Who's got which photo camera and why

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by Von Hinten

Thanks for the hints and tips guys, I'm absorbing all this info and try and get clear what it is that I want. I don't really mind about the size of the camera itself, that's not a big, or even non-issue for me. I've decided that I want to come home with better pictures now so when I'm out to take them I'll just pack accordingly. Easy.

What I do care about is being able to shoot fast moving targets like racing cars blasting by for example. The biggest issue I've had with the smaller cams is that there usually was a significant amount of time between the moment where I take the shot, pull the trigger so to speak, and the actual recording of the picture. Not to mention the time it then takes to safe that picture so I can move on to the next.

This past weekend, for example, I was at the 6 hours of Spa Francorchamps where, among other absolutely gorgeous cars, the classic prototypes from the late 60's and 70's were doing their thing and it proved hard enough a task to catch them on my default camera. But I had also borrowed an standard Canon EOS 400D from work and using that camera I was so much abler to actually getting the moving cars on film.

Like John said I probably have a long way to go to get from the 'shooting snapshots level' to the taking photographs one, but the ease of how I could use the speed at which I could take the shots alone would have been well worth the bigger investment.

Obviously I don't know (yet, as it's clear I have lots of reading to do) how photo saving time compares to the compact camera of course but that would be a big factor to consider for me.

For fast moving objects you will need a DSLR. I have a Canon 450D and am very happy with it.
Do you need fast continues shooting? If you need to take 10 shots continuesly in a row in RAW format, I dont think the XXXD series is fast enough. You may want to look into the 50D
Added to this you need a fast lens. Look at the Sigma lenses with F2.8

[Von Hinten]

The 450D has popped up more than once now since I've started looking around more seriously. Seems that basically does everything I think I'll be needing and most likely a little bit more. I do need to look into this whole lenses business though, that's new territory for me.

[Jimbuna]

Start at the level of your understanding and move progressively forward from there.

Photography can be a very rewarding hobby/experience.

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by Von Hinten

The 450D has popped up more than once now since I've started looking around more seriously. Seems that basically does everything I think I'll be needing and most likely a little bit more. I do need to look into this whole lenses business though, that's new territory for me.

Ask me enything you like - I went through this 8 months ago.
Please note again: The FPS in RAW with the 450D is at more than 3, BUT after some shots the buffer will run full and the FPS will drop.
Please keep that in mind.

A breakdown of the areas of lenses:
1) Budget lenses (f.ex. Canon kit lens)
2) 3rd party quality lenses. (f.ex. Sigma 18-50 F2.8)
3) Canon L series

ad1) They are very cheap and you get alot for your money.
The quality can be hit-miss
They are NOT light sensitive...low F is 3.5 quickly moves to 5.6
They are NOT fast.

ad2) Prices between 1) and 3)
Quality very close to Canon L
Light sensitive with F2.8 through the entire zoom
Fast

ad3) Very expensive, but top of the line.
Great quality
Light sensitive with low F through the entire zoom
Fast

Remember that the sensor in the 450D body is so good that it can deal with even the L series, so a kit lens should only be used to start with.

[Von Hinten]

Thanks a bunch John, that's great info.

I'll start shooting questions then: that buffer running full, does it empty itself after not taking shots for a few minutes/seconds? Or how else do you get the camera back up to speed again?

And what does 'low F is 3.5 quickly moves to 5.6' and 'Light 'sensitive with F2.8' mean? I guess I just need to know what the 'F' stands for.

With regard to the lenses I think I read that you suggest sticking with the default lens until I grow out of it. Oh, and not get a Canon L series until I know for 110% sure that the reason the picture wasn't what I needed it to was not my own fault. Check.

[Prof]

I'm going to disagree slightly with McBeck's explanation of Canon's lens range.
Canon has a very wide range of lenses, with plenty in-between the budget lenses and the L-series lenses. In my experience, there are usually three choices with Canon lenses; budget, medium, and L-series.

The budget lenses are very cheap, but still produce good quality images if you understand the limitations of the lens. Usually they will have small maximum apertures (f/4 to f/5.6) and slower focusing (the old arc-form drive or micro-motor focusing). Examples: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF-S 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

The next step-up usually gives faster focusing (using either of Canon's USM focus motors), but keeps the small apertures. Historically it also added things like IS to the lens, but that is now found on budget lenses too. Examples: EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.

The top of the range are the L-series, which give optimum optical quality, large apertures (f/1.2 for primes, constant f/2.8 for zooms) and very rugged build quality. You also get the full ring-USM focusing in most (all?) cases. Examples: EF 50mm f/1.4L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM.

The kit-lens which comes with the 450D is fine, as long as you accept that it's slow to focus and won't be very good for low-light photography. If you primarily shoot landscapes, it's fine. It's only when you need to do something your current lens doesn't do that you should upgrade.

I've had a 400D for a couple of years now, and I'm reasonably happy with it. The new 7D would be ideal for me, but I can't justify the cost yet.

The buffer will fill up if the camera is capturing data faster than it can be written to the memory card. At that point, the camera will stop taking photos until enough of the buffer has been dumped to the card that it can fit in one more photo. On my 400D in RAW with a Sandisk Extreme III CF card, I can shoot 9 images in a burst before the buffer fills up. At that point, it starts taking shots about once every 2 seconds. It's a good 20 seconds or so before the buffer is completely empty again.

