File :-(, x, )
Replacing Powershot with DSLR Anonymous
I want focus on macro and people. Figures and cosplayers to be precise. Will a DSLR kit lens do this? If not, is there a cheap lens that will or a ring that will modify the kit lens? My budget is under $800, I was looking at something like a used XTi on craplist.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A85Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size5.41 - 16.22 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandVertical Resolution180 dpiHorizontal Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:09:11 16:16:12Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length5.41 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1704Image Height2272RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypePortraitFocus TypeClose-Up (Macro Mode)Metering ModeEvaluativeISO Speed RatingAutoSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModePortraitImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeAutoCompression SettingFineMacro ModeMacroSubject Distance0.100 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed128Image Number154-5430
>> Anonymous
>>229812
"do this" refers to image as well as the description
>> Anonymous
the cheapest set up i can think of that would meet your needs would be an XT/XTi and the canon ef-s 60mm macro
then again, i'm a canonfag so another system might have a cheaper option available, and i don't know very much about 3rd party lenses
>> Anonymous
i like the sigma 105mm f2.8 macro, and i've heard good things about the canon 100 f2.8 macro, but the canon is more expensive.

you could try kenko barrel extensions, for a smaller minimum focus length.
>> Anonymous
Your best bet is something like:

20, 24, or 28/2.8
50/1.8, it's $80, so yeah. Useful for low light, a smidge shorter than usually ideal for portraits but still pretty good.
A 60mm macro lens would make a good portrait lens, too, as would a 70mm. That would cover the figures.

Some flashes should help you, too, but I don't know too much about those, so I'll leave them to the rest of /p/.
>> Anonymous
Alright, I get the general idea about the lenses, what about the body?
Is a $500-600 used XTi kit about the right thing to aim for with this budget or is there a better deal with similar capabilities?
>> Anonymous
Why buy a kit?

Why not just get a body + macro lens + cheapass prime?
>> Anonymous
>>229840
ditto
>> Anonymous
Keep your Powershot for macro. Since you're not aiming for anything amazing or incredibly small, the powershot will be much less of a hassle.
>> Anonymous
>>229840
A basic zoom lens is pretty useful no? And it's cheaper in the kit package than separately. So unless it's a really crappy value/$ I wouldn't mind spending a little more for the kit.
>> Anonymous
CLEAN YOUR FUCKING FAN.
>> Anonymous
Ok, I'm gonna go off now, but if someone has an idea of what to get besides an XTi (kit or body) that'll still have a decent set of features and be in the same price range or cheaper, feel free to post your suggestion, I'm not set on Canon so any other make is fine too.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Thanks for the tips, dudes!
In retrospect, the A85 isn't that bad when there's enough light, too bad there's no flash shoe on it...

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A85Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size5.41 - 16.22 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:05:31 13:31:42Exposure Time1/80 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias2 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.41 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2272Image Height1704RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeISO Speed RatingAutoSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingSuperfineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.350 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation13Sensor ISO Speed128Image Number166-6651
>> Anonymous
sony a200.
>> Anonymous
>>229820


I concur. From what I've seen of it, the EF-S 60mm works well as both a macro and a portrait lens.

And when you get another budget, Canon has a great ringlight lens and the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro if you're real serious about macro work.
>> Anonymous
>>229856

Basic zoom lenses are useful, but my 50mm prime stays on 90% of the time. Take that as you will.
>> Anonymous
canon kit lens sucks anyways so you might as well leave it out.
>> Anonymous
This is a genuine post - not a troll or whatever.

Don't bother - seriously.

After years of wanting one, I bought a Canon 40D to use with my Eos film lenses.

Dust totally destroyed any enjoyment of the camera and I sold it a month later.

Despite being very careful when changing lenses, some dust got on the sensor, ruining a days shooting. Got it cleaned, and was told to use a lensclear stick and blower next time it happened, which was a week later.

