Best products from r/AskPhotography

We found 126 comments on r/AskPhotography discussing the most recommended products. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 1,004 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

Top comments mentioning products on r/AskPhotography:

u/inkista · 14 pointsr/AskPhotography

>Should I just buy whatever is basic/cheapest? Or should I rather buy something that's pretty solid that can continue helping me when I advance?

Depends on your budget, and what you plan to do. But generally speaking, going super-cheap tends not to work out all that well. I'd recommend avoiding any sub-$100 flashes for your first speedlight. See this stackexchange Q&A on what flash features to look for and why you might want them.

>Basic lighting stand - I'd like one that's pretty sturdy. Would an amazon basic one suffice? or should I go for something else.

With lighting stands, as with tripods, you're going to be concerned with how much weight they can hold, how high they go, and how stable they are. Be aware, that lighting stands can be used for multiple purposes, not just holding the light (e.g., background stands). And in the future, you may want to dump something bigger than a speedlight onto one. Not saying you want to start with a C-stand, but a monolight probably needs something more substantial than a compact 7' lightstand that's perfectly fine for a speedlight.

Also, typical lighting, if you're, say, trying to duplicate something similar to sunlight, may have to be higher than your subjects. That's why a 6' lightstand may not be sufficient.

I'd also say look at whether or not the stand is air cushioned. But I've slammed my speedlights down on my fingers enough for that to be an issue. :)

>Bowen's Mount

The mount is a bayonet mount for modifiers on studio strobes. Speedlights typically have to be paired with a bracket in order to use a bowens mount modifier.

>Bowens mount softbox - what size should I go for?

Depends on what/how you plan to shoot.

>speed light - Probably most important part of the kit. Do I need one with TTL or high speed sync? I'd like it to just be able to take simple portraits.

This is just me, but everybody skips over learning on-camera flash bouncing when they read the Strobist, without realizing that when Hobby began that blog in 2006, he was aiming it towards other professional photojournalists who'd already hit the limits of on-camera bouncing and knew how to use TTL and speedlights.

So, I would recommend that you put aside thoughts of stands, modifiers, and triggers for now, get a Godox TT685 or V860II that matches your camera brand (so, in your case, $110 TT685-C or $180 V860II-C; both are quite a bit less expensive than a Canon 600EX II-RT), and learn to do on-camera flash, bouncing with TTL and M (Neil van Niekerk's Tangents is awesome for this). It won't take long, but you'll get a sense of how your camera metering works with flash; the elements of flash exposure, and how to balance the flash against the ambient. And more importantly, to pay attention to the quality, intensity, direction, and color of the light, as well as basic ways to control those four factors.

Getting flash exposure, TTL, HSS, etc. under your belt before you start taking a flash off-camera and onto a stand will make learning off-camera flash a whole lot easier than trying to figure out everything all at once.

Also, it's cheaper, faster, and easier to get started if all you have to buy/learn to use is the speedlight. And even after you're doing five-light setups, it's still going to come in handy for event/social shooting, chasing kids around the house, or travelling light. Off-camera flash means packing up a lighting bag to go with your camera bag, and can be a serious hassle.

>Wireless Trigger- Do these come with the speed light?

Some speedlights have radio triggering built in, others don't. Some can be used as transmitters or receivers; some can only be receivers. And some don't have any radio triggering at all, and will require you find add-on units to attach either via a sync port (which a speedlight might or might not have) or the flash foot.

The Godox speedlights I recommended have radio transceivers built-in, and do "dumb" optical slaving. And in the Canon/Nikon/Sony versions, they also do "smart" optical slave or master. And they have sync ports. So you have a lot of choices on how to trigger it. And the Godox system has a lot of expansion options if you decide not to shoot Canon any more, or to expand to bigger lights than speedlights.

The V860II uses a li-on rechargeable battery pack instead of 4xAA batteries. The pack has roughly 3x the capacity of a set of AAs, so if you plan on all-day shooting and need to take, say, a thousand flash images at a time (say, you're shooting a wedding all day long), then they can be awesome. As a hobbyist, I've only ever needed to swap out AAs once on a shoot, so i'm okay with the TT685-C instead.

>US based, so I can order from amazon or just B&H.

B&H sells them as Godox. Adorama (who also are a seller on Amazon) sells them as "Flashpoint R2 TTL" flashes. Both B&H and Adorama will cover the unit for the warranty period; other retailers may not.

[edited for typos and to add in monolight considerations on lightstands].

u/SC-Viper · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography
  • I'm probably posting a cliche photography gift here but I absolutely love mine: Lens Mug

  • Can't go wrong with a BlackRapid Strap

  • If your brother takes a lot of landscapes and doesn't already have this must have tool in his gear which he should: Camera Remote Timer

  • If he's always on the go and seems struggle w/ carrying his tripod everywhere, I recommend getting him a Gorilla Pod

  • If he doesn't already have a great backpack for travelling while he is shooting his landscapes, I recommend Amazons Backpack for holding his gear. It's essentially a generic version of Canon's basic backpack.

    You can also find some fairly cheap "like new" film cameras on Craigslist along with some film.
    Film cameras are the best and it will probably be very nostalgic to the person you are gifting it to.

