What camera/ type of Camera do you recommend for professional photography? And why?

[Snappingpics]

Hello all,

It's me again. :-) For those who don't know, I've always loved photography as long as I can remember. Now I'm looking to turn that hobby into a career, but I'm still in the researching stage. I saw the amazing photos from the different photographers on here, and I was VERY impressed, to say the least. Beautiful stuff. I decided to post a question about how to get into photography professionally, and the feedback that I got was EXTREMELY helpful. All of the different perspectives help me out a lot, and I really do appreciate it.

I've noticed that a lot of photographers have different opinions on the cameras that they prefer. Me, I've only had basic digital cameras and of course I have a camera on my IPhone. I think I've been able to take some pretty good photos on those cameras, but that was just as a hobby. Obviously, if I'm going to do this professionally, I'm going to need to know about the different types of cameras, which ones are better for "this" and which ones are better for "that."

From my understanding, the DSLR cameras are the ones that are traditionally used for professional photography. But I've also been told, that with all of the new technology, a digital point and shoot cameras are basically just as good these days. And cheaper (which is good because I'm on a budget)

Just an FYI: I plan on doing Travel and Resort, Magazine, Sports, and Showbiz and Entertainment photography.

My question is: When choosing a camera, what qualities do you think are the most important? And what camera/ type of camera would you recommend and why?........Let me know what you think. I really do appreciate the feedback. :-)

[lava_lamp]

There is great information on photo.net about this. Ken Rockwell's site can help, as can Thom Hogan's. A Digital SLR is a good place to start. Canon is the overall market leader, followed by Nikon and Sony at a distant third (Sony bought out Minolta.) Since the lenses for one system are incompatible with the others, once you choose, you will be stuck with that brand for a while. An entry level DSLR will get you started. The more you pay, the better build quality you get, the better autofocus system, the faster frame rate, and the better low light capacity. The number of megapixels is not the most important factor, although marketing often implies that. The cheapest Digital Rebel or the Nikon equivalent (5100?) is all you need.

Good lenses make a bigger difference than the camera. A good pro lens will actually cost more than the camera you buy. If you are just starting out, though, I would get the short zoom that they typically sell with it and the longer zoom. Then you will want to add a 50mm f/1.8 for $100 or so. It is the best quality to value lens in each company's line-up. The lower f/stop on a lens, the better light gathering capacity, the larger glass, and the higher price. I don't want to go through what an f/stop is here, but you should look it up and understand if you don't already.

What happens is you get going with the camera and then figure out its limitations for what you want to do with it and then add lenses accordingly. Good luck.

Oh, no point and shoot is as good as a DSLR, with the exception maybe of macro shots in a well lit environment.

[Bob W]

But I've also been told, that with all of the new technology, a digital point and shoot cameras are basically just as good these days.

I've got a decent point-and-shoot from Canon, the Powershot SX230 HS. The color and resolution is great, but there's no way it takes better photos overall than even an entry-level DSLR like the Nikon D3100 or my D5000.

Disclaimer: I am absolutely not a professional.

[jstrykr74]

I believe the point and shoots that people/reviewers claim are as good as DSLR's are cameras like the Canon G12. Cost wise it's almost as much as an entry level DSLR kit. I bought an Olympus EL-PEN2, which could be considered a point and shoot with interchangeable lenses. Many of the shots I've taken with that camera are as good as those taken with my D90. I like it because it's so small I can take it anywhere. But again, the price is not much less than an entry level DLSR kit. Get what you like and can afford.

[swonut]

If you are really interested in going professional, in my opinion, you need to spend some serious time on a photo specific site and refine what you plan to professionally shoot. Landscapes, macro, weddings, knives, etc. This corner of blade forums has some great photo advice and some great photographers, but this is a side discussion in a room full of blade nuts. Somewhere like Dgrin or strobist is probably more applicable in this case if you want to move it to the next level. Like knife making, it's a fun hobby with the potential to earn some money, but I think it would be a bear to make a living at it day in and day out. Best of luck!

[orork]

When I caught the shutter bug, film was the medium. Short of a Hasselblad, Nikon glass ruled. So I started with Nikon. As mentioned above, Canon and Nikon rule digital. Canon has the deal on bodies but Nikon glass is still king.

In automatic/program mode these boxes are point and shoot. And the shots will look like it. The creativity and better shots come when the user decides the volume and speed of the light entering the box and the sensitivity of the sensor. These shots have to be pre-staged, insomuch as the camera has to be preset and set right. For sports a really good box with an icredible auto focus system is a must, Nikon's 51 point works well at this.

I'm an advanced amateur, club shooter. Here's a couple shots I put some time into.

