What kit do you have/use?
I reckon there's people here who'll be able to write a considerably more lengthy list than I can, but currently I've got a D5100 (which I've had for a good few years now), with a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 and a 50mm prime f/2. I've never needed more as the place I'm doing my photography course is able to provide some better kit than I'd be able to justify investing in.
Now make me jealous.
EDIT: I also have a velbon DV-7000, forgot to mention.
I borrow a Nikon D800 with two lenses, friend just got a third, and I sometimes use an old 50mm off my Nikkormat.
To be honest, you really don't need that much kit to take great photos. There is this misconception that having expensive equipment makes you a good photographer. It simply isn't true. While good equipment can certainly help, skill and having an eye for it is much more important. I've seen amazing photos taken with cell phone cameras and shit ones taken with $1500 DSLRs. So don't feel bad if you don't have the most or best stuff.
I use
Canon EOS Rebel T3i- What most would consider an entry level "cheap" DSLR. Really though, I don't need anything more. It does everything I need and nothing I don't. Plus, for the price, it is quite a good deal.
Canon EF 50mm f/ 1.8 Prime- Great lens for $100.
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/ 3.5-5.6 Kit lens. Gets the job done.
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/ 4-5.6 Zoom Lens- Good telephoto well priced too. Promaster ET-60 Lens Hood
Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Few random filters.
SanDisk Extreme 32GB SD Cards
BlackRapid Camera Sling- Love this thing.
Amazon Basics DSLR Backpack- For $20ish you can't go wrong.
I also have a Minolta MAXXUM 7000 SLR with the venerable 70-210mm f/4 "beer can" lens. Quite a nice film camera. Although, I don't shoot on film as much as I'd like to.
Nikon D5100
PLR Optics High Resolution 3-piece Filter Set (UV, Fluorescent, Polarizer)
AGFA 52mm Digital Multi Coated Ultra Violet (UV) Filter (Protector) APUVF52
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens
2 X REPLACEMENT Battery EN-EL14 / ENEL14 for Nikon
AmazonBasics Wireless Remote Control for Nikon
Neewer Multi-Power Vertical Battery Grip Hand Pack for Nikon DSLR D5100 EN-EL14
HB-33 Lens Hood (Bayonet) for Nikon 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 G-afs Lens 
Nikon HB-46 Bayonet Lens Hood for Nikon 35mm f/1.8G Lenses
52mm Hard Tulip Lens Hood for Nikon D5100
Fotodiox Nikon Macro Extension Tube Set Kit for Extreme Close-up, Fits Nikon
PLR 0.42x HD Super Wide Angle Panoramic Macro Fisheye Lens For The Nikon
Sony VCT-R100 Lightweight Compact Tripod
AmazonBasics Backpack for SLR Cameras and Accessories (Black)
I use these three:
Digital Cameras
Canon 5D Mk II
Canon 40D
Lenses
Canon EF 50mm 1.2f
Sigma 24-70mm 2.8f
Film Camera
Canon AE1 35mm Film, w/50mm 1.4
Mamiya 645 120 Film, w/90mm 1.9f & 55-105mm 4.5f
Here's Three of the four.
Here is a stock photo of the Mk II
I've got a Nikon Coolpix L105 fixed lens with make shift tripod and iphone 5 Sony sensor, lol. I use TIFF and do a lot of processing to compensate. What would be some good equipment to start off with?
I have an old Pentax ME super film camera. Then I went and bought a Fujifilm FinePix S1 last fall, which I out grew in a few months. My newest is my Nikon D7100 with the 18-140mm kit lens, a 50mm 1.8f D, and a 70-300mm tele-zoom. Spare battery and a couple Hoya uv filters, a circular polarizer, and a ND filter.
The D7100 is a beauty, I take it with me everywhere. I am lucky as my job is driving around the west coast fixing beverage equipment so lots of opportunity for photography.
Oh and just picked up a Manfrotto tripod.
Bodies
Camera Lenses
Other Lenses
Light Bucket
Various supporting equipment inc. mount, diagonal, laptop, filters, cables, software, and non-capture equipment.
