35mm Camera Recommendations

[flywithastick]

wondering if I could get some qualified (meaning you've used or owned the equipment) recommendations on some mid-range 35mm SLR camera equipment - bodies and lenses - for aerial pics.

This is a for a little side business idea I've come up with, not an all out pro venture. How about camera rental? Anyone do this/had any luck?

 

[DenverDude2002]

I use a Cannon Rebel 2000 EOS with a 28-80mm and 100-300mm Sigma lenses. Its pretty friendly to beginners and has auto focus and auto aperature adjustment. I took it to AirVenture last year and shot up 14 roll of pictures with not one blury one. I got mine on ebay as a kit for around 400, in the store it was going to cost around 550. If you check eopinions.com its gotten really good reviews as well. If you want to see some of the pictures I've taken with it go to http://photos.yahoo.com/coollandrover200 and click on the airventure folder.

 

[DenverDude2002]

I use a Cannon Rebel 2000 EOS with a 28-80mm and 100-300mm Sigma lenses. Its pretty friendly to beginners and has auto focus and auto aperature adjustment. I took it to AirVenture last year and shot up 14 roll of pictures with not one blury one. I got mine on ebay as a kit for around 400, in the store it was going to cost around 550. If you check eopinions.com its gotten really good reviews as well. If you want to see some of the pictures I've taken with it go to http://photos.yahoo.com/coollandrover200 and click on the airventure folder.

 

[OOramperpilot]

Coors or Budwieser?

This should be a fun topic. Most people into photography tend to be pretty zealous about a particular brand or body.

That being said, I'm a Nikon shooter and use a N80 as a back up to my F100. It's a great mid-range camera (around $350), has a lot of features, easy to use and relatively compact. As for a lens, Nikon glass rocks but for something a little lower priced but decent quality, check out the Tamron lenses. STAY AWAY FROM QUATARNARY!!!

As for the rentals, most high end specialty camera shops (read: not Ritz or Wolfe) will do rentals. It will generally run you $30-$50 per day for a body and lens combo but you will more than likely have to put down a cash or credit card deposit equal to the value of the equipment. Grab your phone book and call around and ask.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Why 35mm? Why not Digital?

Part of my side business is photographing airplanes and parts. Using even a mid level Fuji 602 Zoom gives better results on average than does my Cannon EOS Elan 7E. The difference is the processing. Few of us have darkrooms and getting professionals (not at the local Drug store ) to handle your film is expensive. For a few hundred dollars you can have a nice system for printing your own pictures and making enlargements.

Besides, it costs so much to do aerial photography, you need a back up. Can you imagine a photo shoot that cost thousands to arrange being spoiled by bad film, or an accidently formatted memory card?

With the recent crop of $1,500 5MP cameras, including an excellent EOS model from Cannon, why shoot film? Film is an out of date anachronism. You can use your Cannon EOS lense system (Nikon whatever) with the new Digital cameras that are based on 35mm bodies.

Also for aviation work I have Cannon's 100-300 IS USM lense. The image stabilization helps in light turbulence for air to air work, although shutter speeds are usually high enough to make this less of a problem, it is a great lense for the money.

Another thing to consider is batteries. Maha chargers and Powerex batteries are the best and will save you money and headaches as you use your system.

I will try to find you some links - but in the mean time search Thomas Camera Resource pages and use their links to price equipment over the internet, you will save around 30% off the prices at the big camera stores.

 

[bigD]

I'll second ~~~~^~~~~'s opinion on digital. Now that digital SLR's are down to a more reasonable price, you might want to give them a look. I use a Canon EOS-10D with a 100-300mm lens, and it's awesome.

I'm not a pro by any means though - I'm just a guy with a camera.

 

[flywithastick]

I appreciate all the replies very much. Why not digital? Two reasons. I already bought a Sony consumer (?) grade 4.1 megapixel a year or so ago. Would probably work fine for what I'm doing if I had a stabilized lens that would get me a little closer. Second, IF I can talk my manager (wife) into letting me get this thing, trying to sell a second digital camera would be tough. Rational? Maybe not, but my reality.

Seems to me, for the money, film is still the best route for this work. But try and convince me otherwise if you want. I'd much rather do digital.

BigD, ~~~^~~~ - seems like a very nice set-up! Just looked at the EOS and the Canon lens at CameraWorld. Just too pricey for me. I already have lots of toys/expenses!

Thanks and please keep the info coming.

 

[dmspilot00]

I'm not an expert, I don't even have an SLR, but have done a lot of research on the topic.

The important thing is the lense, not the body. If you're willing to learn you can pick up a used automatic-nothing body for around $100, put a good lense on it, and once you learn all the functions you'll have pictures just as good as any. A lot of people think that the more expensive the camera, the better the pictures, but this is not true one bit.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Canon Elan7e is my choice now. works great, easy to take good pics.

the body is cheap (400 maybe) but lenses can be another story. To get really great action pics I can recommend the Canon 70-300 lense with image stabilization.(pricy option)...lenses can go from 200$-4000$ pretty quick!

