Digital SLR for ground shots

[skybytch 273]

In the near future I'll be upgrading my ancient 1.3 megapixel point & shoot digital still camera to a digital SLR. They ain't cheap so I want to be pretty sure that I'm going to be happy with what I get before I get it.

It will be used for ground shots, mostly landings. It will not be used for freefall photography. I will be taking a basic digital photography class next semester; I'd prefer something that has both a dumbshit (automatic) mode and a way to adjust settings manually. My laptop has memory stick pro and "SD" slots; it'd be nice if whatever I get uses either of those cards.

I've played with a Rebel XTi and a Nikon (D70, I think). I prefer the feel/size/weight of the Rebel, but could be convinced to go with a larger body if there's a good reason to.

My budget will be around $700 - and that will need to include a lens. I'm not set on buying it new.

So... what should I buy and why? What shouldn't I buy and why?

Thanks!

[PhreeZone 20]

Best thing to do is to settle on Canon or Nikon. Look at your friends and see what they are using since you can borrow gear/lenses from them if you have the same body manufactor.

The XTi is great, I've captured some nice landing stills but the issue is that the camera is only as good as the glass you match up to it. Its got the dummy modes and the creative zone to go balls to the wall artistic if you want to. Its not a full frame sensor but until you have a large selection of EF lenses the extra money on a full frame sensor like a 5D won't really be usefull anyways.

Look at an XT or an XTi and then demo some lenses to figure out what you are looking for in terms of the range. the 18-50 kit lens is decent, its nice for jumping with since its plastic and light weight. Isssue is that you need to be somewhat close to fill the frame. not all landings are that close unless they land near you. Issue with a large zoom is that its not as sharp on either end like it is in the middle. A 28-300 lens sounds great for its range but its not usually as sharp as a 70-300 or even a 100-300.

Don't over look some other camera's like the 10D, its a bit older and less $$$ but its still a great camera for ground work and has more feature then the Rebel line does.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Cashmanimal 0]

If you are wanting to spoil yourself with fun/fast lenses my suggestion would be to surf around and find a used XT on sale. If you can find one for significantly less than an XTi, which you probably will, it is a great starter camera.

The XT takes fantastic photographs. If you have an XT and buy the battery pack for it, you can not only have double the battery life (if you purchase another battery) but you will also have more weight for stability as well as the versatility on the controls like the higher-end Canons do. (additional adjustment button panel on the battery back... very handy!)

By picking up a cheaper XT you will be able to afford more/better lenses (which if you are developing new camera skills, may not be such a good thing). But it would be a very economical way to enter the photography game aggressively. You can buy cheap now, and as you develop your skills and a style, you can upgrade to suit your own personal needs. A skilled photographer with an XT will out shoot an inexperienced person with a 1D Mark III any day. Practice!

As your photograph numbers increase you will become more proficient in your camera skills. With some coaching, you will eventually be able to move up to a higher ISO loading, and before you know it, you'll be photographing the longest swoops with the highest clarity. A good general guideline is to have at least 200 photographs before shooting without AF.

It's all fun and until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

[The111 1]

Quote

A good general guideline is to have at least 200 photographs before shooting without AF.

But, but... I'm ahead of the curve! I can shoot manual focus NOW!

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[pilotdave 0]

Ha!

I agree on a used XT. Great camera and really cheap used. A decent lens for landing shots will be harder to come by cheap. But then again I took landing shots with the kit 18-55 for a long time and I was perfectly happy with them... No particular need to buy a better lens right off the bat. That can be next year's purchase.

I wouldn't spend the extra money on an XTi. The cheaper Nikons could be good too for ground use. Nikon seems to have the edge when it comes to consumer-grade stuff, where canon does better at the pro-level.

Dave

[skybytch 273]

Quote

A good general guideline is to have at least 200 photographs before shooting without AF.

Would it be safe to start shooting without AF at 50 photos if I take a camera control class?

[Cashmanimal 0]

Quote

Quote

A good general guideline is to have at least 200 photographs before shooting without AF.

Would it be safe to start shooting without AF at 50 photos if I take a camera control class?

I would suggest you talk to your instructors first. If they think you are ready, then that is a risk you are going to have to take.

It's all fun and until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

[damion75 0]

Quote

Quote

A good general guideline is to have at least 200 photographs before shooting without AF.

Would it be safe to start shooting without AF at 50 photos if I take a camera control class?

Only if you have MAD SKILLZ!

***************

Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus.

[avenfoto 0]

d70s. good nikon starter, and you can find it for cheap.

[shunkka 0]

what kind of shots?
normal student landings?
normal tandem landings?
pond swoop?, normal swoop?
as a camera canon 300, 350 (Xt, XTi) or 400 or Nikon D70 or D80 are absolute more than enough for landning shots (as a begginer)
now wehn it comes for lens, u can use the normal 18-55 lens for everything but ofcourse you will not get the best results

-------------------------
"jump, have fun, pull"

[dragon2 2]

I wouldn't recommend a nikon d70 if you want to be able to jump it later on without hassle, a d70s is a much better choice.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[shunkka 0]

the OP said it will not be used in freefall...
some examples of pictures i made with canon Xt with 18-55 lens.