A 2008 Samsung Eternity, Still putting money in a pill bottle for a Nikon D3100. Then when I got enough and they are on something like a D3600 I'll get that or wait a little longer and get a D50 something hundred or what ever is out by then. I would however not mind getting a $100 one for now if you got any recomendation for that price range as I really need to be getting out and about more and I would go take pictures. Just something that dosn't have a bunch of pain in the ass features that get in the way of practicing.
Warning: TL;DR for most...
I usually shoot film, mostly using my favorite camera of all time, the Nikon FM3a, with 35mm and 50mm lenses. I also have an 85 and a 105, but I don't use them that much on this camera these days, but back in film days, I used them constantly. I also have an F3 with a lot of accessories, but it doesn't get much use any more these days. I also have a black M6TTL, but I don't use it much, because it takes too much maintenance, otherwise I would use it all the time. I used to have two R bodies also until a few weeks ago, but they were pretty unpractical and definitely overrated, and the lenses for it were kinda meh. I also have A Mamiya 6x7 and a Contax 645, but I don't use them very often any more, because I don't have a daylight developing tank for them, and I don't have time to develop the film, whereas for 35mm, I have a daylight developing tank, and I can use it while doing other stuff. The FM3a is a 21st century film camera, it's the highest point to which film SLR technology and manufacturing has ever evolved, with full titanium gearing and shutter curtain, a hybrid mechanical/electronic shutter mechanism, and a fully logical exposure control system (instead of the logically incomplete PASM-system that makes no sense in film-fixed-ISO-terms, and even less in digital-variable-ISO-terms), full TTL and TTL-flash functionality with automatic flash exposure compensation, DOF preview with self-locking aperture ring, full functionality without batteries, etc... all in a lightweight indestructible silurmin housing that is known for stopping bullets in the F-series. Never was there a more advanced film camera made, and it will take a long time before Nikon evolves with it's digital cameras to the same point of perfection...
I always carry small cameras with me everywhere, mostly Nikon Coolpix superzooms (S-series) with backlit CMOS sensors or Sony superthin cybershots with CCD sensors, nothing spectacular, but it does the trick for most snapshotting. I really like the small superzooms because they have great range and are so small that nobody notices them, they are smaller than a smartphone. My favorites are the Nikon s8k and s9k series Coolpix, but I've had to open up and fix almost all of them almost immediately after purchase, because the quality control is very meh on these cheap Chinese products.
I also always carry either a Nikon D3100 (Aptina CMOS sensor, not Sony, all the difference!) with the 35mm DX standard, which is a great combo, but lately I've been switching to manual focus lenses, because I like that much more, and I really like the controls and image quality of the Fuji X-system, so I tend to leave the D3100 at home and take an X-E1 or X-E2 with a manual lens, either a Nikon Ai lens, which give me a kind of FM3a experience and image result on a Fuji, or the absolutely wonderful Zongyi Speedmaster 35mm T0.95 with X-mount, which I sent to the local Leica specialist for full lens tuning, and that made all the difference. I also like to use an X-E with a 50mm summicron, it's the experience and image quality the digital M's should have, but don't have, but you can get it by using a Fuji X-E or X-Pro, and it feels very much like film at that point. One thing that sets the Fuji's apart, apart from the image quality, is the manufacturing quality. Even though the price is in the same range as Chinese made products from other manufacturers, these are Japanese made products and that shows, that really shows a lot.
