An older pro cam is build a lot tougher than consumer grade.
Far easier to hold, line up shots and shoot with. Weather/dust resistant. Better features for quick set-ups. Bigger, brighter viewfinders

Drops will almost always damaged heavy cams. Inspect the pentaprism assembly closely for proper alignment; any misalignment indicates a drop. The test shot should line up perfectly to what was in the view finder.

Verify auto focus is accurate. Make sure AF lock on are fast and spot on.
Boot up time should be to factory specs, go through the set menu and try to verify it's fully functional. Inspect card socket(s) for pin damage.

Check the sensor cover for any scratches or signs of solvent use. Reject it if any are found. The optical cavity should be near spotless. Look for signs of a poor repair.
Check the serial number and make sure it's not stolen.

With digital cams there's a lot that can fail. Best if you're completely familiar with that model. Even then it may be days until you spot an anomaly. Finally if you do buy it, make sure it has the latest firmware update, if not, flash it in.

Any cam or lense you buy, even new may need alignment at a factory authorize service center. No big deal unless it needs it and you don't do it.
Send cam and lens to be aligned together the first time.

Since this is a thread about cameras I am going to use this chance to ask about lenses. Do you guys have a preferred low light lenses that also good at general street photography thats not too expensive since I prefer to avoid going above ISO 1000 outdoors and ISO 6400 indoors. I use a 80D if it matters.

Posted by Zak00 Since this is a thread about cameras I am going to use this chance to ask about lenses. Do you guys have a preferred low light lenses that also good at general street photography thats not too expensive since I prefer to avoid going above ISO 1000 outdoors and ISO 6400 indoors. I use a 80D if it matters.

Fast glass is the best. Faster AF lock ups and brighter images in the viewfinder. Get f/2.8 or faster if you can.
Canon L glass is the cat's ass; I never regretted buying any of my L glass.

The 70-200 IS f/2.8 (any generation) is the best street shooter lense there is, however it's a bit long for shooting buildings.
The 24-70 L is a great all around zoom.
Both these lens are near bullet proof. Always use a quality UV filter such as Heliopan for front vented lens such as these; it acts as a dust barrier.

I really liked the early 50 f/1.2 to spite it's reviews. It was a demanding lense but second to none for low light street shooting. Extremely excellent flare control, same with the 70-200L. This let's capture shots that normally be impossible, like shooting into headlights or the setting sun.

Don't skimp on the glass; good glass makes a huge difference.
The hold their value well and will last decades with proper care.
Many older L versions are available for cheaper prices because of newer versions that have replaced them.


This site has the best lense reviews plus interactive blur charts to find the optimum f/stop setting.
http://www.imaging...ses/canon/reviews/

I guess being a urban explorer and photographing my adventures will make me broke for life. Before I even begin justifying spending 1500 on a lens how much better are these compared to the 18-135 kit lens that came with my camera?

Posted by Zak00 I guess being a urban explorer and photographing my adventures will make me broke for life. Before I even begin justifying spending 1500 on a lens how much better are these compared to the 18-135 kit lens that came with my camera?

Look at the blur charts. Compare.
That not the whole story though.
L glass is weather resistant and tough. The flare control is much better.
Faster AF focusing. Brighter viewfinder images and in low light that matters. Less lens ghosting, distortion, chromatic aberrations because of the greater number, optical coatings and positioning of the internal optical elements.

One of the most noticeable traits of a good lense is bokeh; a pleasing background blur. The 70-200L excels at this.
It caused by the number and shape of aperture blades; better lens have more blades.
https://photograph...com/what-is-bokeh/

As I said used L glass is out there. Canon charges around $60 to calibrate a lense if it's auto focus is off (due to calibration, not damage). A well cared for used lense has many years of life left in it.
Good glass stays with you from one cam body to the next.
Renting a lense is another way to see if it's a good fit for you.

Never go cheap on the glass... it will haunt you.
Never shoot with good glass... once you know the difference, nothing else will do.



70-200 IS f/2.8 1st generation. Shot into the setting sun. A cheaper lense never would have captured this keeper.

