First DSLR - Question& Ideas

I have owned three 40D's over the years and think they were the best camera Canon made in the xxd range. My favourite lens to use with them was the Canon 17-55m f/2.8, felt just right.

Don't worry if you hear a rattle, it's just the hinge mechanism on the flash, it's even mentioned in the later versions of the manual
 
LeahP said:
Wow! I just looked at the Canon 40D on flicker and I am in awe of some of the beautiful images.. totally inspired me..
Click to expand...
Pay attention to the lenses as well as the body.

Personally, I'd look for a used Canon 50/1.8 rather than buy the Yongnuo. However, for the sort of shot you've said you want to take I predict a 30mm or 35mm would be a far more useful focal length.
 
And just to tempt you further, the extra budget puts you right on the edge of the original Canon 5D as an alternative to the 40D.
 
Last edited:
kry10 said:
LeahP if your budget has increased to £300, why oh why get a 40d, it's an old body, seriously, look at the Canon 1300D, it's a brilliant starter camera, has a much higher pixel count, higher ISO, look at that comparison website I linked to, it shows the differences, and, it's brand spanking new for £319 with 18-55mm kit lens.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T6-vs-Canon-EOS-40D

http://www.jessops.com/online.store...18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-dc-iii-lens-97990/show.html
Click to expand...
The problem with 'comparison sites' is that ergonomics is much more important than pixel count, how do you quantify that?

I'd happily go out on a professional job tomorrow with a pair of 40d's, I wouldn't cross the road to have a play with a 1300d.

Cameras are tools, they should be simple to set up and use, and not get in the way of doing the job.

Low light IQ is only important if the light is great where there's not much of it. If there's not enough light to make someone look good, photographers need to know where to find it or create it.

Back to my earlier point...

Photography is about photographs not cameras.
 
kry10 said:
LeahP if your budget has increased to £300, why oh why get a 40d, it's an old body, seriously, look at the Canon 1300D, it's a brilliant starter camera, has a much higher pixel count, higher ISO, look at that comparison website I linked to, it shows the differences, and, it's brand spanking new for £319 with 18-55mm kit lens.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T6-vs-Canon-EOS-40D

http://www.jessops.com/online.store...18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-dc-iii-lens-97990/show.html
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with a 1300D (I've had an 1100D), but as @Phil V says, once you've used a camera where the controls are at your fingertips, having to delve into menus to change settings is frustrating and can get in the way.
 
As far as I'm concerned, the 1300D is a doddle to setup and use, nothing gets in the way, which is why it's considered to be "entry level" not professional, Leah is just starting out, she's not a professional, so, wouldn't an entry level dslr be a wiser move ?
 
kry10 said:
As far as I'm concerned, the 1300D is a doddle to setup and use, nothing gets in the way, which is why it's considered to be "entry level" not professional, Leah is just starting out, she's not a professional, so, wouldn't an entry level dslr be a wiser move ?
Click to expand...

IMHO.
No.

'Entry level' cameras are full of features designed to automate things so that people who don't want to learn photography can pick them up and use them. All those things get in my way, I don't want to have to get past them or 2nd guess.

Cameras should have everything you need at the flick of a switch, with the camera to your eye.
 
I suppose different camera's suit different people. I want to get the best I can for my money, but I get there are so many different things to take into account.

As said, I think portraits will be my thing, but I might change my mind so I want a camera that will be versatile. I assume the lens enable you to take different styles of photos, but the body has the ISO which (if I am right from reading, the higher the ISO the camera can go to, the better it will be at taking photos in lower light, however, the higher ISO the more noise, so in an ideal world, you want to be able to take a photo in high light enabling you to use the lowest ISO, therefore low to no noise. But having a camera with a higher top ISO allows you more possibilities?).

I am a completely beginner, so I want something that is not too complicated, but that, as I learn will allow me to take more control so that I'm not just using automatic all the time.
 
LeahP said:
I suppose different camera's suit different people. I want to get the best I can for my money, but I get there are so many different things to take into account.

As said, I think portraits will be my thing, but I might change my mind so I want a camera that will be versatile. I assume the lens enable you to take different styles of photos, but the body has the ISO which (if I am right from reading, the higher the ISO the camera can go to, the better it will be at taking photos in lower light, however, the higher ISO the more noise, so in an ideal world, you want to be able to take a photo in high light enabling you to use the lowest ISO, therefore low to no noise. But having a camera with a higher top ISO allows you more possibilities?).

