Ok. All the recent Canon cameras can take a cheap interval timer, which allows you to do star trails, nightscapes and wide field pictures. It will also be necessary for deep sky images, but that that you'll also want some way to track the movement of the earth. Pentax's K-r and K-5 can take a GPS unit that does this, which is nifty. But you're limited in the focal length and time you can expose for. A more robust solution is a German equatorial mount, like for a telescope, but you wouldn't need a telescope. If you get a sturdy one, that can track for a long time. But it's heavy and requires some setup. The K-5 can also take the cheap inteval timer, but for the K-r, you'll need one of those, and this http://www.gentles.ltd.uk/gentled/trigger.htm, which someone on here just recently told me about. It uses the IR port of the K-r for shooting. It looks cool but I haven't heard about any first hand experience with it.

As far as lenses go, as I said elsewhere, the Canon 18-55 IS is decent. Their 10-22mm is also good for really really wide angles, but expensive. The 50 f/1.8 is cheap and great optically, but at 50mm, you can only image about 12 seconds without trails, unless you point towards the north star(or south celestial pole). Since the stars move less there, you can image longer. You can use many old prime lenses to save money like M42 screw mount, Pentax, Nikon, or Olympus with just a metal adapter. But you can't use old manual focus FD mount Canon lenses, they wont focus to infinity. If you get a Pentax, you can use all old k-mount lenses, and m42 mount lenses with a cheap adapter as well. Old prime lenses are usually much better than the old zoom lenses.

To save money you could also get a used Canon XS better yet an XSi. They are both decent for astro. You definitely want Live view to help in focusing, which they both have it.

Some good concrete advice here: http://www.backyardastronomy.com/Backyard_Astronomy/BAG_Blog/Entries/2009/12/10_I_Want_to_Shoot_Deep-Space_Objects!.html
here http://astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/TOC_AP.HTM . For more stuff. Also have a look at the cloudynights.com forums' astrohphotography section.

Let me know what further questions you have.

Purely speaking on brands:

• Canon - Best of the best for Canon cameras. L series means it's more rugged. Also very pricey!
  
  
• Sigma - Great brand - my second choice. Save money here.
  
  
• Tamron - Interesting brand - I own a 70-200 F/2.8 lens and it works fantastic - there are some issues with slower focusing but you don't notice it unless you're trying to capture sports or moving objects (I tried it on motorcycles on a track and I couldn't track my focus as well!)
  
  I recently did a lot of research into starting lenses and here are my suggestions :)
  
  
• 50MM 1.4 Canon (Save money - get a used 1.8 - this is a must buy, it's cheap)
  
  
• Canon EF S 17-55MM - This lens is a bit pricey, see below to save money. Totally worth it. Remember your crop ratio on lenses, I'll assume you have 1.6 like I do on my 550D which would bring this lens to a '20-70' (not stopping to do math lol)
  
  This lens is used for 'walking around' you can get some wide angle and some good portraits with it. It's very flexible.
  
  
  
• Cheaper Tamron alternative to the Canon above
  
  
• The baddest mo-fo, the Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS L II
  
  This lens is very pricey. Look at Tamron to save the most money (I vouch for it) or Sigma for a little more, but less than the Canon.
  
  Remember with crop ratio that changes the FL of a lens! Figure out if yo have one or not.
  
  Simple rules of thumb? Save money. Wherever possible. But, always get the best glass you can afford. Glass is greater than body.
  
  Hope this helps - if it does please pay this comment forward, it took a lot of typing so feel free to share with other people in similar questions :D

I wrote an article on intro DSLR kits on Amazon. I wouldn't bother unless you bundled them with your camera.

They're definitely crappy extra toys, but they may help you learn more about photography (by showing you how things make your image quality worse); but they also were kind of fun at the beginning and encouraged me to get out and shake the bugs off and dig into learning how to shoot good photos (and how extra toys don't really help). Everyone takes shitty photos at the start anyway, so you're not missing much; and it's not a ton of extra money over grabbing a body/kit lens/good SD card; but if you already have your camera kit, you can skip it for sure.

DO NOT USE THOSE TRIPODS!

Those are strong enough for point and shoot cameras at most. Especially with a telephoto lens, the tilt arm is likely to fail and it'll fall on sensitive optical mechanics. Those are in the $10 price range. Spend at the very least closer to $30 on a tripod, and a $100-ish tripod will be a safe, and useful tool to use with your precision imaging equipment.

tl;dr - Sure, it's a waste of a little money, but they can be kind of fun toys. Burn the tripod.

Stuff I'd suggest getting:

• 2-3 nice SD cards: Class 10, 32-64 GB each
  
  
• Another few cheaper (but still fast) SD cards: 4-8 GB
  
  
• Solid tripod. $30 or $100 is well worth the money
  
  
• Rocket blower. Avoid touching the lens, whenever possible and never touch the sensor. A lens cloth should be plenty. Avoid being tempted to use a wet cleaning kit on the lens or the sensor if possible
  
  
• I love my big, cheap camera bag. I have 3 lenses, and a speedlight and this is perfect for me. I wear it across my chest and carry it on my lower back where it's out of the way and easy to deal with 95% of the time.
  
  
• An Intervalometer that matches your camera
  
  
• Manual flash that can tilt & swivel
  
  
• Flash triggers are fun and work great with those cheap $10 tripods. Check Strobist.com for great tutorials and inspiration
  
  
• Flash gels can be fun creative tools too. Can you tell I'm getting into playing with off-camera speedlights?

Of course! It depends on your budget and what you want to photograph, but I highly recommend the 35mm f/1.8 prime lens. You can find it used for even less than the price listed ($200) as well. The lens is really sharp and decent for landscape and portraits. You can set your 18-55mm to the 35mm focal length to see what it looks like.

If you want a higher focal length than your 18-55mm, look at the 55-200mm lens. It is a kit lens sometimes bundled with the 18-55mm. There's also a 70-300mm if you want the extra 100mm range. These are usually best for something you need to zoom in on, like sports and wildlife.

If you want something super wide, I recommend either a Tokina 11-20mm or the Tokina 11-16mm. The 11-20mm is the sharpest and fastest autofocus of the two, but it is slightly more expensive. They are both good lenses. These are great for astrophotography, landscapes, and indoor architecture shots.

Here is an example picture of what different focal lengths look like. I hope this was helpful! If you have any more questions or want me to clarify something, let me know.

SD Cards

According to Canon's website, the t3i can record about 22 minutes to an 8GB SD card. So a 32GB card should be about 88 minutes.

When shopping for an SD card I would always suggest a name brand for reliability. For your specific camera, any card labeled SD/SDHC/SDXC should be compatible. For shooting 1080P video you want at least Class 10 speeds (the little C with a 10 in it). Faster cards are still backwards compatible.

I would suggest something like this SanDisk 32GB Class 10. And I'd probably buy a couple, you never want to be without a spare card!

Lighting

I'm no expert when it comes to video lighting, I only do photography, and even then I'm not an expert. But as a techie, before buying expensive lights, I would just try to use some LED light bulbs in those stands you already have as they're a standard lamp socket, to get more light and less heat.

Perhaps something like these 20W bulbs? You can try any bulb as long as it has an E26/E27 base is no more than 45 watts.

Something like these LED flood lights might work since they're directional, but they're probably too wide to fit with the umbrellas on.

Lenses

Getting that bokeh may be difficult. There are five factors that affect background blur, one of which is sensor size, obviously you're not going to buy a new camera, so the sensor size is a fixed value.

To get more background blur you need one or more of the following, a lower fstop on your lens, a higher focal length, to get as close to your subject as possible, and to get the background as far away as possible. So your desire for a wider lens is conflicting with your desire for background blur, and it sounds like space is an issue.

Additionally, since you have a crop sensor camera, lenses are really more zoomed (by 1.6x) in than they would be on a full frame sensor. So your kit lens, I assume goes down to 18mm? So on your camera that is more like 29mm (about the same as a smartphone camera).

I don't necessarily know if I would recommend a wide lens for your application since it will lead to less background blur and will exaggerate facial features when up close, as shown in this example. Although background blur may be impossible if you're in a cramped space anyhow. So if you're going to attempt a wide angle lens, the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 looks like the best, most affordable option (I use Nikon gear myself, so I don't have personal experience), which is equivalent to a 16mm-29mm on your camera. However, that fstop number is higher than both your kit lens and 50mm, which means it lets in less light, which could be an issue.

Conclusion

Hopefully that information was useful and not too confusing. Feel free to ask for clarification if needed. Good luck!

Sigma have been at it for a while. They realized they could make a lens that Canon/Nikon wouldn't want to make, and then sell it in just about every mount they could.

Mid-range primes are a great example. Nikon won't make them because they undercut the high-end stuff. Sigma are more than happy to put out a 150mm f/2.8, or a 30mm f/1.4 -- both of those lenses are like eight years old but really good.

Then they have the super high end stuff that Nikon or Canon just can't afford to make for one lens mount. Stuff like the 200-500mm f/2.8 that costs upwards of $25,000.

Even their "low quality" stuff is good. I have the 50-500mm f/4-6.3 and I love it, you're not going to get a lens like that from Nikon or Canon any time soon. It cost me $600 used.

Sigma have been putting out really interesting stuff for a while. The only true "budget" lens manufacturer these days are Tamron, they are putting out perfectly adequate products in the same focal length range as the big guys, only for cheaper. Sigma & Tokina have been innovating for a while.

So I have a Canon T3i and a 50mm f/1.8 II. In the near future, I will be purchasing a new lens. I'm still a newbie, so I don't really have a specific style and I just shoot what's in front of me. I've been doing predominantly street photography and auto photography, but i'm also looking to branch out. It's come to my attention that I should have a wide angle lens in my arsenal as I was begging for a wider perspective when I went to my first auto show a couple weeks ago. It made framing weird, and I had to move back which was quite inconvenient in a packed show like that. I also love landscapes and views so I want something wide to capture those as well.
Here are some of the choices I'm considering.
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8

Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Lens

Tamron AF 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 SP Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lens

There are also a couple lenses that I have stumbled upon that are not as wide, but have a longer focal length which may double as more than just a wide-angle.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lens (really have my eye on this one!)

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens

This is all a bit confusing for a noob like me, so any help is appreciated it. If you feel like there is a better option, please do recommend it to me! And also, i'm on a working-class student budget.

One last question, how do you feel about used lenses. Just curious towards your experiences as i feel like they can be bargains. Lenses are built to last a long time if they're taken care of right? Sorry for the long post but thanks in advanced!

It is possible to make great photos with a T6, or any camera really, but like with any craft, that depends more on the experience of the person using the tool than the tool itself.

You should read up about the business of photography, something like John Harrington's book would be a good start. Another good resource is aphotoeditor.com. These are both geared toward more commercial photography than fine art selling, but have great information.

You're young, you should focus on making good work, and start reading about the business side of it now, so once your work and confidence is in the right place, you will be prepared to do a proper job. You can't expect professional results tomorrow, but if you start working hard now and have the willingness to hustle, you will see results over time.

On a side note, being a server would pay much better than being a dishwasher, so as long as you're working in the restaurant industry, you should try to do that instead.