Posted by blackhawk Look at the blur charts. Compare. That not the whole story though. L glass is weather resistant and tough. The flare control is much better. Faster AF focusing. Brighter viewfinder images and in low light that matters. Less lens ghosting, distortion, chromatic aberrations because of the greater number, optical coatings and positioning of the internal optical elements. One of the most noticeable traits of a good lense is bokeh; a pleasing background blur. The 70-200L excels at this. It caused by the number and shape of aperture blades; better lens have more blades. https://photograph...com/what-is-bokeh/ As I said used L glass is out there. Canon charges around $60 to calibrate a lense if it's auto focus is off (due to calibration, not damage). A well cared for used lense has many years of life left in it. Good glass stays with you from one cam body to the next. Renting a lense is another way to see if it's a good fit for you. Never go cheap on the glass... it will haunt you. Never shoot with good glass... once you know the difference, nothing else will do. 70-200 IS f/2.8 1st generation. Shot into the setting sun. A cheaper lense never would have captured this keeper.

Well I conveniently have a photo of what brokeh my kit lens produce (I was going to photograph an abandoned school but but went to the docks since it got boarded up since the last time I visited)

1.

I also went and did some lens research on my own too and there is gnereally good reviews of the 17-55 f/2.5 lens or the 24-70 f/2.8, I was wondering compared to my kit 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 is the improvement worth the price just yet

I love my T3i that I've had for a few years. Still just use the lenses that came with it. Only drawback is no autofocus during video recording. :/



https://www.flickr...otos/12215219@N05/

Posted by Zak00 Well I conveniently have a photo of what brokeh my kit lens produce (I was going to photograph an abandoned school but but went to the docks since it got boarded up since the last time I visited) 1. click to view I also went and did some lens research on my own too and there is gnereally good reviews of the 17-55 f/2.5 lens or the 24-70 f/2.8, I was wondering compared to my kit 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 is the improvement worth the price just yet

To really see bokeh in the background you need to be shooting at or near wide open. A few lens are tact sharp wide open, the 70-200 f/2.8 is one of these.
That's one reason to chose it over the f/4 version.

You can get good shots with just about all lens. The improvements come at a steep cost.
L glass is just a joy to shoot with. The zoom and focus rings turn smooth. AF lock ons focus faster and surer.
Far less issues with flare is a huge edge to have especially for street shooting.
The weight of the heavier lens give a more stable shooting platform. To spite the added weight pro cams and L glass, are much easier to shoot with.
The 70-200 IS one of the best sealed lens out there too, it's a beauty that's evolved into one the best if not the best zooms available.

Rebel T3i or T5i. Both are compatible with magic lantern, have a bunch of neat features, a touch screen, and are very beginner friendly.

Cannon has the best glass IMO, and as you upgrade the body, you can reuse your lenses.

Just go to shop and test out a few of the DSLR cameras. Some of them really are not that expensive.

Posted by SirVival Just go to shop and test out a few of the DSLR cameras. Some of them really are not that expensive.

It's better to get what you need to begin with, even if it's used.
At least do some homework and try your best.
Throwing money at cam gear tends to get expensive rather easily.

I loved my cropped DSLR (Canon T4i), but I definitely am glad I got a full frame - mostly because of how well it performs in low light/high ISO. I still use a point and shoot too, but mostly for extreme portability and for scouting.

A FF camera is quite a bit more expensive and just purchasing the body isn't the end of the higher cost. The lenses are substantially more expensive as well. I think it's worth it, but I'm also glad I waited and learned a bit about photography before going out a dropping the money on a full frame DSLR.

Someone asked if they should spend more money on the lens or the camera body. I would definitely say the lens(es) for several reasons, but the biggest one, IMO, is that your lenses will last practically forever if they are good ones and you take care of them. They depreciate a LOT slower than a camera body will! Good glass is good glass, but the technology, hardware, etc., that make up the camera's body will eventually become obsolete or malfunction.

Posted by Dee Ashley I loved my cropped DSLR (Canon T4i), but I definitely am glad I got a full frame - mostly because of how well it performs in low light/high ISO. I still use a point and shoot too, but mostly for extreme portability and for scouting. A FF camera is quite a bit more expensive and just purchasing the body isn't the end of the higher cost. The lenses are substantially more expensive as well. I think it's worth it, but I'm also glad I waited and learned a bit about photography before going out a dropping the money on a full frame DSLR. Someone asked if they should spend more money on the lens or the camera body. I would definitely say the lens(es) for several reasons, but the biggest one, IMO, is that your lenses will last practically forever if they are good ones and you take care of them. They depreciate a LOT slower than a camera body will! Good glass is good glass, but the technology, hardware, etc., that make up the camera's body will eventually become obsolete or malfunction.