For commercial photography, I have a Nikon D810, but I kinda hate it. It's just another Sony-CMOS-sensor-RAW-only-camera-that-requires-too-much-time-in-post. Unfortunately I have invested a lot in Nikkors and CLS compatible lighting stuff. I loved the D700, it was such a nice camera, but unfortunately the requirements for resolution have gone up. Whereas the old Nikkor Ai lenses can still be used with the Fuji X cameras, the AF lenses, especially the G series, are way too big and unpractical for use on a small camera. The performance in terms of AF is great, but the Sony sensors have ruined the general image quality and the software problems and the fact that these are RAW-only cameras that require a lot of development of all files afterwards, just make it annoying. I can also confirm that 36 Megapixels is hard to shoot, because of the mirror and any other kind of camera movement during exposure. The clients require 30+ Megapixel files, but it's very hard not to make them look like 21 Megapixel files from a 5 year old Canon. Well, it's not hard, it's just limiting how the camera can be used. But at least the files are clean coming from the Nikon, and that's something that can't be said from the A7R, which is really noisy, to the point of necessitating even more post-processing, for that crazy cartoon-look that suits the lack of colour depth coming from the Sony sensors I presume lolz... As to Nikon pro cameras, I would not get into the system any more right now. Back in 2005 or so, Nikon hollowed out their entire support infrastructure, and NPS became a joke. Canon works much better for professionals than Nikon these days, but it's far from perfect in comparison to the kind of support that Nikon and Canon offered in the 90's and early 2000's. Sony does a lot of marketing, and gives huge rebates to professionals, but it's not the same quality level photo gear, it's just not what the price tag would make you expect from the gear and the service and expertise of the manufacturer... medium format is a solution for studio photographers, but Hassie has gone haywire on its pricing, and Pentax is Ricoh and thus a bit of a gamble, so Phase One is the only viable option, and for people photographers in a studio environment, it's a really good option, maybe the best option. It's just not for me though, I'm not a fulltime photographer, and I don't want to preoccupy myself with the Danish gear gods to be honest, I want to keep things simple, and actually like Fujifilm Germany and Japan a lot in terms of support and response, so I'm really tempted to go with a Fuji in the studio also, as a replacement for the D810, so basically using the D810 as backup and the X-T as main instead of the other way around. It would however require taking over the pre-press activities, because that's just how the market is these days, if we do the pre-press and upscaling ourselves, nobody will ever notice that the materials weren't shot on a 36 Megapixel sensor, but rather on a 16 megapixel one. That may not be the worst evolution, and maybe it's a necessary step. In my opinion, there are more shots that can't be taken with the D810 that can be taken with a Fuji than there are shots that can be taken with a D810 that can't with a Fuji.
Lately, I've been shooting black and white a lot, even on digital, and I've been using the Fujis with manual lenses and very old (1960's) flashguns without modifiers, and I'm really liking that style for the moment. I use lighting a lot, from strobes to speedlights to vintage flashguns to LED lighting or even HMI spots. I find lighting equipment more important than camera equipment to be honest, I could shoot with a compact camera with my studio strobes, and I'm pretty sure it would pass for even certain commercial purposes, but take away the lighting equipment, and it will become much harder to produce a billable result. I usually only carry a camera with a standard prime, but at least 3 flashes, a reflector and a diffusor or something. When I started carrying the Fuji X-E's for people work, all my Nikon CLS stuff could only be used as manual flashes with the Fujis, so I started looking for old compact quirky manual flashes, and bought a bunch of China flashes to use as slaves. I like the old flashes from the 60's and 70's very much for the specularity of the light they produce, very lively, especially for black and white. There is a quality to the hard light from old flashes that modern flashes don't seem to have, I like hard light from strobes and flashes because they give better subject sharpness where it matters, but the hard light should have an aesthetic character to it, and those old flashes seem to have that. I also moved away from using short tele lenses for portraits because of using the X-E's. They feel like rangefinders, and that brings along two things: 1. more consciousness of the environment, which supports the "story" element of the pictures, which leads to completely different framing, and 2. an expectance of depth and shallower DOF in the pictures, like one would expect shooting a 50mm summicron on an M. That has completely changed back the way I make portraits. I used to use 85 and 105 mm a lot, I was never into long tele portraiture because I found it to two-dimensional and distancing, but now I even find 75mm lacking tangible depth, and I prefer 50mm, which means 35mm in DX format. The tightest I do is 50mm on DX, which is 75mm in FX, and that's really the limit of what I like nowadays. On FX I use a 58mm for portraits these days, and only occasionally a 85mm.