At that budget, get some manual offname speedlights, and some cheap 28in umbrellas. They are far from the best things out there, but even the junk has its place, and that place is on shoestring budgets. As for backdrop, go to walmart, and pick up some queen or king size bedsheets of the walmart brand. Get one thats close to middle grey if possible. A middle grey sheet with a speed light and a color gel will become whatever color your gel is. I bought the strobist pack of gels, so my one sheet instantly becomes the whole rainbow. The reality is that $150 is a drop in the bucket of a proper studio, but there are plenty of budget ways of doing things. If you want even cheaper lighting, at the trade off of control, go to your local hardware store and pick up some of the $5 work lights that look like more like a bowl from your kitchen than a proper light. Continuous light can still be plenty useful but can be a little trickier to set up, and dealing with spill can be a pain. $2 foam core project boards make great dirt cheap reflectors and flags. You best bet at that budget is to think more DIY than "what can I buy". Try things and experiment. I have spent almost as much money at HomeDepot making my own lighting modifiers as I have on buying actual modifiers, and the results aren't really much different between my homebrew and the actual gear.

edit: Here's some links!

AmazonBasics speedlight $28 (x2, ~$60)

flash triggers, $15

two shoot-through, two silver reflectives, two gold reflectives, w/stands and carry bag $57

so that puts us at ~$135 right there

grey bedsheet $15

cheap gel kit $8

So add in tax and shipping, and there's your $150 budget plus a few bucks extra.

Now like I said you can do continuous light a little cheaper.

Here are some lights, modifiers, stands, and backdrops for $97

The key here is this is all "junk". That doesnt mean dont use it. I have a bunch of stuff from kits like these. But dont be surprised if an umbreallas silver lining separates off, or a softbox develops a tear in it. They just arnt made to the same standards as "pro" gear, but you can get just as good results with it if you take your time to learn what you are doing, and accept the downfalls of what you are buying and work around them. Work in your budget and develop your skills more. You will either pursue it further and buy better stuff later, or like me, still have the cheap off name junk because it works fine and you would rather spend money on glass than umbrellas.

you should check the canon S100: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-S100-Wide-Angle-Stabilized/dp/B005MTME3U, but it might be over your budget.

I used a couple of sony digital cameras too, one of them on the cheap end (around 100 pounds I think), the other is around 200 pounds. (I'm not from Europe so these are just rough numbers)

I like the more expensive one (my parents'), and I sometimes borrow it even though I have a Canon 40D. I was amazed by the picture quality of the cheaper one as well, it wasn't the greatest, but for the price it was really good and much better than any other equally priced camera.


I recommend doing your own research on these, and maybe going to the shop and trying some... here is what you should look for:

• Big sensor: some will have 1/2.3" , others 1/1.7", etc... since the number is inverted, the lower the number on the bottom the better (in this case the 1/1,7")
  
  
• High ISO with low noise: the big sensor contribute to this, as does some other technologies, like using CMOS instead of CCD, or backlighted sensor.. I'm not an expert in this, but that's where camera reviewing sites like dpreview come in handy.
  
  
• Stabilizer: optical stabilizer is a must for taking photos at low light conditions or while zooming.
  
  Maybe I missed some points, but these should be good indicators.
  
  Good luck :)

If I were you I'd go out and try to shoot some landscape photography with your 18-55mm lens and take a look at the shots afterwards to determine if the wide-angle is necessary. 18mm is pretty wide and would work well for a lot of landscape shots but you go shooting with it and if you think you need a bit wider then go for it!

Getting a telephoto lens would, like you said, give you a wider range of shots and would be great for wildlife photography when you're out shooting landscapes and spot a deer, or other animal.

Another lens you might want to consider is the Canon 50mm f/1.8 which is great for portraits and it's only $110.

There's this bundle here for $350 it includes the 10-18mm lens you mentioned as well as the 50mm lens I mentioned.

Some other options:

Canon 24mm f/2.8 which is a lot of people on this sub recommend as a good general purpose lens. ($150)

Samyang 14mm f/2.8 is another highly recommend wide-angle lens mentioned on this sub, manual focus only but it's cheap! ($300)

Edit:

Also, check out this thread from yesterday! It was basically asking people from this sub what their favorite relatively cheap lens were and I found it extremely helpful.

Hi ! My first camera was a canon 70D too ! A great all around camera especially if you are into videography. About what lenses you should get, you should definitely buy the nifty fifty, it is just a fantastic lens for its price !
If you are a video enthusiast, you should consider buying the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 which has a great IQ, a nice optical stabilizer and a constant f2.8, video I made with the sigma+70d here.

Or if you can afford a canon lens, the equivalent that is this one.

Anyway, the 70D is probably one of the best camera out there to start. Make sure to read a lot of books about photography, exposure, etc.. And even consider joining /r/photoclass2017/ !

Have a great day !

Sooo,
I have had a T3i for a few years now along side a this:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1398346452&sr=8-2&keywords=usm+300+canon

and also this:
http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/dp/B003VSGQPG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398346666&sr=8-1&keywords=wide+14+mm+canon

I don't know exactly why, but I can definitely take really superb pictures with with the 300mm lens... and also quite good ones with the Rokinon one...
The kit lens takes normal or average pictures...

My only assumptions are that the kit lens is made with lower quality stuff or is someone less powerful... The 300mm lens is "made in japan" so I guess it is higher quality...

Anyway, all this has been said only to ask suggestions on higher quality lenses to take closer up pictures. For example, with the 300mm lens I can get really cool blurring effects and sometimes bokeh... but the close up lense is just meh.....

I don't want to break the bank getting another lens either, so maybe you can help me finding a standard zoom lens or a prime lense that is for close ups that will be better than my current kit lens... If you think I can find a good deal on this used, you can let me know..

Thank you

Look at prime lenses my friend.

• You could pick up a couple fast (large aperture) prime lenses for $800. If you buy them used you can get three of them. Take a look at this page to see what Canon lenses are available. For example, I have used the EF 35mm f/2 (~$350) and EF 28mm f/1.8 USM (~$500) and they are both nice lenses.
  
  
• Even though the 50mm f/1.8 II is a great lens for the cost, the EF 50mm f1.4 USM (~$400) is a worthwhile upgrade. Faster, less CA, sharper, higher quality build, smoother focusing, etc. I love it for both photos and video.
  
  
• I do not own this lens, but the EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM (~$800) is a wonderful portrait and landscape photography lens. And because it's fast it can be used for action and event photography, however it is limiting because of its long reach.
  
  
• The EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (~$600) is also a good lens. Great for both macro and portrait photography. There is also the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM. L class glass with IS for $300-$400 more.
  
  Regarding your Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8: If you're shooting wider than 15mm make sure you take off the hood, otherwise you'll end up with some funky vignetting. :)

Hello!
not too sure if this will be seen, but i recently acquired a nikon d610 with an 80-90's manuel 50mm f1.8 pancake lens.
So pretty much im in the market for new lenses.
pretty much i want a landscape lens, portrait lens, and another all around lens. Since ive been shooting primarily in street shots, first is an autofocus, the faster the better. pretty much if you guys could give me some insight on my choices as to which ones are the best for my style

Landscapes
samyang/rokinon 14mm f2.8
https://www.amazon.com/Samyang-SY14MAE-N-Ultra-Angle-Nikon/dp/B006MI1UDU
Tokina 11-16mm f2.8https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007ORX8ME/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pd_S_img?_encoding=UTF8&colid=6V50J6F8FVLL&coliid=I3TKDTQ6YY21PM
Nikkor 20mm
f1.8https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-Fixed-Focus-Cameras/dp/B00NI6WH1S/ref=sr_1_22?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1483652637&sr=1-22&keywords=wide+angle+fx+lens

Portrait
Rokinon/Samyang AE 85mm f1.4
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003V06YA6/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=6V50J6F8FVLL&coliid=I30GK1FCMJMQPX&psc=1
Nikkor 85mm f1.8 afafhttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B006TAP096/ref=psdc_173565_t1_B003V06YA6
Samyang/Rokinon CV 86mm f1.5

thanks in advance

So, the old kit lens on my T1i has officially crapped out (it was 7 years old, rip little guy) I've mostly self-taught the absolute basics and just dabbled and had fun on road trips and vacations. However, now I'm starting to take an interest in getting back into basic photography. I've started visiting friends around the US and gone on hiking and backpacking trips and really want some memorable shots.

I just ordered myself a nifty 50mm lens for $125 off Amazon, as well as a tiny tripod and a lens hood and polarizer. However, now that I'm going hiking more often I'd also like to invest in a decent wide angle lens for some beautiful landscape shots.

For the kinds of shots I want to take (mountain shots, landscape, scenery) is it worth it for me to get the 10-18mm or just stick with the basic 24mm? Any advice is welcome :)

Edit: a couple words

Personally the obvious entry-level lens after the kit 18-55mm lens is to pair it with something like a 55-200mm lens. That way you will have most of your necessary range covered, all the way from 18mm ultra-wide to 200mm telephoto. These basic lenses aren't anything too special, but they are surprisingly solid for their cheap price.

-Here is a basic 55-200mm; if you want something with more reach such as for wildlife photography, here is a basic 55-300mm. If you believe that you might someday upgrade to a fullframe camera^([>$1500 at the cheapest]), and want a lens that can upgrade with you, here is an FX 70-300mm. All three of these lenses have vibration reduction, which reduces shake from say your hands.-

After a wide-angle zoom lens and a telephoto zoom lens, the next obvious choice for a budding photographer on a budget I would say is either a 35mm prime or a 50mm prime. as I said previously, both of these lenses are close to the focal range of the human eye, making them good choices for general purpose photography. And when compared to say your 18-55mm kit lens, both of these primes will be far faster and sharper at their given focal length, with a small depth of field that is very fun to play with (here is an example of what a small depth of field can look like).

-Here is a 35mm f1.8 [DX]; here is a 50mm f1.8 [FX]. Both are roughly the same price, both are roughly similar focal lengths; choose the 35mm if you prefer to get closer to your subject, choose the 50mm if you prefer to have a little more reach. (also, the 50mm is an FX and cheap, so if upgrading in the future was something you wanted, it would be the better choice. There is an FX 35mm nikon lens also, but it costs over double the price.)-

So to summarize, a solid starter set of lenses would be an 18-55mm, a 55-200mm(or something similar), and a good general purpose prime lens such as either the 35mm or the 50mm. Any lenses after that will depend widely on your given needs and desires.

It depends on the pictures you're taking.

A 50mm f/1.8 is always a good choice. About $100. It's better for portraits or walking around than landscapes though.

A wide angle zoom like this 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 from Canon wouldn't be bad. It'll let you get wide angle landscape shots of basically anything. Would not be the best for low light situations though and if you ever go full frame you would have to sell it.

Finally, more expensive, but generally worth it, is the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. You can get them used to save a bit of money and the best part is generally lenses hold their value very well, unlike camera bodies. This lens will be much more appropriate for low light shots or pictures of the stars.

If you're gonna splurge, splurge on lenses. Hope that helps a bit or gets some ideas flowing.

Agreed that it all depends on the specific lens you are looking at. Taken with a grain of salt, I would trust user reviews, image searches from somewhere like pbase.com and photography-on-the.net to give you an idea of the what lens is capable of and what caliber/type of photographers generally use it.

Here is a search on that Tamron 10-24 from pbase.com

Personally, I have the Tamron 17-50 and couldn't be happier, given the price and the quality for my Canon XTi. However, I probably would have bought the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 if I had the money. I have used the Sigma 30mm and thought it was very good. I also have the Sigma 10-22 and my wife has the Tamron 18-270. The 10-22 can be fairly sharp and the 18-270 is pretty good for what it is. One can't expect tack sharpness and perfection from a super zoom like that.
.

tl;dr - totally depends on the actual lens model.