    I'm making the assumption that he has a Canon DSLR but you can find most of this gear if he has something like a Nikon, Sony, etc... One thing I love to receive to as a photography gift is more batteries! I use to shoot a lot of landscapes and I could never have enough of these.

    Anyways, hopefully you find something for your brother! Good luck!
u/kingofnima · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Just to compare, here is a selection from the Canon side of things with Amazon used prices:
Canon 7d - $990
Tamron 17-50 2.8 - $340
These two are a great basis to work off off and get you to $1330.

If you want to spend some more you could add the following:
Canon 50mm f/1.8 - 100
Canon Speedlite 430EX - 235

But to be honest, if your wife is just starting out and money is a bit tight, don't go out spending $900 or more on a body. As most people will tell you, picture quality is mostly due to lenses. Canon t3i, Canon t4i or 60D as well as Nikon 3200 and 5100 are all excellent bodies and have more than enough features to keep her happy. If you get either of those bodies and a decent 17-50mm lens as well as a 50mm prime she will have great tools to learn on with space to grow.

Just like daegon I would recommend to buy used. Most Photographers look out for their things quite well and most of these lenses and bodies are made at quite good quality levels. I hope this helps.

u/Bossman1086 · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I have a Rebel T3i. I got my lens kit with it and was soon looking for more lenses, too. For cheap next lenses, two that I would highly recommend are the Nifty Fifty or the EF-S 24mm f/2.8.

The nifty fifty is a great lens and one that many pros even recommend. It's a good focal length to have to portraits and such and will work on even full frame cameras if she gets one in the future. The 24mm lens only works on crop sensor cameras (like the T5 your girlfriend has). But it's still a great cheap addition to her kit. I just used mine recently for a photoshoot with a model and the shots came out great. The focal length is good for portraits on a crop sensor. With the 50mm, I sometimes have to back away further than I'd like to frame the shot right. But the 24mm in the same situation doesn't limit me.

The 50mm also has the advantage of having a f/1.8. This allows some great shallow depth of field in the images she can take (blurry backgrounds) if she so chooses. It makes the subject pop more. Both are lenses I'm very happy to have in my bag. I don't think you can go wrong with either.

u/returntovendor · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

That's a fairly broad reach of different subject matter.

I'd say the single most important task is to master the controls of your equipment and understand intuitively how it works, in addition to understanding the behavior and characteristics of light.

Nothing will help you achieve that like practice, practice, practice. I'm not saying you need to recite f-stop numbers in your sleep, but the more instinctive your control of the camera becomes, the more brainpower you can dedicate to creativity. is one place to look and have the ability to compare your work to your peers and receive feedback.

Without knowing your skill level, Tony and Chelsea Northrup offer two excellent books which, while not necessarily structured like a class, are filled with valuable reference material and a great source of information.



Lastly, a book which has been often referred to as "the lighting bible" is a wonderful study in the behavior, characteristics, and quality of light.

This book covers light and a very, very broad array of practical applications. It is not a physics book, this is written for photographers and I've found it my go-to when needing to refresh or solve any problems with light.

Happy shooting.

u/wanakoworks · 5 pointsr/AskPhotography

If you want a general purpose prime on an APSC camera, 35mm is the sweet spot. I run Canon gear, but on my old 80D, I had the most satisfaction using a 35mm f/2. My brother uses a D7100 and I recommended him a 35mm. He got a 35mm f/1.8G and has been extremely happy with it and never takes it off. It's cheap and gives great image quality for the price. That will equal about 52mm on your body which is a generally wide enough FOV for environmental shots but also narrow enough for portraits, with blown out background. The most recent maybe 15-20 pics are with the 35mm, just to give you an idea.

He has a 50mm, as well, but was very unhappy with it because it was not wide enough for general use. Someone recommended him that one without taking into account the crop factor of his camera. Those "nifty fifties" are great for Full-frame/FX cameras for general use, but are actually closer to portrait lenses on APSC.

I would suggest you go to a camera store or something and try it out real quick and see if you like it before buying.

u/Airazz · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

50mm F1.8 is an obvious first choice for a prime lens. As explained by others, a prime lens is a lens with no zoom, it's fixed. It works beautifully in low light and it's perfect for portraits.

It's also cheap (Canon sells them for just a bit over $100), so it's a good starting point if you don't know what you want.

I also bought a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 as a replacement for my worn out kit lens.

The lens you're asking about is the cheapest versatile lens, that's why it's included with most consumer-grade cameras. It's really simple, it won't last very long, but it's cheap and it does the job. Mine started getting a bit loose, not focusing on auto mode properly after some 30k shots. I was working as a news photographer at the time, so this was like 2 months. For a home user this would take like 2 years, maybe even more than that. It's definitely not a bad option, though. You can take beautiful shots with it.

When it comes to photography, it's 80% skill, 10% gear and 10% luck. Don't buy expensive lenses hoping that they'll magically make your photos look better. It's the other way around, you need to learn to make beautiful photos first. Then you'll see where that lens is lacking, then you'll know what you need to buy. Don't waste money.

u/BWeidlichPhoto · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I choose Canon because it has a better (wider) mount, magic lantern firmware, and less expensive lenses. (Many of Nikon's are optically better)

Nikon's generally have a little more dynamic range but I prefer Canon's colors.