I don't do RAW processing in post any more except when it's specifically shot for post-processing, but the demand for that in people photography is not as high any more as a few years ago. I offload all SD and CF cards immediately in several storage locations with Rapid Photo Downloader, and with Darktable, there is direct access to the storage structure that Rapid Photo Downloader creates, without any big database bloat or things like that, so Darktable is what I mostly use these days to tune the files (mostly jpegs) that come out of my cameras. With the masking tools that work on every separate tool/module, just like in Snapseed, it's very efficient at tuning and patching. I might also just use Snapseed on a tablet. If it takes RAW development and post-processing, I'll use Digikam in linux and Capture One on other platforms (mostly OSX). I still have Lightroom installed on OSX and Windows, but it's pretty useless, because for just viewing and presenting it's nerve-wreckingly slow, it doesn't work well with enterprise grade storage arrangements, and for editing it's a complete joke, with RAW processing that is just awful, even in comparison with in-camera RAW processing on cheaper cameras, and Adobe products don't offer manual control over the RAW development, you can't select the algorhythm, you can't select the demosaicing process, etc... it's hugely substandard and not usable since pretty much Lightroom 3. Also the cloning and healing tools are ridiculously old for modern standards, the cloning and healing AI hasn't evolved at all, the masking is not dynamic with other operations, the batch functionality is ridiculous, etc... it was a huge step up in productivity from Photoshop back in the day, but now it's become old and dysfunctional. Luckily, in-camera development is now really great on several newer camera systems, and performance profiling has really broken through, allowing for much more specialized and precise development. So RAW processing is only necessary on DSLR systems and Sony sensor systems, and for specific post-production needs like composition and 3D graphics. For jpeg-post-production, my favorite tool these days is just Snapseed, it's by far the most efficient and the quality of the interface and the functionality is unmatched by anything for the moment, because all of the layers and masks and operations, are interconnected and work together, it makes everything so much more efficient and logical. It's also by far the fastest photo editing application, even though it runs on typically the weakest hardware.
I don't do video, I leave that to others. I have no interest whatsoever in video. I only do some wildlife occasionally, mostly birds, and all kinds of wildlife in Africa, my favorite destination for travel. I've never used anything above 400mm though, I like to take time to get close. I hardly do any landscape photography, except occasionally while travelling, but I won't make elaborate landscape shots because I'm not into that. More than 80% of my exposures are people, most of those are lifestyle and portrait, about half being commercial for a specific thing. I usually only do commercial stuff on request, but that has grown pretty much out of proportion in the last decade, so it has become a time consuming activity, but one that I like very much, because it's always an opportunity to meet people and have fun, and I find taking photos a welcome distraction.
To people that are just starting to build up still photography gear, I would recommend going with old manual prime lenses, a cheap adapter, and a mirrorless camera system with a good electronic viewfinder. I personally like the Olympus OM-D's and especially the Fuji X-series with X-Trans sensor (X-Pro, X-E and X-T), because these camera systems produce very good jpeg's right from the camera, and have the EVF to make RAW shooting completely superfluous (because you see what you're going to get before taking the photo, and you can bracket and have a lot of exposure and toning functionality right in the camera). Compared to Sony alpha series cameras (which are RAW cameras, they require post-production to correct the images), they also have good colour reproduction, and a sensible control interface, and they are much better built and finished (and not as plasticky, even the A7R is pure plastic fantastic, not made to last at all). In most situations, you'll get sharper images from the Olympus and Fuji 16 megapixel sensors than from the Sony's 21/24/36 megapixels sensors, because of two reasons: 1. camera shake, 16 megapixels is about the highest pixel density on an M43 or DX size sensor that can be shot handheld without seeing image degradation from mechanical camera functions even, and 2. really good in-camera development, which prevents degradation of the image quality by post-processing. Those that like video, should look at Panasonic cameras instead, and those that do wildlife or sports should go with a DSLR, because of the better tele-lenses and the much better AF. For sports that are medium tele range, an FX DSLR will deliver much cleaner files, but for high tele range sports and wildlife, a DX DSLR is the better choice because of smaller files and sharper (center-image on FX lenses) quality and tele range. For those that are really tight on cash, a DSLR is also the most budget-friendly solution that offers all the features. A Nikon D3k series DSRL has all of the functions anyone ever needs, and can be had with the pretty decent image stabilized kit lens for less than 300 USD these days for the D3100, which doesn't have a Sony sensor yet. That is a price point that is historically low for the amount of functionality and image quality, and the D3k series is pretty small and light also, almost as small as a mirrorless camera, and has pretty good battery life, something mirrorless cameras lack. Those are also new cameras, not second hand, not new old stock, the D3100, despite the fact that it's now 4-5 years old, is still in production.