Seriously, unless you enjoy putting yourself through pain my advice (which you will almost certainly ignore and probably come to wish you had paid heed to) would be to buy the very pest PAS you can, maybe one of the new Ricohs, Panasonics RX3 or Canons new one out soon. In addition get a half decent film slr and lenses and use that for when you need it, carry both on shoots.

Just my opinion. A film slr = easy to clean, cheap to replace - the exact opposite of a digital one.
>> Anonymous
>>230146

lolwut

"hay guys, I cant keep dust out of my SLR for some reason, also I have no idea how to clean one anyway, so they SUCK SHIT"
>> Anonymous
>>230146
What do you do, take off your lens, have a beer while dusting your subject, then put the other lens on? I've never had any problems with dust on any DSLR I've used (Including the 40D, which cleans its sensor automatically) and I go in there with a blower for a couple minutes every week or two.
Disregard that, he sucks cocks.
(Film cams still rock sometimes)
>> Anonymous
>>230177
While he's wrong, in his defense someone who shoots stopped all the way all the time (someone doing hardcore macro work, someone who shoots landscapes and includes some foreground inches from the lens they want in focus all the time, etc.) might have more of a problem with dust than most people.

But they should still suck it up and clean that bitch and just use the clone stamp tool when it does pose a problem.
>> Anonymous
>>230146

Actually, I have been shooting with two Eos slr cameras for some years, mostly when I lived in Northern Japan. In all those years I have only had problem with dust on two occasions, and both times it was due to a van/truck blowing up dust whilst changing lenses - easily fixed by popping into shelter and using a blower - problem solved.

It's not quite so easy with a DSLR, and actually, in my experience, the 40D self cleaning system does jack shit.

Photography is all about either getting paid and being anal, or getting out there and having fun with your hobby.

In my experience, after a month I wanted to throw the 40D off a bloody mountain, but sold it and got a decent digital PAS to accompany my film SLR's and couldn't be happier.

Flame back all you like kiddies, I'm enjoying photography again which is all that counts ; )
>> Anonymous
>>230208

Yes, clearly anyone who disagrees with your bizarre minority view simply must be a kiddie. It sounds more like user error is to blame for your extreme problems. The rest of the world seems to be managing just fine, oddly enough.
>> Anonymous
>>230220

Seeing as I changed lenses exactly the same way with the 40D as I do with my film Eos cameras, your opinion doesn't make any sense.

Whatever, I'm happy being back with film and a PAS. Enjoy your dust paranoia ; )
>> Anonymous
>>229880
How are the lenses for the sony compared to canon/nikon (prime, macro)? Is the kit lens good?
>> Anonymous
>>230233
All companies have good lenses.

IIRC Sony's kit lens is better than the Canikon ones, but don't get a kit lens except as a cheap way to go wide if you usually don't need to.
>> Anonymous
The sony kit with 18-70mm lens is now selling for 499.99 in futureshop/black's is it worth it?
What's the 50mm prime for sony called?
>> Anonymous
>>230265The sony kit with 18-70mm lens is now selling for 499.99 in futureshop/black's is it worth it?

Is that USD? If so, HOLY FUCK NO! You can get them new for like $150 if you really really want one. They aren't bad lenses, but $500 is fucking crazy. You can buy an A200 with the lens attached for that much.

>>230265What's the 50mm prime for sony called?

Minolta 50mm 1.7 RS

=3

Sony doesn't have a Sony-branded 50 prime yet. The Minolta one can be had on eBay for less than a hundred buckaroos. Buy one; they're twice as sharp as the kit lens and, of course, much faster.
>> Anonymous
>>230285
>>230265
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&
amp;langId=-1&productId=11033562

And I think he's talking about the A200K, not the 18-70mm by itself.
>> Anonymous
>>230303

Oh whoops, I totally didn't see the word "kit" in there. My bad. Let's back up a little, shall we...

