Options
Jumping ship from Sony. Need help choosing new gear.
ecphotoman
Registered Users Posts: 109 Major grins
I've been using a Sony alpha a330 for over a year now. I'm shooting a few weddings for friends in the next couple months and it got me to start wanting a different setup.
Other than this camera everything I've ever shot with had been purchased used. That includes lenses and accessories.
I've looked at variety and prices from various vendors(I.E. KEH, Adorama, and B&H) and have cone to realize its more expensive and there's much less to choose from out there for Sony.
Anyway...adorama has quoted me about 400 for the body and kit lens alone. Once they inspect it it could go up or down of course.
I've found a few used camera bodies on Adorama from Nikon and Canon that I can get with my trade value.
NIKON D60 or D40x
CANON Rebel Xti or Xs or Xsi
Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?
P.s. I'm thinking nikon or canon so I can start building a decent collection of lenses and accessories and upgrade to a better camera in maybe another year. I know its a lateral move from my camera to these, buy I'm thinking long term. For the time being I'm doing weddings free to build a portfolio.
Other than this camera everything I've ever shot with had been purchased used. That includes lenses and accessories.
I've looked at variety and prices from various vendors(I.E. KEH, Adorama, and B&H) and have cone to realize its more expensive and there's much less to choose from out there for Sony.
Anyway...adorama has quoted me about 400 for the body and kit lens alone. Once they inspect it it could go up or down of course.
I've found a few used camera bodies on Adorama from Nikon and Canon that I can get with my trade value.
NIKON D60 or D40x
CANON Rebel Xti or Xs or Xsi
Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?
P.s. I'm thinking nikon or canon so I can start building a decent collection of lenses and accessories and upgrade to a better camera in maybe another year. I know its a lateral move from my camera to these, buy I'm thinking long term. For the time being I'm doing weddings free to build a portfolio.
0
Comments
To be honest if you are getting into weddings, I would hold out for better gear. Jumping ship from Sony to a Nikon D60 or a Canon XTi isn't much of a jump, not when you're going to find yourself shooting in one of the most challenging environments that a photographer can ever face.
Personally, the only "affordable" camera that I can confidently and fully recommend for wedding use is the Nikon D700. It is the best long-term, ~$2,000-ish investment that a low-light, action photojournalism photographer can make. The Canon "equivalent" comes close, the 5D mk2, but honestly I've shot plenty of weddings with it and I prefer the D700 by far, it focuses WAY more reliably in low light. Of course anybody in their right mind will wait ~1 week and see what the Canon 5D mk3 looks like; that may turn out to be a killer camera. :-)
Sure, you could get the job done with pretty much ANY other DSLR these days, but it will take SERIOUS attention to technical perfection with focusing, exposure, etc.
So the only questions I have to ask are, 1.) Is a D60 etc. the absolute maximum of your budget, and 2.) How well do you know photography in general, I mean how good are you with exposure, focus, lighting, etc?
Also, I suppose I should ask how SOON these weddings are coming up. The LAST thing you want to be doing is trying to learn a completely new camera right before a wedding. That's a really good way to accidentally bump the camera into manual focus just 5 seconds before the first kiss, or the first dance, or whatever.
BTW just to warn you, when you ask about weddings you are bound to get some heated responses; it may be downhill from here depending on how others are feeling. But if this is your first post and you're currently in Vegas, maybe you're just a WPPI attendee out for a troll? ;-)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I used to post on TPF, I got tired of all the angry trolls on there.
Well the closest wedding is June so I have a few months to learn the features and menu.
Ive been shooting for about 3 years, seriously about 1.5 of those. I don't have very much extra money because I'm the sole provider for my home. So a trade is about all I can do for now.
I'm still learning but here's some of my work WWW.ernestochavezphoto.com
Sent from mobile
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I'm using a shoe mounted flash I got from cameta. Its a cheap one with no ttl so its all manual. I usually bounce the flash.
Sent from mobile
That's great. An external flash helps image quality trremendously.
I highly recommend that you build a couple of DIY, and cheap (less than $3USD each), flash modifiers:
1) http://www.fototime.com/inv/908195739C4C0D3
2) Better Bounce Card
1) The first of these is called a "scoop" modifier and it's what I use primarily:
This modifier helps to:
Cast the shadows even further behind the subjects.