I have recently gotten a D5500, which is a pretty OK camera for those that need video functions and need touch screens. I don't really like it. The pixel density makes me miss the sharpness of the D3100 using the non-stabilized 35mm1.8DX, and an FX lens makes very little sense on the tiny D3/5k bodies, because only half of an adult male hand actually can grip the camera fully, making a small lens useful, and a heavy lens not. The only DX lens that can offer really good perceived resolution, is the 35mm1.8DX in the Nikon Range, and that has no image stabilization. Another nice lens on Nikon DX is the 60mm FX Macro, which is very sharp, although it's only f2.8, which is on the low end for crop sensors, especially on FX lenses, because where DX lenses are made to perform great even at maximum aperture, FX lenses often are not, but the 60mm macro is very sharp by design, and offers a good 90mm on DX. It's also a pretty small and light lens without VR. The DX lenses that do have VR, have a reduced optical performance that only renders between 6 and 9 effective megapixels, which makes a sensor with a resolution above that pretty pointless. FX lenses with higher optical performance make no sense for DX cameras at all, because if they are really sharp on DX cameras, then they are also really expensive and really big and heavy, and at that point, an FX camera makes sense, because of the larger grip, the better weight balance, the sturdier bayonet, and the even better optical performance. The "pro" DX cameras like the D300S and the D7k series make little sense to me. Actually, the D300S is very useful for wildlife, but the D7k series is probably not tough enough for that. The price point is also disturbing, being almost as expensive as the D610, as expensive as the A7I (which is a plastic fantastic kinda deal, but it is a full frame camera), and more expensive than a used D600/D610/D700, which are much superior FX cameras. At 1000 USD, you shouldn't have to put up with the noise level of a Sony DX sensor any more... both the FX sensor and a Fuji DX sensor will have much superior noise performance. The sensor in the D7k is basically a sensor for sub 500 USD plastic consumer cameras like the A6000 and A5100. There is also a huge benefit to the D3100 in terms of controls, with the live view lever instead of the button on later models and other control positioning, the D3100 is easier to use single handedly than later D3/5k series DSLRs, and that's a huge benefit in my opinion. There is a simplicity in controls to the D3100 that makes me hold on to it, even after all of those years. It's what I used to like about the D700 also, and it's definitely what I love about the FM3a and the Fuji X-E's and X-T.