Im no pro but the canon has always done well. I also hear Nikons are very good, if not better....

I myself wont go back to digital....I have thousands of digital pics on computers ...so what good are they....prints are just easier, slides even better...

Have Fun!

 

[~~~^~~~]

DMS - You have a point, but I respectfully disagree. Air to air work is a lot like sports photography. Selecting the focusing system and light metering system properly matters a lot. For example, camera bodies that use an infared system do not seem to work as well as those using a contrast type system. Also, Nikon equipment might be a little less cutting edge and cost a bit more, but the clunky nature of the beast pays huge dividends in long term reliability.

Again, when doing aerial photography, quality matters. There are shots that can not be repeated. I will have to scan and post my photo of Bob Hoover single engine in the Shrike Commander framed on top of the entrance sign for Oshkosh 2000. That photo was pure dumb luck, but without the Cannon and the 300mm USM lense there is no way I could have got lucky!

 

[Dash8]

I've used a Canon Rebel Ti, excellent excellent camera, super light, has a metal lens mount (as opposed to plastic on many cameras) and has a HUGE lcd on the back for all the settings rather than on top, so you don't have to keep tilting the camera back to see your shooting modes and settings easily.
Definately would want to go with a fast lens though, f2.8 would prolly be ideal.
This is a very good website with lots of info for lenses, flashes, and bodies. This is the specific link to the Rebel Ti review.

Canon Rebel Ti Reviews

All the photog mags gave it fairly high marks as well. Granted it may not be quite as capable as some of the much pricier elan series, but it's pretty close and more affordable.
Good luck with the shoots.

 

[freeflyer14]

I've had a Canon EOS rebel 2000 for a while now and like it a lot. I am a skydiving video/photographer and use it for work and play. I will say that one of the reasons most of us video guys use the canon rebel line is their durability. They go through hell (200mph wind speeds, moisture, heat, cold) and stand up to it all. I have been using a sigma 28-80mm lense and it is working out great. This was my first SLR camera purchase, and I find it very user friendly for a newbie. It also has more features and settings that I think I will ever use. I looked into the Ti, but the only real advantage it has over the 2000 is the fps is slightly faster. Other than that they are basically the same camera.

 

[Timebuilder]

My dad bought a Nikkormat in 1968, and I have used it a lot. A beautiful, if not common, camera.

I use two lenses: a 43-86 zoom, and a 45 mm shortie.

I'm really interested in the new trend of digital bodies that can use existing lenses. That should be a lot of fun, and no color development hassels.

 

[Smoking Man]

I must agree with freeflyer14, the rebel 2000 is very user friendly for a beginner. Just my opinion.

 

[flywithastick]

Looks like I'll try and go with a Canon Rebel TI with a Sigma lens combo (28-80 & 70-300).

My thinking is that I might be able to afford one of the Canon digital SLR's one of these days and be able to use the Sigma lenses. Yes?

Thanks for all the info.

 

[Smoking Man]

From what I understand the lens will work on both the digital and the film camera.. Although I have not actually done it or personally know anyone who has.

Good luck!

 

[Dash8]

Looks like I'll try and go with a Canon Rebel TI with a Sigma lens combo (28-80 & 70-300).

My thinking is that I might be able to afford one of the Canon digital SLR's one of these days and be able to use the Sigma lenses. Yes?

Thanks for all the info.

I'm sure you'll be really happy with your choice, the other guys were right about the rebel2000, but the TI is just an upgraded version, your gonna love that nice big lcd screen on the back when your shootin through a bellyhole

 

[flywithastick]

I've received the Canon Rebel TI and lenses from CameraWorld (been a customer of theirs for 10 yrs or so - very good operation) and so far am impressed with the precision, weight and ease of operation. Shot three rolls this weekend of family and some aerial, just to get a quick idea of it's capabilities. shot some Kodak 400 I found at the house and used the local 1 hr quick develop to process. Generally, I'm happy (I think!) with the quality of the pics. Exposure and focus was excellent on most, particularly since I was shooting most out the side of a plane.

Now I think I'd like to step up a notch if possible. what would some of you folks recommend as top notch film (for enlargements) and a lab? Found a few local labs - Acadian, Thomas, Houston Photo Imaging. Are these places worth the additional expense for 35mm?

How about these digitizing services? Puts 24 exposures on a disc for $6.99. what kind of res are they? The person operating the equipment had no idea.

Thanks again, in advance.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

save yourself a bundle of cash....shoot slides.
If you get good enough to sell some or use as stock phots, nobody wants prints anyways. You can always go from slide to print, not the other way...

good slide film, Agfachrome, fujichrome velvia.
can buy in bulk for 2.50/roll
buy prepaid mailers to send to labs 3.99/36 exposures.
then convert your best ones into prints of your choice...

If you do shoot prints, I suggest snapfish.com.
4.99/36 exposures including shipping and prepaid envelope.
good deal. they also post them online, you can pick from there for multiples..etc..

hope any of that helps!