Just remember if you get a FF, you better get good glass to go with it. A FF makes use of all the glass not just the sweet spots towards the center.
A FF will make you quite aware of the quality or lack of, in your glass.

Posted by Maineurbex I got the Canon Rebel t6 for $450 and I love it. Great video and pictures.

Second that. I started with a used canon sxi which eventually died and went with a new canon t6
Maybe looking into a used dslr would be a good option. Just to learn and not to have to worry about a huge investment.

Posted by blackhawk Just remember if you get a FF, you better get good glass to go with it. A FF makes use of all the glass not just the sweet spots towards the center. A FF will make you quite aware of the quality or lack of, in your glass.

Yup.

Personally, unless shooting superwide, plan on not using supplemental light or superfast lenses, a FF isn't the way to go.

I'd lean toward an older refurbished 'prosumer' camera body like the Nikon D7100. Durable as hell, weathersealed, etc. Most Nikon lenses other than the kit ones have a sealing gasket on them to keep water/crud/dust out of the camera.

Good FF glass is expensive. Like, I just dropped $2000 on a Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 expensive. Granted, it is exactly what I need for what I do, but your OEM fast (f/2.8 or better) glass is going to tickle a lot. Can get Tokina/Tamron for less, but you're still looking at $1000+ per.

Regardless of the camera someone gets, try the lenses out before buying. Tolerance stacking can make lenses focus weird, and trying to figure out front/back focus in the field is no bueno.

Case in point, the portrait lenses I'm looking at. Nikon is spot on, but the duplicate in Tamron back focuses 4-5 points worth of correction. Yeah, built in VR is nice, but I decided on the Nikon because it was good out of the box and needed no tweaking.

Currently I'm using a Nikon D7200 (fantastic camera)which has the top rated APS-C (crop) sensor out there, per DXO Mark. BUT I'm getting ready to cross into FF photography, so I've sold off my crop lenses and gotten into FF glass.

Posted by DarkAngel Yup. Personally, unless shooting superwide, plan on not using supplemental light or superfast lenses, a FF isn't the way to go. I'd lean toward an older refurbished 'prosumer' camera body like the Nikon D7100. Durable as hell, weathersealed, etc. Most Nikon lenses other than the kit ones have a sealing gasket on them to keep water/crud/dust out of the camera. Good FF glass is expensive. Like, I just dropped $2000 on a Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 expensive. Granted, it is exactly what I need for what I do, but your OEM fast (f/2.8 or better) glass is going to tickle a lot. Can get Tokina/Tamron for less, but you're still looking at $1000+ per. Regardless of the camera someone gets, try the lenses out before buying. Tolerance stacking can make lenses focus weird, and trying to figure out front/back focus in the field is no bueno. Case in point, the portrait lenses I'm looking at. Nikon is spot on, but the duplicate in Tamron back focuses 4-5 points worth of correction. Yeah, built in VR is nice, but I decided on the Nikon because it was good out of the box and needed no tweaking. Currently I'm using a Nikon D7200 (fantastic camera)which has the top rated APS-C (crop) sensor out there, per DXO Mark. BUT I'm getting ready to cross into FF photography, so I've sold off my crop lenses and gotten into FF glass.

A used pro body in good shape is a great choice.
My weapon of choice was a 1D Mark3
It was a crop frame and usually preferred it over my 5D unless I needed to go wide. The crop frame gave more reach on my favorite lens, 50L, 24-70L, and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS
Both cam and lense quality do make a noticeable difference when shooting and with the images. A good piece of glass can shoot into the setting sun or headlights and grab a one of a kind image that cheap glass couldn't grab.
Flare control on the 50L and the 70-200 are exceptional.

You can't go wrong with fast, good glass (in this case L glass).
It generally is tougher, has better weather sealing, sharper, better flare control and that dreamy background blur shooters kill for.
With a pro cam and lense if you can't capture it, it's your fault!