# What to tell a newbie?



## hhelmbold (Aug 14, 2012)

Today I came to a realization that Canon is indeed behind in the current camera market. I LOVE Canon products and LOVE my 1D X, but I also give training to new and upcoming photographers. I get a lot of questions on what camera to buy and what is the best camera and of course I know the best camera is the one you have in your hands, but how do you currently advise a new photographer to buy Canon if they just cannot deliver?

For example... I have someone who wants a camera to use when going overseas for travelling and holiday purposes (Powershot G1X will work here) and not sure if they will get serious about photography. But they also go away to a game farm frequently and wants to get a bit closer to the birds and wildlife. (SLR territory) Video is a nice to have feature seeing that it will also be a family camera.

Now newbies don't have a clue about ISO and shutterspeed and aperture and focal length etc - they want to push the button and get a great shot. Of course they will be disappointed and then they want to learn more on how to get the better shot.

Comparing Cameras AND availability just showed me once again that Canon has seriously dropped the ball. For what this student want the EOS 600D would be sufficient, but why force him to buy a Canon because I like Canon if the D3200 is clearly the better choice? I am comparing with the EOS 600D, because Canon had to recall the EOS 650D, once again, and it is not available - so in my opinion that isn't even a contender for someone who is burning to buy a camera.

I advised about 3 or 4 people in the last week to buy Nikon, and it really hurt! I still love my Canon gear, but Canon left a deep scar with the delays of the 1D X, the delays in the 5D III and now the EOS 650.

My only way of staying positive is believing they have something big up their sleeves... a game changer. Canon was the first to release a full frame DSLR and this made A LOT of Nikon users switch to Canon and they got a big market share there. Canon will have to bring out another miracle like the full frame DSLR - or they will lose all that ground they built up with it...


----------



## Z (Aug 14, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> I advised about 3 or 4 people in the last week to buy Nikon, and it really hurt! I still love my Canon gear, but Canon left a deep scar with the delays of the 1D X, the delays in the 5D III and now the EOS 650.



Why did it hurt? Brand loyalty won't improve anyone's photographs. On the other hand I would say there is no clear winner between the 650D and the D3200. The D3200 has more pixels and better DR (the standard 'Nikon advantage' these days) but just 1 of its 11 AF points is a cross-type versus all 9 of the Canon's. Plus a flippy-outy screen and pseudo-video autofocus might be important to a beginner.

Maybe in future you could forego any sense of guilt by telling them that the two/three/four obvious choices are the 650D, D3200 and whatever else, and that they should go to a camera store who will allow them to play with each of these cameras for a bit, to see what fits them best. For a newbie the feel of a camera will be more important than the megapixels or dynamic range - and they might just prefer shooting with the Pentax after all.


----------



## Tcapp (Aug 14, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> Today I came to a realization that Canon is indeed behind in the current camera market. I LOVE Canon products and LOVE my 1D X, but I also give training to new and upcoming photographers. I get a lot of questions on what camera to buy and what is the best camera and of course I know the best camera is the one you have in your hands, but how do you currently advise a new photographer to buy Canon if they just cannot deliver?
> 
> For example... I have someone who wants a camera to use when going overseas for travelling and holiday purposes (Powershot G1X will work here) and not sure if they will get serious about photography. But they also go away to a game farm frequently and wants to get a bit closer to the birds and wildlife. (SLR territory) Video is a nice to have feature seeing that it will also be a family camera.
> 
> ...



Sigh... Why does everyone always get so caught up on just the camera bodies. The lenses are a huge consideration when buying into a system, not just the body. Sure, the nikon body might have more resolution or more dynamic range, but what it doesn't have is that awesome canon glass.


----------



## Halfrack (Aug 14, 2012)

Lots of us get these questions. I push folks to Roger (LR) to 'try before you buy'.

What's funny is the number of folks that need to understand the give and take between the types of cameras around. These '12 packages for xyz' on sites tend to be too general - if they work to being with. This really is where the local camera store could do a lot of education, but their margins are thin and when you have someone asking for your time, but shopping online, it sucks.


----------



## Razor2012 (Aug 14, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> Today I came to a realization that Canon is indeed behind in the current camera market. I LOVE Canon products and LOVE my 1D X, but I also give training to new and upcoming photographers. I get a lot of questions on what camera to buy and what is the best camera and of course I know the best camera is the one you have in your hands, but how do you currently advise a new photographer to buy Canon if they just cannot deliver?
> 
> For example... I have someone who wants a camera to use when going overseas for travelling and holiday purposes (Powershot G1X will work here) and not sure if they will get serious about photography. But they also go away to a game farm frequently and wants to get a bit closer to the birds and wildlife. (SLR territory) Video is a nice to have feature seeing that it will also be a family camera.
> 
> ...



