Choosing my first DSLR camera but need some direction

[Kyle918]

I am starting my first SW tank within the next few weeks and I think I want to invest in my first DSLR camera around Christmas. I haven't used anything outside of an iPhone camera in about 6 years. I've done a little bit of research into DSLR but I need a little bit of direction on what I should focus on, aspect wise of the camera, be it settings or internal hardware to get the best experience with photographing my tank. I've read that this really comes down to the lenses I purchase, so long as a few basic options are available on the camera.

My question is open to any suggestions on cameras but some specific questions I have are:

What is a good starting range for someone like myself? I was hoping to stay below $800.00 or so for both the camera body and macro lens.

What are some good numbers or specs to know to discern a good, better and best camera?

What brand has a good lineup for starter DSLR in terms of easy of use, features and price?

 

[msderganc]

I'd look for a used or refurbed Canon T2i, or possibly T3i. Great sensor, and easy to use. You can easily get both the camera and macro lens for ~550.

dpreview.com is a great place for camera reviews as well. You can't really go wrong with any of the Canon or Nikon DSLRs.

 

[sirreal63]

There is also a photography section here where you will get a lot of great recommendations from other hobbyists who are also camera buffs.

 

[dmh8801]

I've had a Canon Rebel 350D for about 6 or more years now. (not positve on the time but I've had it a while) It was my first DSLR and It's been a good camera. Looking at the specs of the newer Rebel's I don't think you could go wrong with one just starting out.

The big thing is learning how to use it. There is a learning curve to figuring out the the best way to get the picture you want. Of course you could also just use auto mode and push the button, but to me that kind of defeats the purpose of having a DSLR.

Here is a good book I bought when I first got mine: Understanding Exposure

I don't have a macro lens (yet) so I can't coment on that. I currently have an 85mm (great lens) and the kit lens 18-55mm non IS. If I know that the 85 will work with what I'm going to be shooting I will use it. If not I will use the kit lens and work with it. Guess what I'm trying to say is you can get good results with a kit lens but better results with a shot specific lense. Best thing to do is if you see a picture you like ask what the person used and the settings. See if they will give up their secrets.

 

[ontop27]

I just got a canon rebel t3. Love it. Is the t3i better yes...do you need it for what your doing most likely not. I also got the canon 60mm macro. Awesome lens. Just make sure when you get a lens the magnificat is 1:1 or better. Many lens are labeled macro but are 1:3 or 1:4

 

[d2mini]

As stated above, you can't go wrong with nikon or canon.
Get as much camera as you can for the money.
I have nikons and for them the best value in a macro lens is the Tamron 90mm 1:1.
But that right there is at least half your budget so a lightly used body may be a good idea.

One thing to look out for on the cheaper bodies is many of them don't have an internal focusing motor which means your lenses need to have it.

Something else you are going to need to learn (and purchase) to get the most out of your camera is software. Adobe Lightroom is what I would recommend for organizing and retouching your photos. You can download a fully working trial before you buy.

 

[Get Hooked]

Look at the lenses each manufacturer has to offer and decide which you prefer. Camera bodies come and go each year like all technology products, but lenses never go out of style, new ones are just usually added to the lineup.

The "right" lens for the scene you are shooting is more important than all of today's camera bodies since all recent years camera bodies are all good compared to say 7+ years ago.

With that being said I personally own a Sony Alpha NEX Series - lowest availability of lenses because it's a relatively new line, but for me I also had to factor in size and weight. If it's too big, and I don't bring it with me, then what's the point no matter how good the camera may be.

 

[Deinonych]

Nikon or Canon - pick your poison. Both make great lenses and camera bodies. I personally use a Canon EOS 5D Mark II.

 

[3dees]

photography has been my other hobby for forty years. I have had Cannon and Nikon and they are both great systems. other camera makers are just as good but the problem is that it's hard to find third party lens, flash, etc. which can save you money. I use all Sigma lens with my Nikon D300. you will have to go used to get a dslr and macro lens for under 800.00. there is nothin wrong with older cameras. mine is 3 years old and I would'nt trade it for anything on the market now. any camera can be put on auto everything until you get a better understanding of things. you certainly don't need a macro lens. I do most of my aquarium pics with a 17-70 mm for fts and a 70-200mm for close ups. the best thing for tank shots is flash. it freezes the fish and allows for great depth of field. I hang two flashes over the top of the tank and it works really well.