I am about to get into flash photography and, wanting to hit the ground running, I will buy three flashes and related equipment off the bat. I have decided to go with the cheap Yongnuo flashes.

The Yongnuo is up to version IV, but I can purchase some used version III's for a bit cheaper. The difference between them is that the IV has a transmitter built in that can communicate with the other flashes remotely. If I am understanding correctly, this would eliminate the need to buy a separate transmitter (called the TX for Yongnuo).

Is there any benefit to buying three IV's or is it fine to buy one IV and two III's? The latter seems fine to me, but as I am new to all this, I thought it best to ask the more experienced in case I am missing something. The savings are minimal, but as I am about to buy quite a lot of photography gear, it should contribute to substantial savings overall.

I may purchase from a similar cheap flash company if I can find a better deal. If anyone knows and even more cost-effective way to get into flash, please let me know.

Link to the IV

Link to the III

If you stick with the T5i an 11-24 would be a "waste" of glass - hear me out. Part of the reason that lens is so massive is the amount of glass and witchcraft it takes to design an 11-24mm lens to cover a full frame sensor with a flange distance of 44mm. The crop sensor will not be able to make use of all that glass

You'll save a huge amount of money and weight by going with the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM - though it's variable aperture it's optimized for crop sensor cameras. It's definitely not as nice as the 11-24; however, it's 10% of the cost of the Canon 11-24! Check out some sample images, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the performance.

Disclaimer, I'm a 5D4 shooter and I love it - so it's hard to advocate against going full-frame with a great piece of glass like the 24-70!

I'd recommend a lens with a wide zoom range. For lifestyle-type shots where you are shooting yourself/your friends/the journey from a more intimate perspective (read -- up close) and the occasional landscape, I'd recommend a lens that gives you at least a 18-24mm focal length at the bottom end. It's hard to take pictures of the car or your friends with a 200mm telephoto lens, unless you want an up close and personal shot of the pores on your friends' noses.

My 18-135mm kit lens that came with my Canon works wonderfully for me when I'm on trips. It's very versatile. The lens that I'm referring to is this (this is a CANON lens, it won't fit your Nikon):
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-18-135mm-3-5-5-6-Lens/dp/B008UGMLWQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500062853&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+18-135

.
Alternatively, for YOUR particular camera, I'd recommend something like this Sigma 17-50mm:
https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6NU3U/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500062448&sr=8-1&keywords=sigma%2Bcanon&th=1

The latter lens has a shorter zoom range (17-50mm) than my Canon lens that I mentioned, but you get a nice, low aperture of f/2.8 throughout the entire zoom.

A cheaper option that is similar to the Sigma lens that I mentioned above is a Nikon lens that can be found here:
https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-Vibration-Reduction/dp/B00HQ4W4PC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1500062981&sr=8-2&keywords=nikon+lens+18-55

The Nikon lens listed has a variable aperture, and the lowest that it will go is 3.5. I'd spend the extra ~$100 and get the Sigma lens. You'd probably get a TON of use out of that Sigma for a long time.

Please feel free to reach out if you have some more questions. :-) There are some great people here.

Need some camera buying advice.

I've been shooting for 3 years, and I don't have my own setup. I normally use my sisters' Nikon L330, or my Dad's Canon SX30IS. Both are non-DSLR, and they look like DSLR's and perform mediocre, but not quite what I'm looking for. My Mom recently gave me a Nikon B500, which I really don't like- simply because it has NO manual settings. I always use manual settings on the SX30, and so now I'm looking in to a DSLR.

I am in to shooting surfing photos/videos, and I've been checking out the Nikon D3300 since you can upgrade to a 200mm lens for just $149. (This would be down the road) On the other hand, the Canon T5 looks almost as legitimate, however it has 18MP to the D3300's 24.2. The canon T5 has a 300mm lens option at just $98, which is extremely fair priced and another purchase for down the road.

As for preference, I don't know the difference between the performance of Canon vs. Nikon DSLR's, and I'd like to hear some feedback. Since I am shooting surfing, I'm looking for the best options for focus and zoom, and long-range quality. I also take a lot of Macro shots, but this doesn't matter as much.

Any feedback is appreciated, cheers!

I invested in a T3i when my daughter was born, and I never regretted. I'm happy to see a fellow parent that enjoys photographing the details of their children.

One piece of advice, that may or may not help with this particular shot: Grab a 50mm lens with a low aperture rating. It takes beautiful fast shots in low light, with a tight depth of field that really focuses in one your subject. They are relatively cheap. I got a f1.4 from canon for just $300 or so (which is a great deal for a prime lens), but you can get a f1.8 for less than half of that, and it would probably work about the same. Because you will be on a cropped sensor so it's going to be a pretty heavy "zoom" so you will feel like you are having to stand pretty far away from the action to fit it all into the frame. But I highly recommend it to a new parent that wants to document their children.

I've just bought the Canon 50mm F1.4 from Amazon in the UK. In the picture, it has white detail (Pic here)

The one that has arrived has gold detail, which appears to be an older version. Is there any material difference or is this just trim? I could have got the older version from eBay for cheaper, but thought it best to get the most recent version, which is why I went with Amazon. I am tempted to return it, but would much rather get snapping with it! :)

Thoughts welcome! Thanks.

My favorite low cost photography gift idea is the Ultra Pod. I've only gotten mine somewhat recently but I was looking for a small/low table top tripod that would hold a relatively heavy lens, and this one can also be strapped to railings and such. It's got a really smart design so it can safely handle much more weight than any other small tripod like this I've seen. It also packs down to very small. AND it's super affordable.

https://www.amazon.com/Pedco-UltraPod-Lightweight-Camera-Tripod/dp/B000ANCPNM

Canon person, but a Nikon person should come and correct me if I'm wrong. :D It looks like a 18-55mm kit lens. What kind of nature shots does she like to take? More wildlife or landscape stuff? If it's animals, a telephoto would be great. Something like the 70-300mm or the 55-300mm. Those would be in the $300-500 range. Indoor events, it would be good to have either a faster lens (50mm 1.8 is a cheap start, ~$100-150) so that she can take non-blurry photos in dark conditions.

Alternatively, get her a tripod (good for landscapes that require long exposures) or a flash like the Yongnuo to play with for portraits/indoor stuff.

Late to the party today!
Ok, I have a pair of the Yongnuo wireless transmitters RF-603 II C3 and the YN-468 II E-TTL speedlight. I'm wanting to add 1-2 of the YN560 IV flashes. The YN560-TX transmitter looks like a great value, but I'm wondering what my options are to keep my older flash in the mix.
Set it to slave mode and hope for the best? Doesn't LOOK to me like the two setups can talk to each other.

Hello Everyone! I need advice on buying a camera. Please and Thank you in advance! I am going to Thailand for my honeymoon in April. I have a 7 year old Samsung Point & Shoot that is very slow. And I don't want to rely on my phone to take pictures. So therefore I want to buy a new camera. I want something that takes good quality pictures, Zoom really is not THAT important to me IF it takes a lot away from the quality of the image. I also want to take HD video as well. I have looked at the Buyers Guide and it seems a lot of the cameras that I am interested in fall into the "Super Zoom" Category, (such as the SX-700) which seem to be limited in picture quality if I understand it correctly (Correct me if i am wrong). I am looking to spend about $299. Is there anything in between the S-100 and S-120? I don't need to stick with Canon, if someone has some good recommendations i would love to hear them.


Canon S-100

Canon S-120

Canon SX-700 HS

Lenses are classed by what they're used for, and at what price. For example, very telephoto/zoomed-in lenses vs wide-angle/zoomed-out lenses. Decent (read: not shitty) quality lenses come in prices ranging from around $300ish to really good ones over $2000. (The exception is the $100 prime 50mm f/1.8).

I actually recommend you to get fairly decent lenses, even if your camera is quite old. Why? Because you can always upgrade your camera in a year or two, and use the same lenses. Canon's been making the same 50mm f/1.8 for 20 years, your lenses will not go out of date anywhere near as fast as the camera would, and can be resold for about the same value if you bought it used. There are some very nice $300 cameras nowadays, such as the T2i deal that's been going on; much better than 10 years ago, where a new dSLR camera might cost a good portion of $1000.

"Beginner lenses" are generally ones that are fairly cheap/budget oriented. Your camera might come with a kit lens, which is a cheap, shitty 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. It's kind of (but not extremely) wide on the wide end, and kind of (but not very) zoomed in on the telephoto end. It's also not very fast glass, which means it's a lot harder to take pictures in dim light.

People augment the beginner lens in many ways.

• First off, getting some prime (non-zoom) lenses. Since because they don't zoom in and out, they tend to have better image quality and are cheaper than zoom lenses. The aforementioned 50mm f/1.8 lens is an excellent way to boost your low light capabilities. (Quick tip: the f/number is the called the "aperture" of the lens. The smaller the number, the more light the lens can capture, but becomes more expensive for the dim light capability. The more expensive lenses also generally give better image quality. Compare the price of the 50mm f/1.2 vs the 50mm f/1.8).
  
• Replacing the zoom lens with a better zoom. The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a common choice. It has much better image quality compared to the kit zoom.
  
• Getting a telephoto lens. Common choices include the 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 zoom, or at the medium level, a 70-200mm f/4L. Compare this with a pro using a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, which costs over $2000 new.
  
• Wide angle lenses. The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is a common choice.
  
• Macro lenses. Beginners usually use Extension Tubes for cheap macros. Actual macro lenses cost a lot more.
  
  These are general gear tips for starting out. (I'm bored at work, my manager is missing today, and I have nothing assigned to code. Hope this helps)
  

I was in a rush to buy a tripod and needed one quickly for the lunar eclipse so I bought the targus tg-p60t for $50 from walmart. It seems reasonably steady and I shot some decent timelapses, but for $50, I was wondering if I could buy something better online.

I've got a couple questions


What do you guys think about the dolica gx600b200?

The dolica has a ball head mount. For general photography (and timelapses) is this better than the pan tilt on the targus? Researching online, I found many people tend to like ball heads better, but what do you think?

Are there any other used options or new stuff I should be looking at? Is there a specific used tripod that is a good deal? I am aware that the normal budget for a good tripod is $150 at minimum, but, as a college student, that is way out of the budget.

Links to both tripods

http://www.amazon.com/Dolica-GX600B200-Proline-60-Inch-Aluminum/dp/B004XC3GWU

http://www.amazon.com/Targus-Panhead-Bubble-60-Inch-TG-NI200/dp/B007REQU9W/

Hey I'm looking to buy a new DSLR. Old one was a loaner Canon 20D, I'm looking at T2is, T3is or some other X0D to get.

Budget is around 200-400 CAD. I have a sigma kit lens so I'd be cool getting just a body, and for that reason I'd probably prefer to stick to Canon since I already have a lens. Although if you could recommend a different brand that might be better for the uses I'd like it for, then I'd be happy to hear it. I'm sure I could find an equivalent on Kijiji with a lens.

I'm into shooting landscapes and astro landscapes. I'm wondering how the night time capabilities of the Txi series is, or if there are any other series from other brands that you think would be better for those uses.

I'm also wondering if anyone has any experience with the Rokinon 14mm, I'd probably be interested in getting it for landscapes and astro shots.

