nikon d40 - canon xsi question?

[photosoto]

ok, these are two i'm considering. Again, these prices reflect my max budget, I'm a beginner, and I would like to have a stronger zoom lense as well. thoughts? I've also considered one lense 18-200 maybe but the options are mind boggling, so I thought the kit might be simpler.
thanks

Nikon | D40 SLR Digital Camera Kit with 18-55mm & | 9420

Canon | EOS Rebel XS (a.k.a. 1000D) SLR Digital Camera Kit | B&H

those lenses dont have stabilizers so unless you are shooting in fantastic light or cranking you iso through the roof the xs will give you better results .... extra money in the long run .... that will be well spent. hope you are happy with whatever you get!

so the two lenses in the Canon kit have image stabilization? I knew the Xsi lenses did but wasn't sure about XS kit. Actually what is image stabilization crucial? when I was snapping photos with the d40 in the store the photos were clean and no blurry. is the image stabilization like for drasic movement shakiness?

 

[musicaleCA]

Image stabilization will correct camera shake and small vibrations. If you're stating out, IS is a real, real boon because it lets you be just a little less precise and still get good pictures. (Without getting into the mechanics of it, which are actually really cool.)

I'll attest that the Canon 450D (XSi) is a wonderful camera to start with. I'd recommend getting the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens though, as it will afford you a little more flexibility and it's also better glass than the kit (though it has all the same problems as most wide-angle zoom lenses have, particularly barrel distortion at 17mm, but that can be roughly corrected in Photoshop). I'll also swear by the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS; it's a decent lens for the price. Cromatic abberation can get a bit nasty on it and it's a little soft at 250mm, but other than that, it's solid glass.

actually the 18-55IS lens is supposed to be better glass than the 17-85IS ...... my canon rep told me this

I stand duly corrected. Did he mention how it's better? Less CA or distortion?

 

[Dao]

I'll attest that the Canon 450D (XSi) is a wonderful camera to start with. I'd recommend getting the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens though, as it will afford you a little more flexibility and it's also better glass than the kit (though it has all the same problems as most wide-angle zoom lenses have, particularly barrel distortion at 17mm, but that can be roughly corrected in Photoshop). I'll also swear by the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS; it's a decent lens for the price. Cromatic abberation can get a bit nasty on it and it's a little soft at 250mm, but other than that, it's solid glass.

actually the 18-55IS lens is supposed to be better glass than the 17-85IS ...... my canon rep told me this

According to the lens review site such as Photozone, it also mentions that the 18-55mm IS lens is optically better than the 17-85mm IS lens. But the 17-85mm IS lens has a better build and better focal length range.

 

[wgp1987]

ok, these are two i'm considering. Again, these prices reflect my max budget, I'm a beginner, and I would like to have a stronger zoom lense as well. thoughts? I've also considered one lense 18-200 maybe but the options are mind boggling, so I thought the kit might be simpler.
thanks

Nikon | D40 SLR Digital Camera Kit with 18-55mm & | 9420

Canon | EOS Rebel XS (a.k.a. 1000D) SLR Digital Camera Kit | B&H

those lenses dont have stabilizers so unless you are shooting in fantastic light or cranking you iso through the roof the xs will give you better results .... extra money in the long run .... that will be well spent. hope you are happy with whatever you get!

so the two lenses in the Canon kit have image stabilization? I knew the Xsi lenses did but wasn't sure about XS kit. Actually what is image stabilization crucial? when I was snapping photos with the d40 in the store the photos were clean and no blurry. is the image stabilization like for drasic movement shakiness?

dont buy the xs 2 lens kit. for $100 more you can get the xsi 2 lens kit. image stabilization makes a huge differance. well not a huge differance, but a major one. when in low light situations and when zoomed out far the lens slows down and it takeslonger to take pics ... lens shake is a major issue and the stabilizer makes up for a lot of that. its a benefit to have in slower lenses and a cheaper solution to spending 400+ .... just a recomendation!

 

[photosoto]

Image stabilization will correct camera shake and small vibrations. If you're stating out, IS is a real, real boon because it lets you be just a little less precise and still get good pictures. (Without getting into the mechanics of it, which are actually really cool.)

I'll attest that the Canon 450D (XSi) is a wonderful camera to start with. I'd recommend getting the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens though, as it will afford you a little more flexibility and it's also better glass than the kit (though it has all the same problems as most wide-angle zoom lenses have, particularly barrel distortion at 17mm, but that can be roughly corrected in Photoshop). I'll also swear by the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS; it's a decent lens for the price. Cromatic abberation can get a bit nasty on it and it's a little soft at 250mm, but other than that, it's solid glass.

actually the 18-55IS lens is supposed to be better glass than the 17-85IS ...... my canon rep told me this

I stand duly corrected. Did he mention how it's better? Less CA or distortion?

so Nikons kit 18-55 and 55-200 lenses don't have this or a similar feature? I still don't know if this enough to convince me of the Canon over the Nikon. will I really be crippled that much by not having Image stabilization?