The f/# number you see on lens descriptions is the maximum aperture of the lens. It's the size of the hole through which the light travels to the sensor. A larger hole means more light, and a shallower depth of field. Smaller f/ numbers are larger apertures. If you see a lens specified like EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, that means that it's f/3.5 at 18mm which changes to f/5.6 at 55mm. If you zoom to, say, 30mm, you'll probably get f/4. You can always choose a smaller aperture (f/8, f/11, etc...) if you want, but those will be the largest you can get with that lens.

Hopefully that explains some of it

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by Prof

I'm going to disagree slightly with McBeck's explanation of Canon's lens range.
Canon has a very wide range of lenses, with plenty in-between the budget lenses and the L-series lenses. In my experience, there are usually three choices with Canon lenses; budget, medium, and L-series.

The budget lenses are very cheap, but still produce good quality images if you understand the limitations of the lens. Usually they will have small maximum apertures (f/4 to f/5.6) and slower focusing (the old arc-form drive or micro-motor focusing). Examples: EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF-S 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

The next step-up usually gives faster focusing (using either of Canon's USM focus motors), but keeps the small apertures. Historically it also added things like IS to the lens, but that is now found on budget lenses too. Examples: EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.

The top of the range are the L-series, which give optimum optical quality, large apertures (f/1.2 for primes, constant f/2.8 for zooms) and very rugged build quality. You also get the full ring-USM focusing in most (all?) cases. Examples: EF 50mm f/1.4L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM.

The kit-lens which comes with the 450D is fine, as long as you accept that it's slow to focus and won't be very good for low-light photography. If you primarily shoot landscapes, it's fine. It's only when you need to do something your current lens doesn't do that you should upgrade.

I've had a 400D for a couple of years now, and I'm reasonably happy with it. The new 7D would be ideal for me, but I can't justify the cost yet.

The buffer will fill up if the camera is capturing data faster than it can be written to the memory card. At that point, the camera will stop taking photos until enough of the buffer has been dumped to the card that it can fit in one more photo. On my 400D in RAW with a Sandisk Extreme III CF card, I can shoot 9 images in a burst before the buffer fills up. At that point, it starts taking shots about once every 2 seconds. It's a good 20 seconds or so before the buffer is completely empty again.

The f/# number you see on lens descriptions is the maximum aperture of the lens. It's the size of the hole through which the light travels to the sensor. A larger hole means more light, and a shallower depth of field. Smaller f/ numbers are larger apertures. If you see a lens specified like EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, that means that it's f/3.5 at 18mm which changes to f/5.6 at 55mm. If you zoom to, say, 30mm, you'll probably get f/4. You can always choose a smaller aperture (f/8, f/11, etc...) if you want, but those will be the largest you can get with that lens.

Hopefully that explains some of it

Good comments too. I have though not found any canon lenses (yet) in the mid range that can match the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 or 70-200 F2.8.
Have you? I can only find canon lenses thats either 3.5-5.6 or highend(L)

[Fish]

Nikon Coolpix P90.

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im.../p90/index.htm

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by Von Hinten

Thanks a bunch John, that's great info.

I'll start shooting questions then: that buffer running full, does it empty itself after not taking shots for a few minutes/seconds? Or how else do you get the camera back up to speed again?

And what does 'low F is 3.5 quickly moves to 5.6' and 'Light 'sensitive with F2.8' mean? I guess I just need to know what the 'F' stands for.

With regard to the lenses I think I read that you suggest sticking with the default lens until I grow out of it. Oh, and not get a Canon L series until I know for 110% sure that the reason the picture wasn't what I needed it to was not my own fault. Check.

OK.

F number refers to the apeture. Its the size of the whole the lens makes to the senor in the camerabody.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture

A small hole will let in little light, but give you great depth of field(DOF).
Thats a high F number. See pic below:
http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs47/o/20...4e41d110fa.jpg

A big hole will let in alot of light, but give you a short DOF.
Thats a low F number. See pic below:
http://fc07.deviantart.com/fs49/o/20...15057501ba.jpg

So if you apply that to what I wrote it means that a lens which has 5.6 as the lowest F number, it means that its not light sensitive.

So why is it important how much light is let in?
In order for the sensor to capture a photo it needs a certain amount of light. How much light it gets depends on 3 things:
1) Aperture
2) Shutterspeed (How long the sensor receives light from the lens. If the speed is too slow you will get camera shake and thus blurry picures)
3) ISO (How sensitive the sensor is. The more sensitive it needs to be, the more noise it will generate - Low is better)

This pic was taken with a shutterspeed of 30 seconds (on a tripod):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3625/...cb1903a2_b.jpg

This pic was taken with a shutterspeed of 1/200 of a second:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/...b3992586_b.jpg

The lens I use can go from 2.8-22 through the entire zoom range. It does not matter if im at 18mm or 50mm.
The kit lens starts at 3.5 at 18mm, but you only need to zoom a little bit and it will go to 4.5 as the lowest F.

In regards to the buffer. Its inside the camera and its a fast memory thats used to store data untill its transfered to the mem card. The buffer will continue to be emptied into the mem card, but in the XXXD series the mem interface cant keep up with the buffer. The slowdown will only be for some seconds untill the buffer data is moved to the mem card.

As far as lenses I would suggest you think hard about what you need. Some people can live with the kit lens for some time.
I went straight for the Sigma lens, because I knew I would be limited too much by the kit lens.

What will you use the camera for? What scenarios?

Have you looked at my portfolio?