-------------------------
"jump, have fun, pull"

[johnboy 0]

Hey shunkka, any chance of getting pablos or 4 resized for a desktop? Those are some beautiful shots...

I've been playing around with my buddy's older Canon 10D which is 6.3 megapixels. Great camera, although I've not taken it to the DZ yet. You can pick those up on ebay in the 400-500 range. Rumor has it Santa's bringing me a 30D for Christmas. Hence I've not upgraded from film yet...

[StevieBoy 0]

This site is a Canon dedicated site, everything you need to know on Canon cameras

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php

And here for a look into the Rebel XT

http://www.usa.canon.com/content/rebelxt_tutorial/rebelxtlessons.htm

Hope they help a little.

Steve

it deosn't mttaer waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm.

[dima39 1]

Very nice shots, especially sunset swoops!!!

What settings on XT was used?
(I also have Canon 350 D / XT with 18-55 lenses).

Thank you in advance !

[mnealtx 0]

POTN is a great resource!

The original Rebel (300D), XT (350D) or XTi (400D) would all serve well. Depending on how close you are and if you have the software to crop the photo, the 50mm is hard to beat at ~$75. The kit lens also gives respectable quality if you stop it down a bit (around f/8 to f/16 - I wouldn't go higher than that).

This kit at BH Photo and Video would definitely serve well, but is a bit more than you're looking at spending. The 18-85 would be a decent walk about lens and is a good upgrade from the kit lens.

You could go with this kit and spend $75 on this lens and be well set for a little over $600 and have a bit left over for extra CF cards, batteries, etc...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skybytch 273]

Thanks for all the info, guys!

Quote

what kind of shots?

Non-pond swoops, non-swoop experienced jumper landings, candid people shots and all the things that "normal" people use a camera for. Will not be used in freefall - my neck won't allow that.

Has anybody seen/used the new Nikon D40x? Comments? At $799 for body and lens it's a bit above my budget but the one review I saw made it sound like it'd be worth it.

[dragon2 2]

Only buy the d40x if you're 100% sure all you need is the kit lens It can only handle AF-S lenses (if you want autofocus that is), and the nicer ones are mostly quite expensive.

I'd buy a D80 over a d40(x) anyday, or a 2nd hand d70/d70s.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[skybytch 273]

Quote

It can only handle AF-S lenses (if you want autofocus that is), and the nicer ones are mostly quite expensive.

Thanks, that's exactly what I needed to know.

[shunkka 0]

sorry... i cant send them in full resolution beacause of some exclusivity rights i gave to some magazines

now back to the subject
the origianl kit (18-55 lens) is enough for normal landing pictures
u have to think the subject will not have a lot of speed (u say it`s not swooping) so u can use the normal sport mode on autofocus till you`ll start to move to tv or manual mode and manual focus...

-------------------------
"jump, have fun, pull"

[The111 1]

Quote

sorry... i cant send them in full resolution beacause of some exclusivity rights i gave to some magazines

Not very exclusive once you post them on the World Wide Web.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Stumpy 284]

Incidentally - with the better lenses (L series) in the Canon range, the autofocus is more than fast enough for swooping.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[Laszloimage 0]

For landing shots (and generally for all kind of shots as well) the most important thing is a GOOD LENS.
Today's digital SLR cameras all have the necesarry features to take nice ground photos.
Landig parachutes are fast moving objects so a fast focusing motor and the image stabilizer is the most beside some experince.
Unfurtunately these lenses aren't cheap. That's why I charge for my photos...
Canon has real nice USM IS lenses. Also there's a 80-400mm lens from Sigma with stabilizer (they call it OS ) with fast focus motor. (hyper sonic) I never tried that lens though... but seems to me OK for the price.
Does Nikon have image stabilized lenses?
Personally I own a Canon 70-200 f2.8 USM IS lens.
I love it! (at day light you don't really need the f2.8 unless if you want to take pics with very shallow DOF).
Get a nice piece of glass for ground shots!
-Laszlo-

the first two photos were taken with the Canon 70-200 f2.8 USM IS lens, and Canon Rebel XT camera.

the second two were taken with the same camera, the Sigma 15mm f2.8 lens, and the Canon 580EX flash. Everything was set manually.

[Zee 0]

Quote

Does Nikon have image stabilized lenses?

Yep. They call it "VR" or Vibration Reduction. The 2.8 80-200 I showed you this weekend is the non-VR version but it still cost a pretty penny. I think the VR version is around $1,700

And thanks a bunch for the night shot from the "sunset" load by the way. I just need a good frame and it's going up on my wall.

Peace,

Z

Action©Sports

[pilotdave 0]

A good lens is better, but a kit lens is perfectly adequate for getting landing shots and other stuff around the DZ or wherever.

Here are a few examples of ground shots I've taken with the canon 18-55 kit lens (easily found used for $65). Not as nice as yours (or the ones I'm getting with my 70-300), but you don't need to spend $500+ on a lens to take some pictures at the DZ.

Dave