Hi Nooby_Scooby, there is an ongoing Question thread is here for small questions like this :) You might find it interesting to read and there will always be people answering questions in there.
***
As for your question, Why do you plan to buy a full frame body? You're spending more money now and carrying extra weight for the years until you upgrade to full frame.

I'm going to go against pretty much everyone in this thread and offer you this alternative advice :)

A lens like the 17-55mm f2.8 is actually an option you should consider if you're not upgrading very soon (i.e. next purchase or within the year).

Lenses like this have very good resale value especially if you buy them used. You would lose at most $100 from buying a new one and selling it in 2-3 years when you upgrade to full frame. If you buy used, and resell it, you probably won't lose any money and might even make money if you're a good haggler.

The 17-55mm f2.8 is about half the price and half the weight of the 24-70mm f2.8, and actually has a more normal focal length when on your camera. (Although some photographers might prefer to have a the longer focal length that the 24-70mm would have on a x1.6 crop)

Here are some options:

$8 reversal ring

$10 extension tubes, $40 if you want aperture control (I forgot you guys don't have aperture control rings...)

$40 bellows


Summary: With your current lens I'd say the $40 extension tubes are your best bet as they allow aperture control. Getting true macro sizes will be best with the bellows and the reversal ring however you will want a lens with an aperture ring so that you can stop down to extend your depth of field. If you are using a reversal ring it doesn't even have to be a canon lens, just buy a lens that you can thread onto your reversal ring... in fact, here's a really good setup:

$40 bellows + $7 reversing ring + $3 46-52mm or 49-52mm step up ring + $30 55mm takumar = $80

With this setup you can go all the way to 3x life size and have full aperture control. Just be sure to use it on a tripod, (and you'll probably want to light it with a flash) extreme macro shots are tricky!

Awesome, thanks for this. Wasn't quite aware of what focusing screens were, but that looks exactly like what I want.

As for the feel of the lens, I figured that they wouldn't really design the stock lenses for manual focus. I've been looking at getting a fixed 50mm for the T2i, and I'm debating between Canon's f1.8 and f1.4. I like the price of the f1.8, but it looks like it has a similar focusing system to the stock lens. I need to get to a store where I can handle them side by side so I can decide myself, but has anyone out there had experience with these two lenses who has anything to say about them? I've looked up comparisons online and the 1.4 seems to produce better images, but does anyone know if it has a smoother focus?

Hey guys! First time checking out this subreddit.

Current camera: Canon T5i

Current lenses:

• Kit (Canon 18-55mm)
  
• 50mm f/1.8
  
• Canon 55 - 250mm
  
  
  Two questions:
  
  1: I wanted to get a wide angle lense for doing some star photography / landscapes / cityscapes. I was torn between these two lenses:
  
  
• Canon EF-S 10 - 18mm IS STM
  
• Canon EF-S 10 - 22mm USM
  
  I don't really care that the 10-18 is mostly plastic, given the lenses I already have. But, I didn't know if the 10 - 22mm would be worth it. It also seems to be lacking IS but would it be more versatile having the extra 4mm and toting it around for the day?
  
  2: While I love the prime 50mm I have, I find that it's incredible zoomed in for obvious reasons. I see a lot of amazing pictures taken (suggestive/tainted opinion, photos of which I aim to take) with prime lenses around the 20mm's range. These two lenses I was interested in and didn't know if they are more "wide angle" than they are actually for candid/portraits and a good reliable daily shooter:
  
  
• Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
  
• Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
  
  Again, I'm running into the IS or no IS problem. Didn't know if people have had experiences with either.
  
  Thank you!

I'm a bit in your same situation. I'm going to Iceland for 12 days and going to try and shoot a ton of landscapes with my Canon 60D and Tokina 11-16mm Ultra Wide angle (uses 77mm filters). Here's what I got on a budget from a little digging on Amazon.com:

Tiffen 77mm Circular Polarizer: $144; on sale for $20!

B+W 10 Stop Neutral Density filter: $252; on sale for $100

Tiffen 77mm Neutral Density 0.9 Filter: $99; on sale for $25

Step-up and Step-down rings let you use your pricey filters on your other lenses; saving you lots of $$$!
Fotodiox 7 Metal Step Up Ring Set, Anodized Black Metal 49-52mm, 52-55mm, 55-58mm, 58-62mm, 62-67mm, 67-72mm, 72-77mm: $13.49

Fotodiox 7 Metal Step-Down Ring Set, Anodized Black Metal. 77-72mm, 72-67mm, 67-62mm, 62-58mm, 58-55mm, 55-52mm, 52-49mm: $14.60

Pedco UltraPod II Lightweight Camera Tripod: $16.67 instead of a $100+ Gorillapod

You can go super cheap/artsy and use welding glass as a ND filter: $6 There's lots of easy tutorials on how to fix the color tint of the glass online.

Travel and photography are both amazing yet expensive hobbies. I hope my little list helps you out by saving you a little $ on the photo side; letting you have more $ on the travel side to do and see more... thus getting more amazing shots!

The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (version 1) might just be a hair outside your budget, but it's easily one of the best wide-angle landscape lenses there is. If you really can't make that price point work, the Rokinon 14 mm f/2.8 works just as well, except it's manual focus and doesn't take filters. If you don't care about the f/2.8 aperture, the Canon 10-18 is another option.

A good wildlife lens could be the Canon 55-250 STM, only $150 for a certified refurbished version. Not all landscape photos need wide angle lenses (in fact, many of the best photos are taken with telephotos like the 55-250), but sometimes it is a little hard to get used to searching for landscape compositions in a telephoto manner.

In terms of "waterproof" bags, there isn't going to be something that withstands being tossed into the ocean other than perhaps an adaptive dry bag that you can somehow throw all of your gear in. The Peak Design Everyday Backpack gets recommended a lot - it is water resistant so it can withstand a rain shower. For added protection, just buy a raincover for your backpack. I generally don't like bags that scream "camera bag! steal me!", so a lot options over at Lowepro don't appeal to me, but they may to you. I use an Arc'teryx Brize 32 backpack for hiking - it's fairly water resistant.

Might I also suggest something like this little tripod so that she can get good shots even in low light: http://www.amazon.com/Pedco-UltraPod-Lightweight-Camera-Tripod/dp/B000ANCPNM

I like the ultrapod better than something like a gorilla pod because it more easily adapts to heavier cameras, and still gives amazing flexibility in positioning. Also, it's under $20.

Hi all,


 

I am researching getting a new camera and I have never had a DSLR camera before. I want to buy something nice, but not something so entry level that I'd need to go out and buy a new one again in a couple of years. This is definitely something I will keep for a while.


 

Option 1: Nikon D3300
-https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-1532-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-Focus-S/dp/B00HQ4W1QE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1485311699&sr=8-3&keywords=d3300
-$450 on amazon with a 18-55mm lens and accessories

 

Option 2: Nikon D5500
-https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Camera-3-2-Inch-Certified-Refurbished/dp/B013RFPOEG/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1485312117&sr=8-4&keywords=d5500
-$600 on Amazon (REFURBISHED) with a 18-55mm lens

 

I would also consider getting a 55-200mm lens for either option for an additional $150:https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200MM-Vibration-Reduction-Cameras/dp/B00RUBK53Y/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1485312649&sr=8-10&keywords=nikon+lens


 

Current thoughts
--The 3300 seems to be very highly reviewed as an entry level DSLR
--The 5500 seems to be a couple of steps ahead and may be worth it to me to spend a little extra for something that will last longer and produce higher quality photos. Does anyone have experience between these two, is the upgrade worth it?
--I care more about the photo quality than touchscreens or wireless connectivity
--Any thoughts on the 55-200 lens?
--I will also search ebay for deals

Sigma 17-50 2.8

Tamron 17-50 2.8

These are your standard options for that budget. Both have compromises. I went back and forth, umming and aahing over which to get. The Sigma is good but you can be unlucky on build quality. The Tamron is good but the AF is slow and noisy. The Sigma is sharp between A and B but sucks at C, the Tamron is sharp between X and Y but sucks at Z. And so on and so on. Neither of them will give you the sharpness of the 35mm 1.8 throughout their zoom range.

But the Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART will. It's out of your budget new, but I bought it mint-condition second hand for £400 - so you might find one closer to your budget that way. It is one of Sigma's new 'Global Vision' lenses, which is marketing speak for 'we've pulled our finger out in terms of build quality, sorry about that'. It is astonishingly sharp right across the zoom range, even wide open at 1.8: yes, as sharp if not sharper than the 35mm. The AF is fast, silent, and (in my experience anyway) accurate. It is built like a tank. It has FTMF. It looks the dog's.

The drawbacks are: it doesn't have the reach of a 17-50, obviously. In the end, I decided I didn't care: I used the Nikon 35mm 1.8 almost exclusively for 2 years and didn't really feel the need for a longer lens the entire time. Admittedly I don't take many portraits, but when I do I just shoot 3/4 length. As someone who leans towards landscape photography, I was more interested in the wide end. It's quite big as far as standard zooms go, and quite heavy, but I'm a grown up, I can handle it. The image quality more than makes up for it, and on my D7000 with a grip it actually balances perfectly.



^Yeah, ^I ^went ^there ^dasazz

Photography newbie looking for help! I was hoping to get a recommendation on which macro extension tubes to buy. I have a Canon EOS rebel T6 and any help would be appreciated.

I've decided between these two at the moment but would love to hear from anyone that has had experience with them before I make the purchase. And I'm open still to other products too!

Fotodiox Canon EOS Macro Extension Tube Set

Mcoplus EXT-CP Auto Focus AF Macro Extension Tube Set Lens Adapter Ring


My friend has a pair of red spitting cobras that laid 13 eggs which are starting to hatch and I can't think of better excuse to by myself some camera accessories!

> flat lays

Just to clarify, are you talking building interior shots here? If so, generally that kind of shooting wants a wider-angle lens, and the Rokinon 12mm f2 is a pretty solid choice without blowing your budget. It's manual focus, but it has a pretty aperture and due to its wider angle nature it's pretty easy to get stuff in focus when you stop down. I have the Rokinon 14mm f2.8 for my Canon 5D/5D2, and I can just set it to ~f4-5.6 and get almost the entire scene in focus no problem.

For portraits you'll want something like the Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS which will give you that nice blurry background to separate your subject from the environment. If you're looking for more environmental portraits, something a little wider might be a good idea such as the Sony 35mm f1.8 OSS or Sigma 30mm f1.4.

for the record i think craigslist is a fantastic resource. ive used it countless times to buy and sell camera equipment and never been burned. i'd reconsider if i were you, but be smart when buying or selling.

however, you can find the tokina used on amazon for ~$400

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B007ORX8ME/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1466031552&sr=8-1&keywords=tokina+11-16&condition=used


as far as other lenses go...i'm not sure. there weren't any at the quality/aperture/focal length for a comparable price when i left #teamcanon.

the-digital-picture.com is a great resource for lens reviews, but take them with a grain of salt, he seems to bend over for canon backwards when comparing to 3rd parties.

I have a few recommendations for you:


Master the Business of Photography with Sal Cincotta: This class will give you a good primer on the business side.


Build Your Lighting Knowledge with Peter Hurley: Peter will teach you simple lighting setup and whatnot.


Because I like books, I'll recomend some as well.

• Best Business Practices for Photographers by John Harrington
  
  
• How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie
  
  
• The Trusted Advisor by David H. Maister
  
  
• Ziglar on Selling: The Ultimate Handbook for the Complete Sales Professional by Zig Ziglar
  
  
  Beyond that: practice, practice, practice.

