# Starter camra



## h.f.d.firedog (Dec 29, 2008)

Will a canon T3I be a good starter camra?
Most i will be doing is taking is wildlife and family pics. Camping pic.
Seems like canon has a good variety of lens, Will a 300 mm lens take good pics. at at 100 yard?
I am a rookie at this , So your help would greatly appreciated. Thanks.:texasflag


----------



## Formula4Fish (Apr 24, 2007)

It will be a good "starter camera" if it's also the one you want to ultimately end up with or if it's all you can fit in your budget. If you foresee a better camera in your future, there is something to be said for doing it right the first time, and skipping the "starter".

You're going to have to be more specific about what you expect from a 300mm lens. Yes... It will take good pictures of the Grand Canyon at 100 yards. Yes, you can take a picture of the Moon with it, at 238,000 miles. It won't be very big though. If you expect it to produce a full-frame portrait of a person's face at that distance, probably not. The average Sparrow taken at that distance would be easy to mistake for a speck of dirt on the picture.


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

I shoot a T3i for wildlife photos.... What do you wanna see? I took 4k photos last season of everything from deer to ducks to bald eagles to zebras... so I can probably provide you with examples of what you can expect.

I am using the Canon 55-250 IS as my zoom and I want WAY more...

(If you are looking at that 75-300 kit lens, it does not have image stabilization).


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

All photos taken with the 55-250 fully zoomed. The darker pictures are after sunset... the brighter photo is in the morning....

20 yards










35 yards










50-60 yards










125 yards


----------



## h.f.d.firedog (Dec 29, 2008)

Ha Thanks justinsfa. Just what i wanted to see. Good pics by the way. Ithink the camra will do good for what I will be doing...


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

No problem... If you want to see anything else in particular, just let me know. Like I said, I have plenty and at all kinds of distances, times of day and with a variety of animals. I have some bald eagle shots at 200+ yards and it makes me sick how great they could have been with a longer range lens... they are photos I could probably never catch again.... UGH...

I think with that 75-300 kit lens you are looking at, you are going to have a tough time due to it not having the IS function, unless you are shooting off a tripod, your pics will most likely turn out pretty blurry at full zoom.... Personally, I dont think the 75-300 gives enough zoom to bother with a tripod.


----------



## Formula4Fish (Apr 24, 2007)

justinsfa said:


> I think with that 75-300 kit lens you are looking at, you are going to have a tough time due to it not having the IS function, unless you are shooting off a tripod, your pics will most likely turn out pretty blurry at full zoom.... Personally, I dont think the 75-300 gives enough zoom to bother with a tripod.


That's pretty much dependent on how much light you have, or more specifically, the shutter speed at which you're able to shoot. A kind of "rule of thumb" says that hand-held shooting at 300mm your shutter speed should be 1/300s or faster. If you're shooting at slower shutter speeds a tripod would pretty much be indicated.


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

Formula4Fish said:


> That's pretty much dependent on how much light you have, or more specifically, the shutter speed at which you're able to shoot. A kind of "rule of thumb" says that hand-held shooting at 300mm your shutter speed should be 1/300s or faster. If you're shooting at slower shutter speeds a tripod would pretty much be indicated.


Agreed.... The majority of wildlife movement is found in the early morning hours and late evening hours, so that becomes a big factor.

I find myself constantly trying to find enough light. Also, most of my subjects are moving at a fast pace, therefore I am also in constant movement tracking them. I tried a lens without IS and found quite a noticeable difference on waterfowl, in a bad way.


----------



## h.f.d.firedog (Dec 29, 2008)

Thanks Guys ' I need a lot of learning on shutter speeds. May have to get a lenze with the IS Kinda shakey. Have you used the 2-x converter with the lenzes ?


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

h.f.d.firedog said:


> Thanks Guys ' I need a lot of learning on shutter speeds. May have to get a lenze with the IS Kinda shakey. Have you used the 2-x converter with the lenzes ?


Have one that came with my "kit"... it sucks. I threw it in the bottom of a drawer somewhere.


----------



## Formula4Fish (Apr 24, 2007)

h.f.d.firedog said:


> Thanks Guys ' I need a lot of learning on shutter speeds. May have to get a lenze with the IS Kinda shakey. Have you used the 2-x converter with the lenzes ?


In short, the 2X converter is probably a bad idea. 

My EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM will not physically couple to a teleconverter.

Here is a *Extender EF 2x Compatibility Chart*

Even if you could find one that will connect physically, because a 2X teleconverter costs two f/stops you would not be able to autofocus that lens. To autofocus that camera with a 2X teleconverter, you need a f/2.8 or faster lens . 

Due to the relatively poor resolution of the viewfinder and of the LCD display, it nearly impossible to see when you have tack-sharp focus using manual focus.