Soften the shadows.
2) The second modifier allows you to "catch" some of the light from the flash and redirect it forward. It's effectively just another type of "fill card" that have been used for decades. In effect, you get 2 - light sources from a single flash (bounce plus fill). Instead of using paper, like he says in the video, use a "Foamies" sheet, like shown in the "scoop" link above.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
On the Canon side consider a newer model, e.g. 60D, 50D, etc. or in the Rebel line T2i (550D)
weddings? consider putting more in the budget for good glass and lighting !
Sent from mobile
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
Absolutely untrue, but mildly amusing.
Professional wedding photographers use a broad variety of camera makes and models, including Nikon and Canon as, probably, the dominant brands.
I recommend starting with lighting and technique, building your available budget through working as a second shooter, and making a future choice based on what you find available that is appropriate. Nikon and Canon are both very viable, based mostly on the availability of used equipment.
Personally, I would recommend a Nikon D90 or D7000 as the minimum in that brand, or a Canon 40D, 50D or 60D as the minimum in that brand. You can keep your Sony as a temporary backup, until you can afford a backup body and lenses. I do not recommend shooting a wedding for hire until you have sufficient backup and redundancy.
The first value lens I would recommend, for either brand of body, is a Tamron SP 17-50mm, f2.8 XR Di II LD IF. You can find them used for either Nikon or Canon mounts, and it's an excellent standard zoom. I use a similar type of lens for around 80 percent of weddings and receptions (i.e., a standard zoom of constant f2.8).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
smart move, most ( if not all) pros use Canon
however good lighting and lens can help those with lesser brands
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/05/camera-test-canon-eos-rebel-t2i
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Lol, guess I should tell a couple of guys I know who use the Hassy H3DII and a Phase One/Leaf Aptus II combo they're doing it wrong.
5D2/1D MkII N/40D and a couple bits of glass.
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
The reason I originally recommended Nikon and explicitly NOT Canon, at this point, is because I have in fact used both systems very extensively and I feel that Nikon is a better system for anyone on a budget but looking to do big things.
Canon has historically been kind of "elitist" with their camera and lens lineups, tactfully designing their lower-end cameras to goad you into upgrading to the most expensive models possible. While Nikon, on the other hand, has a proven track record of simply cramming as many flagship / pro / high-end features into as affordable of a body as they can make profitable.
I know the "masses" mostly use Canon, and that is probably why you're leaning in that direction, but popularity is almost never a good deciding factor. I'm sure everybody else is telling themselves "well it must be the best if it's the most popular!" ...but if enough people tell themselves that, well, then popularity alone becomes more and more of a false sign of superiority.
Canon makes great cameras, don't get me wrong, and indeed MANY wedding photographers out there shoot on all kinds of different Canon bodies. I'm just here to say, as one person who has shot EXTENSIVELY with both brands, that my standards combined with my budget have consistently lead me to Nikon.
HOWEVER, as I originally mentioned, this could all change in ~1 week. Canon is poised to make a 5D mk3 announcement, and rumors are that it will be a true "mini flagship" as opposed to the "prosumer body" that the 5D mk2 turned out to be. If Canon puts their flagship 61-point AF module in a $2700 camera, I'll be singing a VERY different tune in ~1 week, because that will be one of the biggest steps Canon has ever taken away from their past "elitist" marketing philosophy...
Respectfully, to all die-hard Canon users out there, (although I suppose a little LESS respectfully, to any who vehemently argue in favor of one brand but have NEVER tried the others...)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
No worries, Believe me this is a welcome relief. Thephotoforum was bad, people on there just go at for no real reason lol. At least you guys just seem passionate about your work and not about trolling forums. Thanks for that light modifier idea btw.
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
Again, I'd still question whether or not a "ship jump" is the right thing to do at this point. Even if you can stretch your budget to get a newer Canon Rebel or something in the $500 range, you're still not very well-equipped for a wedding, compared to simply mastering the Sony camera you already have, and maybe investing in some better glass or something.
In all honesty, I think Sony is poised to become a major player in the pro DSLR market in the next few years, and they offer quite a few advantages that Canon and Nikon will simply NEVER be able to offer. (in-camera stabilization, etc.)
I do still think that Nikon is a superior system, however my point is that it won't make much of a difference if you're only getting a beginner DSLR. The perk would be of course, that your long-term lens purchases would be safe.