 

[wgp1987]

Image stabilization will correct camera shake and small vibrations. If you're stating out, IS is a real, real boon because it lets you be just a little less precise and still get good pictures. (Without getting into the mechanics of it, which are actually really cool.)

I'll attest that the Canon 450D (XSi) is a wonderful camera to start with. I'd recommend getting the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens though, as it will afford you a little more flexibility and it's also better glass than the kit (though it has all the same problems as most wide-angle zoom lenses have, particularly barrel distortion at 17mm, but that can be roughly corrected in Photoshop). I'll also swear by the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS; it's a decent lens for the price. Cromatic abberation can get a bit nasty on it and it's a little soft at 250mm, but other than that, it's solid glass.

actually the 18-55IS lens is supposed to be better glass than the 17-85IS ...... my canon rep told me this

I stand duly corrected. Did he mention how it's better? Less CA or distortion?

and dao pointed it out to me before i askedmy rep! he didnt elaborate! sorry :/

 

[musicaleCA]

Oh well. I wish it had less CA, but it's still a great lens and I'm quite happy with it.

photosoto: You won't be crippled without IS. Think of it as an enhancement. Lenses with IS note how many stops of IS they provide; that is, take the slowest shutter speed at a certain focal length that you can hand-hold the camera without shake, and then slow down the shutter speed by three stops; you'll still get the same image quality.

Say I'm using a wide-angle at 17mm, and the slowest shutter speed I could hand-hold the camera without shake is 1/60. With IS rated to 3 stops, I could slow the shutter speed down as far as around 1/8 and still get a reasonably sharp picture. In reality I find it doesn't work quite as well as it's rated for, but hey, it's still awesome. ^.^

IS can also be helpful when you're actually trying to achieve a bit of motion blur. Getting motion blur while hand holding without IS is practically impossible (for me, anyway), but with it, the IS will remove blur from camera shake, while motion blur remains. (Always, always, always better to have a tripod for things like that, but in a pinch, IS can help get you there.)

 

[photosoto]

thanks to everyone for their help.

I think I"ve settled on the Nikon D40. And I'm interested in the kit below but would like to know a little more about the recertified by Nikon thing. any help? still warranted?

INKD40KRA Nikon D40 Digital SLR Camera Kit Outfit, w/ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Lens - Recertified by Nikon U.S.A. w/4 GB SD Memory Card, Spare EN-EL9 Lithium-Ion Battery, Lowepro Holster-Style Case


also, if I wanted to extend my focal range a little would you guys recommend getting 18-55 and 55-200 with VR or just one 18-135 lens?

 

[Montana]

Not being able to bracket shots is a deal breaker in my eyes. I cannot believe that Nikon left that out of the D40. I love to bracket for landscapes and what not. Adjusting settings manually allows for the chance to introduce a slight movement in camera position on the tripod.

 

[PhotoXopher]

The 18-135 would give you nice range, or you could go with the 18-105VR, 18-200VR - lots of options really.

Will come with a 90 day warranty from Nikon USA.

 

[photosoto]

The 18-135 would give you nice range, or you could go with the 18-105VR, 18-200VR - lots of options really.

Will come with a 90 day warranty from Nikon USA.

what exactly does recertified by Nikon mean though? was the camera previously damaged?

 

[PhotoXopher]

Could be a warranty exchange, store return, etc that has been gone through and checked out. Typically these units come out better than off the line new ones because each one is checked before going out unlike the assembly line ones that are randomly chosen. (At least to the best of my knowledge.)

 

[photosoto]

Could be a warranty exchange, store return, etc that has been gone through and checked out. Typically these units come out better than off the line new ones because each one is checked before going out unlike the assembly line ones that are randomly chosen. (At least to the best of my knowledge.)

as for the 18-135mm f/3.2-5.6g lens, does it have the ability to do close up shots as well as the 18-55vr? I'm tore between 18-55/55-200 vr lenses or the single 18-135 lens. i'm wondering if I should go with the two separate lenses because of the VR?

 

[PhotoXopher]

I haven't noticed any difference personally.

The big advantage to a single lens is not having to swap them out, the disadvantage is some minor distortion that is easily corrected (if you even notice it). The 18-135 gets a mixed bag of reviews but the 18-55/55-200 combo is generally well praised.

The convenience of having a nice single walk around lens is pretty sweet, I have to admit. Having owned the 18-105 and 18-200VR (sold for the 70-300VR) I've never had any issues with distortion that I really noticed.

 

[photosoto]

I haven't noticed any difference personally.

The big advantage to a single lens is not having to swap them out, the disadvantage is some minor distortion that is easily corrected (if you even notice it). The 18-135 gets a mixed bag of reviews but the 18-55/55-200 combo is generally well praised.

The convenience of having a nice single walk around lens is pretty sweet, I have to admit. Having owned the 18-105 and 18-200VR (sold for the 70-300VR) I've never had any issues with distortion that I really noticed.

would you recommend 18-55/55-200 VR lenses over the regular 18-55/55-200? I've decide to go that route because of a poor review I read on the 18-135mm. I'm on a budget here and if I get the good VR lenses the bag, battery and memory goodies will have to wait.