I love Canon's ergonomics: the joystick and wheel on their 1D, 5D, 7D, and 50D are awesome to shoot with. They put the Iso button where I feel it belongs. But you'll get used to any button layout after a couple shoots so it's all a matter of preference.

Canons still shoot better video than Nikon but Nikons have and will continue to improve.

But some people care less about video than I do and while Nikon's mount is smaller it hasn't changed so there's a lot more Nikon glass out there from the film days. So each system has their advantages it's silly to fanboy one brand so whatever saves you money.

What do your friends/coworkers shoot being able to borrow equipment is a pretty big factor to. Most of my coworkers/friends shoot Canon but I've borrowed a Nikon body and lens a handful of times with no complaints.

Since you're already invested into Canon I wouldn't switch brands unless you really weren't happy with it for some reason. I don't think the smaller brands like Pentax and Sony have the kind of used market that Canon/Nikon have and they don't have many if any full frame cameras. Canon has made 9 FF bodies to date if my memory serves me right and 4 Ap-H (1.3X) camera bodies. I don't know how many FF bodies Nikons made so far (since they don't progress in name as sensibly as Canons) but they're out there.

Consider investing in a 24-70 or a 70-200 now and getting a 5D II or III in a couple years when they've come down in price further. If you need to go wider as I mentioned in the other comment Rokinons 14mm f/2.8 is less than $400 new on amazon.. It's manual focus only but it's so wide that won't be an issue also buildings rarely move.

I started with a t3i and graduated to a 1D for shooting sports. I still use the t3i for video and timelapses. But in a 2 years I'll own a 5D just need another lens or two first.

u/snuflswasmyslavename · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I would suggest a high-quality compact camera like the RX100 line from Sony. The Mark III is $750. If you want to save money you can get the mark I for $450 (the III has a better lens). Don't get the mark II, it's an in-between model not worth the extra money.

Another outstanding camera is the Fuji X-T20 with 18-55mm kit lens for $999. The extra $250 over the RX100 M3 is worth for the excellent colors that come out of a Fuji (everybody is in love with them) and the ability to change lenses if you'll ever need to.

00You can also get the RX100 M1 for $250, RX100 M3 for $400, RX100 M6 for $900 and the X-T20 for $900 from Amazon Warehouse. They're open box items in very good condition, with Amazon's money back guarantee.

u/beherenow13 · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I know canon equipment, not so much Nikon. Two lenses fit your requirements, inexpensive, very good, Manual focus.

One is the 28 f/2.8 AIS

The other is the 50mm f/1.8D

If you are going to be on stage, the first one is good. The second one is great for close ups from the front row, but no group shots except from further back. With small venue, wide angle may make sense. I have found the good, and unusual images are close ups. I use wide angle to fill in the gaps, but depend on the telephoto to make my work 'special', better than the average person. Honestly, either one is good, because I do not know how close you will be.

In post production, multiple images can be combined for a montage. I find that more effective than a plain group shot. I could make only the 50mm work, better than I could make only the 28mm. You will have to use your legs, shoot some from the back of the audience area.

Others with more knowledge of Nikon equipment could be helpful, but autofocus is not a requirement. Neither are zooms, that are expensive, over your budget.

u/parzivalsanorak · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography
  • Bodies:

  • If you're buying used, pay attention to the number of clicks the body has gone through. Basically, like mileage on a car.

  • I wouldn't go back too far, but a generation or two is not an issue. Personally, I have a D3300 and it's perfectly fine. IIRC, it has the same sensor as the D3400 and the D5xxx and D7xxx of the same generation (and the D3500's might be marginally improved). What you'll be missing is comfort (e.g. an articulating screen, more focus points) and autofocus on AI and AF lenses. For $50 more, I'd definitely get the D3300 rather than the older models.

  • The D80 came out in 2006. A lot has happened since.

  • Lenses:

  • Check out which ones you're getting. E.g., there are three modern versions of the 18-55, two AF-S and one AF-P (most recent one) and of those, there are versions with and without image stabilisation (VR). if you can, get the one with VR. The same goes for the 55-200, there are three versions of that as well.

  • Assuming this 35mm is bundled with the D3300, that thing is a steal for $50. It typically costs thrice that where I live, used. Personally just got one, it's fun and a great lens for environmental portraits and street.

  • I'd assume you'd want a wide, fast lens for landscape and astro. Here's an extensive article on the matter if you want to delve deep. But don't fret. Unless you can get an exceptionally sweet deal, buy something simple that gets you started and try stuff out.
u/brianmerwinphoto · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

For what you're hoping to accomplish, nearly any DSLR and lens combo will get the job done. It mostly depends on the size of the products you're shooting and what your final use of the image files will be. (Ie just for web, print ads, billboards etc - do your research based on that).

Some mirrorless camera systems would work, but you need the ability to change lenses, set exposure controls manually, have a hot shoe to trigger strobe lights (even if you don't have any yet it's good to plan for) and ideally have the ability to shoot tethered to a computer - and you can get all that reasonably inexpensively with some of the base model Canon & Nikon DSLRs.

That said, the difference between mediocre product images and excellent images has little to do with the camera and EVERYTHING to do with lighting. Especially with reflective or glass objects.

