Good camera for a noob?

[nikki_dyann]

I have never been much of a photographer, but as of late I am being drawn to it more and more. Right now I am just using a cheapie from wal mart to take pics with and it doesn't do too bad but does anyone have suggestions on a good "real" camera for someone starting out, any tips or suggestions about starting out in photography??

 

[Greg Campbell]

Well, as always, the questions are: "How much $ do you want to spend?" and "What do you want to take pictures of?"

$50 will get you a perfectly functional 'antique' film SLR camera.
By $500 you'll be well into the new DSLR range.
In between, there is a wide range of digital point-and-shoot and 'bridge' cameras.

You can buy new, refurbished (Adorama offers great warranty on refurbs) or used. You can find used digital SLR bodies (older models) for under $200 at places like Fred Miranda and photo.net.

Chasing often favors wide-angle lenses, which can be rather expensive.

-Greg

 

[Jason Foster]

Canon Rebel XT (DSLR) on ebay for around $200 and decent lens. Work on good lens upgrades. Good thing with the XT is they are pretty much as cheap as they go...so you'll be able to sell it for about what you paid if you don't like it.

 

[Darren Addy]

Jason's suggestion is a good one. Getting a USED DSLR as your first isn't a bad idea as the value depreciation has made it a "very little to lose" proposition. IF you go that route, besides the obvious "how it looks" condition you will want to know how many shutter actuations have taken place on it. This is like the odometer on a car, telling you how "low mileage" it is. Some cameras give you this information from the menu system, for those that don't you can get it from the EXIF data with a free program like PhotoME.

 

[Jarrod Barnett]

I agree that a used DSLR is a good way to go but the best advice I can tell you after you make your choice of what to buy is.... LEARN HOW TO USE IT! You can have the best camera money can buy but if you dont know how to use it the pictures could look worse than if they were taken with a disposable camera.

As for brands... Canon, Nikon or Sony are most popular. Personally I have a couple different Sony camera's from a simple pocket carry point & shoot to my DSLR. Great quality, very user friendly, durable and dependable. Everyone has their own opinion of brand or what they're comfortable with but I dont think you will go wrong with either of those 3 brands.

 

[nikki_dyann]

im actually consindering the canon rebel, been looking at that for a while just havn't heard of anyone useing it for chasing, but more than likely ill go with that one

 

[John Gnuechtel]

I still use my original Digital Rebel that I bought way back in early 2004. It is the camera I learned on. It's served me very well and still shoots great. You can see a small selection of my stuff here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28278560@N07/ Get your hands on a used one and you'll have some extra dough for better glass, which--unlike the body--can stay with you forever. Here are the main give-and-takes as I see them:

• Burst mode is slowish and doesn't shoot a lot of frames before it has to stop for writing.
• Screen on the back is smallish.
• Some people don't like the plastic build...but mine hasn't broken after being rained on and dropped in sand.
• 6.2 megapixels is a little low, but your file sizes are much smaller than drastically higher megapixel cameras. Once you get past about 10mp you're really just wasting memory anyway.
• High ISO is terrible. I go great lengths to stay at 100, and absolutely never go over 400. Outdoor and daylight shots, or tripodded stuff can look as good as any camera. However, low light pictures and things like indoor sporting events are gonna be grainy.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

im actually consindering the canon rebel, been looking at that for a while just havn't heard of anyone useing it for chasing, but more than likely ill go with that one

From 2004 through March 2010 all I used were rebels(X, XT, XSi). I actually regret going to the 5Dii in March. Had the 2Ti been announced before I bought the 5D I'd very likely have went with that.

For chasing there's really very very little need to go higher than a rebel line. Build quality and "weather sealing"....blah. FPS, no use. Image quality pretty much always as good as the 10-50D line above it. Early on the sensors were identical. Half the time the lower models get the better/newer technology first anyway.

I've known plenty of chasers using the same rebel line. If it helps one afford better glass then it's very much a smart move. Like now I have a full frame but I can't afford a better wide angle for the thing as it makes my 17-40L look like ass. Recently came to the conclusion there's no more open past F7.1 for me and that lens. Vignetting is just nasty on full frame. Then there's the whole soft corners crap. All problems I never had on rebel, etc crop sensors. FWIW

If you go rebel I'd at least try to get an XSi. With 2 versions out after that already Id think it's price point would be rather nice and you wouldn't save much going lower. At least I wouldn't think.

 

[Greg Campbell]

The Drebel takes dandy lightning pics! About 2/3 of these were taken with a lowly XT. http://www.flickr.com/photos/19806236@N00/sets/72157622800084513/

The cameras are small, light, and not very solidly built, IMO. The tiny viewfinder sucks, and the chicklet control buttons are a pain in the ass. On the other hand, they camera does what any camera should - make decent images. Newer bodies may have slightly better noise characteristics and, of course, more megapickles, and do-dad features; none of which have a hell of a lot to do with making pretty pictures. In short, an older Rebel will make a dandy first camera.

As Jarrod points out, it's NOT about the camera, or the lens. It's about the photographer understanding what they are doing and investing the mental effort into making good shots happen. So many digital shooters fall into the trap of 'throwing' their fancy toy at the scene. They are invariable disappointed when the camera takes a perfectly exposed, ill composed, ugly, boring picture. You don't (let the camera) take good shots, you make them!

If you're new to photography, I'd suggest you rent two ancient books from the library: The Camera and The Negative, both by A. Adams. Both are friendly and accessible yet quite informative. Camera function and sensitometry haven't changed near as much as the camera manufacturers might have you believe!