Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Agentmckay

macrumors newbie
Jul 1, 2007
14
0
Iowa
Any of the Canon cameras will suit your needs. As other have suggested get a good a good lens, either the Canon 17-55 or the Tamron if you can't afford the Canon. The zoom will serve better than a prime as you will have more room to frame your shots. I wouldn't worry about high iso performance as you are going to be shooting in a controlled setting with a stationary object. In this type of setting you can control your lighting and that will be very important in getting a nice shot. The photos you have on you site now are somewhat harsh and you also have refections in the finish. If you setup good lighting you can soften the photo and remove the reflections. Read up on lighting and proper setup for your type of photos, I'd do some closeups of that nice veneer work too.
In order of importance, Knowledge, Lens, Lighting, camera. You need to know how to setup your shots and use your camera or you won't get good pictures. I put camera last since any of the Canons listed would work fine. Just my two cents..
 

beatzfreak

macrumors 6502
Jan 11, 2006
349
3
NYC
You really need to spend some money or effort on lighting.

Those shiny lacquer finishes are tricky to shoot. You need diffused lighting so you don't end up with flash reflections dominating your photos.

You could probably use a couple of Speedlites with some shoot through umbrellas, or diffuser panels.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
Sorry, but AFAIK, Nikon has the best flash system, which would be very important in your case. I don't understand why you are only considering Canon.
 

PCMacUser

macrumors 68000
Jan 13, 2005
1,704
23
The camera is for a serious purpose. It merits serious analysis.

The resounding advice coming from most people in this thread, is buy the cheapest body and spend the money on lenses and lighting. The D90 is twice the price of a Canon XS. While the D90 is not a particularly expensive camera, that extra US$500-$600 the OP would save by buying the XS would go a long way towards buying lenses and lighting systems.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
The resounding advice coming from most people in this thread, is buy the cheapest body and spend the money on lenses and lighting. The D90 is twice the price of a Canon XS. While the D90 is not a particularly expensive camera, that extra US$500-$600 the OP would save by buying the XS would go a long way towards buying lenses and lighting systems.

The point was whether he shouldn't be looking at the Nikon flash system in the first place.
 

shady825

macrumors 68000
Oct 8, 2008
1,863
105
Area 51
The resounding advice coming from most people in this thread, is buy the cheapest body and spend the money on lenses and lighting. The D90 is twice the price of a Canon XS. While the D90 is not a particularly expensive camera, that extra US$500-$600 the OP would save by buying the XS would go a long way towards buying lenses and lighting systems.

Exactly. This is what i was saying as well.
 

wheelhot

macrumors 68020
Nov 23, 2007
2,084
269
Erm cube, is it me or is there something to do with fanboyism in your post in this thread?

Sorry, cause its just me that whenever a person blankly say Brand X is the best without any supporting reasons I will usually consider that post as a fanboy replying or a troll.

And like other posted, why would he get a D90 while he can get a much better lenses and few flashes then buying a expensive body with things that he wont need (and those extra features might be too much overwhelming for a person coming from PnS). Remember, a user might own a camera body with the latest features and such but it will only be useful if he knows how to make use of it otherwise its just a waste, in the user case its best he own the basic/starting DSLR, and to me Canon basic DSLR offer better value then Nikon basic camera which is D40 or D60.

P.S: Please dont make this topic into a Nikon vs Canon or whatever please, stay on topic. Like PCMacUser says, what so good about Nikon system? Sorry, but I dont bother to read your sites cause its just too long. From a quick read it seems Canon flash system is also able to the same thing.

Oh yeah and I agree that prime will definitely get him better quality pictures but take note, he is graduating from a PnS, he is accustomed to zoom lens and by giving suddenly give him a fixed focal length lens, it might overwhelm him.