So I have had my T4i DSLR for a while now, and I am looking to get a new lens. I got it with the 18-135mm STM lens.

I want to get more into photography, specifically landscape shots, a lot of cool night scenes, and some timelaspes. I am also going to Europe for several months and am looking for something a bit smaller than the 18-135 that will be more comfortable to carry around.

Two lenses I have came up with are the Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Lens and the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Lens.

Now in terms of price I am definitely more comfortable with the 24mm as I am just getting into photography more.

One thing I am worried about with the 10-18 lens is it being too wide for a lens that will act as my primary one. While it may be nice for those landscape shots, would it work photographing places in European Cities like London? Also, I have read the 10-18mm takes sharper photos, is this true?

Let me know what you think I should pull the trigger on.

I'm looking to replace my Nikon 18-55 kit lens and I'm not sure on what to get. I've got a D5300 and mainly use my 35mm f/1.8, which I love, but I want something a little wider. I don't need anything extending into the telephoto range as I already have a 70-300 and a 150-500.

My 'dream' lens would be the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, but it's beyond my budget. I'm currently looking at the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 - is this a good choice? Is there a better option? Or should I wait & save up for something a little better?

This camera is fantastic at both photos and videos, and this refurbished model saves you more money for a great lens, which is by far the most important part of your investment.
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D5500-Wi-Fi-Digital-Camera/dp/B00TFYRG3G/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1464046609&sr=1-1&keywords=refurbished+d5500
This incredible lens has recently had a big price reduction. It has pro features such as a fast, constant aperture and stabilization that will make it possible to shoot sharp photos and videos even in low light, where most lenses fail. It shoots everything from landscapes to portraits perfectly. You will likely keep this lens forever, and it is an ideal lens to learn on. Much better than the cheap kit lenses bundled with most cameras that are very limiting.
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6NU3U/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1464049539&sr=1-2&keywords=sigma+17-50mm+f+2.8
Throw this on the front of the lens to protect it.
http://www.amazon.com/Hoya-Digital-Frame-Multi-Coated-Filter/dp/B002L60TTI/ref=pd_sim_421_4?ie=UTF8&dpID=313Zr0POzWL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=12EBWXTVA2D5E3BNTGY2

The "Nifty fifty" is a must-have lens for all photographers. You are right in the crop factors though, but it's just how it goes. You'll use it for portraits and other subject photography. You'll probably never use it for landscape photography, so don't worry about the crop zoom factor, it's a must-have lens.

For a VERY afforable ultra wide lens, I'd recommend this one. Not 100% sure if you can find it on amazon EU, which I am assuming you might need to use because the 550D appears European. Either way, it's totally safe to look for cheaper auxiliary brands of lenses like Rokinon and Tokina, as long as they are APS-C ready.

I went with this dolica one and I haven't had any problems with it so far. It's one of the cheapest ball head tripods I could find but I think the quality actually seems pretty good. The carrying case is nice to have as well.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004XC3GWU

I have been shooting on Nikon for a while now. The D7000 is a solid camera. Going from my old D80 to the D7000 it was like stepping into the future. The full RGB meter and the 6400 ISO range make for some amazing shots.

Now as for lens that largely depends on your budget.

• The standard starter 50mm f/1.8 $219.00
  
  The 50mm will give you razor sharp images work in low light and is a great lens to learn on. If you ever move to a FX (full frame) camera is will work on there as well. On your crop camera it will be 50mm x 1.5 (crop factor) = 75mm lens. This is a little long for some folks which leads to our next lens.
  
  
• Great starter just for DX Cameras 35mm f/1.8 $196.95
  
  The 35 is a DX lens (build just for your crop camera so it won't work well on a FX camera) but its a great place to start. This lens is a "normal" lens. Meaning it is close to what your eye sees. Its cheap and has many of the qualities of the 50mm.
  
  
• If you have some money to burn the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 $594.00
  
  I just picked up this Sigma a few days ago from Amazon and I can confirm its sharp as a tack. I honestly like this lens better than the 17-55 Nikon which is 1500 ish dollars. It has optical stabilization and is lighter than the hulking Nikon lens.
  
  I have stayed away from lenses with, in my opinion, crappy f-stops. You can find cheaper lens out there but you will suffer from high f stops like 5.6 which will kill your ability to shoot in low light, and to isolate your subject and have real control over your depth of field. These lenses are great place to start and they will stay in your camera bag for years to come. There are more lenses out there from zooms to telephoto to macro if you give us some idea of what you want to shoot then we can help recommend a more specialized lens. Happy shooting.
  

Ah so grateful! Really, I needed this sort of 'debate' ironed out because it's bugging me. If I begin to sound like I'm counter-pointing I apologize, it's probably due to my lack of knowledge

Now, I probably should have lead on with this but sometimes I forget I even have one because the quality is lousy. I have a 55-200 and it's this one.

Again, I only use it if really necessary as I've never really liked a single photo that's come out of it. So I technically have the focal range but the photos are just so bad I don't even like pretending I own it.

The 70-200 is very nice. But it's arguably more expensive than the original lens I am out seeking. The end goal is to own a full frame, 24-70, and a 70-200 as they are champions in the game haha.

I believe the 85mm would hold me over for now and would provide a fill for the tighter focal length I'm seeking. If it turns out that I have a huge demand for my services (one can dream) then having that for tight shots, the 50mm for slightly wider and 'tight spaces', and the 18-35 for environmental portraits, I think I would be in good shape as long as my client could wait while I swapped the lens in and out haha

I just purchased a new lens, and I realize I have no real appreciative knowledge about lens filters. All I really know is that I have an inclination that it will protect the lens itself from damage. I usually shoot landscape (nature, parks), or nighttime (milkyway, stars). Is a lens filter like this one cheaping out? It seems to have positive reviews, but I thought I'd ask you all! I would like to protect the lens, but I don't want to degrade the quality of the lens. Thanks!

New lens buying advice for Nikon

I'm looking into buying a new lens to move beyond my kit lens from the Nikon D5300, my kit lens is 18-55, 3.6f.

I need advise on what new lens I should get... I do lots of night photography, long exposures and whatnot. I'd love to have something with a wide angle and large aperture size. Preferably keeping the price under $300. I dont mind a cheap feel or manual focus lens as long as the quality and functionality is great.

So far im considering the "Ultra Wide Angle" Rokinon 14mm 2.8f but I'd love something similar with a larger aperature but I havent found anything as of yet, any advise on what other lens I should look at?

Rokinon for those that are interested
http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/dp/B003VSGQPG

I'm looking into a good general-purpose prime lens for my Canon APS-C camera, something that I can keep on by default for hikes, parties, etc. I've narrowed it down to three:

24mm f/2.8 pancake: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NI3BZ5K/
28mm f/2.8 IS: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0076BNKU8/
35mm f/2 IS: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00A2BVBTG/

28mm is probably the ideal focal length for me out of the three, but I'm not sure if IS is really necessary at that focal length.

If I don't need IS, I'm tempted to save a few hundred bucks and go for the pancake lens. I can handle 4mm wider and the small/light form factor would be nice. If I ever upgrade to full frame I'll lose the lens, but at $150 it's not a huge loss.

On the other hand, if IS is useful, I could add 7mm and get another full stop. 35mm is pushing it though since I already have a 50mm prime.

Any thoughts?

>Isn't there some kinda verbiage you need to have ready to go for how long they can use it for

Yes. This is called a licensing contract for usage rights (or something like that).

A book like this can help you understand how to handle writing such a contract:

https://smile.amazon.com/Best-Business-Practices-Photographers-Second/dp/1435454294/ref=pd_sbs_14_2?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1435454294&pd_rd_r=BYMEZ05X7ADQNZ28MG3X&pd_rd_w=qoJ3o&pd_rd_wg=eTKTp&psc=1&refRID=BYMEZ05X7ADQNZ28MG3X

You could also use those calculators on Getty and Corbis to understand each factor you need to address in the license you create. There is more than just "how long they can use it for."


-----

>proof that its your picture

This is on them to ask for.

You should be able to do this in a number of different ways.

The easiest and most important one is to have a copyright registration document to show them.

Without that, there are many other ways. Use common sense with this.

Can anyone recommend a good lens for firework photography? I'm shooting with a Canon T6S with crop sensor. I'm leaning towards the Canon 10-18 f4.5-5.6 or maybe a Rokinon 14mm f2.8 since I don't need AF nor IS for this purpose.

The pics won't be traditional firework photography like most people here do with items in the foreground to balance it out. I'm a member of the Pyrotechnics Guild International and participate in many competitions. So the photos will strictly be of the fireworks and firework displays.

Here's some images that other members took of shows that our crew shot. These are not great images, but gives a good idea of the framing I'm going for.

• 1
  
• 2
  
• 3
  
• 4
  
  I'd prefer a prime lens, but if a zoom does the job then so be it. Prefer to keep it under $500 new, but I still need a good tripod so the less expensive the better.

There may be better options out there, but I have this one and I like it. The ball joint is reassuringly firm and the legs are pretty solid when extended. When folded up, the legs form a V-shaped channel that lets the tripod rest stably against a rounded pole/rail/whatever, whether using the velcro strap or (as I sometimes do) simply holding the tripod against a rail during a long exposure.

If you aren't going to go TTL, pick up 2 or 3 of these

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/ibn/AmazonBasics-DF500-Electronic-Flash-for-DSLR-Cameras/B01I09WHLW

You can get two of them for the price of one Yongnou. You lose out on zoom, but honestly that is something I never have needed with modifiers.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Channels-Wireless-Trigger-Receivers/dp/B008MTN9MM

Would be your wireless triggers. You can pick up 2 flashes and a set of triggers for dirt cheap, and then pick up a modifier

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Andoer-Portable-Umbrella-Reflector-Speedlight/dp/B00VJFHRE2 - My favorite as a key light with a

https://www.amazon.co.uk/DynaSun-UR02-43-Professional-Diffusion/dp/B005O8ZXZ0/

for fill light. That gives you a great starting setup minus light stands for portraits. And its cheap enough you can even get a grid for the octobox and color gels to expand your kit for cheaper than just getting the flashes from Yongnuo

A few people have already answered your questions but I was almost the exact same boat as you just a month ago. I also bought the D3300 with both kit lenses as my first camera.

> How do you know from looking at lens specs which ones are wider, just the focal length (18mm vs 100mm)?

Im not 100% sure what you are asking here but generally the lower number = wider view.

> Would a Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G allow me to take better low-light photo's than the 18-55mm kit lense?

The 35mm 1.8G was the second lens I bought after getting a 50mm 1.8 (Which I hate on the D3300 Cropped sensor). I LOVE my 35mm on the D3300. I took it off one time after I bought it so I could show someone the picture of the moon with the 200.

Shooting at 1.8 lets in more light which does mean you can shoot better in low light.

You have the remember that your camera has a cropped sensor which means you have to multiply the mm of a lense by 1.5, so if you buy a 35mm and put it on you are shooting at 52.5mm. If you are showing at 200mm you are actually at 300mm, ect.

> I am looking to get a tripod, thinking about the Dolica GX600B200; anything better in that price range that I should consider? Travel friendly-ish would be nice.

I did a lot of research in to tripods before I got mine and it generally seems like any new tripod under $100 is a no go. They are almost always flimsy and poorly made. I ended up buying a used Manfrotto from http://www.fredmiranda.com/ for $40.

