Pro Cameras: Canon and Nikon
- Thread starter Mosquito
- Start date
nailz
Member
I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking it. 
Anyway, there's no way to really get movement correct without Autofocus. I was more talking about people who spend $700 and leave their camera on full-auto all the time. I normally shoot manual. For concerts, I'll shoot TV, and when I just don't give a fuck I'll shoot auto.
Anyway, there's no way to really get movement correct without Autofocus. I was more talking about people who spend $700 and leave their camera on full-auto all the time. I normally shoot manual. For concerts, I'll shoot TV, and when I just don't give a fuck I'll shoot auto.
It is indeed a bit converse isn't it? The more advanced a capable the gear, with all the fancy features, yet putting it into manual mode 
....as advanced as these things are, in all auto modes, program being the most notorious, you are still letting the camera make your exposure decisions, vs forcing it to expose the creative way you want for the scene at hand.
I've come to shoot manual at all times, even my flashes, be it events, weddings, concerts, promo, etc.
-A
....as advanced as these things are, in all auto modes, program being the most notorious, you are still letting the camera make your exposure decisions, vs forcing it to expose the creative way you want for the scene at hand. I've come to shoot manual at all times, even my flashes, be it events, weddings, concerts, promo, etc.
-A
mgirishfan
Member
I'm a Nikon fan from back back back to the film days, which for me ended in 2003 when I first got a DSLR. Esa's tips are straight-on so I can't add much to that, but I will say a higher-end DSLR, combined with shooting RAW, will allow you a lot of flexibility during shooting and processing - pump up that ISO! (Go back in this thread and see where Allen had the ISO pushed to 51,200!!!) My next 'big' shoot is next month in a hall where the lighting ranges from dark dark dinosaur to pure white so I never know what I'm going to get there. The only other thing I can add now is that when you go for memory cards, do not buy on price alone. I have shot tens of thousands of images on ONLY SanDisk (what I use now) or Lexar cards (what I used when I started shooting digital) and I have NEVER EVER lost an image. NEVER. So don't skimp on the card - it is never worth it!
Cheers and happy shooting, everyone!
Cheers and happy shooting, everyone!
nailz
Member
You won't walk away from shows with the pictures I'm getting. Hell, I don't. You'll spend hours agonizing in photoshop over whether to move the levels slider over .01 more to dark or not, and then wonder just how much to push the sharp mask, and how you're going to make that gaussian blur look right with the rest of the shot. Post Processing is a necessary bitch. Get used to it.
That said, the best thing you can do is take that camera everywhere with you, and take a ton of pictures of everything. If you haven't, go to Barnes and Nobel, and sit down with a photography book on your camera. Read it. Then go out and experiment. Get off Auto mode and play around with AV/TV and Manual mode. It'll force you to
1. Think about your shots.
2. Think about what the settings do.
Also, browse flickr or some other photo websites. Start looking at photographers. Pick one or two you really like and study their work. Look at it and ask yourself WHY you like it. Pay attention to composition and lighting. Mimic it. It'll help. Looking at Allen's photos and what he was doing in Post really made me push my limits to find out how he was getting those colors to pop, and helped me get creative. Two of my favorite photographers are Aaron Nace and Rosie Hardy.
Don't even bother going into a concert with either of those lenses. My guess is they're probably f/4-5.6? At those kind of levels, and especially with the 55-200, you're not going to get anything worth looking at. You need a faster lens. Anything F/2.8 or faster. NECESSITY. The 50mm F/1.8 will allow more light with faster shutter time, but you really need to practice your focus with that f/1.8 setting or you're going to trash shots. It's not easy. I shot at f/2.8 for PP X and it worked out well. Shutter speed 1/125 at least, 1/160 is better.
Also, any prime lens (non-zoom) are going to give you incredible, razor sharp pictures, because they're designed to do one thing, and while they don't have the flex of a zoom, they do what they do incredibly well. I would say I probably get sharper pictures out of my 50mm than I do out of my 24-70L, which, new, is 14 times the price. (The overall quality of the L, AND the Zoom, AND the F/2.8 make it worth it for me.)
That lens isn't something you save up for. That lens is something you work towards. You hone your photography skills, you push your limits, you figure out what you like shooting, and what you need to shoot it, then you RENT anything your considering buying, take it out, and shoot the everloving shit out of everything, and see how you like it. I didn't buy this lens lightly. I wanted to take my photography to the next level. Pro lenses are really not for people who "just want to take some pictures'. I know that sounds really elitist, but seriously, save your money. There's a lot of lenses for 1/4 the cost that will suit 80% of the hobbiest market fine, even for concert photography.
Anyway, I rented that lens for a week and took it to San Francisco. Here's one of my better results. (I cloned in the sky today. It was a cloudy mess that day. The city itself was taken with the L lens.)
Before:
After:
edit: formatting/extra info.
Kazi
Photographer
I've been reading up on DSLRs for a while and am planning on buying one next weekend. I haven't owned a DSLR before although I've had the chance to use an EOS 20D at work. I'm currently considering the EOS 7D, EOS Rebel T2i, D300S, and D90. Is there anyone that has used these bodies that can give me some first-hand experience on what they're like? I plan on using the camera for mostly outdoor shots of nature/wildlife/scenery etc.. but am also really interested in getting some great concert shots. I was also curious about the best places to buy DSLR cameras. I feel that going somewhere like a Wolf Camera would be my best bet, but was wondering if anyone has had any experience purchasing these online. Thanks in advance.
esa
Member
All of the above are good cameras.
Canon and Nikon have three lines of camera bodies: "pro" (costing thousands), "midrange" (couple thousand) and "consumer" (hundreds). D90 and T2i are models from the manufacturers' consumer lines. D90 is way overdue for being replaced with a new model; T2i is brand new. D300S and 7D are from the midrange lines. If you plan to learn to shoot concerts in fully manual exposure mode, this is the way to go -- consumer models don't (or didn't use to) have a way to adjust both shutter and aperture (or ISO) with the camera on your face - you had to plough into menus.
Your nature/wildlife priority is a good reason to stay with "small sensor" bodies (which all of the above are), giving you extra "reach" with telephoto lenses. For ultimate low-light performance you'd want a full-frame sensor body, but the current midrange models from both manufacturers are plenty good enough.
The Canon vs Nikon decision today for most people is purely a subjective one. Canon's super-telephoto lens selection (for nature/wildlife purposes) is better and cheaper, but if you plan to stick with consumer zoom lenses that won't matter. Both have their own signature ergonomics -- you need to try both on for size (and note that consumer bodies are smaller than midrange bodies.)
I buy camera gear only from amazon or bhphoto.com.
Good luck with your decision.