I am a completely beginner, so I want something that is not too complicated, but that, as I learn will allow me to take more control so that I'm not just using automatic all the time.
Click to expand...
In essence you have it.
The thing is, when photographers are learning, they get fixated on 2 things (which actually slows their progress).
1. Gear and specifications
2. Exposure and technique - which leads to thinking that 'enough light' is good, when 'the right light' is what makes pictures. The other obsession is sharpness, and image noise. No customer ever complained about a noisy image.
 
LeahP said:
http://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T6-vs-Canon-EOS-40D

This is interesting
Click to expand...
And factually incorrect (according to the chart at the bottom of the screen, the 40d has no metering modes)

And how do you quantify:
The bigger brighter viewfinder?
The rear control wheel and joystick?
Just like a quality screen and mouse are what makes your computer nicer to use, your life more comfortable. A crappy screen and mouse just add to your frustrations.
 
Buy the 40d, easy camera to use, enough features without being bloated with tech. Every one has their opinion and you can prevaricate for ever wasting good photo taking time in the process.

Odds on if you enjoy it you will soon be wanting something later and greater, so get started then save for your next purchase
 
Okay I'm going to sleep on it. Really grateful for such help so early on, very thankful I joined. I think if I can get a Canon 40D at a good price then I will just focus on that, getting some great photos and getting more skilled. Just want to get started now!
 
Whatever you get, remember, it's just a tool to get the job done.

Some of my favourite shots cone from a camera you can pick up from under 30 quid.

Get the camera, study pictures you like. Think about light and composition. Think about backgrounds and foregrounds - what do they add to the subject of your portrait.

Take LOADS of photos. Put them up for critique. It'll be scary initially but you'll reap the benefits.

The more you do, the more you'll realise that the gear is probably the least of your worries given all the other variables.

Good luck!!
 
kry10 said:
As far as I'm concerned, the 1300D is a doddle to setup and use, nothing gets in the way, which is why it's considered to be "entry level" not professional, Leah is just starting out, she's not a professional, so, wouldn't an entry level dslr be a wiser move ?
Click to expand...

How about...
You and Leah's friend who's also learning.

What do you think the chances are that in 5 years time you'll be saying;

'Ignore the entry level kit, learn from my mistakes, buy an enthusiast model that's easier to use'.

Just a thought :D
 
For me it's more the loss in dynamic range as the iso goes up which is important. Within reason noise can be a acceptable, dealt with in post and sometimes even provide an artistic look.

If portraits are most likely going to be your thing then you will have more control over the situation so iso performance, fps, focus speed etc should be less of a concern.
 
Thank I have found a 40D in good condition, with a shutter count of under 10,000. Comes with 12 months warranty, and it'll be £130.
 
Bought it! So blooming happy, just want to start practising. Will buy a lens and SF card today, kind of glad the choosing part is over, thank you all so so much for your guidance!
 
I find my 50d quicker (if that's the right word) to use than my 1100d. Everything is at my finger tips. I don't need to take the camera away from my eye to be able to access commonly used functions. Quite why entry level cameras aren't made more user friendly i don't know, maybe it's just a marketing thing.
 
I'm completely at a loss as to why other people struggle with the 1100D-1300D, personally I find it really simple to use, I can do all the common functions without going through numerous menus, I find it intuitive, straightforward and I shoot with my camera in manual mode, everything is right under my fingers, I suppose it's personal preference, I also have a eos 500n film camera, which is really basic, but, much prefer my 1300D.

Good luck on your photographic endeavours LeahP, I am sure you will have loads of enjoyment.
 
Additional.....

I feel that I owe a massive apology, everyone who has advised the 40D was right, by the looks of it, it's a decent camera, might end up getting one myself eventually, I do love my 1300D though, but, yeah, sorry everyone.
 
@kry10 don't get me wrong, i was very happy with the 1100d and I've still got it. It's just that the ergonomics of the 40d/50d (for me at least) are better and it's bigger which fits my big hands. Imagine quality, well there's not a lot in it.
 
Guys :)

Now I have finally purchased the 40D, can we go back to lens.