A zoom lens will give him something less to think about (figuring out how a DSLR works will already give him a lot of new experience), besides he is not getting any ordinary zoom lens, he is getting (as some say) the best zoom lens in the EF-S series (which is equal quality to an L lens).
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
I said AFAIK the Nikon flash system is the best. It's legitimate questioning of the OP's preselection. It has nothing to do with fanboyism.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
For example:
The colour of light being emitted by a strobe changes slightly as flash duration increases (longer flash duration tends to produce redder results). The CLS communicates the degree of colour change to the camera's Auto White Balance (Auto WB) system so that the latter can make relevant adjustments and produce accurate WB irrespective of flash duration.

How would you do that kind of thing with third-party lighting?
 

Narcosynthesis

macrumors member
Dec 21, 2008
70
0
As said above, the 40d is probably much more camera than you need, and for 'studio' work you will get the same quality with a 400d or similar camera.

Between the 400d, 450d and 1000d, the 400d is an older model, superseded by the 450d (better) and 1000d (newer, but a simpler camera - things like a lesser autofocus and some missing settings). For your needs any of them should do, I would be tempted by the 400d for the better autofocus over the 1000d, but really you won't go wrong with either.

For lenses, the Canon 18-55IS is simple, basic and great value, the 17-55IS is a brilliant lens if you can afford it though, incredibly sharp and brilliant quality. The Sigma and Tamron options I can't really comment on, as I have always tended to stick to the Canon lenses.

The biggest thing you can do for your setup is control the lighting - a couple of flashes and a trigger to let them fire off camera will do more to improve your photography than any fancy camera or lens. Check out http://www.strobist.blogspot.com for some idea on what you can do with product photography like yours and off camera flashes. There will be a fair learning curve if you are not really a photographer to begin with, but the results will be more than worth it.
 

jbrooksga

macrumors newbie
Oct 23, 2008
18
0
FWIW, I've owned a XTi and now have a 40D. They are both good cameras. The 40D shoots up to 6 frames per second, but you will not care about that feature in your work.

Pay attention to the crop factor on these cameras though, because the XTi is a 1.6 for example. This means that a lens spec of 20mm will actually produce a 32mm images on that camera. Wide angle lenses become less so in that situation. The 40D is a 1.3 crop factor by comparison.

In your situation, you should get a solid camera but concentrate more on getting the right lens. You really need something with wide angles for your situation. The kit lens sold with the X series (18-55mm) is really not that high quality in terms of the images produced. You should consider looking at the 17-40mm L lens. The L class lenses are a step above in image quality, and if you use them for a while the difference is noticeable. I personally use a 17-40mm L to shoot interiors, and have been impressed with it. It also shoots great portraits if you ever dabble in that.

You really should educate yourself on lighting. It will be the element that makes your photos really standout. The mantra of the strobist, is that you can produce high quality images with minimal investment. You would need 1 or 2 speedlights of virtually any brand, and some wireless triggers to fire them from your camera. I would suggest going to Strobist.com and read the section on Lighting 101. They even tell you sources to find all the equipment.

I purchased equipment to shoot interiors originally, but the photo bug has now transcended in to every element of my life. So buy the best equipment you can afford now.
 

wheelhot

macrumors 68020
Nov 23, 2007
2,084
269
Pay attention to the crop factor on these cameras though, because the XTi is a 1.6 for example. This means that a lens spec of 20mm will actually produce a 32mm images on that camera. Wide angle lenses become less so in that situation. The 40D is a 1.3 crop factor by comparison.
Erm I think you are wrong,

Current Canon Lineup
Sensor sizes and models
1.6 : 1000D, 450D, 40D, 50D
1.3 : 1D
FF : 1Ds, 5D
 

147798

Suspended
Dec 29, 2007
1,047
219
I am in the process on trying to decide what camera body and lens I should buy for taking pictures of our pianos. We are a 4th generation piano restoration company and have over 90 pianos for sale - http://www.lindebladpiano.com/gallery.asp. I have been using a regular sony point and shoot but I want to make our photographs stand out that much more than our competitors. I will be mainly be using the camera I by indoors to shoot our pianos that we have for sale in our showroom. It is very important that the photos show the detail that our pianos have to offer. Many of them have carvings, exquisite veneers, etc. To really make our photos really look great, I am trying to decide what camera I should buy - 40D or XSI or XTI. Since I'll be using a tripod most the time, I'm also trying to decide whether to buy the Tamron 17-55mm lens or spend more money for the Canon 17-55mm lens. Thanks to anyone that puts their two sense in, I'd really appreciate it!