You don't necessarily need to drop $10k on ProFoto lights, but you'll want to start looking into strobes and light modifiers because you'll reach the limit of what you can accomplish with Home Depot clamp lights super fast.

You also need to understand that product photography is one of the most technically complicated styles of lighting and if you want to level up your images, it's going to take a bit of an investment and a lot of damned patience.

Step 1: buy a copy Light: Science & Magic

Have fun!

u/Oilfan94 · 6 pointsr/AskPhotography

To really figure this out (and or realize the limitations of what can be done), you may need a bit more education than a reply to a reddit post will get you.

In a nutshell:

Objects have different properties of how they react with light, reflection being the most important to us. Two main types of reflection are diffuse and direct. Something with mostly diffuse reflection will not show glare (think of a white piece of paper). The thing that most exemplifies direct reflection, is a mirror.

Another property is absorption, which is how we get/see colors & black etc.

So if you have something that is highly reflective, it has lots of direct reflection, and if it's black like a Darth Vader helmet, then it probably has plenty of absorption (and thus less diffuse reflection).

So when it comes to lighting something like this, we need to consider what type of reflection we want to (or have to) use. If the item is mostly black, then it probably doesn't have enough diffuse reflection or the direct reflection properties are going to be dominant.

So when lighting something that is dominated by direct reflection, we need to understand the family of angles. Basically, you will see a reflection of the light source (usually glare) when the angle between the lens, object and light all line up.

When the object is flat (or has flat sides etc) it can be easy to 'hide' the lights by placing them (or the object) where the reflections won't be visible to the camera. Of course, if the object is rounded, your family of angle will essentially be anywhere in front of the object, which can make it impossible to 'hide' the light..

However, if the object is mostly direct reflection, you may need to use that reflection glare, because there is nothing else.

So the task for the photographer then becomes getting the best looking reflection, to achieve what they want for the photo. So we would find/create the right size and shape of light, and place it carefully. A good example is wine bottles. Using a square or round light would leave a square or round glare on the bottle, which doesn't look good. So a photographer may use a strip light and align it with the bottle, so that the reflection shows up as a vertical line on the bottle.

Sometimes, the solution is to make your light source as big as possible (relative to the object). So getting something big and/or getting it really close. This is why we might use a light tent, it basically puts the light source all around the object.

So what you will likely have to do, is experiment by moving the lights around (while viewing the object from the camera position). You may find a position that makes for better looking reflections. Changing the size & shape of your lights may also help.

Read this book... Light: Science & Magic.

u/noimnotnick · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Alright so unfortunately I wont be able to get the Tokina 11-16mm because there really no way I can afford it at the moment. But I came up with a new set i'm trying to choose from, a couple from the ones you showed me and one I found after googling.

I don't know if me telling you this will help you help me at all but i'm mainly going to be using the lens I buy for video. I am starting to be a cameraman for a friend of mine and I go with him to his performances on stage and record him. I'm also going to use it for music videos. So any lens that's good for that and is wide angle is what I want.

Anyway, the lens are:

Rokinon FE14M-C 14mm F2.8
(I have this one first because I found this video on youtube and I was pretty amazed by the quality of the video, I don't know if it's because the camera is a T3i or what, I like it.)

[Tamron AF 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5]

and the Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4

u/Slarm · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

You can, but you can't include anything after the actual item number including I think reference links.

So for example a link like
would not be okay.

A link like
should be fine.

You can pay a lot less on eBay for the same kit, but really, most of that lot of stuff is junk. The telephoto and wide angle lenses (converters) will sort of do what they claim, but at great cost to image quality. Everything other than the camera and 18-55mm lens is essentially bottom of the barrel.

The lens and camera together retail for $450 from reputable sources. Whether the listing you were looking at includes a manufacturer warranty is questionable. For the $30 less you'd pay for one of those kits, you could get a better SD card and a probably slightly better tripod, and a probably better warranty.

u/notaneggspert · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

I would go with a Canon t3i or t2i in your case over a D5100 only because of magic lantern. The pixel difference between 16 and 18 doesn't matter. If you go with Nikon you'll be just as happy and appreciate the boost in dynamic range.

As for lenses I'd recommend getting a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 only $350 new on amazon. Manual focus only but much wider and faster than the kit lens. Abandoned buildings don't move very fast and It's available Nikon and Canon.

Canons 50mm f/1.8 are cheap and fast but pretty tight on a crop sensor for shooting indoors but worth $100.

A good tripod is also a good investment, and if you buy your camera body used you'll have more money to spend on one. Fredmiranda is a good forum to buy used.

u/rtananis · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

wonderful cameras... very small... can put in your pocket.

I have the rx 100 iii and its a challenge for me to use... I have large hands and 64 year old eyes .... when I have my reading glasses I can see the settings a bit better.... but this is probably the best pocketable camera out there for that price range.

Assuming u are a lot younger than I am with good eyes... its a nice deal for you if you want to travel light


amazon warehouse has a whole bunch of em used for under 500

u/theshriekingpines · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

It's a perfect starter. I use a d5500 for my hobby photography. I'm 99% sure it's the same sensor and everything as the d300--just has built-in wifi (which I hardly use) and a swivel screen (which I actually use a lot).