> Good idea or bad - I read that I should just start in aperture priority mode, does it make sense to learn this way?

I taught myself to shot in manual mode first. The D3300 has a really nice light meter built in to it that makes shooting manual easy. When I got my 35mm tho I went to aperture priority almost exclusively. You just have to pay attention to the shutter speed it is going to use tho. If it is too dark it will start getting under 1/30 which you dont normally want. IMO learning manual first is a must just so you gather an understanding in what is happening that way you can take control if Av isnt working how you want.

> I downloaded RawTherapee to play with as I'm shooting RAW, is there a simplier way to just view RAW photos?

Windows 10 lets me see RAWs with no extra installations

> Will shooting RAW + JPEG slow shooting down or is that just a space savings concern?

It will have very little effect. I also went to all RAW but then I realized if I wanted to send a quick picture to someone I had to convert it which was a pain so I went back to R+J.

I will say tho the kit lenses are garbage. I actually sent my D3300 back for a full refund and Im getting a 5300 body only. (I have the 35mm that I got for $120) If I need to get the kit lenses I can buy them second hand for almost nothing.

Ben Long's Complete Digital Photography, now in its 7th edition, is pretty good for beginners, and only costs $30. I used it to design an online course in digital photography for a graduate school project (e-learning design).

Edit: for aspiring professionals, I'd recommend Best Business Practices for Photographers by John Harrington (2nd edition), around $22 on Amazon. It's chock full of recommendations for starting your own business, shooting professional paid assignments, handling releases and contracts, copyright protection for your work, etc. Great resource.

I also have the 77D with the 50mm 1.8. I bought the 24mm 2.8 pancake lens and love it. Great cheap lens for all sorts of shooting. Love using it to take landscape shots but is also great for portrait shooting a subject up close.
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-24mm-2-8-Lens/dp/B00NI3BZ5K/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1524755265&sr=8-3&keywords=24mm+2.8

I preface by saying I know almost nothing about photography.

My gf has a Canon Rebel T2i and recently we went on vacation to Iceland where she commented she wasn't taking the best pictures because she only had a kit lens.

I wanted to get her something around the $300-400. What would be the best bang for my buck? She likes doing wildlife and landscape photography.

I see these two lenses, are both of them together a good deal?

Zoom lens

Landscape Lens


Is there another lens in that price range that would be better than both of these combined?
Also, is it worth it getting a lens for a T2i, she was commenting that it was a beginner camera.

Okay, here is a better list, sorry for the mess:

Flash -- around $65.

Transmitter --around $35

Light stand + umbrella + flash bracket // around $30. I got this one used for $20 on Amazon. There are different ones and with different quality.

Canon 24mm f/2.8 -- around $150

Canon 50mm f/1.8 -- around $110.

Also, Yongnuo makes their version of the 50mm ($50), the 35mm ($88) and some others. I can only vouch for the 50mm, I either got a great copy or it is just great.

Most people will recommend a 50mm 1.8 but honestly its too long for a crop sensor camera like the t6i in my opinion, I recommend a 24mm or 40mm instead.

I purchased my first camera, a Nikon D3300 with the 18-55mm & 55-200mm kit lenses.

Just a few general inquries :)

• How do you know from looking at lens specs which ones are wider, just the focal length (18mm vs 100mm)?
  
• Would a Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G allow me to take better low-light photo's than the 18-55mm kit lense?
  
• I am looking to get a tripod, thinking about the Dolica GX600B200; anything better in that price range that I should consider? Travel friendly-ish would be nice.
  
• Good idea or bad - I read that I should just start in aperature priority mode, does it make sense to learn this way?
  
• I downloaded RawTherapee to play with as I'm shooting RAW, is there a simplier way to just view RAW photos?
  
• Will shooting RAW + JPEG slow shooting down or is that just a space savings concern?
  
  Thanks!
  

The T2i is an excellent camera, I bought mine shortly after it was released and I still love it.

The image quality is on par with a 7D or 60D but it's much cheaper. The auto-focus system isn't on par with pro-level cameras and it has a mediocre continuous shooting frame rate, but that shouldn't be a deal breaker. I've used my camera to shoot college sports (baseball and basketball), wildlife, landscapes, portraits, etc. and it has always proved to be a capable camera. If you get it, I would suggest getting a vertical grip and then saving up for some nice glass.

While the kit lens is fairly capable for outdoor shooting, you might eventually consider upgrading it to Tamron's 17-50mm lens or Canon's 17-55mm lens.

well you could get close to the subject with the 35mm 1.8 if you want a tiny bit more space from your subject and less of a wide angle 50 mm1.8, but I think the best for you would be this 55-200. You could definitely use it for portraits and some amatuer action/sports/nature photgraphy, i use it all the time. if you've got the money then go for the 55-300 it might be a little softer and less crisp around the 250 mm+ range but I dont really have any personal use with it so i wouldn't know.

I have a D3300. My most used lenses are the 35mm 1.8 and the [Tokina 11-16 2.8] (https://www.amazon.com/Tokina-11-16mm-AT-X116-Digital-Cameras/dp/B007ORX8ME/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1480092486&sr=1-1&keywords=tokina+11-16). I highly recommend both of them. The 35 is great for every day use, and the 11-16 is amazing for landscapes. But it really depends on what you want the lenses for?

I took a class recently and used the Canon T5i Rebel, which I really enjoyed. But now that I'm buying my own camera I'm struggling to find the right skill vs price balance.

Is a $600 camera too much for a beginner who just wants to photograph landscapes, night scenes, and everyday objects? In class we used manual mode exclusively -- something with a lot of versatility in that aspect would be great. I also want the basic features so I can learn and explore this hobby without accidentally paying extra for luxuries only a highly experienced photography could use. But I also don't want to be kicking myself 1 year from now for buying such a limiting camera, you know?

I visited a local store and the owner recommended the Nikon D5300.

Nikon D5300 - $500

Nikon D3300 - $450

Nikon D3000 - $150

\^\^\^ I found those other two by reading through this thread.

On top of this I'll need a lens, tripod, case, and SD card. But the issue isn't really price but rather overestimating the quality of camera I realistically need.

If anyone can offer some guidance I'd really appreciate it, because this is stressing me out. Thank you.

Which zoom lenses would be best for night time street photography? I have a D3300 with 35mm prime which has been doing really good so far, but I'm thinking to replace it (although replacing a prime for a zoom for low light photos is a downgrade) with zoom lenses for the versatility because I've been increasingly needing zoom for the event photography I take at school. I've looked at the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8, and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I want to keep it under $600 in terms of cost, but yeah, if I were to replace my 35mm prime for zoom, which zoom would be the best for nighttime street photos?

Honestly, I think you’ll be unhappy going cheap in the beginning. You’ll probably want to upgrade later on, so you might want to save some extra money for better equipment. But if that’s not an option right now, I totally understand!

You really can’t go wrong with the Yongnuo flashes. Check those out to see which one fits your needs and is in your price range. These triggers are pretty decent. You’ll want a nice bracket for your umbrella and flash. These stands are also fairly decent.

Not too long ago I purchased the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro (amazon). I picked it because I wanted something for both macro and a sharp prime lens for portraits. I have been fairly satisfied with it and would recommend it. If you aren't interested in the portrait aspect, then I would probably get something longer than 90mm.

I'd suggest buying some extension tubes which can be found for cheap and would allow you to play with your current lenses at much closer distances to your subjects to help you decide what length macro lens you'd like to get (60mm vs. 90mm vs. 100mm etc.).

The main thing I'm looking for is a bigger aperture to get that nice background blur, aside from that I just need to make sure I can be close enough to take pictures in small rooms sometimes. I'm actually going to be using whatever lense I get for cosplay photos a lot so it's good to know it worked for you.

I'm starting to think this lense will be best for me. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003A6NU3U/ I'm hoping I won't miss having f/1.8 on a prime lense though since that one is max f/2.8.

Here are a few I've found to be helpful.

John Harrington's Best Business Practices for Photographers:
http://amzn.com/1435454294

Scott Bourne's Going Pro: How to Make the Leap from Aspiring to Professional Photographer
http://amzn.com/0817435794

In addition, PPA (Professional Photographers of America) and ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers) offer tons of resources on their websites, as well as several publications, seminars, and online courses. If you go pro, membership to these two organizations is extremely helpful.

ASMP's Professional Business Practices
http://amzn.com/1581154976

55-200mm. Seemed like a great idea at the time and I used it a lot during my month in Greece, but I've barely touched it in the year since then. I guess I don't do much shooting that requires that sort of lens. The 18-55mm kit lens took care of most of my needs, but that's seeing less use now in favor of my 35mm 1.8.

It's also a hassle to carry around since it's a heavier lens.

I would get the T2i unless you really want the flip out screen. Spend 325 for the kit, 20 for a SD card, and 125 on a 50mm 1.8. You'll end up right around the 450 mark with three lenses instead of one. You could also wait for the new 24mm 2.8 pancake thats coming out instead of the 50mm. I find the 50mm a little bit tight on my T3i but it's still a fantastic lens.

There isn't much difference between the two unless you want the flippy screen like I said before. I wouldn't think you'd really want the battery grip anyways as it just adds weight and bulk, but thats my opinion.

Are you trying to do a baby photoshoot for someone or taking pictures of your own baby and kids?

For the 7Dm2, I'd strongly consider the [17-55mm f/2.8 IS] (https://smile.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074). In theory, I love prime lenses... but I'm taking candid pictures of my kids most of the time and rarely have any time to position myself correctly. Being able to zoom in and out right then is fantastic. I <3 the [24-70mm f/2.8L II] (https://smile.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8L-Standard-Zoom/dp/B0076BNK30) on my 5Dm4 and even when I used it on my 7Dm2, wish I'd known about this lens when my 7Dm2 was my primary. I picked one up to just keep on it a month or three ago.

The AmazonBasics flash is ~$30 and is just a rebranded Neewer model. It's full manual, but if you're shooting off camera with speedlights, with the A6000 that's the only game in town anyway. (If there's a TTL wireless transmitter/receiver out there for the Sony multi-interface shoe, I'm not sure).

For stands and umbrellas, when I started off Cowboy Studio stuff was inexpensive and relatively good quality to price. I'm not sure if it's still that way, but if you're looking to keep it cheap to start with, it's not a bad way to go. Same with their wireless transmitter, but Neewer has one for $16 on Amazon right now that comes with 2 receivers.

(The one thing to keep in mind is that the hotshoe on the black A6000 is painted/coated, so the transmitter may have issues grounding, but I haven't had one of these in hand for several years, and I'm having difficulty remembering if the transmitter required a ground spot in the first place, as it's just a simple "pop the flash" affair. You should be fine though.)

So for a starter kit to learn off camera stuff, I'd say go with 2 of the AmazonBasics Flashes

This umbrella/stand kit

And the above mentioned trigger set. That's around $130 and two lights should be plenty to get you started. Maybe even consider getting some softboxes while you're at it.

Since you're just getting started with it, I wouldn't dump too much money into it for now. Those two flashes with umbrellas/soft boxes will be plenty to just get the basics down, learn the different lighting styles, and decide if shooting with flash is where you want to go.

From there, shelling out for some PocketWizards, Profoto strobes, and all the high end kit is up to you!

I would recommend a EF-S 17-55 2.8f if you go for the 7D (will not work with a 5Dmrk2)
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1292814940&sr=1-1

It's not a L series but for the price it is an excellent lense.

