What shall I do? Canon (50D, 7D vs Nikon D90)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greyblk

I think i may go with a 50D... and take my time and invest in lenses... I've been reading that the 55mm is good to have all around capability (even for landscapes and portraits) what do u think?

---

I think 55mm on a crop factor camera is too long for a lot of landscape, and too short for a lot of portraiture.

Quote:

---

I saw (starter kit) 50D body only and it comes with 70-300mm & 28-135mm both IS, get a uv filter, bag, battery for about $1600 USD.

---

Be careful where you buy. B&H are the gold standard for pricing, integrity, and service - and they're currently listing that kit for $1948, less a $250 manufacturers rebate so your net price from them would be around $1700. Cheaper deals are possible, but you need to do your homework first as there are a lot of dishonet bait and switch companies out there.

Quote:

---

What does it mean "body only" as it comes with 2 lenses. Does that mean no software, etc?

---

"Body Only" means no lenses so "body only with 2 lenses" is a mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greyblk

I have been granted the opportunity of a $2000 budget. As my large family has decided to fund my camera. As i like to go forth with a photography business/studio/gigs, etc. I will be shooting portraits, nightlife, landscapes, weddings, fashion shows, bugs for god sakes... I want a camera with speed to catch movement, great IQ, *SHARPNESS, focus, facial images, hardware & software capability with a MAC, lenses say 70-300,...

---

Shelly can you post some examples of your current work so we can see what you're founding this 'all in one' photography business/studio on? It may influence the recommendation on what to spend your family's money on.

Lenses, lenses, lenses. I shot weddings and such back in the late 50s with a 50mm and a 135mm. That was with film, of course. The usual advice today for minimal lens equipment for weddings is ... a 50 and a 135.

The key to portraiture if to back off a bit. Those extreme close-up model face shots you see in magazines are shot at about 15 to 20 feet with a long reach lens. I shoot landscape and town shots (digital) with my D40 using the kit 18-55 and kit 55-200. They do quite well. When shooting, as an example, a motorcycle for a sale shot or contest, I go to film and break out the fast, long lenses. After that, it is all lighting and placement/setting.

Remember that the customer for a wedding wants a few superb shots of them and immediate family, as flattering as possible. The rest is to capture the action and flavor of the moment. There is where the advantage of the digital comes in. Shoot and shoot and shoot. If you get to keep 25% of your activity shots, you will be doing OK.

One of the above posts came in while I was typing. Check with Adorama, also. The are a strong competitor with B&H.

Good luck.

Pops

Right on Colin...
I totally agree with your comments on wedding photography. Here is a reply I wrote to another aspiring wedding photographer on another forum. Even though it has been several years since I typed these words, my feelings regarding their validity remain the same.

I strongly urge you to only shoot a wedding if you:

1. Are certain of your photographic skills. Wedding coverage is not an arena in which a person should learn to use his or her equipment. It is difficult enough to get proper coverage when your equipment operation is second nature to you. It is pretty darn near impossible to effectively cover a wedding if you are unsure about the technical details of your equipment.

2. If you have proper equipment - cameras and lenses that will allow you to do quality 8x10 inch (approximately 20x25 cm.) prints at a minimum (and up to larger prints on an "if required" basis). Also you MUST have back-up equipment immediately available. Redundancy is the name of the game. Shooting with one copy of any equipment (such as camera, proper lens, proper flash) is inviting Mr. Murphy to bite you in the "you know where spot". If I were contemplating weddings again (which thankfully I am not!) I would strongly lean towards full frame equipment. This is not to say that competent photographers (If they are using top-line lenses) cannot do a proper job using 1.5x or 1.6x cameras, it is just that the larger sensor would be advantageous. IMO, a photographer would be better off having two cameras and two medium focal length zoom lenses with a constant f/2.8 aperture than having one medium focal length zoom plus a telephoto. Weddings can effectively be shot with a medium angle zoom but, cannot be effectively covered with a medium focal length zoom that has failed and a telephoto left as your only working lens. BTW: also IMO, you CANNOT effectively shoot weddings using most "kit" lenses of any make.

3. If you have enough flash cards, batteries, etc. Enough means MORE THAN ENOUGH!

4. You have attended enough weddings to be fully aware of the general flow of a wedding ceremony. All weddings are different but, all are the same in many respects. Most weddings are open to the public. It would be beneficial to have attended enough receptions to have the same grasp of the general sequence of events. However this is more difficult to do than attending weddings. Most church/synagogue weddings are open to the public; this is not true regarding receptions.

