His first photographic camera
Antonio Correia
Registered Users Posts: 6,241 Major grins
A cousin of mines would like to buy a photographic camera to begin shooting.
He wanted to buy a Canon 400 D but - as he is a beginner - I suggested he should buy something more easy to begin with.
Today, he asked my opinion about the Canon G7 .
Can you please, give some advice on this option ?
I myself think this Canon G7 is a good choice.
He insists on Canon, but I see no reason for such a brand.:dunno
Thank you.:D :thumb
He wanted to buy a Canon 400 D but - as he is a beginner - I suggested he should buy something more easy to begin with.
Today, he asked my opinion about the Canon G7 .
Can you please, give some advice on this option ?
I myself think this Canon G7 is a good choice.
He insists on Canon, but I see no reason for such a brand.:dunno
Thank you.:D :thumb
All the best ! ... António Correia - Facebook
0
Comments
Have him also look at the Fuji F30 and F31fd. They give the best low-light performance of any digicam I've found, as well as superb daylight and outdoor photography.
A couple of DGrinners use them and seem to like them:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=27977
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=45201
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=45446
Then again, if he really wants a dSLR, it's not that tough to learn. I got my very own SLR Pentax film camera, manual everything, when I graduated from the 8th grade. I was borrowing my father's cameras for years before that (which is why he got me my own.)
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Depending on his age, you may wish to reconsider the 400D. Of course, I started taking pictures with any number of 'point and shoots' at a young age, but it was not until I was given a SLR at 14 that 'photography' was anything more that taking random pictures. The SLR forces one to think about the shot more, especially if forced to use 'manual' as I was, before any significant program modes.
I think a SLR will provide the education for taking photographs, vs snapshots. Yes you can do this with a G7, but a used 350D will run about the same, and provide lots of upgrade room.
Thank you for the advice and opinion.
You probably know that I am not very young. I am just young
I also begun with the Rolleicord and the Zeiss light reader.
I have shot in my young days with the Pentax, I can't remember the name, the Nikon F later and the Nikomat from 1974 on.
I have been stopped for quite (too many) years and I re-started with the 20D.
My advice is however, to start with a point and shoot.
He is 25 years old and he knows nothing about photography.
I pratically introduced it to him some months ago and suggested: Come on it's nice. Look at my pictures...:D Look at other people's works !
He has to learn the concepts, the composing, the frame, the feeling, the mood, the ... of photography.
To feel if he really likes photography. And if he does get his own style.:D
Later, he can then move to an dslr. OK, it may be the 20 D, the 30 D, the #D.
First things first. To read we have to learn the letters.:D
I think the point and shoot will always be usefull even if you have a dslr.
Sometimes I feel the need to have one of these cams when I want to go and have dinner with my friends in the restaurant and take some pictures and I don't want to drag the 20D, and the flash.
The infos you gave me are very valuable for myself. One of these days I want to buy a point and shoot.
My wife has a 350D - I mean HAD - I am now using. She likes to shoot with her 5/6 years old Sony. She does a nice job with it.
Cheers:D and thank you again.
Now if he insists on jumping straight to a Canon DSLR, I'd suggest getting a used one. Something like an older Rebel or maybe a 10D. That's about the same price range as a nice current P&S (KEH shows several Rebels in the $300 range); so that plus an inexpensive lens like a 50/1.8 isn't a bad start. It will certainly allow all the control needed to learn the basics. Then, if he doesn't care for it, he should be able to sell that used gear for nearly what he paid for it.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Some hours ago I have been talking to him and I think he is going for the Canon G7.
It's a good choice.
We talked about memory cards and I told him a fast card is a must.
I suggested that he could go and check if Sandisk Extreme III works fine with the G7.
I assume that Extreme IV is "too much" for the G7 and it's use would have no benefits on speeding the photographic process.
Cheers
Just out of my own curosity, what do you have against a dslr for him when the cost is so similar and you can do so much more in the long run with a dslr???
Jane B.
Jane.
I have nothing against a dslr for the young man. No. Did you think I thought so myself ? Oh, no. Just one of mines small language problem.
Thank you for your opinion.:D
Now, back to your idea: the Canon G7. Excellent camera. In some ways, this isn't a beginner's camera, either, in that it's very expensive for a fixed-lens model. But the feature set is excellent, the lens is good (better, I suspect, than the lens that comes with the Rebel XTi), it has image stabilization built in (unlike the XTi) and the camera, out of the box, is much more versatile. One drawback of just about all of the fixed-lens cameras is that the manual controls are not as easily accessible as they are on SLRs. But that's okay. The menus on the G7 are pretty easy to navigate. It's an excellent camera to use to learn to compose shots. THe sharp image-stabilized lens, the decent zoom range, and the great depth of field are likely to produce BETTER photos at first than a beginner will get from the SLR. The G7 is not a toy! Not to mention that it's considerably more versatile, as it does excellent video capture as well - something you don't get with an SLR. The ability to shoot without making noise is another advantage of the fixed-lens, compact cameras. If I'm shooting in a museum or a church, I REALLY wish I could muffle the shutter noise of my SLR!
