MicrostockGroup

I'm new to this business but not new to being meticulous and very technical with an eye for the perfection I have seen in microstock pics. Have been in the technical world since the 80s so can learn anything and always study all the details. Now I want to pic out the right camera. Important is since I'm in need of reading glasses the easier to get around the menu/buttons/screen view etc the better. I was looking at the 3" view finder that flips to see from the front as well. For starters I'm just taking pics of objects, food, and anything close up that would be a good seller and creative.

All I'm looking for in this thread is more technical reasons why you as a professional photographer choose what DSLR camera you prefer. I read many specs on Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and others but am aiming more between the Canon or Nikon and adding in an upto 250mm or 300mm lens with my purchase.

It is hard to get a hold of them in the store to feel them out since so few are on display this time of year, so all I get a chance to do is look at this screen and read about them.

So in the DSLR Canon and Nikon models what technical reasons do you prefer the one you have or why do you not like a certain one you know of real well? bulky, light, easy to handle, menu ease of use, lens glass grade, longer lasting, more lens interchangebility, etc. Your information will help me out quite a bit and I'm sure help anyone else who is in the same boat as I am. I'm telling you it really is hard to check out cameras in the store with a saleperson all over you and with so few on display, so you are doing a great service by sharing such information here.

Also would like a view finder that actually shows me what my pic looks like before I snap it. I mean an Olympus I took back to the store flickered a quick focus on the screen when you half push down the snap button and I hated that. Don't tease me show me what you see camera. lol. I was guessing how it looked and really did not know until I uploaded it on the PC costing valuable time. I want to see how the focus, white balance, and other settings look as I change them. Isn't that what the view finder is good for? Yes adding a flash adds more to it, but would like to do better than that half push on the button to see what the pic looks like.

Thank you so much,
Laura

I'm a Canon man (once you get the lenses you tend to stick to one manufacturer or another) and all of Canon's cameras are superb and perfect for stock photography, commercial work or hobbyists. I'm sure the same could be said of Nikon too. All modern DSLR's vastly outperform their film predecessors of yesteryear.

I'd recommend Canon because there is a greater range of bodies and lenses and also a much bigger aftermarket for both on Ebay and the like.

DSLR bodies I have tended to think of as almost 'disposable' in that they have usually been superceded by more pixels, etc within a couple of years. The mega-pixel race seems to be over for now though. Good glass on the other hand is forever if you look after it.

Stock photographers like lots of pixels because larger sizes can sell for more and provide more opportunities for cropping, down-sizing, etc. I'd suggest you aim for a minimum of 12MP but anything beyond that is luxury and will not necessarily make sufficient more money to justify the additional cost.

You can pick up hardly used equipment on Ebay for a fraction of the original price as hobbyists always want the latest gear. I'd suggest you start with a low-end model like the EOS 1100D (with kit lens) as it will be more than enough to make a start. Trust me, photography is not about the gear, it is about the photographer.

^^^ I'd agree with that if it's within your budget. The 5D MkII is a fantastic piece of kit at an extraordinarily low price.

I started with Canon when I got my first dSLR because I wanted a 100-400 IS lens. (from Pentax in my film days). Took a couple of years until I could afford the lens.
Got the 5D2 just for stock as it copes well with the low light levels I have here and with night time street shots. Bulky and heavy, though.

Horses for courses: if I'd been shooting different stuff, maybe I'd have fancied a Nikon lens therefore gone that way.

I shoot Nikon D3x it is incredible and easy to use.  Would I recommend it to someone starting out? No. Too bloody expensive.  As others have mentioned Canon 5d mkII, full frame, lots of great lenses available and not too expensive (if top shooters pick this over more expensive models then you know it has to be right).

However Nikon should be bringing out a D800 soon which should move the game on. But and it is a big BUT, I waited a year for this camera and got bored and got the d3x (which I have had for over a year).

I have used both systems for years, the D3X and the 5dMII,  both are superb cameras, none better then the other. Camera bodies are of less importance, its the optics, that does it.
The more you invest in lenses, the better and both Canon and Nikon lenses are super!  nowdays you can also put Zeiss and Leitz optics on your dslrs. You can even convert the old Hasselblad and LF-Schneider optics to your cams. The possibilities are endless.

If I were to pick a camera just for stock-photography,  it would be the Canon MII.