Edit: It is also an easy lense to use as it has a constant apature (how much light comes it to the lense) through its whole zoom range.

The Rokinon 14mm 2.8 is $300 and works pretty well. Since it's fast and manual you can control everything really well while still letting in a decent amount of light. However it's pretty heavy and 100% manual, so you probably won't use it for anything that you don't have time to shoot.

Otherwise, the Canon 10-18mm is nice and wide, especially for $300 also. It has IS and focuses really quickly. On the flipside it's really, really slow and doesn't have a focus distance scale marked on it.

The technique is much more important than the camera at this level. I would get the Nikon D3100 with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and a 55-200mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. Then you would have plenty of money left over for accessories (or other lenses once you know what you want) and maybe a good book on photography technique.

edit: An extra battery can be a lifesaver. Also, make sure the memory card is fast enough if you plan on ever taking video.

Thank you, I came here to post this Amazon listing. The customer-provided photos and ALL the reviews are pretty priceless. Makes me love Amazon for allowing them.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-200-500mm-Ultra-Telephoto-Canon-Cameras/dp/B0013D8VDQ

to see the others ^

They wiggle, their fasteners don't hold tightly, they wear, and they break. Even when they're new, they just don't hold a camera stock-still enough for long exposures in imperfect situations. They move in the wind, they transmit vibration, and they just plain aren't designed well or built of solid materials.

You can find some OK mid-priced tripods, but with a tripod, "OK" can really, really ruin your day when you need a tack-sharp 1.5 second exposure. I had a very good $40 tripod, it'd wiggle if I hit the shutter release on the camera, and it wouldn't damp vibration. The leg locks would slide--very subtly at first, but then one lock let go altogether. Gusts of wind would make it nearly unusable.

It's just one of those situations where a $150 tripod can cause you endless problems, while a $250 tripod will save the day. It just doesn't make sense to trade the $100 for many missed shots and frustration. I know that when I snap the legs out and tighten the extension locks, nothing is going to move. At all. A good set of legs will allow you much more flexibility--it'll have several positions for each leg, providing for solid placement on very off sets of surfaces. I've set my Manfrotto legs up in very cramped, uneven spaces, and I've always found a way to set it solidly. That simply isn't possible with a cheap set of legs, or at least none that I've seen. (Each leg locks at 25, 46, 66 & 88°)

My Manfrotto 055 legs can hold my camera, a heavy lens, 2 flash units, and an external Quantum battery pack at 7' without any motion. The center column cannot rotate. Nothing has any play.

I have several cheap tripods. I use them as light stands. See the stabilizers between the legs and the center column on this tripod? You know why those are there? Because it needs them. Every interface between metal and plastic is a place that motion can occur, and it'll get worse as the tripod ages. I have a friend with a ~25 year-old pair of Manfrotto legs like mine that are just as rock solid as they were when brand new. This one looks better, but I wouldn't expect it to last for years.

Go to a camera store and play around with a few well-engineered, well-built tripods. You'll see that they're very different types of equipment than department store tripods.

Hello, relatively new Canadian here. I am planning on buying the Yonguo 560 IV! for about $100 in hopes of taking better portraits. What controller works best? the YN560 TX! for $60 seems to give me wireless controls but it requires batteries so I don't know how reliable that is, there is also just a simple trigger! for $40 dollars. Is there anything else I should be looking into when purchasing? Thank you.

As everyone is saying, buying good glass is a great investment. Keep in mind though that the L lenses are very heavy. And if this is going to be your primary lens also keep in mind that 24mm isn't very wide on a crop sensor.

Unless you want more zoom a 17-55 f/2.8 might be a better option:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074/

Everyone I know that has one loves it. The only issue is it's an EF-S mount, but if you're just buying your first real lens my guess is you won't be getting a full frame anytime soon, and could resell this lens very easily.

I did a lot of solo traveling when I traveled to Europe, so I recommend getting a mini tripod like a gorilla pod or I use [this] (http://www.amazon.com/Pedco-UltraPod-Lightweight-Camera-Tripod/dp/B000ANCPNM/ref=sr_1_1?s=sporting-goods&ie=UTF8&qid=1369817861&sr=1-1&keywords=ultrapod) for night photography. also its cheap, strong, and light. Also I find that the Eiffel tower is cooler at night.

Make sure you have extra battery's and memory cards. I took three memory cards with me and one failed. There were so many photos from different country's on that memory card, that I still get angry thinking about it . If you bring your computer please dump your footage whenever you can, if not try to spread your photos through different cards.

Also maybe consider an ND filter and lenspen.

Be safe, have fun and happy travels !

I own a 70D with a 50mm f1.8 STM lens on it - and only that lens. I was wondering if there was another ~$300 lens that has the ability to zoom, but won't require me to move around too much when photographing. I hang out with my friends quite frequently and capture it all through the 50mm, although lately I have been finding it more and more inconvenient when trying to take a group photo or generally pictures in small places - there's no room to move around much with the 50mm. I was looking at this lens, but wondering if there was any other lens that could fit the need I'm trying to fulfill ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00K899B9Y ). Thanks guys!

I looked around quite a bit before I ended up with the Manfrotto 190cxpro3 and the 498rc2 ballhead. I'm a little over 5'7" and the size of the tripod works fine for me. I have a T1i and I've used my tripod/ballhead with the 55-250mm with no issues.

I'm also mainly a nature/landscape/architecture photographer. I've carried around this combination for several hours a day (along with a packpack with my gear) and the weight doesn't bother me all that much. I'm also quite happy with the operation of the ballhead and the quick release mechanism. I was really tempted to pick up one of those really fancy $400+ ballheads but decided that I'm not pro enough for something that nice.

I've read mixed reviews about the gorillapod. I have one for my point and shoot and love it, but from what I've read, the SLR version doesn't work quite as well. If you go that route I believe you'll have to get the version with the ballhead or you'll be very frustrated trying to adjust it to the right position.

The mini tripod I would recommend as an alternative to the gorillapod is the UltraPod II

I have this book, which I found quite useful.

Laurence Kim's blog has also been quite useful as well, and his blog touches on a lot of what you're interested in (I'd suggest reading it in an RSS feed since his redesign destroyed any easy readability of post titles).

Without a doubt get the Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR.

For under $150 you can get a used or refurbished one. Some of the sellers list refurbished models in the used category on amazon. I was able to pick up a factory sealed refurbished model (listed under used) for $130 shipped last month.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000O161X0/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used

You have the close end of the range and you have a prime lens. You are right to think about the long end of the range with your next lens. For the money you are looking to spend I recommend you go with a Nikon lens especially with the used prices what they are.

edit: I should add, despite not being a macro lens the minimum focus distance of the zoom i recommend is 1.1m. The sigma macro lenses you named above list 1.1m and 0.95m as their minimum focus distance respectively. This is hardly a difference and I think you get a better value from the Nikon lens here.

For a true macro lens with very close focus distance you will likely have to pay a lot more than you are looking at (closer to $1000 than $100). A budget alternative is picking up a set of close up filters which will allow your current lens to focus closer. They add some distortion and have a very narrow depth of field, but they may be able to satisfy your curiosity on a shoestring budget: http://www.amazon.com/Zeikos-definition-Close-Up-Diopters-Magnification/dp/B001UE6NAQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1345214405&sr=1-1&keywords=close+up+filters

Is the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 my best best for landscape/camping photography if I also want it to be functional/capable enough for astrophotography? I'm trying to keep my backpacking setup relatively light, so would be bringing my Nikond7100, Nikkor 35 mm f 1.8, and ___. What do you guys think should fill that 2nd lens role.

Sorry, I made this a post then saw the sidebar


So I finally decided to ditch videogames as the only hobby I have and pick up photography. I went out and bought a few things that I deemed required after I researched a little bit.

• Canon EOS Rebel T6 with Kit lens
  
  
• Lexar 64gB (10 speed? Read to make good videos I needed a higher class one so I just got 10)
  
  
• Canon 50mm 1.8f STM Lens
  
  
• 2 Extra Vivitar batteries
  
  
• Tripod
  
  
• Carrying Bag with shoulder strap
  
  
  
  I still have a bit of money I can drop on anything else I need. Since I wanted to do some night photography and am interested in astrophotography I was thinking about getting a remote for my camera, although I read that I can just put the timer on before I run long exposure shots.
  
  
  I also got a couple books!
  
  
  
• National Geographic Book
  
  
  
• And an old edition of "Digital Photography for Dummies" (I am going to buy the new one if I figure out it's too outdated)
  
  
  
  I was thinking I need a lens hood but I'm not sure how to figure out. I am going to San Antonio on Thursday and just wanted to make sure there isn't anything I need that I looked over because I'm a scrub!
  
  
  Thanks!

Landscape isn't really something that I shoot all that often but for capturing wide landscapes or grand night skies I know that many people use the Rokinon 14mm. I haven't tried it myself but many people swears by it and for a wide angle lens it has a large aperture (which is great to have when capturing the night sky). It's manual focus only but that doesn't really matter when it's this wide. If your shooting landscapes you'll stand still or have the camera on a tripod and should use manual focus anyway.

It's also sold as the Samyang 14mm but it's the same lens, just a differnet name.

I was going to recommend a Canon, but I don't think there are any Canon DSLR bodies under $700 that can do 1080p@60fps (Only 30 fps). So your choices for #1 would either be the Nikon D3300 or the Nikon D5300. Image quality wise, they should be exactly the same (they use the same sensor), however the D5300 has a flippy screen (useful for video), a better autofocus system (for stills), and wifi. I don't usually recommend the D5300 over the D3300 because I don't find these three features worth the $200-300 difference in price, but in your case it's what fits your criteria: D5300.

Disclaimer for camera #2: I'm not too well versed in Nikon point and shoots (and point and shoots in general), so I don't have as much confidence in this recommendation. With that said, point and shoots, especially in this price range, tend to all be very similar in feature sets and performance. It's going to be a bit tricky to find a point and shoot under $300 with 1080p@60 FPS, I'm not sure if it even exists. The closest Nikon camera I can find is the Coolpix S7000, 1080 @ 60i.

Ah, okay... so it seems like cheap tubes like this one don't have wiring built in, while pricier ones like this one do.

It seems like it would be so simple to just have the electrical connections, the cheaper ones could do it...

Oh wait, here's a cheap one with the stuff built in.

I recently did a Euro-trip and brought nothing but the Sony a6000 and the kit zoom lens. It was honestly perfect for traveling. I was so glad to not be hauling around a full sized SLR. The distortion is really only bad when you are shooting at 16mm. I also just got the 35mm 1.8 prime lens and it is fantastic. I'm just a hobbyist though, so you may be a lot more picky than me.

Here are some sample shots with the kit lens while on my trip.

I own this and it's amazing. It folds up really nicely, supports my t2i even with the tokina 11-16 f2.8. It has a forever home in my bag, and is invaluable while traveling. I will not travel without it.