[Mr. Clean]

Canon no longer leads the body war. I've shot so many Canon bodies, pro and otherwise and was completely floored when I moved to Nikon. The D700 is one of the finest bodies I've ever owned and the newer Nikon bodies rule in resolution and ISO performance. The ability to perform time after time, focus properly, high iso performance, weather resistance is all key and Nikon is the best of all those worlds.

Digital point and shoots are not anywhere close to the performance DSLRs are capable of. Not even the 4/3ds bodies are, which I've also dabbled in.

That said though, everyone wants to be a pro photographer and get paid for what they take pictures of. The field is very saturated by every Jane and John that think they should be a pro. I highly discourage it. For a couple reasons. First off, there are people that make a living off of this, have thousands invested and are very good at what they do. Posting on Craigslist saying you'll do a wedding for 100 bucks does no one any favors. Secondly, if it's a hobby, enjoy it as such. Turning a hobby into a job more often than not ruins it.

If you want real photography advice, check out a photography forum. Photography-on-the.net,NikonCafe, FredMiranda are the best.

[Chief]

Great advice, was going to add fredmiranda.com, it's a great site for anyone aspiring to be a professional photographer.

When considering a DSLR, consider a "system", choose a company with a group of products that meet your needs. IMO there are really only two companies with a broad enough selection of equipment for a pro to consider, Canon and Nikon. I've done some pro work in the past and selected Canon due to their lens selection and availability at reasonable prices at that time. Today I might choose Nikon as they have a couple lenses I would really like to try. Have owned / used almost every Canon DSLR from starting with a 10D back in 2003 to a 1DMKIII and 5DMKII, and there is no comparison between using a Canon 1 series body and anything less in the Canon lineup. The focus system in the 1 series blows away lesser bodies, the response, the frame rate, once you get used to using a Canon 1 series, they are a joy to work with. You can do pro work with lesser equipment, but using a Canon 1 series body is like driving a Porsche, a prosumer 60D like a Camry, and any point and shoot would be a Nissan Leaf. If you are going to drive for a living, the Camry can make deliveries, but the drivers in the Porsche would have an advantage. The Leaf driver would be severely limited and too embarrassed to show up to the contest. Pros use pro gear, it gives them an edge against the competition or at least evens up the playing field with other pros. Even stock photography is very competitive. When you are the paid photog, you will need backup camera bodies, backup lenses, backup flashes, etc., and the last thing you want to do is show up to shoot an event and have the guests using better equipment than you. Photography is fun, but when it's work, it ain't easy.

Am not wanting to smash your dream, just sharing experience. If you have a dream and a dollar, beware, there's someone waiting to use your dream to take your dollar.

[lava_lamp]

That said though, everyone wants to be a pro photographer and get paid for what they take pictures of. The field is very saturated by every Jane and John that think they should be a pro. I highly discourage it. For a couple reasons. First off, there are people that make a living off of this, have thousands invested and are very good at what they do. Posting on Craigslist saying you'll do a wedding for 100 bucks does no one any favors. Secondly, if it's a hobby, enjoy it as such. Turning a hobby into a job more often than not ruins it.

The same fella posting this question posted a similar one about getting started as a pro. It generated responses ranging from yours (which I agree with, but didn't put as succinctly) to responses that I would paraphrase as it easy to make $100k a year as pro photographer.

[butcher_block]

im a sony guy but will say flat out that while they can cover most things they are the shortest list of lens options(tho you go get to use most of the minolta stuff )
i have zeiss 16-80 and its a great lens tho for crop bodys only (its also the cheapest zeiss lens and it shows in build )

with sony going to EVF and getting rid of OVF im not sure what im going to do when its time for a new body

[NeoClassic]

I'm a print journalist and have been taking pictures to accompany my stories for about five or six years. All of them appear on the web, not in magazines or newspapers, so the capabilities and resolution of a Canon point-and-shoot has been all I have needed thus far.

Where those let you down is in low-light or with fast-moving subjects. I've lost photo ops many times in such circumstances -- in which case I usually fill in with company-supplied photos. But for 95% of what I shoot at press conferences and events, my Canon Powershot Elph 300HS does the job superbly.

I love that it fits in my pocket. I am often the only one snapping pics at events when other guys have had to leave their bulky DSLRs in their bag back at a staging area.

Now, however, I am ready to step up to a DSLR so that I can get better resolution, shoot faster and in low light.

The two I have settled on are the Nikon D5100 and Canon T3i. I'm leaning toward the Canon because I like the 28 mm 1.8 prime lens. The equivalent Nikon is a 35mm.

In either case, I will keep the kit lens that comes with the camera as backup (two is one, one is none) and just use the "fast" prime lens. This will have the additional benefit of keeping weight and size down, both things that are a huge factor when running and gunning all day long.