People just getting into photography should be learning the basics about taking pictures and using their cameras not about the politics. They can decide for themselves later on which gear best suits them. That's a decision only they can make.


----------



## nebugeater (Aug 14, 2012)

I am just an amature myself but I still get asked by people that I know what they should get to get started. 

My answer is almost always start with something recent but used. Get a decent body and one good lens. See where it goes from there. IF you are not developing an interest you can get out for about what you spent to get in. If as you devlope you learn a bit about what your interest is and what you want to shoot then you are not sunk in high $$ equipment and can make a change. The people that ask what do I need often cannot even say what they want to do other than take better pictures than my P&S. IMO there is nothing wrong with that aproach but there is no reason to go broke finding out if it is really something you want or just thuink you want.


----------



## crasher8 (Aug 14, 2012)

It's true, no one has taken a decent photograph until the last batch of Nikons were released. 

I take better images with my 40 year old rangefinder than I did with my 300D. Why? Because I invested in my education. Anyone busting into photography might want to consider a simple body and a prime, shooting on manual and taking a course. You don't give a Maserati to a 15 year old with a permit do you?


----------



## preppyak (Aug 14, 2012)

Tcapp said:


> Sigh... Why does everyone always get so caught up on just the camera bodies. The lenses are a huge consideration when buying into a system, not just the body. Sure, the nikon body might have more resolution or more dynamic range, but what it doesn't have is that awesome canon glass.


Yep, does Nikon have the 100-400L or 400mm f/5.6 as cheap options for if he gets into wildlife photography? Maybe he needs something like a G1X for travel, and a DSLR with a tele lens wildlife. Canon suits him quite nicely there, and better than Nikon's offerings. Whether the D3200 is better or not is irrelevant if his only option is the Nikon 300mm or $5000+ lenses.

If you're a teacher, you should be taking the broad view of things. Sure, I'd tell a landscape photographer to go Nikon, because their future is the D800 and the 14-24. For wildlife, Canon would easily be the winner for me. For someone with a video heavy focus, I might point them to Panasonic. For someone wanting to do a bit of everything, I still think Canon is a great option because they have great variety


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 14, 2012)

Canon is behind on sensor tech. But that's not why Im here in the canon camp.

Its the Ub3r Primes canon has with no nikon equivalents in price, speed or quality. 8)

24L II

50L

85L II

135L


----------



## LSV (Aug 14, 2012)

Very easy, tell them there are great beginner's DSLR cameras under every brand. Chances are they'll stick with the same brand as the Point and Shoot cameras that they currently have.


----------



## Razor2012 (Aug 14, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Canon is behind on sensor tech. But that's not why Im here in the canon camp.
> 
> Its the Ub3r Primes canon has with no nikon equivalents in price, speed or quality. 8)
> 
> ...



and the 70-200 2.8II!  8)


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 14, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Canon is behind on sensor tech. But that's not why Im here in the canon camp.
> ...



and 24-70 mrk II ;D


----------



## Razor2012 (Aug 14, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Razor2012 said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Yes that one too. I hope that baby lives up to the specs.


----------



## hhelmbold (Aug 15, 2012)

Wow - this got a lot more feedback than I expected ;D

I can't quote on everyones comments else I will create one extra page with a lot of duplicate content hehehe... 



Z said:


> Why did it hurt? Brand loyalty won't improve anyone's photographs.



No it doesn't and I did mention that in my original post, but you get loyal to a brand because it offers you something that no other brand can, maybe not technical, even an emotional connection can keep you loyal. And you are all correct about the glass... But everyone here is talking out of experience. And personal experience hardly ever motivates a beginner on a tight budget. They do not look at future glass investments or care about learning more about photography first (I am talking about the average 35 year+ home user here) they want to buy a camera now with as little money as possible but that can do as much as possible. My experience is that you can tell them camera A is the best camera for you and they will still buy camera F because they got a good deal and the salesman told them it is as good as camera A.

It all comes down to personal choice...

But overall I am saying that Canon is missing a crucial market here. Just about all the replies here is about the amazing glass Canon offers - but for a newbie buying a great lens only comes much later... after they invested in one or two camera bodies first. They might even buy a flash before considering a better lens. And from experience we know you should almost buy the CANON lens first, but in reality people don't think like that.