If you only ever plan to shoot weddings for friends and family though, if your long-term aspirations aren't to be some sort of full-time pro, then yeah I would say go for it, do whatever you like. As long as you understand your camera, and basics like lighting and posing, pretty much any camera will do. As much as I'm a stickler for this or that camera's performance or shortcomings, but at the end of the day it comes down to whether or not YOU can make the camera "dance and sing" for you.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I've used both systems, Nikon is the "elitist" with their usury high lens prices! seriously, Canon is way better. Just read some of the pity stories from former Nikon users on the Canon forums
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/
The best usually costs more.
Proofing: clients.captured-photos.com
Facebook: Like Me || Twitter: Follow Me
Gear: Lots of Nikon bodies & glass, an office full of tools and toys
I know we're just pulling each other's legs at this point, but it's fun so I'll keep going hehe! I'll just say that yeah, Nikon may indeed have an ego that bumps high-end lens prices up just a little bit more, but then again the glass IS usually superior to anything else on the market.
And whenever Canon does come out with something equal or better, (70-200 mk2, 24-70 mk2) ...it usually costs just as much, or even more. ($2300 24-70 mk2?)
Also, historically Nikon has consistently crammed as many flagship features as possible into a jaw-dropping price point. First the D70 in 2003, which eclipsed the previous D100 in many ways. Then the D300, which COMPLETELY eclipsed the D2X, although admittedly the D2X was a pretty sorry camera compared to the D3. But then the D700 and the D3, and now the D800 and the D3X...
In the Canon lineup, there is simply no history like this. They have their flagships, and their consumer cameras, and I can't think of a single flagship feature / spec that has EVER "trickled down", aside from the 8 FPS in the 7D and the sensor in the 5D mk2....
(/poke the dead horse)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
At comparable price points with glass and bodies the value goes to Canon !
seriously, go to a Canon forum like
http://photography-on-the.net/forum
read the stories of former Nikon users and when they compared photos
it's fun reading!
I'm still not sure what to go with canon or nikon. Both have really great lenses and cameras.
As I speak my a330 and all accessories are on eBay if I'm lucky ill have about 500 cash in hand once it sells.
I think ill be buying from adorama, they have some great deals on used gear.
Sent from mobile
I actually think they would be terrible choices for wedding photography. A D700 or 5D2 would be far superior in all the aspects that matter.
Selling on eBay should be fine, I've done that myself many times. I actually think it's sensible to switch to Canon or Nikon if you intend to setup as a wedding photographer. Both are great, and the choice of lenses is much better than with other systems. Also, having played with some Sony DSLRs myself, I found the Canons and Nikons to feel much more professional, subjective I know, but the Sony seemed more like a consumer gadget, even compared to my old 450d.
Regarding what gear to get. If you intend to become a full time wedding photographer, you will eventually want a full frame main camera such as the D700 or 5D2 or better. On the other hand, if you are going to do 10-15 lower budget weddings per year on a part time basis, maybe something like the 7D or D300 would be fine.
A decent f/2.8 zoom lens (~24-70 or ~17-55 range depending on FF or crop) is a must (f/4 with IS is ok for full frame). I would also recommend some kind of telephoto lens, possibly 100mm f/2 on a crop as the cheapest option.
Regarding flashes, personally, I would get a 430exII or equivalent as a minimum, TTL is very useful and will make your life a lot easier than manual flash IMHO.
Finally, for weddings you must have backups. So at least a 450d/rebel/d60 etc. in case your main camera gives up. A kit lens for the second camera as well, just incase. You will also need a backup flash.
All in all, the above kit will cost you several thousand $, but this really is the minimum you can get away with. I'm afraid that $500 is not nearly enough and you would be very irrisponsible to start charging for weddings if you haven't got proper kit. You could end up ruining somebody's big day, you really don't want to do that!
Well I want to take that to buy a d450 body or a nikon in that range. I figure I won't do weddings for charge for at least a year or two. I just want to get started building my set up again.
The few weddings I'm doing in the coming months are free of charge for friends. They realize I'm inexperienced and don't have all the gear. Its more or less convenience for all involved lol.
Sent from mobile
I would still rent/borrow/beg/steal a backup for the wedding day. Having zero pictures would be really inconvenient for everyone.