Hello, i come back with an other beginner question,

So i am buying my first flash for my Nikon D5200 and i came across this seems to be Chinese brand that offers good flashes (according to many reviews on youtube)
and i was willing to buy the Yongnuo YN-560 IV
so i have to questions:
1- what do think about it, do you recommand it?
2- is it compatible with my Nikon D5200?

thank you once again lovely subredditers :3
cc u/MrSalamifreak

Hi there, so I'm a flash newbie, but I want to buy a yongnuo flash to work with my Canon 5d classic. I also want to be able to attach the yongnuo to a tripod and fire that with a wireless trigger on my 5d in certain settings. I'm wondering what flash equipment I would need for this to work. I'm considering this, but I'm not sure it would work? Would I need something like this for it to fire the flash wirelessly? Is it simple enough to buy the yongnuo YN560-TX, attach that to my 5d's hot shoe, dial in the settings, attach the yongnuo YN560III to a tripod or wherever, then press the shutter button on my camera to activate the flash? Thanks for the help!

Essentially a total newbie here. I'm looking at either a D3300 or a Rebel T5 for what will probably be exclusively outdoor shooting. I have no idea if I should get something cheaper and get a better lens (wouldn't even know where to start with lenses), or go mirrorless, or anything else.

I'd like to keep it under $500, and I know that probably limits me pretty greatly as far as equipment.

Thanks in advance.

Thoughts on Rokinon FE14M-C 14mm F2.8 Ultra Wide Lens for astro & landscape photography?

I have a Canon t3 with the kit lens and I'm looking at getting another lens that would be better suited for astrophotography and landscape photography when I go camping / hiking. I was searching around for a budget lens and came across this one. Does anyone have it / use it for the intended purposes mentioned above? Is it a good bang for the buck? Other suggestions are welcome.

https://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/dp/B003VSGQPG

Looking for some lens suggestions. Will be traveling soon would like to upgrade the lens I have (Canon 70D with the kit lens Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens)

Need an all around lens. Can someone please give any suggestions?

Saw the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD on sale not sure if this would be good or if I should spend a few more bucks and get something better.


http://amzn.com/B003A6H27K

Actually the Sigma is not too far out of my budget. Can you tell me why you recommend it among the enormous myriad of options? I found this on Amazon, is this model compatible with the T5i?

Thank you again for the advice, much appreciated!

Congrats on having your photographs well received.

Whenever you send photos to anyone, or give permission for use of the photos, you should be explicit, in writing, with what can and cannot be done with the images, and whether or not they need to be credited, etc. It's important to be very specific and include limitations (you can do use for social media, but not advertising; you can use the photos in a local market but not national; etc).

You're looking for info on what to charge for next summer, and also what to charge for photos that are already shot?

Here's a useful book about licensing your photos:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041IXRQQ?btkr=1

And photo business in general:
http://www.amazon.com/Business-Practices-Photographers-Second-Edition/dp/1435454294/ref=sr_1_1

The L840 is just a point and shoot, it won't teach much in the way of stutter speed, aperture and all of the other control you have with a dslr. It's a little above your budget but the D3300 is $396. It'll teach her a lot more and give her more cool stuff to play with, also that lens will be usable on a better body later.

Hi all! Preemptive thanks! And now...filter questions:

I've recently purchased a Sony alpha a6000 and I've got two lenses for it:
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0096W1P5W a 35mm f/1.8 prime, and
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BPZD0M4 a 19mm f2.8 sigma wide.

The next things I want to buy are a couple of neutral density filters, and I really want a Lee big stopper.

My questions are the following:
Will any of the cokin series holders (maybe the p series?) work with these lenses AND hold the Lee seven5 big stopper (and other seven5 format filters)?
Is a polarizing filter (the $240 from Lee) worth it (that is, does shooting for longer exposures in the sun increase the strength/likelihood of glare)?

Perhaps I should have specified, I don't mean "as cheap as possible" I just mean "not 100+ dollars". For instance this tripod seems good to me, I was just wondering if there were better options. I don't care if it's light, I just want something cheap that's moderately compact (not even really compact, just compact enough to not be absolutely massive and in my way) and strong enough to not drop my camera or topple over from a light breeze.

Whoops! I corrected it, here is the other one. I posted this same question in r/nikon and somebody suggested getting the newer Sigma, which I think might be this one. Its a bit out of my price range but I might just suck it up and get a used one. Do you know what advantages the new one would have?

Thanks for your help! I'm leaning towards a Sigma!

Excellent timing! I've actually been looking at the non-L Canon 17-55/f2.8 with IS. It's pricier than the L you mention (?!!), AND it's only an EFS, of course. But its USM AF motor blows my Tamron's screechy, plodding AF out of the water, its range (27-88) is marginally better and it has IS.

Confusion reigns at the moment. Upgrade body and buy an out and out lens upgrade, or just upgrade to somewhat better lens.

I hear a lot of good things about the sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. It's pretty inexpensive and much better quality.

Newb here with a Nikon D3400. Looking to buy a wide angle lens for architecture/landscapes. The Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002D2VSD6/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza) and the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007ORX8ME/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza) are a whopping 11 cents (U.S.) difference in price. Both SEEM to support AF for the D3400, so I'm wondering if there's a clear difference between the two that would drive me towards one or the other. Thanks!!

Step back! Generally lenses are made with the same equivalent field of view for different sensor sizes (for instance, m43 is a 2x crop factor, and we have 17mm, 25mm, 40mm lenses instead of 35mm, 50mm, 80mm); the only time you should be running into field of view issues that using a more appropriate lens won't help with are when you get into super-wide angle. And if you're looking at doing portraits, you should be far away from that territory, since wide angle lenses will produce unflattering photos.

Since you're on an APS-C sensor, your 50mm lens will be more equivalent to an 85mm lens on a full frame, which is a pretty good focal length for portraits. If you want more environmental portraits, you might try something like the 24mm f2.8 (some photos on flickr here and here).

I've been using a Gorillapod for my GoPro and an Ultra-Pod for my a6000 when I'm out travelling. Definitely both on the short side but they both save on space and are ridiculously light. For me, I'd have the size and weight advantage since I can usually easily find something to elevate the tripods on.

according to http://camelcamelcamel.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/product/B003VSGQPG?active=price_amazon&context=home_alerts

It appears as though it lasts just a day or two. Unsure from the level of detail in that graph.

www.camelcamelcamel.com is a really silly name, but very helpful tool for getting a good price on a big ticket item, if you have the time to wait.

Thanks! But it looks like the 50 is better for portraits, which is what I use more of the time.

Do you know anything about this one?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00009XVCZ/ref=psdc_173565_t2_B00X8MRBCW#customerReviews

In addition actually getting to know how to use your camera and finding your niche, read these:

Best Business Practices for Photographers by John Harrington

The Personal MBA by Josh Kauffman

One thing I'll grant you, kid: You're not a good photographer yet, but at least you seem to recognize that taking sellable photos and running a photo business require two sets of skills, and that you should be developing those skills in parallel if you are serious about creative work as a career. Those two books should get you on the right path for the latter.

Also, don't print a portfolio. You're not good enough yet and you'd be wasting money by doing so. Get a few photos you're proud of (and that have been critiqued well) before dropping real money on marketing materials. The money is better invested in the two books I linked above.

Hey guys, I'm planing to travel to Thailand and I want to buy some new lenses for that trip. At the moment I only have my Nikon D5300 with the kit lens 18-55. The lenses I'm planing to buy are: Tokina 11-16 2.8 // Nikon 50 1.8 G // Nikon 35 1.8 // Sigma 17-50 2.8. I love doing landscape photography, astrophotography and portraits, but I can't afford all these three lenses and I don't want to travel with all that weight on my bag. What would u do in my situation? Thanks for the comments.

I got this alternative and I like it. You can't wrap it around anything, but you can strap it around most things! I've tried it with a three pound setup and it was secure.
pedco ultrapod II

As for the rest of my setup, I got this tripod head to put on that ultrapod
so that it works with my peak design capture (clip with the dual plate)[https://www.peakdesign.com/product/clips/capture/].

It trades a bit of bulk for more convenience so i think it's worth it.

I'm not sure about the price at Best Buy, I got it off amazon here http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000O161X0/ref=mp_s_a_2?pi=SL75&qid=1347483141&sr=8-2.

I notice someone else mentioned another 50mm without an AF feature. I would say not to get that one if you can afford to. You'll want the one with AF support for any fast moving subjects outside of what you normally shoot. Plus it's just simpler most days. Of course if you don't have the money for it, that's fine. The one with AF is here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B004Y1AYAC/ref=mp_s_a_1?pi=SL75&qid=1347483321&sr=8-1

Complete noob here. How is the Nikon D3300 1532 18-55mm?
Link below, I might pick this up, is this a good investment? Any good lenses to go with this camera, or is the lens that it comes with fine? I want to take clear/crisp/dank pictures ranging from family to scenery, maybe some animals to.
Thank guys

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HQ4W1QE/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=BIYNPMQWFCRF&coliid=I35CI2HWZP8D9X&psc=1

I used to own a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 with optical stabilization back when I had a t2i and was very pleased with it. I'd recommend it for a general purpose lens and a good upgrade from the kit. Amazon has used ones as low as $320. This lens is not designed to work with full frame cameras though.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-2-8-Aperture-Canon/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1420669004&sr=8-3&keywords=17+50+2.8

What's the best small / mini portable tripod that is less than $50?
Looking for something like this: https://www.amazon.ca/Pedco-UltraPod-II-Lightweight-Camera/dp/B000ANCPNM

Or perhaps a bean bag is more suitable?

What's the deal with lenses from Japan being super cheap on amazon? I'm looking at a $569 lens and it is $360 from Japan. There's a few other sellers as well from there with similarly priced lenses.

I am getting into flash photography and my first step is buying a flash then heading onto strobist.ive done a little research on cheap flashes that are within my budget and i have narrowed it down to the neewer vk750 ii and yongnuo yn560 iv.The flash would be used for indoor events for example weddings. I would like to know which flash is the best of the two.

For a budget tripod people often recommend the Dolica GX600 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004XC3GWU/ref=sr_ob_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503187362&sr=8-1

Personally I just took a chance on one of these and I've been very satisfied with it's performance for the money.
https://www.amazon.com/PrimaPhoto-PHTRBBL-Gear-Traveler-Tripod/dp/B015RJ0WHY/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1503187529&sr=8-3&keywords=primaphoto+big+travel

I'm interested in getting a flash to start learning with and I'm ideally looking for one that I can fire remotely off something like a light stand. I'd prefer to stay around $100, and so far I've narrowed it down to these two but can't really tell the difference.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PGTOX26?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=ox_sc_act_title_4&smid=A1NZ7IEFV816B1&pldnSite=1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OUU7W8O?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=ox_sc_act_title_8&smid=A6EGA15UEFYEQ&pldnSite=1



Any help / recommendations?

I have a Canon T3i btw.

You can buy $12 extension tubes, and a $100 50mm 1.8 lens that will take good macro pictures for your Rebel. Those tubes will probably work good with your kit lens, too, if you want to save even more money. Unless you really want a new point and shoot, this would be the route I'd take.

If you have the money consider getting the sony 35/1.8:

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-SEL35F18-35mm-Prime-Fixed/dp/B0096W1P5W/

Maybe get it used if that's too much $$$.

With the crop factor it'll take the place of a "nifty-fifty" and is plenty fast enough to get good subject isolation. It's also stabilized so it'll help take pictures in lower light.

I'm also going to make an assumption that you're using the kit zoom and if that's so then a fixed lens will probably make you more comfortable coming from using your iphone and force you to process what you're doing more. The 35/1.8 is also significantly sharper than the kit.

Aside from that, setup your auto iso and you'll be able to just shoot in aperture priority pretty easily. If I remember correctly then you should be able to push up to iso 6400 with the a6000 and still be alright as far as noise goes.