As an alternative to the the G7, he might consider the Canon PowerShot S5 IS. The PowerShot S-series of "superzoom" cameras are great cameras - I owned the previous three models. If it were me, I'd get the PowerShot S5, personally, because of the greater zoom range.
Hope this helps.
Will
I have not spoken today with the young fellow but I suppose he is going to buy the Canon G7. It was his idea yesterday evenning...
I, myself I want to shoot with his G7 !
You pointed an interesting fact that I could not remember so far: absence of noise !
The 20 D is very noisy. If you go to the Moscow subway - where it is forbidden to photograph as far as I know - and want to take a shot under cover, you better have a G7 than a bulky 20D !
As a second - sorry, third - camera the G7 would be fine for me as it can have the 430 DX on top in case of need.
Thank you. Good points.:D
Cheers
From what I've read the G7 is a very good camera. I'm tempted to take a serious look at adding one to my arsenal (or maybe the G6 that still does RAW). For cards, I'm wondering if even the Extreme III's are a bit overkill.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Indeed I told the young man to make a search and see if the Sandisk Extreme III is not "too much" - an overkill as you said - to the G7.
In fact, I suppose that when the Canon G7 was concieved and lauched, Extreme III did not exist.
So, the G7 doesn't take all the advantages of such a card, thought it can work with.
In other words to be more clear: Working with a Canon G7 and Extreme III is a waist.
It's like with the 20 D. If you work with Extreme IV you get no advantage at all because the camera doen't recognize the hight level of sophistication of the card.
If you ever find a way to silent the 20 D let me know.:D
To quiet the 20D down, you might look into a muzzle or blimp. The less expensive muzzle can be found here and here. Which AFAIK are the same product, so the first place is the better deal. These reduce the noise, and is reviewed at Galbraith's site. Or the hard case sound blimp, found here. THe hard case one completely silences the camera, but looks like a huge PITA to use; I plan on the soft one, which is sufficient for my needs. Yup, I've done a bit of research on ths subject; what I've linked above is about all there is available to be found online. If I missed some other option, it's super-obscure.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Chris.
I am much obliged for the infos you sent about the cards and the 20D's noise.
This is a most useful information. You had all the work of searching and you give the infos here. Nice.
Thank you. Thank you Chris.:D
Have a nice week end.
My turn to show you what I found.
This . Have a look at the 3.ed picture from the top, please.
It is not for reducing the noise but it is against the rain as you can see.
I didn't know the meaning of muzzle or blimp. Now I do.
The link in Luminous Landscape send us to Kata, carrying solutions for equipment.
Hope this is of some help.
I have been to dpreview and robgalbraith and I completely changed my opinion.
The shutter lag is something very irritating when it is slow.
A photographer misses many shots because of it.
Even a horse walking in front of us can be missed.
I must tell the young man: get the 400 D.:D
You have a few smiley faces in there, so I'm not sure whether you're being serious or not. But I'm going to assume you're serious, and say something in response.
There is shutter lag on every camera. On SLRs and digital SLRs, it's very short, although that doesn't mean that I never miss a shot when I use my DSLR. Even with the DSLR, I may miss the shot because the camera can't auto-focus fast enough in low light - or more often, because I myself react too slowly. But in bright light, or when the camera is manually focused, yes, shutter lag on a digital SLR is very short. This is one of the advantages of SLRs.
However, shutter lag on fixed-lens cameras like the Canon G7 or the S5 IS that I also mentioned earlier is not nearly as bad a problem as reviewers make it sound. Don't just read the reviews - try the camera. First, the lag is not long. It may be something like half a second, but I think it's less than that. I also think it's less of a problem for beginners and average photographers than it is for really experienced shooters.
When does this slight delay between pressing the shutter and capturing the shot become an issue? Not when you're shooting a landscape or a building. Not when you're shooting people who are sitting or standing still and perhaps posing for you. Not when you're photographing a sitting bird, a grazing deer, an insect on the wall or a plant on your window sill. In other words, not very darned often. I hear people speak about shutter lag as if half the photos they took were like quick-draw shootouts in the old westerns. Yes, it would be a shame to have the fastest draw in the West - but get killed anyway because of a half-second "trigger lag."
But who shoots that way? I carry my camera with me nearly everywhere and have for years. Not one picture in a thousand is the result of my whipping the camera suddenly up and pressing the shutter.
Now, it looks like shutter lag would be an issue if you shoot sports. To some small extent it is. I don't mean to deny that shutter lag exists. I am much happier shooting basketball and volleyball with my digital SLR than I was with my Canon PowerShot S3 IS - and I do get better photos. But that has less to do with shutter lag in the old camera and more to do with the more expensive camera's ability to shoot effectively at higher ISOs.