I also agree 100% that the D3200 isn't necessarily better than the EOS 650D... but it is on the shelf. I think that beats any camera on paper


----------



## Hillsilly (Aug 15, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> Now newbies don't have a clue about ISO and shutterspeed and aperture and focal length etc - they want to push the button and get a great shot. Of course they will be disappointed and then they want to learn more on how to get the better shot.



I think you've answered your own question. If people are interested enough to take one of your courses and learn more about photography, it shouldn't really matter what camera body they start with. What's more important is buying into a system that gives flexibility and options. Because, as newcomers, they're probably not going to know initially where their long term interests really lie. I've come across some new Nikon buyers who are now a bit disillusioned that Nikon only offers some lenses in top dollar format. Canon offers more choices at varying price levels - especially at the longer end. And to my sister who chose some D5000 thing and now wants to start shooting sports on a budget, ha ha, I told you so.


----------



## PhotoBadger (Aug 15, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> hhelmbold said:
> 
> 
> > Now newbies don't have a clue about ISO and shutterspeed and aperture and focal length etc - they want to push the button and get a great shot. Of course they will be disappointed and then they want to learn more on how to get the better shot.
> ...



Completely agree - when I got my first SLR I knew I was going to take photography more seriously, but really couldn't have cared about Canon or Nikon. And being a complete newbie, I didn't know enough to ask any sensible questions about them. Unknown unknowns  

What swung me Canon's way was that I could see far more options for stepping up lenses over time. Nikon seemed to go from entry-level to staggeringly expensive with little inbetween. Canon seemed to offer a more gradual development route. I may be doing Nikon a disservice - just the way it seemed to me.

I have no problem recommending Nikon to friends, especially if they're just looking for something that'll help get better pictures of their kids & holidays and will probably never take it off auto modes. Interestingly, nobody ever wants to hear "get a high-end compact / bridge " - £300 is far too much for something with a built-in lens, apparently, but they're happy to drop double that on kit that probably won't serve them as well! 

But those who say they want to take it more seriously, I'll generally point towards Canon.


----------



## elflord (Aug 15, 2012)

For most beginner budgets and needs, I recommend against the latest body from any brand (mostly because buying a more expensive body would leave them with cheap glass). Consumer level bodies depreciate very quickly so it makes more sense to buy used, or buy an older model that is sold new at a firesale discount. 

You get much more bang for your buck allocating most of the budget to glass. A tripod and a flash doesn't hurt either.


----------



## Joseph M (Aug 15, 2012)

PhotoBadger said:


> Interestingly, nobody ever wants to hear "get a high-end compact / bridge " - £300 is far too much for something with a built-in lens, apparently, but they're happy to drop double that on kit that probably won't serve them as well!



I know what you mean. I know a few people who bought a 60D when it came out and only kept shooting on full auto, 99% live view, and no plans for buying lenses. I don't want to judge newbies since I was a newbie too but, for the money, a high-end compact or mirrorless that has tons of automatic presets would have worked better for them.

When people ask me what they should get, the first thing I ask is if they actually plan on using the cameras viewfinder and if they would actually use different lenses and going manual (in the future of course). If it's a no for the majority of the questions then a point-and-shoot/mirrorless would do them good.

These days it seems like DSLRs are becoming more of a toy to people, for showing off that they have a bigger camera than others.

Sorry if this turned into kind of a rant ;D


----------



## Daniel Flather (Aug 21, 2012)

iPhone.



/thread


----------



## Axilrod (Aug 21, 2012)

How exactly was the 5DIII delayed? It was announced March 2nd and I had it in my hands March 22nd......And I agree they have been bad with some stuff, like those super-tele's, 1DX, and 24-70II, but I thought the 5DIII was available very quickly.


----------



## dawgfanjeff (Aug 21, 2012)

I get this asked of me all the time, too. Like everybody else here, I shoot Canon for my reasons, but those are obviously MY reasons, not theirs. Of course, I can't describe my reasons in terms that make sense to them, so instead I recommend this: 
1. Immediately narrow it down to either Nikon or Canon. 
With those, they will get the best support and the broadest possible array of choices of both accessory and lens. Either of those will give them a solid base from which to learn photography from the most basic to the most advanced. Along the way, they will get killer images from either. If they want, later they can obsessively scour reviews, spec sheets, and rumors sites to switch if they want. Then, 

2. Rent one of each based on your budget (I use aperturent.com). Pick the one who'e ergonomics you prefer.
3. Don't look back. (Unless you picked Nikon  )


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 21, 2012)

When I worked in camera retail and ever since I always tell folk the same thing when asked what camera to buy:

Decide on a budget. Add on 1/4th for memory card, case and spare battery.
Go into a shop. Try a few models out. See which fits best in the hand.