----------



## MT Stringer (May 21, 2004)

A 2x TC won't fit on the 55-250 because of physical limitations. Even if it did, you would be shooting at f/8 - 11.

The only way to get enough light to shoot early morning or late evening is to have a fast lens - one that has a maximum aperture of f/2.8. Sometimes f/4 lenses will work but your camera must have the capability of creating good images at high ISO settings like 3200 or 6400.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Formula4Fish (Apr 24, 2007)

I don't mean to nit-pick MT, but "sometimes f/4 lenses will work" is not accurate for a Rebel. An f/4 lens with a 2X converter becomes an f/8 lens, and simply will not autofocus with that camera body. 

It's simple math. F/stop is the ratio of the lens's focal length to the diameter of the lens, and the ISO setting has nothing whatever to do with it.


----------



## MT Stringer (May 21, 2004)

For example, shooting inside a dimly lit gym - ISO 6400 @ f/2.2 - 2.5 will yield a shutter speed of about 1/400 sec ( I used a 100 f/2.0 lens). That would be similar to early morning light or late evening light. It takes camera capability and lens capability to produce good shots. Otherwise, the result will be blurry pics from slow shutter speed.

I haven't seen the late model Rebels. What is the max ISO they can be set at?


----------



## captbobLE (Jul 16, 2012)

I shoot with L series lenses and ID MKIIN and IDs MKII and when I put the 2x tele conv. on my 300 F4 IS and 70-200 F2.8 it SUCKED, even with good light there was a loss of quality, one thing you have to remember is, when you put that 75-300 on that Ti it is now a 480mm lens, meaning you need 500/sec shutter, and a rookie should probably have more like 750/sec. put a 1.4 tele conv. on it and your hand holding 672mm even the pros don't try to hand hold that without a bipod. I have had excellent success with the 1.4 tele, and not noticed any real loss of image quality.

I suggest for a beginner the Ti3 is ok and will take good pics, for a lens, we common folks can't afford a 600 L F4 and nothing else can be made to do what it does!! But the old L series F2.8 70-200 was no slouch, and every Slr owner should have one anyway, right now the used market is very reasonable for one since the 70-200 MK II came out a couple years ago, good portrait lens and with the 1.4 tele converter on it, is close to a L 300mm F4. With the 1.4X tele-converter it gives you a 98-280mm zoom, and great lens quality with a constant F4, for a poor man just starting out hard to beat, put that on Ti3 and you have the equivalent of an 448mm F4 lense!! and plenty good enough to keep when you start upgrading camera bodies, and adding lenses to it as you grow. Not to mention, you will need some time to learn to hold that much lens before you waste your money on bigger lenses and try to master them. Just my thoughts. Plus its kinda of like hunting, part of the object is to get up close and personal!!


----------



## Arlon (Feb 8, 2005)

I'm not really fond of teleconverters. About the only time I use them is for moon shots and for that I use a 600m/2x tc and a tripod too. I have Nikon gear and shoot a 500mm f4 with a 1.4x tc from time to time. I've shot it without the TC thousands of times and have never used it with a tripod. I shoot the 500mm f4 off hand ALL the time. I also have a 600mm and it DOES get a tripod 90% of the time. The 600 is just too heavy for much off hand shooting.


----------



## captbobLE (Jul 16, 2012)

Arlon said:


> I'm not really fond of teleconverters. About the only time I use them is for moon shots and for that I use a 600m/2x tc and a tripod too. I have Nikon gear and shoot a 500mm f4 with a 1.4x tc from time to time. I've shot it without the TC thousands of times and have never used it with a tripod. I shoot the 500mm f4 off hand ALL the time. I also have a 600mm and it DOES get a tripod 90% of the time. The 600 is just too heavy for much off hand shooting.


I don't know what body you are using, but on a professional non crop body (full frame) with that 1.4 tc, makes the 500 f4 become a 700 f5.6, on a full frame, a 1.3 crop camera body would make the focal length of this setup 910mm, no pro in the world is going to take shots less than full sun beach shots offhand, with any kind of keeper success, and on the 1.6 crop bodies your hand holding 1120mm, aint happening! Not a good idea for a wildlife setup, you need a lot of daylight to use that setup with any kinda success with a mono pod, try it at sunrise in the outdoors and you are going to be very disappointed!! I shoot weddings and events for hire, and know a little about hand held possibilities and that aint happening. You also have to realize the Ti3 is a 1.6 crop camera, that makes this set up a 1120mm with a f5.6, and aint know pro in the world taking wildlife photos offhand and thinking there going to get any keeper shots, AINT HAPPENING!!

Another thing I would mention is the canon EF II extenders are optically superior to the after market tc's, and made for the "L" lenses in the chart Formula4Fish pointed out. On a non L series lens the aftermarket and older extenders are really degrading. I won't use the 2x EF II on my "L"'s it is made for, I am Happy with 1.4 on those lenses.


----------