With my DSLR, I do very much like the responsiveness of the shutter. Nevertheless, the truth is, when I was shooting with my Canon S3 IS, I did the same thing I still have to do: I anticipated when I needed to press the shutter. You have to compensate in either case both for shutter lag and for your own reaction time, so any good photographer has to think ahead. With a fixed-lens camera, you just have to think about a third of a second farther ahead than you would with a DSLR. It's a noticeable difference, but it's not earth-shattering. And it only really matters for certain kinds of shots.
Even with the shutter lag, I was able to get this shot of an egret snatching a fish from the water - by using the S3 IS's excellent continuous shooting mode. (Look at the following picture to see the fish in the egret's bill.)
No, shutter lag is not a strength of the fixed-lens cameras. But it's not the only thing to consider when making a decision! In my judgment, in-camera image stabilization trumps shutter lag. If you were considering an Olympus or Pentax DSLR with in-camera image stabilization, well, that would be a tougher decision. Late last year, I wrote a fair bit about the problem of deciding between a compact superzoom and a DSLR: here (part 1), here (part 2) and here (part 3). The bottom line is: this can be a hard decision.
Every DSLR I've had a chance to shoot with was capable of taking really fine photos. But the high-end compact cameras like the G7 are also very fine photographic tools. They can do a lot of things well that DSLRs can't do at all or can't do as well. Try to look at the big picture and weigh ALL of the pros and cons. Don't listen to somebody who judges cameras with a ruler or a stop watch - or by looking at the price.
I'M NOT TELLING YOU TO GET THE G7!! I'm just urging you not to NOT buy it just because of what somebody said about shutter lag.
Best of luck,
Will
Yes, the P&S cameras have shutter lag and the lack thereof is one of the advantages of a DSLR. However, if your shooting rarely is of the action variery, then it's really a non-issue. You can also compensate with experience by anticipating the "moment" and knowing how much sooner you need to hit the shutter release. With that said, there are moment of opportunity a DSLR shooter will catch while the P&S shooter will miss. The trick is deciding how important that one feature is to you.
I can say for me shutter lag is a huge issue as the majority of my shooting is action (dance, not sports but very similar challenges). This is one thing that drove me to DSLRs--but only one of several.
I'm sure I posted earlier in this thread that really, he needs to figure out what the most important features are to him, then compar ethe various candidate cameras' features list to those requirements. A winner (or smaller selection of possibilities) should be revealed.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I read your post yesterday but I was waiting to have some more time to give you an anwser.
By the sentence I quote here it seems that you think I am kidding, playing with this matter. If so, excuse me, as I am not. May be we have here another language problem.
I consider shutter lag to be ... a drag. An irritating quality of a camera.
My wife is sometimes using an old Sony DSC S85. I can remember one day that she could not get the bulls because when she shot they were out of the screen as they were moving slowly!
The anticipation of the shot by the perception of what is going to happen is important.
But even in portrait photography the person is supposed to keep the smile or say cheeeeeeeese during too long.:D
This is the reason for which I moved suddenly to a more sophisticated camera: a DSLR.
After all, it was one of these he wanted to buy since the very beginning.
I hope to be able to teach him some subjects of photography. With a 400 D for example I hope to be able to give some useful tips.
I have even told him that a good option would be to buy an used camera as someone proposed here, I think.
I wanted to sell him my 350 D - which I offered to my wife and she doesn't use because she doesn't like it (!!!!) -
It is almost brand new, the price was good but he rather have a new camera.
If ever I could sold him the 350D I could go and get another 20D to ease my work using two cameras alike.
In Portugal the 20 D is discontinued.
So, I would buy an used one.
Not a problem. It would have a warranty of 1 year at the shop where I usually buy the equipment.
Thank you for the trouble of writing.
Nice of you.:D
As a matter of fact I think he is going to the 400 D.
It's a good and reasonable choice.
In the afternoon, I gave hin a quick explanation about the settings and he went away.
In the evening he sent me an SMS telling that he was sorry hw got such a complex camera.
Some hours ago he sent another SMS saying: "Forget it, it's a wonderfull camera. I am going to shoot nice pictures with it"
I sincerelly hope so.
I hope to be able to take him a picture with the 400 D and post it here.:D
Kristi
http://www.simplykristi.smugmug.com/
My SM site: http://www.simplykristi.smugmug.com/
He has been shooting often and he likes what he gets !
From time to time I give him a tip or two.:D
He has a very peculiar way of photographing, in tems of subjects.
He has a blog for his photos but I don't know how to get there.
It jsut struck me, that is one heck of a narrow DOF you have in those shots. Shooting wide open in daylight? Note the "Canon" logo on the prism and his hat are in focus, the end of his lens is not.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I have no time now to investigate.
I give you the link to the photo in the gallery.
The diaphragm is 4. and the lens is the 24-70
Thank you for commenting.
Center point used.
I wouldn't have thought the 24-70 at f4 would be that narrow a DOF.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I think the 400 is a great beginner camera (not just for beginners tho)
I would get a PS because I wanted a PS and an SLR because I wanted to learn a new hobby. One doesnt have to own 5 or more lenses or shoot in manual after all.
...and yeah I want a G7 too