As far as lenses go, I have this lens here and 99% of my instagram photos were taken with that. I use my foot zoom a lot, and sometimes have to stitch together a grid of images if I need a wider angle, but the quality of picture over the 18-55mm kit makes it well worth it.

I would recommend getting a lens with a range (18-55mm or 70-200), just so you can play around with different framing...but I'm a firm believer that getting a solid fixed lens appropriate to your subject matter (landscape vs portrait vs wildlife etc) will make you become a better photographer.

u/GartNJ · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

I got my first camera, Canon Rebel T5i kit, used, on amazon for roughly $250 (US). It's served me super well for a couple years now. If it's your first one, you might as well get a used camera. That way you can see how you like it and still get some great shots, without breaking the bank.

Even something like this used Canon Rebel T6 would serve you well... for $245+shipping:

Happy shooting!

u/balcony-gardener · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Oh wow, the detail on that is great!! It would for sure show all of the delicate details of a wildflower and do everything else I'd want it to do. I'm almost positive I'm going to get the lens on amazon and just get the body used. You seriously saved me from wasting $90 on less than great lens.

This is the one I think I'll get along with the used D7000

u/bobbfwed · 5 pointsr/AskPhotography

First things that come to my mind:

  1. This tripod is so absolutely fantastic, and cheap!
  2. A fast lens or two. Either a zoom at f/2.8, or my suggestion would be a prime (50mm or 85mm -- or both) at f/1.4 or f/1.8. These primes will yield incredible results, and are reasonably priced.
  3. A flash. Something that can be used off or on camera. Something you can slave/master would be best.
  4. A polarizer for your best lens(es). Polarizers make a huge difference when taking landscape photos or photos with a lot of reflections.
  5. One of these two backpacks could make being mobile so much easier! This one or this one. I have owned the first for a couple years now -- taken it all around the world, don't have a single complaint.

    Hope some of these ideas help.
u/Dragonteuthis · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I also wanted to experiment with flash units for portraits. I bought a couple of these:

It's fully manual and rather close-range (the guide number is only 33), but you can trigger it remotely with your onboard flash, and for the price, it's great to just have fun and experiment with. And they've improved my indoor photos dramatically.

u/luminaeus · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I'm going to assume this is your first entry into digital photography.

The camera body is fine.

The 18-55mm kit lens will take a decent to good photo in most circumstances. An external flash will improve your results in low light situations.

The 70-300mm will only be useful (hand held) in bright daylight because of it's narrow apeture and lack of image stabilization. A monopod or tripod will help. I'd also recommend a remote to further minimize vibration.

I highly recommend getting a nifty-fifty. I have basically the same lens on my Canon and it takes a higher quality picture than all my other lenses, some of which cost nearly $1000.

u/burning1rr · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Soft-boxes are different than umbrellas. I used basic 60x60cm soft-boxes and they worked fine. It's smaller, which is good for stability and portability, but produces good results for portraiture.

Godox also makes umbrella style octaboxes. Those are a bit easier to pack and transport, but also a bit more fragile and fiddly to adjust. I like em, though. For those, get an umbrella adapter for the speedlight rather than the S-Bracket. It's difficult to install these over the godox s-bracket.

Normal umbrellas work fine with the S-Bracket. They are cheap and easy to use, but spill a lot of light.

u/d4vezac · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Lens buying can be a bewildering and expensive rabbit hole to dive down, and it really does come down to how much you want to spend and what you want to shoot. The 50mm you linked is probably the best cheap lens you can buy because it remains useful even as you get more and more into the hobby. It's never a bad buy.

If you're wanting this to be a surprise for your wife, I'd buy the camera with the 50mm, and talk to her when you give it to her about having planned to budget additional money for a second lens. Depending on how much she knows/remembers from her earlier experience with photography, she may know exactly what she wants. If she doesn't, the Sigma 17-50 that someone else mentioned is a good recommendation. It's a step or two up from a kit lens in terms of quality, and it probably won't break the bank if you were already planning to buy another lens. It also gives you a little bit of wide-angle and a little bit of telephoto, so you can see what zoom range you find yourself using the most, and whether you find yourself wishing for an even wider-angle or even more zoom, which will inform you as to where you might look next.

The Tokina 11-16 might be your next lens if you want wider-angle, or some flavor of a 70-200 might be your next purchase if she really wants to follow through on shooting weddings. Again, I'd recommend against diving straight to weddings, and maybe work for a friend, or shoot some other indoor events to warm up and learn what tools she might need. I'd advocate for a 70-200 f/2.8 (and preferably either Canon's version with IS or Tamron's version with VC) rather than the 70-200 f/4, as lighting conditions might just be too poor for f/4 and no stabilization.

u/Harriv · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

Click number is probably the number of photos taken with the camera. There's some mechanics inside camera which will eventually wear (except in mirrorless cameras).

> 50mm 1.8

This is only 90$ as new, very good quality lens for the price:

Most cameras use these day CMOS sensor (as well as phones). Only color issues I can think now is chromatic aberration, caused by the optics. It can be corrected by using better lens or in post processing. Anyway, even the cheapest DSLR camera has much bigger sensor than any phone, which means better image. Modern phones do magic in the processing and of course newer sensors are better than ancient.