>>230265The sony kit with 18-70mm lens is now selling for 499.99 in futureshop/black's is it worth it?

The A200 is a rockin' little camera. You can't go wrong with it.

BUT! For only a hundred bucks more, you can get the A300, which is the same thing but it also includes a live-view LCD (like a point & shoot) that fucking TILTS.

Live view is great for a number of reasons...like being able to check white-balance without taking a picture and fudging around (you just change the setting, and the LCD shows you the effect right there through the live view, like a point & shoot does)...or being able to get step away from a tripod and not have to squat down or stand on your tippy-toes to see into the viewfinder (you can just...tilt the screen, and see what you're pointing the camera at). You'll still use the optical viewfinder 90% of the time, but the LCD is super handy in those tricky situations.

Oh, and Sony live-view isn't crippled to shit like the Canon one (no autofocusing? only works in P, Tv, Av, or M? what the crap?) or slow as fuck like Olympus's. You just flip it on and it does exactly what you expect it to.
>> Anonymous
>>230309
Lol wut? Is this a troll?
>> Anonymous
>>230314

Are you one? You're adding nothing to this discussion. If you've got something to say, then say it.
>> Anonymous
For starters,

>only works in P, Tv, Av, or M?

What other fucking modes are worth anyone ever touching on a camera?
>> Anonymous
>>230330

People who buy XSI's and 40D's are high school kids and soccer moms. That is 99% of the demographic being served. Auto is their savior, and when Auto can't do live view, these people become very nervous.

Step off of the internet for a while. It's rotting your mind.
>> Anonymous
>>230337

Addendum: I notice you didn't say anything about the fact that the Canon can't autofocus. Or tilt.

Troll.
>> Anonymous
>>230337
1) OP is not a high school kid or a soccer mom.
2) P is auto.
3) It takes all of ten minutes to understand exposure.
4) There is no reason to care if dipshits who can't be bothered to learn about things get "nervous." Actually, yes, there is: hopefully they'll be encouraged by their nervousness to RTFM/four Wikipedia articles they would have to read to use the priority modes or manual.
>> Anonymous
>>230339
Who needs autofocus on a screen that size? The tilt thing is a valid advantage to the Sony.

I called troll on you because so much of your post contains the sort of pandering to naivete and ignorance /p/ hates. You sound like you're working at Best Buy.
>> Anonymous
>>230342
You assume that everyone NEEDS to use manual modes to take decent pictures. People use cameras for different purposes. Some just want to be able to take pictures of their kids/pets indoors.
>> Anonymous
>>230360
Let's go through this again:

1) OP is not one of those people.
2) P is just as easy as auto, because it is auto.
3 and 4) I suppose people who aren't looking to become mathematicians shouldn't learn arithmetic? Or people who aren't looking to become writers shouldn't learn spelling and grammar? Just let the calculator and the spellcheck take care of it? And when we invent autopilot for cars, I guess no one should learn how to drive?

Once you know what you're doing- ten minutes of learning, again- it takes just a second to set it manually.

And beyond all that, why shouldn't people know and understand how their tools work?

5) If they're so keen on auto-everything, why is it such a pain for them to have to use the SLR finder? They're not doing serious photography, they're not hauling out tripods or shooting waist-level for a different perspective/sneakiness, so why is the SLR finder such an encumbrance?
>> Anonymous
>>230364
I didn't read your post carefully, but your counter-examples make no sense. I'll give you another example. Most people who own cars don't know how they work or how to drive manually because they don't need to. Same with computers. Just because a computer can do wonderful shit doesn't mean that everyone needs to use them to their potential.

I'm just saying that not everyone is able to learn new things as quickly as young people.
>> Anonymous
The sony does look pretty nice :O
What lens/rings do I need to get to 10cm focal distance with it that won't cost as much as the camera itself?
>> Anonymous
>>230364

Blah blah fucking blah.

OP has a powershot. Fuck off with your elitist faggotry. Auto's too good for him.