Topic: Let's talk Canon digital SLRs... Part 2

[Jimna]

have fun!

[stirinthesauce]

and leave your wallet at the door.   

[stevetoney]

I went ahead and pulled the trigger today.  $549 shipped for a factory refurbished Canon EOS Rebel XSi.  All original items normally included are present.  They gave me a 1 year warranty as well.  The standard kit lens was included (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS).  I realize that new glass will be in order fairly quickly.  For another hundred bucks, I can get the EF 50mm f/1.8 II and be set for a while.  $650 total price and I am just under what I would pay new, but with two lenses.  Pretty happy with the deal.

FWIW, I'm gonna list my 70-300 f4.0-5.6 IS USM lens for $375 on ebay as soon as I get back from a week long business trip.  If you look in the rig pics section, you'll find some Phish and Summercamp pics that I shot...all with the lens I'll be selling.  IS works like freaking magic on these 200 - 300mm focal length zoom lenses.

[Corporate hack]

OK, I'm so far behind in the Canon dSLR world that I need a bit of help.  I've got a number of clients who could use some regular photography of their products- mainly restaurants.  I'm beginning to think that at $200/session to hire a photographer, I could go out, purchase amid level dSLR and a macro lens to cover my clients for their advertising and web needs far more cheaply (especially since the fees come out of our budget, not theirs). 

So, here are my questions:

1. Are new new EOS Rebels decent for this purpose?  If not, I can always go back to a 20D or something like that, but we're not going to be producing anything other than photos for web use, some magazine printing, newspaper printing and press kits.

2. What's out there right now for decent macro lenses for product shooting?

[phanophish]

OK, I'm so far behind in the Canon dSLR world that I need a bit of help.  I've got a number of clients who could use some regular photography of their products- mainly restaurants.  I'm beginning to think that at $200/session to hire a photographer, I could go out, purchase amid level dSLR and a macro lens to cover my clients for their advertising and web needs far more cheaply (especially since the fees come out of our budget, not theirs). 

So, here are my questions:

1. Are new new EOS Rebels decent for this purpose?  If not, I can always go back to a 20D or something like that, but we're not going to be producing anything other than photos for web use, some magazine printing, newspaper printing and press kits.

2. What's out there right now for decent macro lenses for product shooting?

I would think a basic Rebel would be fine, particularly for studio use where you can control everything.  You could do a fairly inexpensive macro as well since you likely won't be shooting really large apertures so you have some depth of field.  I'd guess you could fine something for around $200.  The big thing for food is lighting, it's an art and you will probably end up spending as much on lighting as you do on camera/lens to get top quality results

[Corporate hack]

OK, I'm so far behind in the Canon dSLR world that I need a bit of help.  I've got a number of clients who could use some regular photography of their products- mainly restaurants.  I'm beginning to think that at $200/session to hire a photographer, I could go out, purchase amid level dSLR and a macro lens to cover my clients for their advertising and web needs far more cheaply (especially since the fees come out of our budget, not theirs). 

So, here are my questions:

1. Are new new EOS Rebels decent for this purpose?  If not, I can always go back to a 20D or something like that, but we're not going to be producing anything other than photos for web use, some magazine printing, newspaper printing and press kits.

2. What's out there right now for decent macro lenses for product shooting?

I would think a basic Rebel would be fine, particularly for studio use where you can control everything.  You could do a fairly inexpensive macro as well since you likely won't be shooting really large apertures so you have some depth of field.  I'd guess you could fine something for around $200.  The big thing for food is lighting, it's an art and you will probably end up spending as much on lighting as you do on camera/lens to get top quality results

I'm pretty familiar with what's out there for lighting as that hasn't changed much in the last 5-10 years   Thanks for this!

[stevetoney]

My response was gonna be virtually the same, except I was gonna add that if you have to pay for lights, you might be better off just paying someone the $200 per session rate, which doesn't seem like all that much to me if they're good.  However, since you say that you've got lighting covered (and this is without a doubt the most important aspect of your shoot), I concur with the earlier comment that a decent macro lens would work just fine with the Rebel series.  My opinion is that the basic image quality for most DSLRs is excellent given good glass and the incremental increase in cost of the camera body is largely a function of features.  Having said that, I do understand that the image quality going from a crop-frame camera to full-frame body can be quite startling, but so is the cost difference (for new at least).

