Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Thought I would move my reply to here as so many people have/had opinions in my WTB thread. Mods feel free to merge previous posts with this.

Thanks for everyones opinion. Let me start by saying she had been using a d70s for a couple of years and the past year has taken over my D2x exclusivly which she built her portfolio on. She also shoots Nikon for film and works 100% in manual mode on both cameras with confidence. We were lead to believe the D300 was the minimum requirement hence looking for a 300 or 700. D3 would be nice only because I know she would have something to carry her through school and beyond comfortably if working profesionaly.

She was going to purchase this http://www.vistek.ca/store/DigitalSLRs/ ... t-kit.aspx

But being cheap I felt we would more effectivly use that 6k getting some used pieces or holding off on the 24-70 for a bit.

Forget about what people say. Get the best you can afford.

After reading your context above, and re-reading the advice given in the other thread, I agree with all of the posters in suggesting that a D700 or D3 would be overkill for a beginner photographer.

Your daughter is not a beginner.

Now, all this being said, does Humber have in their literature something stating explicitly that a D300 is the minimum requirement? Maybe the folks who have been in the course can comment.

Unfortunately "student" is one of those words that makes people also think of the words "amateur" and "inexperienced" when neither may be entirely true. It's like when we think of "pros," they're supposed to know what they're doing and be very talented, and yet, we all know someone who is a paid "pro," at whatever, who sucks.

More like on a budget in my eyes

I still shoot with XSI

Derek, its wonderful to see that my old D2x was put to good use in training another future photographer! It sounds like she has been using it well - and I'd actually love to see her portfolio.

I would say that if she is doing good work with the D2x, then she is definately ready to move onto a camera like the D700 or D300s. And either are extremely capable camera's. The D700 would be well suited if she likes landscape photography, or for that matter - anything studio related such as fashion, food, product, commercial, events, etc. The D300s is a killer camera for fast action, sports, nature, wildlife, etc. I have both, and use them for either situation.

You might consider going for primes at this point, rather than going overboard on a zoom... although the 24-70 is an amazing zoom lens, I recently upgraded from a 28-70 to the 24-70, and I am happy with mine. The kit that Vistek is selling is not far off the mark in pricing. And aside from the tripod and CF card brand that I've never heard of, most of the gear is quality. The grip is awesome for either the D300s or D700, and you should definately factor in getting one.

Anyhow, good luck on your choices!

That's so 2008

I have to agree... I spend too many years shooting with sub standard lenses. I am very pleased with the gear I have now.

I know two photographers on this forum who are starting at Humber in the fall and one is using a D300s and one has a D700 - both have the 24-70/2.8 from Nikon.

Perhaps they can chime in and comment on this. I would rather not disclose who they are - it would be up to them to do so.

I commented on the other thread ... Im pretty sure you need to use a d300s first year ..second year they don't care. I would get a 300s and buy some used FF lenses and a flash or so

I will be in the program in september with your daughter and Tyler. I PM'd this to Tyler when I found it. It is a bit out of date but it is the only thing they provide you with still.
http://programs.mediastudies.humber.ca/photography/equipment

I currently am using a D700 which i upgraded to recently from my old D80. If she is comfortable shooting FULL manual on both of her current cameras then she will have no problem with either the D300/D300s or D700. It is a decision more geared towards what she anticipates she will focus on after her school. Specific subject matter requires full frame or crop to enhance usability, as David already pointed out about how the D700 and D300s are used best.

As for lenses and flash, I use some of the big Nikon Zooms and some primes: 14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/.28, 80-200mm f/2.8, 24mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.4 and my trusty Metz 54 MZ-3 Flash. If she is looking at any of these they are all killer items. Primes are awesome too though so other primes are always recommended such as a 35mm f/2.0, 24mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8. As for the flash i would recommend Metz 54 series (more power) or 58 series (full digital) or the Nikon SB-900 (built in PC sync for remote triggering and full digital). I am picking up a SB-900 to accompany my Metz.

I guess they are going the safe road for their tutors, one camera for all There is nothing you couldn't do with a cheaper camera, I believe and practice it.

Are you kidding me?
All of this gear for school??? I couldn't afford all of that when I was in school.

Never mind the gear they require you to buy - the tuition fee is 4 or more times what I paid per year when I attended post secondary education.

Not that uncommon really. Meagan was accepted to Humber, Sheridan, Georgian and Fanshaw. They all had pretty tough minimum requirements. Some were mere recomendations so that you could borrow lenses from the school instead of renting. But in all cases you were looking at D300 or 50D plus a long list of accessories.

Sheridan did not require a laptop but also insisted that all post production be done in their LABS on their colour corrected $3000.00 monitors. Talking to a few students that requirement seem to have them in the labs allot of late nights and weekends. Not something we were happy with for our country hick daughter doing when first out on her own.

Times have changed a lot since then. I'm glad I only paid probably $40K for a piece of paper that's not even hung on the wall LOL.

My oldest son goes to University out of town in a BioChem program and between books, tuition, housing, expenses, etc - it runs almost 20K per year. For a four year degree, it adds up.

Not to derail the conversation, one advice is to look at a trade instead of going to college/university, I still have second thought on what I got into.

Plus they no longer have to walk in 4 feet of snow up hill both ways.

Yeah, instead of University I should have been an electrician or carpenter.

Agreed, electricians and plumbers make more than a lot of people. I worked in a HVAC company and my old boss finished some college in HVAC, apprenticed a few years and opened his own business.

25years later, he drives a mercedes to make house calls.

My degree isn't even framed. In fact it is crumpled away somewhere!

But I would love to be in Sheridan on their photography degree!

Bingo. You cannot outsource plumbing work to india. There will always be a need for somebody to fix a roof, leak, wire up a house, etc. Tough work but good money when the economy is ok.

+1

Back onto the topic, is D2x really worst than a D300? Beside different AF, better high ISO and builtin flash+ commander, I can't really think how a D2x can be inferior to D300.

I left a job as a plumber's apprentice to go to university. I don't regret it for a second even though I'm currently unemployed.

I did two universities and happy I did.

I think they just want a standardized control and layout!
The 300/s and 700 is very similar in layout and menu!

Why stop with Nikon? If she wants to impress her teachers she should get the Red stuff!!

I have to agree. The better ISO performance is only reason I see the d300 out performing the D2x in the classroom environment. I still know some working pros using them daily and producing great things.

But Like Elisha stated, it is easier for instructors if they do not have to try and figure out 30 different cameras in a class and what some can or can not do.

Hey, didn't I see you on last comic standing?