Here's some information:

iPhone 6 sensor is 17.3 mm², smallest DLSR format ("micro four thids") is 225 mm² and the sensor in the example Rebel t2i is 332 mm².

u/perpterds · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

So, I didn't see the post I originally found, so you might need to do some google research. I can't speak to the quality of anything honestly, as I've no experience with them, myself.

Anyhow, I did also find the Amazon listings:

Body only, no lens, $999.00 US

Body + Kit lens 18mm-135mm (it's a pretty solid zoom), $1399.00 US

Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM lens
This is possibly *the* best lens you can get below $400-$500, especially in terms of sharpness. It's what I used for that photo linked above, and it's nearly the only lens I use (despite having about 4 other lenses). And it's only $125. I recommend this even higher than the 80D itself, if you get *any* Canon.

u/mmcnama4 · 0 pointsr/AskPhotography

Recently bought the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro and really like it, especially for the price. My only gripe would be lens flare and minor chromatic aberration. Really a good option for a crop camera.

I've also used the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L (rented it) and loved it. It's a bit outside your price range, so maybe you can find it used or up your.

I actually bought both of these to test and then returned the Canon because of the huge crop factor since I'm not on a full-frame camera. I would've bought the Canon over the Tokina if I was though.

u/newdingodog · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

If you can afford both the 35mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 I would buy them both. They both go down to 1.8 which means the aperture is open very with and will let a ton of light in. These are both prime lenses so they don't zoom but that is not as important as you probably think.

I am assuming here that you don't want to spend 1500+ on a fast professional zoom lens, that would also be okay.

The 35 mm is 200 and I just bought it myself:

The 50mm can be had for 131:

You can also just go with what you have, but you will probably need to crank the ISO up pretty high.

Suggested settings:

  1. Put the camera in aperture priority (A on the dial) and set it to the lowest number it will go. (1.8 on the suggested lenses, 3.5-5.6 on the kit lenses).

  2. Take pictures of the subject, look at the shutter speed the camera is choosing.

  3. Increase the ISO until the shutter speed is around 1/200 at minimum (if the subject is moving)

  4. Take some pictures with a higher ISO to get shutter speed at 1/400 just in case 1/200 was not fast enough. (1/200 should be plenty fast if they are not running and jumping all over)

    The reason for the suggested lenses is at 1.8, your ISO can be much lower than 3.5 and this will result in less noise. One last time: shoot raw if you can since it is a tricky situation. GOOD LUCK!
u/moby414 · 4 pointsr/AskPhotography

I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 for my 700D (T5i) and I really enjoy it for dark/landscape photography. Great for general use too although it's got quite a large diameter so filters can be a bit pricey!

I also bought a cheap, off-brand filter kit to test them out and mainly protect the glass.

u/ZacharyRD · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

Honestly, that lens is not worth it, because it's a very awkward lens for most things on a 1.6x crop body, such as the 60D. 300mm on a 60d is the equivilent to >450mm on a full frame sensor, and is not really necessary. Even if it was nicer glass, it's just not a lens I'd want to own as one of my first lenses.

If you wanted a cheap lens, it's not the one I'd buy -- The "Nifty Fifty" -- is even cheaper, and I'd prefer it. As I'd also prefer the Canon 40mm fixed lens.

If you want a telephoto lens, the kit lens Canon 55-250 is a much better buy, and can be found MUCH cheaper used, because it's practically given away in many kits. Amazon has their refurbished price as within $30 of each other.

u/dmpither · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

You can replace the Canon 18-55mm with a refurbished Canon certified STM version for $88, or if you want to upgrade, see Amazon or Ebay for a new or used Sigma 17-55 mm with a Canon mount; new is $297. Either is good, but if you were going to spend money, I'd recommend the Sigma. Once you learn more about photography, you can do more with the Sigma. In the meantime, look on YouTube for macro photography tutorials; you don't usually want to use auto focus in macro so the 18-55mm lens you have is fine for now.

Canon 18-55mm STM, $88 Amazon:
Canon 8114B002 EF-S 18-55mm is STM (Certified Refurbished)

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera, $297 new:

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I have the Nikon D5100 and I absolutely love it. It meets all of your requirements if you get a lens with VR, such as the kit lens (18-55mm). I currently only have two lenses - the 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8. I also highly recommend an external flash. It is the most important camera accessory I own.

Here are some pictures that I have recently taken with my D5100.

u/ReverserMover · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Not the other guy, but for $200 or just over, you can get really good images.

What you need:

u/phooton · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

The wife did not want me to buy this camera, so it is still in hiding. I have not been able to use it that much as a result, but the pictures I have taken so far have mostly been with this lens:

Regardless of the lens, my advice is read up / google your way to being knowledgeable with photography. Stuff like depth of field, exposure & the exposure triangle, and composition are probably the most important, but keep in mind I am not a professional by any means.

I remember reading that you should not buy another lens until you have mastered the ones you currently own, so that is good advice too I think.

u/geekandwife · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

That budget is going to mean compromises, but is doable. - Flash brackets - Light stands - Wireless triggers - x2 - Flashes - Batteries and charger - Umbrellas - x2

All of this will cost your right at 200. For a background, shoot against your plain wall and use photoshop to do a background overlay, Very easy to do, and the only way to stay in your budget.

