i think you would need the 50mm f2 or 35-100mm f2 as i have seen better results with them in portraits. just my 2 cents