Budget would be up to $2,000 - $3,000. Whatever is needed to have some excellent looking photos.

Since your thread is filling up with debates around XS, XT, international naming conventions, etc. let me try a different tack.

I agree w/those who say that if you are using a tripod, etc. then save the money on the camera body, and go with the XS or XTi and put money into lenses. Maybe look at some primes, unless there is a reason you need a zoom.

But besides a good lens, lighting will REALLY be the difference for you. I would recommend visiting the POTN forum for great lighting advice. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/ and click on the "small flash and studio lighting" forum. I find the lighting pros over there to have invaluable help. I've only glanced at Strobist, but that seems to be a strong site as well (as Narcosynthesis suggested).

Also, I'd drop into the lens forum on POTN, and explain quite precisely how close/far you'll be from your subject, and which lenses you should consider for that work. Here's an example of something to consider, re: wide angle lenses: they may be good for getting the whole piano in frame, but if you are taking pictures of details, you'll need to get up close with a wide angle, which can cause a distorted perspective. Better to use something more like 50mm or 85mm and stand back a bit. There's likely someone at POTN who has done work similar to what you are proposing, and can recommend specifics.

Sorry this thread got train-wrecked on you! It sounds like very fun and interesting work. Hope you find what you need.
 

compuwar

macrumors 601
Oct 5, 2006
4,717
2
Northern/Central VA
I will be mainly be using the camera I by indoors to shoot our pianos that we have for sale in our showroom. It is very important that the photos show the detail that our pianos have to offer. Many of them have carvings, exquisite veneers, etc. To really make our photos really look great, I am trying to decide what camera I should buy - 40D or XSI or XTI. Since I'll be using a tripod most the time, I'm also trying to decide whether to buy the Tamron 17-55mm lens or spend more money for the Canon 17-55mm lens. Thanks to anyone that puts their two sense in, I'd really appreciate it!

Budget would be up to $2,000 - $3,000. Whatever is needed to have some excellent looking photos.


I would seriously recommend getting a professional photographer (who's done large product photography before and can show you examples) to do the shots if you can budget for that instead. Outstanding product photography doesn't simply take a good camera, it takes a good photographer with lights, flags, modifiers and a bunch of stuff that would blow your budget and could take you months to learn to use well. Also, it's my experience that folks rarely purchase high-end items based on photos on a Web site even if they're great photos.

If you want to learn product photography, that's a different thing than trying to move inventory and get good product shots to do so. Pianos are large, so you're going to want to start with large lights- the strobist route would fit your budget but be a poor choice for lighting your subject- a 7 or 8 foot octobox would be a good primary light source for a piano, or large diffusion sheets like most automobile shooters use for showroom shots. In general, you want diffusers/softboxes to be around the same size as your subject- that makes the strobist route a poor choice for the large surface area and curves of a piano.

You could probably start with 3-4 strobes, some large diffusion panels, a grid, a softbox and either a good "stage" area or two large backgrounds, but that's likely going to break your budget *without* a camera[1]. For showing off details, you're going to want some magnification, perhaps even a macro lens- you may be able to get away with one of the cheap 50mms for Web resolution images, but you're going to have difficulty without 2-3 lenses to get anything that looks good going from a whole-piano shot to very minute details unless you want to spend lots of hours cropping and post-processing every shot, and even then you may still not get the results you want.

If you're set on the idea, then I'd suggest starting with "Light, Science and Magic" as a cover-to-cover read, followed by some product photography books- look for ones that deal with large products though. I wouldn't get a camera until you're sure you can get acceptable results- if you're not getting the shots now with your current camera for Web-resolution shots, I submit that you're not likely to get significantly better shots by changing cameras- this sort of product photography is more about lighting and placement than megapixels and lenses.

[1] You could build your own diffusion panels to save money- but I still think the appropriate lighting is outside your budget if you want professional results.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.