You've recommended the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM (or Yonguo as a cheaper alterative). Not sure which to buy really, I'd prefer to get cheaper but is the quality of the canon much better?

I'm a bit confused with lens though ah! I gather the 50mm is good for portraits, what is the 18mm-55mm good for?

I'd also like a good lens for nature photography, as my Mum lives in Wales and I'd love to try some good nature shots. And shots of friends etc. Could you please advise?

What what side flash card is best?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-3-13_12-24-56.png
    upload_2017-3-13_12-24-56.png
    200 bytes · Views: 17
@LeahP - you've mentioned birth/newborn, I'd really like to see some examples of the style you want to achieve (maybe a Pinterest board of inspiration?) because I'm in a few groups where this type subject is one of the popular genres and with the current "lifestyle" trend for these shots I'd strongly recommend a 30/35mm over the 50mm. If you look back across the forum you'll see that most people buy the 50/1.8 because it's cheap.. not because it's a useful focal length (it isn't) or because it's any good (it's average - better than a budget zoom but mediocre in the realm of prime lenses).

As for a longer lens for wildlife, the Canon 55-250mm is a popular choice - because it's a decent lens for the money and it's a useful focal length range.

The 40D uses Compact Flash cards, I'd stick with Sandisk Extreme or Ultra - you don't want to be buying the absolute cheapest with memory cards, better to have some reliability.
 
Hi Alistair, I'll try create a board soon. In terms of birth photography and I would be looking at very natural and raw photographs. Not intrusive, but reflective oh each individual family's birth experience. With new born, I'm not a huge fan of props, I prefer just seeing the true innocence of the new born and their individual features. I saw a lovely photo on flickr, from someone on here, of two newborn (twins I think) lying together, it was a very simple set up, but the lighting and nature of the photo was just beautiful.
 
Alastair said:
@LeahP - you've mentioned birth/newborn, I'd really like to see some examples of the style you want to achieve (maybe a Pinterest board of inspiration?) because I'm in a few groups where this type subject is one of the popular genres and with the current "lifestyle" trend for these shots I'd strongly recommend a 30/35mm over the 50mm. If you look back across the forum you'll see that most people buy the 50/1.8 because it's cheap.. not because it's a useful focal length (it isn't) or because it's any good (it's average - better than a budget zoom but mediocre in the realm of prime lenses).

As for a longer lens for wildlife, the Canon 55-250mm is a popular choice - because it's a decent lens for the money and it's a useful focal length range.

The 40D uses Compact Flash cards, I'd stick with Sandisk Extreme or Ultra - you don't want to be buying the absolute cheapest with memory cards, better to have some reliability.
Click to expand...

Also, I read this: For a 35mm film camera or a full-frame DSLR, the 50mm lens is considered standard. At higher focal lengths (85mm or 100mm) you have an ideal lens for portraiture, because when coupled with a wide aperture they thoroughly soften any background detail, thus making it less likely to distract from the main subject.

I am confused, as I thought for portraits you want high mm?
 
Congratulations on your new purchase.
The 40D is a good place to start.
As for the lens, the Canon 50mm 1.8 STM is going to be much better than the Yonguo, the build quality and focus speed will be a big improvement. It'll be worth the money because you can keep using it as you upgrade your camera, some people still swear by the 50mm f1.8 even when using pro cameras like a 5D Mk3.

A 50mm lens on a crop sensor camera like the 40D does give you an "effective focal length" (more accurately referred to as "equivalent field of view") of about 80mm (note that the actual focal doesn't change, it's just giving you an equivalent). So 80mm is close to the traditional portrait focal length of 85mm.

The reason 85mm (and longer) lenses are popular for portraits is not just to do with background blur (because you can do that with a 35mm f2 lens), it's because it flatters the face.
Notice how the face is distorted with the wider 24mm lens.
focallengtharticle.jpg

(borrowed from here: https://mcpactions.com/2010/07/21/the-ideal-focal-length-for-portraiture-a-photographers-experiment/ )

I've used a 50mm on a crop sensor camera (the 60D) to photograph babies, it's not a problem, but working in the smaller environment of the families' home, it can be restrictive in terms of how far you need to move back in order to get the whole of the body in shot.