5. If you have studied wedding images online and in books and magazines; and have predetermined how you want to shoot the essential shots. When I first began to shoot weddings, I used a written "check-off list" to ensure that I didn't miss any important shots.

6. If you are willing to put the time into shooting the ceremony and not to be a guest or to interact during the ceremony/reception. The two most difficult weddings I have ever shot were of my two very beautiful step-daughters. I did not want to shoot the weddings because I wanted to take part and to enjoy them. They both, however, made it clear that they wanted and expected me to do the job. I got some beautiful results but, I missed sharing those wonderful occasions as a participant and guest. I was also not able to be next to their mother, my wife during the ceremony.

7. Finally, the wedding photographer needs (in addition to photographic and business skills) to be a people person. The photographer needs to control the flow of photography without seeming pushy. In most of the weddings that I have shot, the bride and mother-of-the-bride (who is often funding the gig) are caught up in the whirlwind of emotions and activity. Photography takes a second place to the other activities UNTIL THEY GET THE PROOFS. Saying, "You didn't give me enough time!" or "You would not let me take the back-up shots!" is not an excuse for poor photography. People skills are necessary for good wedding coverage as well as for repeat business from recommendations. I got most of my business from referrals.

Not to pontificate, but I would stay away from extreme focal length lenses (such as 18-200mm or anywhere in that area) if I were considering shooting for pay! These extended focal length lenses are very convenient for a holiday photographer but, usually do not have the image quality, the focusing accuracy/speed and a wide enough f/stop for professional work. For a Canon 1.6x camera, the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (not to be confused with the 18-55mm IS "kit" lens) is probably ahead of the rest of the pack with the 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron VC and non-VC lenses following closely behind. For a full frame camera, you really cannot do better than the trusty 24-70mm f/2.8L with the 28-75mm Tamron following fairly closely behind. I have not followed Nikon products so I could not provide any insight in that area.

And speaking of drowning, wedding photographers have to consider all potential shooting conditions. If there is a chance of rain, snow or request for a photo op at the beach, be prepared to protect your equipment. The bride wants you to stand on a diving board while the guests are at the end of the pool, make sure your shoes are tied or kerplunk. The wedding photographer has to be prepared to meet or refuse some odd ball requests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Wedding photography has something in common with space flight and filing tax returns ... "Failure is NOT an option". In one-off events like weddings, the B & G are paying for great results - not excuses - so backup bodies (preferably more than 1) - backup lenses - backup flashes - backup media are just the beginning. Many think that wedding photography is an easy way to earn a few extra bucks ... they are wrong. I can't think of ANY area of photography where the photographer has to be so much on top of their game; thinking on their feet - dodging curve-balls - and keeping one step ahead of everyone else. Many jump in the deep end; many drown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7Rz...layer_embedded

---

Hi Shelly,

I am new at photography, and I was facing the same situation that you are in now a couple months ago. Colin and Dave helped me out quite a bit. Here are my comments:
1) Between 50D, 7D, and D90 - I will pick 7D, but
2) How about Canon Rebel T2i for now and 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM - Then, get more lens - Then, a second body later...

70-200 will not help you with landscapes, but it will help you with weddings and fashion shows. f2.8L is fast and IQ is very good.

Good luck :-)
Dennis

Another side note regarding the above suggestion, if you the wedding crasher photographer actually photograph
sections of the event and want to sell those photos to the contracted photographer, one of you will have to get additional model releases signed by the guests. Chances are the contracted photographer already has obtained the releases, but you would not be covered because the photos you take are your property. Chances are that the contracted photographer will not want to purchase your photos but if you capture something he or she could not then the opportunity has to be handled legally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpcrowe

4. You have attended enough weddings to be fully aware of the general flow of a wedding ceremony. All weddings are different but, all are the same in many respects. Most weddings are open to the public. It would be beneficial to have attended enough receptions to have the same grasp of the general sequence of events. However this is more difficult to do than attending weddings. Most church/synagogue weddings are open to the public; this is not true regarding receptions.

---

I'm confused, is post #27 all quoted text from above, or is some of it yours Shadowman?

I suspect the bit beginning "[4" is really the quote and above that is yours, let me know and I'll fix if you like

Dave,

#4 is a portion of post #24. I only wanted to address that section. Thanks ahead of time for the fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Humphries

I'm confused, is post #27 all quoted text from above, or is some of it yours Shadowman?

I suspect the bit beginning "[4" is really the quote and above that is yours, let me know and I'll fix if you like

---