 

[Kyle918]

Thank you for all of your advice and suggestions! I have actually had my eye on the Canon Rebel T3i for its overall set of functions, features and image quality for the price point but I will definitely spend some time researching. I don't plan to settle on any particular camera any time soon. I need to save a bit first I did just get wind though that my mother, who is very supportive of this new hobby of mine, has offered to purchase my first DSLR, despite the price tag. I will still hunt for the best deal though and will probably still contribute to the overall cost. Used didn't cross my mind but one would assume such precision instruments are normally well taken care of so a used one from a reputable place is now an option.

@msderganc - That is an excellent site. That is exactly what I was looking for for reviews and detailed information on the hobby itself. Thank you.


Is is a particular thread or is there a section for photography? I did a quick scroll through for a section but didn't see one.

d2mini, I'm glad you posted here. Just to let you know, I have spent countless hours obsessing over your tanks, among others haha. I really do appreciate the time you have spent photographing your tank to the level you have. It truly has driven my passion of the hobby to where it is now and I haven't even gotten my feet wet yet haha. It has also driven me to want a camera so I can do the same not only for myself but for the next person like myself dreaming of the day they one day have their own slice of the ocean. I am thrilled to be joining all of you in the near future not to mention my buddy and his girlfriend who also wants a cube tank (after see your previous 130 gallon cube) for their first ever marine tank as well. He hopes to get started in 2014, conveniently once I've gotten all my mistakes out the way haha.

I do agree with software though the thought hasn't crossed my mind until you mentioned it. I own both an apple and a windows desktop so I'll have options in that regard.

Thank you everyone for the suggestions, I will take each of them and use them to make a decision.

I am open to any other suggestions and tips as well!

 

[PatW]

It is Nikon or Canon for a DSLR. These are the only 2 companies that make a full range of lenses.

I know Nikon better. With Nikon, you want autofocus. The drive can be in the camera or in the lens, an AFS lens, preferably both. You can get a cropped sensor camera like a D7100 or a full frame sensor like the D600 or D800. The larger sensor has advantages and a higher price.

I would suggest that you go read the reviews of cameras and lenses at Digital Photography Review.

 

[aandfsoccr04]

Is is a particular thread or is there a section for photography? I did a quick scroll through for a section but didn't see one.
I am open to any other suggestions and tips as well!

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=118

 

[d2mini]

d2mini, I'm glad you posted here. Just to let you know, I have spent countless hours obsessing over your tanks, among others haha. I really do appreciate the time you have spent photographing your tank to the level you have. It truly has driven my passion of the hobby to where it is now and I haven't even gotten my feet wet yet haha. It has also driven me to want a camera so I can do the same not only for myself but for the next person like myself dreaming of the day they one day have their own slice of the ocean. I am thrilled to be joining all of you in the near future not to mention my buddy and his girlfriend who also wants a cube tank (after see your previous 130 gallon cube) for their first ever marine tank as well. He hopes to get started in 2014, conveniently once I've gotten all my mistakes out the way haha.

Awesome. It's always good to hear when the build thread does somebody some good. :thumbsup:

 

[dmh8801]

I hang two flashes over the top of the tank and it works really well.

That is a great idea!

 

[dkeller_nc]

I've been a photographer for about 35 years, this is my take on this question:

You're asking the wrong question (which is common, don't feel bad). As others have alluded to on the thread, the correct question isn't "which camera", it's which lenses.

Both Canon and Nikon have great camera lens systems, and both have strong adherents in the professional photographic community. Generally speaking, Canon has extreme market domination among sport photographers, and Nikon has extreme domination among nature photographers. Portrait photography seems to be somewhat evenly split.

The reason for this isn't Nikon or Canon's cameras, it's their lenses. Canon makes telephoto lenses with substantial amounts of (high quality) plastic in them, so the are considerably lighter weight. In fast-action sports photography, weight matters a great deal. For nature photographers, weight isn't as big a deal as lens interchangeability and choice. Because all Nikon lenses will work with all modern Nikon cameras, even lenses made back in the 1970s, there's a good deal more lens choice with Nikon.

The limitation with older Canon lenses is that Canon changed lens mounts in the late 1980's, again in early 2000s, essentially obsoleting some older lenses.