As an example, here's a shot I took with my old 60D and 50mm lens:
Blue Eyes by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

This was also at 50mm, though with a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 lens
Father's Hands by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

That Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC lens I used for the second shot there is a great budget alternative to Canon's 17-55 f2.8. As a zoom lens it's more flexible when working with people and it's also able to shoot at f2.8 all the way from 18mm to 50mm (this is referred to as "constant aperture zoom"). You can probably pick up one of these for about £150 (the newer version is 17-50mm f2.8 and will be more expensive as it also has Optical Stabilisation).

And here's some tips on photographing babies: https://digital-photography-school.com/photographing-babies/

Hope that helps.
 
LeahP said:
I am confused, as I thought for portraits you want high mm?
Click to expand...
Depends on the portrait - group, single full-length, quarter length, head and shoulders. There is no once-size fits all "portrait". And I keep going back to (and you keep ignoring) your earlier mention of newborn/birth photography, your aspiring to be a pro and I'm asking you what style inspires you?

Full-frame or APS-C, I wouldn't choose to use anything shorter than 85mm for a conventional quarter-length or tighter portrait. I wouldn't choose to use anything longer than 35mm for an environmental portrait. Between 35mm and 85mm is a big hole of not-as-useful-as-you'd-think focal lengths. If I look at the current flavour of the month for lifestyle portraits I'd start with the 35mm (or even a 24mm on crop, but there are fewer budget-priced options) and add the 85mm later (although a 55-250 would be perfectly adequate as an interim).
 
Thanks Alistair, I haven't ignored you, I did reply. I suppose I haven't really got a specific style in mind. Natural, raw, relaxed comes to mind. I will look for some examples, definitely nothing staged.


Would you be able to recommend a good (not too pricy) 35mm lens?
 
LeahP said:
Thanks Alistair, I haven't ignored you, I did reply. I suppose I haven't really got a specific style in mind. Natural, raw, relaxed comes to mind. I will look for some examples, definitely nothing staged.


Would you be able to recommend a good (not too pricy) 35mm lens?
Click to expand...
Ha ha, you have 2 Alistair/Alastair's responding to you !

For the Canon crop cameras, you can look for either the older Canon EF 35mm f2 lens. This is the non-image stabilised lens. You might find one for £150ish but for some reason Canon don't make a cheaper one and this one has kept much of it's value.
There is a Yonguo equivalant 35mm f2. This will cost about £70, but as with the Yongnuo 50mm f1.8 lens, it's not going to be as quick on the autofocus and the build quality wont be as good, even if the glass itself is good enough.
The other cheap-ish option is the Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC. This is very good for low light and will blur the background nicely too. It will cost you £150-200.

Beyond that, you're looking at £500+ for Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art or Tamron 35mm f1.8 VC.

The compromise would be the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 as I suggested, which will mean you can get 35mm and 50mm, f2.8. They're a good all round lens for the money. Here's one for £120 on ebay.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure about the Canon fit but the Sigma 30mm 1.4 Sony fit is an excellent lens, I've been loving it!
 
Holy moly

At this early stage I want a good all round lens, ideally more than £100. Something I can take portraits and general nature shots with. Whilst I am learning.

I'd like to buy one lens tonight, so I can't enjoying the camera and practising. What would be the best all round lens, I suppose mainly with the intent of taking good portraits/ close ups of animals and babies?

I'll invest in a canon official lens at this point or a sigma.
 
LeahP said:
Holy moly

At this early stage I want a good all round lens, ideally more than £100. Something I can take portraits and general nature shots with. Whilst I am learning.

I'd like to buy one lens tonight, so I can't enjoying the camera and practising. What would be the best all round lens, I suppose mainly with the intent of taking good portraits/ close ups of animals and babies?
Click to expand...

The best sort of all-rounder is a zoom with constant f2.8. The Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 and the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 are the cheaper options.
ABTog said:
The compromise would be the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 as I suggested, which will mean you can get 35mm and 50mm, f2.8. They're a good all round lens for the money. Here's one for £120 on ebay.
Click to expand...

I've had the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 and it's great, very sharp, good in low light, good all-rounder. Unless you can afford the £400ish for a second hand Canon 17-55mm f2.8, then I'd go for the Sigma.
 
Thank you ABTog, both those lenses retail at around £150 though. I completely understand in the long run I am going to have to invest, but as my first lens I'd like to keep within £100 if poss. Bit concerned as wondering what I should do!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top