Since you will be a photographer and not a journalist/writer, looking further up the food chain than the models I listed might be worthwhile -- Nikon D7000, D800, or Canon 60D, 7D, for example. It all depends on your budget. And you will need more lens than I typically use. BUT, you will be surprised how you can get by, and often do better with, less equipment, as opposed to more.

Also consider video capabilities. Many photographers and journalists are having to get into shooting video out of competitive necessity.

Any of the DSLRs I mentioned can do well with video, but you will want an external mic and focusing on moving subjects will be a challenge.

I would *NOT* buy the most expensive, highest-tech camera out there thinking that it will make you a better photographer. Look for the best value-to-quality ratio and try to use whatever you buy as long as possible to maximize your return on investment. And anything that makes your job more complicated or difficult, forget about it -- simple is always better.

How you regard/use technology as a professional will be different than how you do as a hobbyist. The one constant is a love for photography.

It is a highly competitive world out there right now as technology has leveled the playing field and created an influx of new entrants who previously didn't have the skill or wouldn't have considered getting into the field. Quality and work ethic still stands out, regardless. So I recommend spending more time perfecting your craft and making contacts in the industry than focusing on the hardware.

Once you make your decision, invest in the equipment, then get out there and shoot.

Best of luck to you.

-Matthew

[Ebbtide]

The photographic equivalent of "What survival knife"

[mrn8]

It's way more about the glass than the camera, to be honest. With a cheap Tamron 18-55 on my Canon 7D and my 50mm 1.4 or 24-105f/4L lens on one of my old Canon 30D cameras, the 30D will have a much more pleasing outcome to my eye. Also, spending hours and hours getting to know your camera will help, because the best camera will take garbage photos when you don't set up your shots correctly.

That said, for what you are doing, you'll need a prosumer or professional DSLR and a selection of lenses, if you really will be shooting that diverse of a field of subjects. If it's a hobby, grab a Nikon or Canon prosumer or pro body (these levels put the controls on the body and not in the menus) and a good wide-telephoto lens and a telephoto lens. Something like a 24-70mm f2.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 or a fixed telephoto in the 400mm-600mm range. Once you have the body and 2 nice lenses, get out an practice every given chance to get to know your camera and lenses, so you won't miss your shots when you are on assignment. Plan on spending $3000, on the low end, if you want to cover all those areas.

[kancler]

Just my five cents...

If we are talking about pro-photographers then first question should not be a camera...

Bad photograph with the best camera in a world will not be able to take good images...


Learn about photoraphy ART first: technics, composition, etc... I have see some pros taking unbelievable images with point-shooters.

SO learn and learn, only after that buy pro camera.

Photo is my hobby also but I'm very far from pro-photographer, my first ok camera was Nikon 5000. And yes you better spend extra money on pro-lenses - advice from an experience

[Remyrw]

On the technical side, consider your lighting. Many cameras these days don't have the right port for a traditional strobe setup, you're stuck relying on proprietary stuff or adapters. That's annoying because it limits your options. I finally dug out my old strobes and run a little adapter to get the to fire properly with my D70, but it's not as elegant and reliable as it could be. Your lighting equipment is at least as important as the camera side of things, but doesn't have to be really expensive. Just figure out your needed output and then what equipment you need to manipulate it. For knives and guns and such that's often a large softbox setup. the softbox size and quality is at least as important as the actual lights behind it, you could use regular light bulbs if you packed enough in behind it.
Don't underbuy on the body, but don't worry about getting the latest and greatest. Buy a higher end but slightly older body rather than lower end but newer. There's a qualitative difference that goes beyond the basic spec sheet. Also factor in the cost of suitable computer hardware, a wacom tablet and storage for images. These days that last one's a lot easier than it used to be, dvd's and burners are cheap and easy. If you plan to use Photoshop that's not cheap, nor are many of the add ons, but they can make your life much easier. If you use GIMP it's free, but not as efficient to work in, in my experience.

Talk to a tax pro before you start buying things, there are good and bad ways to do things when it comes to a new business and major purchases. If you do it right and actually make some money in the first few years your equipment can be almost free due to tax deductions on it, but not if you don't do things properly.

[jarodmichael]

Dont have a lot of time to go on and on, but, I use a Canon 5D with L lenses and absolutely love them. Wouldnt trade them for the world. Now, I would trade up to the Mark 3, but that takes lots of monies.

[Adrien23]

Hi friends i would like to recommend a good and high quality camera for a professional photographer you should purchase Nikon D700 this is the best model for all the professional photographers but this is important to mention that what type of photographer means Wedding photographer or Wild or Fashion or any other photographer because many more camera models are here for professional photographers.....



portrait photography gold coast