[Corporate hack]

My response was gonna be virtually the same, except I was gonna add that if you have to pay for lights, you might be better off just paying someone the $200 per session rate, which doesn't seem like all that much to me if they're good.  However, since you say that you've got lighting covered (and this is without a doubt the most important aspect of your shoot), I concur with the earlier comment that a decent macro lens would work just fine with the Rebel series.  My opinion is that the basic image quality for most DSLRs is excellent given good glass and the incremental increase in cost of the camera body is largely a function of features.  Having said that, I do understand that the image quality going from a crop-frame camera to full-frame body can be quite startling, but so is the cost difference (for new at least).

Food product lighting requires a minimal cost- I've done it plenty of times.  As far as $200 per session here's how it stacks up in the coming year for my clients- I've got 4 clients each of which has quarterly (if not more often) shooting needs to highlight different menus for as many as 10 different publications.  At 200 per session that means that we're spending 3200 per year on photography costs, plus we're at the scheduling whim of someone else.  The best time for my guys to shoot is often on Sundays or Monday mornings when no one is in the restaurant.  That doesn't even include the special shooting we may have to do for special events. 

[phanophish]

There was a great post on Strobist a while back on lighting food that this post reminded me of...

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2009/06/food-photography-made-easy-lunch-box.html

Great setup for a low budget shot.

[stevetoney]

Food product lighting requires a minimal cost- I've done it plenty of times.  As far as $200 per session here's how it stacks up in the coming year for my clients- I've got 4 clients each of which has quarterly (if not more often) shooting needs to highlight different menus for as many as 10 different publications.  At 200 per session that means that we're spending 3200 per year on photography costs, plus we're at the scheduling whim of someone else.  The best time for my guys to shoot is often on Sundays or Monday mornings when no one is in the restaurant.  That doesn't even include the special shooting we may have to do for special events. 

Nice savings there!  For that cost savings, I might be inclined to use those figures to justify some higher quality Canon glass to go with that Rebel body that you're talking about.  But then again, I'm a total gear slut (not just audio gear, mon) and I'm a sucker for using this type of logic to overextend my cash flow limitations!

[Corporate hack]

Food product lighting requires a minimal cost- I've done it plenty of times.  As far as $200 per session here's how it stacks up in the coming year for my clients- I've got 4 clients each of which has quarterly (if not more often) shooting needs to highlight different menus for as many as 10 different publications.  At 200 per session that means that we're spending 3200 per year on photography costs, plus we're at the scheduling whim of someone else.  The best time for my guys to shoot is often on Sundays or Monday mornings when no one is in the restaurant.  That doesn't even include the special shooting we may have to do for special events. 

Nice savings there!  For that cost savings, I might be inclined to use those figures to justify some higher quality Canon glass to go with that Rebel body that you're talking about.  But then again, I'm a total gear slut (not just audio gear, mon) and I'm a sucker for using this type of logic to overextend my cash flow limitations!

I'll probably pick up a 60mm 2.8 macro and leave it at that.

[phanophish]

Nice savings there!  For that cost savings, I might be inclined to use those figures to justify some higher quality Canon glass to go with that Rebel body that you're talking about.  But then again, I'm a total gear slut (not just audio gear, mon) and I'm a sucker for using this type of logic to overextend my cash flow limitations!

I don't know anything at all about doing that.....   

I just hope you are not coming here to get talked out of it 'cuz you are in the wrong place!

[Corporate hack]

Sorry to keep this going, but is there any reason I shouldn't go back to just using a 20D over the new rebel?  I mean I know the new rebel has tons of features, but I could get a used 20d with grip for like $350.

[phanophish]

Sorry to keep this going, but is there any reason I shouldn't go back to just using a 20D over the new rebel?  I mean I know the new rebel has tons of features, but I could get a used 20d with grip for like $350.

I don't think it matters for your stated purposes.  The only real drawback to something like a 20D is likely in low light the newer sensor will do better, but for studio stuff you control the light so it should be fine.  It just becomes a question is the better low light performance worth the extra $$ as a nice to have.

[leehookem]

It's worth it IMO.