But with that gear, yes, you will be able to do shots like you have linked.

u/axvk · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

I also have a d5300 for about a year now. There really isn't a one lens fits all kind of solution if you want quality. My favorite lens is this one

It's a good quality prime lens. Meaning that it's only 35mm and you can't zoom (You zoom with your legs.) Once you see the quality compared the 18-35 lens that comes with the camera, you won't be able to go back.

35mm on d5300's APS-C sensor will feel a little cropped so you will need to back up a good amount to capture the entire object.

u/travshootsphotos · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I am a little bit biased because it is what I shoot on, but a Pentax either with built-in Astrotracer (K3ii) or with the extra Astrotracer equipment would be my recommendation if you aren't ready or willing to invest in something like an equatorial mount for your tripod. This is the body I shoot on, a little bit more expensive than the body you are looking at but for astro, I think it is well worth the extra investment.

As for lens, anything with a wide aperture (2.8f at least) and a wide angle lens. I pretty much haven't taken my Sigma 17-50mm off of my camera in a year or two. For a small preview, this body/lens setup is what I used to get this shot at the top of Loveland Pass in Colorado.

u/PooTommy · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

My current bag (which I absolutely love) is the AmazonBasics DSLR Bag. I've had it for over a year now and it's still in great condition, even after taking it for many hikes and beach trips. My only problem with it now is that I am running out of space as it is a kind of small bag.

Pros: Cheap, good camera and lens storage, has a tripod holder on the side, it's well organised

Cons: Small size, doesn't look that great.. Honestly, these are the only two cons I can think of, and they are both subjective.


If you think this could be a problem for you, there's also the bigger AmazonBasics DSLR and Laptop Bag. I haven't tried this bag, but I assume it is very similar to the smaller one (besides size, obviously).

I've also heard many good things about Lowepro 450AW.


I recently backed the Boundary Errant on Kickstarter. It's due to arrive around November, but I purchased this bag as an "all-rounder" bag so I could start carrying my camera everywhere with me, such as Uni, as it has an optional camera insert. It's a little pricier but I believe it will be a bag that can last for ages.


u/Vinny_Karma · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

A good starting camera that I started out with, and still use it to this today, is the Sony A6000. Takes great 4K pictures and record's in 1080p. Starting kit comes with 2 lens, 16-50mm and 55-210mm Power Zoom Lenses. Total comes to $750, haven't included shipping.

u/inverse_squared · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

Phones are still a good starting place unless you need the advantages of a stand-alone camera. Do you need anything that your phone photos are currently lacking?

What's your budget?

I would look into something like the Nikon D3400 with the kit zoom lens and maybe an optional 50mm f/1.8 lens for product shots.

u/InjunJ03 · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Awesome thank you. Last question, im looking through 4 kits for the STM 18-55 and I'm not sure if any of these have it? (1, 2, 3, 4)

u/bravokiloromeo · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

It's all just a matter of focal length. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 will have the same field of view as your 18-55mm set at 50mm, and the 10-18 @ 18mm will look the same as the 18-55 @ 18mm.

If the 18mm isn't wide enough, then you need a wider lens. The 10-18 is a great budget upgrade. You could also go for something like the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 which also has a wider max aperture if you want to do astro stuff in the future.

u/hamletmachine72 · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

I've had this one for about a year, and it has served me very well:
It's not the sexiest looking camera bag, but it's dirt cheap, well built, and holds a lot. They have a slightly smaller version that's only about 27 bucks. I actually like that it's pretty anonymous and doesn't scream "expensive camera inside." In fact, I recently switched to an even more low profile setup, an old school Jansport backpack that I added some foam inserts to. If you stick with this hobby/profession, you will end up amassing an unreasonable number of bags fairly quickly ; )

u/amullet77 · 5 pointsr/AskPhotography

This book is amazing at teaching you the basics of photography!

Understanding Exposure, Fourth Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera

u/chrisgagne · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

Do you have any modifiers over your bulbs or can you place the light further away? That might help distribute the light more before it hits the painting. The usual 45° advice might not be sufficient if you're trying to avoid glossy highlights and you're using a relatively wide lens.

There was a really good discussion of how to do exactly this in this book: In particular, there's some good advice on how to use rake-lighting to accentuate texture in your art.

u/trolllante · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

O wouldn’t sell your lens kit, instead I would buy a 50mm 1.8f . Not only they are great for portrait but they work good during night.

u/Dirtylicious · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

why not spend much less on the f 1.8 instead and save the extra 4 bills for a better lense

u/brusifur · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX

2,200 reviews on Amazon and a 5 star rating. I love mine on my d5200.

u/W0NDERMUTT · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

I think the first decision you have to make is does it make sense to stick with Canon or would it be better long term to switch to Nikon. The two biggest factors I would consider is price and availability. Do you have canon-mount lenses readily available to purchase? Or is it easier to get Nikon products?

If you decide to stick with Canon the first thing i would do is buy another lens or two - NOT a new body. I started out with a Nikon D5100 kit with two lenses (18-55 & 55-300) and replaced my 18-55 pretty quickly. The kit lens was fine, but the lenses I did end up purchasing really helped my images to step up a level (linked below for reference).