Another argument against overspending on a camera, is the necessity to buy accessories. Even when you're not doing video, you'll need some accessories. For instance: at least one flash or strobe. Modifiers are not really necessary, creative use of bouncing and generic materials comes a long way, and is a lot of fun, but without the flash, it becomes very hard to get to a certain quality level, especially in certain lighting conditions. In order to have sharp images with a dimensional "feeling" to them, you need to control the lighting, and positioning subject and camera only offers so many options. Flashes have become really cheap these days, you can get 4 pretty solid China flashes with decent power (about GN38 at ISO 100 wide angle dispersion) for about 120 EUR shipped and taxed. Those even have a metal shoe and come with a small stand with 1/4 thread, and have a power connector. That's actually a sweet deal, because speedlights are actually technically pretty useful, as they have a short fire time in comparison to generic studio strobes. That has a number of benefits, from hypersync flexibility to motion freezing. The problem speedlights have, is that they don't put out a lot of light, they are very weak. But 4 GN38 speedlights will outperform a 120 EUR studio strobe without problem! A decent studio strobe costs at least 400 EUR per piece. If you would hang the four strobes on an external power supply, and tone down the power output for each one individually to bring decent performance together, the recycle time will be very short, the fire time will be very short, and you'll have the performance you need with a very good source dispersion. I've actually ordered an entire box of China flashes when I was there, and that came at about 18 EUR per flash, and they all work perfectly fine, offer full spectrum daylight balanced light, are consistent, and work just fine as optical slaves, even with hypersyncing. Not as user friendly as the Bron, but there is a huge difference in price, and they are creatively very useful. Money spent on accessories means less money spent on camera at the same time. I personally think that it's way more important to go for a complete kit with camera, high quality prime and lighting, than to go with a more expensive camera with more megapixels. The lighting makes a lot of difference in image quality, the extra megapixels don't, and can even lower the quality of a lot of shots because of the high pixel density and therefore higher sensitivity to camera shake and vibrations. The image quality is capped by the lenses also, it is not very useful to pay for a 24 megapixel sensor if the lens you use only resolves 7 P-Megapixels. However, if you spend more on the camera body and less on a good lens and a flash for instance, you'll be handicapped severally, because you won't have a lens that's as fast, you won't be able to shoot in many situations, you won't be able to take a lot of shots, because the lens will be limited in performance, and you won't have lighting. So you'll miss shots that you would have gotten with the cheaper camera and the better lens and the set of China flashes.
Hey, I've got the same tripod (well, I have the PROB version) and ball head : )
I don't have anything special. I haven't been heavy into photography in a number of years, so I've still got an old Canon 30d, 18-55mm, 70-300mm, 50mm prime, various filters, cards, batteries, couple light stands, umbrellas, backdrops and a couple bags. Oh, and the aforementioned Manfrotto 190XPROB, ball head, and a number of el cheapo tripods I've collected over the years. I also have an old Olympus C-8080 that I kept around as a backup camera.
What's funny, is right around the time I moved away from photography, I completely switched systems from Nikon to Canon. On the plus side, I sold all my Nikon gear for more than I spent on my Canon gear. The reason being was my Nikkor glass was much nicer than my canon glass. The original plan was to upgrade, but I moved away from photography before I did (thankfully, since it saved me a ton of money).
At this point, my gear just sits in a trunk, and only gets pulled out once every couple months when I need to take a better picture than my phone is capable of.
600D
Arsat H 50mm f2 TACK freaking sharp at F4!!! and awesome bokeh, plus interesting light effects since it does not have an anti glare coating.
and a kit for not 18-135.
Velbon c 600.
In the near future want to get 70d with 18-135))
Just got given this thing to play with for a couple months, (see image for details, it's a triangular one):
Mmmm, F/2. Nice dusty mouse mat, too.
just received my generic 8 point star filter. city night shots will never be the same.
I have the following:
Canon 5DmkIII
Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 OS
Sigma 35mm F/1.4
Canon 85mm F/1.8
Canon 24-105mm L
Samyang 14mm F/2.8
The kit works pretty well and I have really enjoyed the 5D mk3. For me it was a nice upgrade to the mk2.
I mostly shoot landscapes but have shot a few weddings and events.
Not what i thought it was xD
ya, not my pic, but the one i have is the same
http://img.fasttechcdn.com/126/1267304/1267304-6.jpg
No, they still do.
A couple new items for the collection.
My list:
Nikon D5300 DSLR
Girlfriends Nikon 35mm f1.8 Lens
Girlfriends Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 Lens
Shenggu SG-108 Shotgun Mic (Only use for reference audio)
Zoom H1 Audio Recorder
Davis & Sanford Provista 7518B Tripod
CowboyStudio Triple Lighting Kit
Hoping at some point to finally pick up my own lens lol. Looking at the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8
Also hoping to grab a Cinevate Duzi slider
