HOME | GALLERY | WORKSHOPS | ASK GARRY! | BOOKS |
Garry Black Photography |
Question: I am just now developing my photography skills. I am 19 and I travel worldwide and year round, so I have unlimited photo ops. My question is which camera do you think would be better. I have a choice between an older canon with several different lenses, but is not auto-focus. My other choice is getting a newer Nikon with just the zoom lens but it does have auto-focus. Is auto-focus better or does it really make such a difference? Or is auto focus better for a quick photo chance? Are newer cameras worth the money in your opinion? This is a great web page, I really learned a lot.
|
Answer: Before I recommend either camera, give me some more information about what type of things that you would like to photograph. Such as people, landscape, nature, cities, etc. or just about everything. Also what are the focal lengths (i.e. 24mm; 50mm; 80 - 200mm zoom) of the lenses or the range of the zoom lens that you are considering buying? What camera models you are looking at? How serious do you want to get with your photography? |
Follow up Question: The cameras both have 24 and 50 mm lenses, but the older cannon has an added 100mm and maybe a 200mm if I can get it. The Cannon is a rebel camera, but it was made in 1990. The Nikon in a pronea APS. I want to photograph landscapes, close-ups of flowers with insects, waterfalls, skylines etc....Not so much people. I don't plan on making a career out of photography, but I am taking it pretty seriously, I want to blow up some of my better pictures and have them framed. Thanks for your help. |
Answer: The two cameras are very different. The Canon is a 35mm camera; the range
of film speeds and types are much greater for this camera than the Nikon
Pronea which is an APS (film type) camera. The 35mm film is slightly larger
than the APS film, so it would be better for enlargements. |