Of the ones that fit nice in the hand try the menu out. Is it easy to navigate?

Try and reach the shutter button and a button on the back. Still fit the hand ok?

Put it to your eye. Viewfinder nice and clear? Adjust the dioptric lens. How about now.

Like? Buy.

The best camera is the one you have with you, and the greatest camera is the one you have with you because you feel confident holding and using it.

Most folk don't care about the rest. 

And most DSLRs, nay ALL DSLRs these days do a grand job at respective price points.

If they were students I would steer them to Canon or Nikon, a model with depth of field preview, if they had a specific interest I would steer them towards a choice of cameras that suited those.

The right camera for me is not the right camera for somebody else. Folk need to be happy with what they are buying, and for their own reasons. As with anything tactile, it's how something feels that will win the sale.

MP's. Noise at ISO 12'800 and technical specifics don't really enter it.

We are a bunch of anoraks. Sometimes enthusiastic. Sometimes cynical. Sometimes out to pith on others parade. Most folk aren't like us, and I bet most of them enjoy their photography just as much, if not more so than us.


----------



## sdsr (Aug 21, 2012)

Z said:


> hhelmbold said:
> 
> 
> > I advised about 3 or 4 people in the last week to buy Nikon, and it really hurt! I still love my Canon gear, but Canon left a deep scar with the delays of the 1D X, the delays in the 5D III and now the EOS 650.
> ...



Indeed, especially since the Pentax will have good image stabilization built into the camera.... I was a complete and clueless novice when I bought my first dslr a couple of years ago, a Nikon D3100, but fairly quickly switched to a Pentax K-5 and, a year after that to a Canon 5DII (plus a Rebel t3i as backup) - each better than its predecessor, and not just because I've become less clueless along the way. 

So I still have a pretty good memory of what it's like to be a complete novice and despite that don't really know what I would recommend if someone asked me. If I knew for sure that they wouldn't want to upgrade to FF and wouldn't ever want to spend a lot of money on lenses, no matter how good they were, it would be easy enough to recommend Pentax. But it's almost impossible to predict such things - you don't really know until you get into it how much you might like doing low light photography (if you came from a point-and-shoot, how would you?), whether the effects obtainable via shallow depth of field appeals, or how far in you'll want to zoom, etc. So it makes sense to buy into a brand that gives a lot of options, both its own and third-party (Sigma & Tamron make far more lenses for Canon & Nikon than they do for other brands, DxO has proportionately far more modules for lenses that fit Canon & Nikon cameras, etc. ).

Between Canon & Nikon it could well be a toss-up (if I could afford it, I would probably want both). At any rate, it's not clear to me that a 3200 is a better place to start than a Rebel; a newbie who doesn't care about ISO etc. will likely care even less about dynamic range, especially the relatively slight differences in question and especially if he ends up knowing how to get exposure right in the first place (I don't know about the 3200, but my Rebel does that better as a matter of course than my 3100 did (as does the 5DII, of course)). But he might care that, like other low-end Nikons, the auto-focus won't work on some otherwise appealing Nikon lenses, whereas all Canon EF-S and EF lenses will work just fine on a Rebel.... (And he might, if he reads enough reviews, conclude that the D3200 isn't a better camera, period.) In any event, given all the Canons I see around the necks of tourists every day (they seem to outnumber Nikons), Canon seems to be doing rather well among newbies (yes, I know, that's hardly a scientific observation).

Ultimately I don't think it matters much. If a newbie likes the camera he buys and doesn't really get into photography, he'll be happy with what he bought and stick with it; after all, the differences among photos taken with any of the cameras under consideration will be pretty trivial to the non-obsessive, and the standard is very high. And if he does turn into an obsessive for whom these differences turn out to be important, it still doesn't matter much if he decides he should have bought into the other brand because - as I have found out twice - jumping ship isn't really that expensive. Unless he bought the latest camera body at its highest price, chances are he can sell what he initially bought for almost as much as he paid for it; any "loss" can be justified because he will nevertheless have taken some good photos and learned a lot in the process.


----------