So - here's what I would advise. Make a choice between either Canon or Nikon, because while you will be changing out the camera on a every 3-6 year basis, your money is going to be in lenses. You definitely don't want to build up 2-3k in Nikon lenses and then decide you want to change to Canon, and vice versa. Any of the current Nikon or Canon DLSRs will be more than adequate for your needs. Do not focus on megapixels - anything over 8 megapixels is pointless unless you're a pro that needs to print poster-sized photos. Instead, go to a local professional camera shop and handle several of either Canon or Nikon cameras (whichever system you've chosen) to decide which one fits your hand and eye better.

Then, buy lenses according to your needs. This is where you want to spend your money. The world's greatest camera will yield crappy photos with a cheap, poorly designed lens. But even a mediocre camera can take spectacular photographs with superior lenses.

As far as macro lenses, you're going to want one with a focal length of about 105mm and a reproduction ratio of about 1:1 or 1:2 for reef tank photography. A lens with a shorter focal length may frustrate you when trying to take photos of very small things, because you have to be right on top of it to get it into the focal field. In an aquarium, the distance between the glass and the item you want to photograph can be longer than your lens will handle.

 

[Kyle918]

I've been a photographer for about 35 years, this is my take on this question:

You're asking the wrong question (which is common, don't feel bad). As others have alluded to on the thread, the correct question isn't "which camera", it's which lenses.

Both Canon and Nikon have great camera lens systems, and both have strong adherents in the professional photographic community. Generally speaking, Canon has extreme market domination among sport photographers, and Nikon has extreme domination among nature photographers. Portrait photography seems to be somewhat evenly split.

The reason for this isn't Nikon or Canon's cameras, it's their lenses. Canon makes telephoto lenses with substantial amounts of (high quality) plastic in them, so the are considerably lighter weight. In fast-action sports photography, weight matters a great deal. For nature photographers, weight isn't as big a deal as lens interchangeability and choice. Because all Nikon lenses will work with all modern Nikon cameras, even lenses made back in the 1970s, there's a good deal more lens choice with Nikon.

The limitation with older Canon lenses is that Canon changed lens mounts in the late 1980's, again in early 2000s, essentially obsoleting some older lenses.

So - here's what I would advise. Make a choice between either Canon or Nikon, because while you will be changing out the camera on a every 3-6 year basis, your money is going to be in lenses. You definitely don't want to build up 2-3k in Nikon lenses and then decide you want to change to Canon, and vice versa. Any of the current Nikon or Canon DLSRs will be more than adequate for your needs. Do not focus on megapixels - anything over 8 megapixels is pointless unless you're a pro that needs to print poster-sized photos. Instead, go to a local professional camera shop and handle several of either Canon or Nikon cameras (whichever system you've chosen) to decide which one fits your hand and eye better.

Then, buy lenses according to your needs. This is where you want to spend your money. The world's greatest camera will yield crappy photos with a cheap, poorly designed lens. But even a mediocre camera can take spectacular photographs with superior lenses.

As far as macro lenses, you're going to want one with a focal length of about 105mm and a reproduction ratio of about 1:1 or 1:2 for reef tank photography. A lens with a shorter focal length may frustrate you when trying to take photos of very small things, because you have to be right on top of it to get it into the focal field. In an aquarium, the distance between the glass and the item you want to photograph can be longer than your lens will handle.

There is a lot of really good information here. I will reread this a few time. I did find out mentioning cameras today to a friend that he has a Nikon D5000 just laying around :uhoh3: Anyway, he said I can borrow it while he is away at college this semester. I'm glad I can get some practice in before purchasing my own in the next few months.

I took several pictures but I have on a very, very basic idea of the settings and how they operate as a whole but here are a few I did pick from probably close to 50-60 that I took.

There are my two clownfish in QT.

 

[3dees]

this is my flash set up. it's my 120 gal discus tank which I broke down for a fowlr. two Nikon flashes with commander on the camera.

 

[d2mini]

Those look great.
But have you tried the flashes with saltwater? The temp of the flashes is much better matched with freshwater lighting. What would you do about the intensity of the blues in sw?

 

[3dees]

I can play with the custom white balance or use some gel filters on the flash heads. maybe even do it in photoshop.

 

[d2mini]

Yeah ok. That's why I don't bother with flash over my tank.
Just set a custom wb and jack up the iso to get a fast enough shutter speed and take advantage of the tank's natural lighting. Then just slight tweaks in lightroom or photoshop.

I might play with it sometime though... just to see what kind of effects I can get.