  • Nikon 35mm
  • Sigma 17-50mm

    If you decide to switch to Nikon I would pick up a used body (best series you can afford) and a lens. I would not buy the D3400 kit, the lens is going to be comparable to whatever you have.

u/DinhDan · 4 pointsr/AskPhotography

Understanding Exposure was probably the most useful book I read when I started shooting:

Understanding Exposure, Fourth Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera

I have an older edition so I'm sure it's even more relevant now.

u/gabezermeno · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

Well for the price of a 600d you could get a 35mm 1.8 and a Rokinon 8mm fisheye. You would have tons of fun with those two lenses.

u/prancerciseisthebest · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

1st Gen - Amazing Photos and Video. $340 Used / $500 New

2nd Gen - APV + MultiShoe + Wifi and PlayMemories. $480 Used / $650 New

3rd Gen - APV +WPM + EVF - MultiShoe. $730 Used / $800 New

u/h2f · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I have this Amazon Basics bag. $40. I love it.

u/tcdejong · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

I'm 6'1" and the Amazon Basics DSLR and Laptop backpack works pretty well for me. The hip strap isn't ideal but in general it sits well.

u/sa7abi · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Good deal on used/like new product at Amazon warehouse!:



a6000 body + 16-50mm + 55-210mm : $585.44 -20% = $468.35

a6000 body only: $385 - 20% = $308

u/av4rice · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

That price seems a little steep. You could get that body and lenses brand new for only $138 more:

Or you could get a used D5000 with 18-55mm lens kit in like-new condition for as little as $349:

Even if you get the most expensive kit on that page ($465) and add a brand new 50/1.8G, that's still cheaper than what she's asking for.

50mm on a crop sensor like the D5000's is good for portraits, still life, products, and food photography. It's a little tight for general use and things like indoor group shots.

55-250 is longer for more distant objects. You could use it for sports and wildlife, but mostly only in daylight because it's somewhat slow.

u/Dweller · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

Start here:

Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. I find this book very helpful for people breaking into photography to learn the hows and whys of shutter, aperture and ISO.

u/fivethirdstwo · 4 pointsr/AskPhotography

You should seriously consider picking up a 35mm DX F/1.8 instead. Thats what I did for my d3200 and it is amazing what it did for me in terms of flexibility for exposure. I recently got a hand me down 18-105mm and it just feels restrictive in comparison.

u/MetsToWS · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

What's the difference between these two lenses? Would the f/1.4 be worth it?

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Also, should I be concerned about buying refurbished from Canon or purchasing a used lens - is there anything I should look out for?

u/labapprovedhuman · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Amazonbasics laptop and camera backpack is nice. I have a D800 with a couple of lenses and a 15 inch laptop. It has lasted more than my old lowepro.

u/AyEmDublyu · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I recommend: Light Science & Magic: An Introduction to Photographic Lighting. Includes lots of info about photographing art and controlling reflections.

u/Hexous · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

To add to /u/johninbigd, I'd recommend picking up the book Understanding Exposure. I got it a few months ago and can attest that it's a phenomenal aid in understanding exactly how the different manual settings interact and how to utilize them to their fullest.

Understanding Exposure, Fourth Edition

u/imperialka · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

> On Canon APS-C cameras this is 1.62. Multiply the focal length by 1.62; for 16mm this is 26mm - if you have an APS-C camera with a 16mm lens next to a 135-format camera with a 26mm lens they would have the same perspective.

You lost me here. I'm not sure where you got 1.62 from or why you have to multiply this by 16mm to get 26mm. Could you explain this a little differently?

If I understand right 26mm on a full frame is the equivalent to a 16mm on a crop sensor? 26mm is actually 16mm on a full frame? I'm confused.

EDIT: is the Tokina 11-16mm DXII better than the first DX? Here is the DX on amazon and the newer version. Newer one is cheaper than the original but idk which is better or what the difference is.

Also, I see that the Tokina has it's own aperture ring...does this mean I have to always manually select this by turning the ring? Can I select the aperture electronically from my DSLR screen?

It even has an infinity sign which I know means "focus to infinity" but I genuinely don't understand how this works except I know it's for manual focus. What is this and how do you use this?

u/daegon · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

just a possible combo, with used prices from amazon:

u/AbunaiXD · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

As many others stated its more about the lens than the camera. I personally use Canon with the nifty 50 to achieve similar results.

Pro tip to achieve that effect, there must be distance between the subject (girl) and the background (tree). The more distance, the more the background is out of focus. Lower F-stop helps but you can achieve similar results at F4 if your close enough to the subject.

Also if you have an IPhone 6(idk if others do it) you can achieve similar photos with the blurred backgrounds.

u/donoteatthatfrog · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

This book, for example?
Understanding Exposure , by Bryan Peterson.

u/VAdrienV · 4 pointsr/AskPhotography

Oops, my bad. This is the one I bought from Amazon

u/Artvandelay403 · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

Thanks for the reply, lots of helpful information!

These are what i'm currently considering (I don't have a physical camera store within a 3 hour drive)

Any idea if the AF-P DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED kit lense is decent for distance shots, or should I be looking at something else? I'm assuming that both the kit lenses are poor quailty, as they only add $300 to the price of the body.
Trying to keep it under $2500ish