Three D-SLR camera variants to choose from >>>

[Ben777]

Hi, I have three hot D-SLR camera variants in mind, and here are they in random order >>>

The Canon EOS 400D + the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

The Nikon D80 + the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX VR Nikkor

The Sony Alpha dSLR-A100 + the Sony 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 DT Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* SAL-1680Z

****Important note: I would need to have one of those D-SLR camera + lens combos above, by the 22 of July; 2007 at the very latest.****

I have some photographic assignments to perform, on the 22 of July; 2007.

Well, I just want a "walk around combo" for general purpose (shoot anything) photography in good enough image quality.

Which of the above combos would be the most ideal/suitable for my photography, in your opinion?

Thanks a lot in advance.

Your help would be very much appreciated.

 

[JIP]

I'd pick the D80 but not that crappy lens.

 

[Steph]

The Canon lens is probably the best of the 3 and it has a constant aperture of f2.8. For that reason alone I would go with the EOS 400D.

 

[Mike_E]

LOL JIP, you must have gotten a bad example of the 18-200. While it's not up to the standards of the 70-200 f2.8 VR or the 17-55 f2.8 the examples that I have seen do what they are designed to do in exemplary fashion.

Ben777, the Canon and the Sony lenses cover less than half the range of the Nikon although both are likely the Nikons' better as the Nikon lens is designed to be a walk around do every thing well lens and not a professional grade wide to medium zoom. (the Zeiss might not fall into that category either, I have not held one of them much less shot through or even to my knowledge seen a photo taken through one) and I only know them by name.

As far as camera bodies go, I have the Nikon D200 (the D80's big brother) and like it so much that I've made a little bed for it on my nightstand. I'm sure you would be very happy with the D80. btw, Nikon also has a great 17-55m f2.8 lens if that is the range that you want.

mike

 

[JIP]

LOL JIP, you must have gotten a bad example of the 18-200. While it's not up to the standards of the 70-200 f2.8 VR or the 17-55 f2.8 the examples that I have seen do what they are designed to do in exemplary fashion.

I dont have an example I just know it's crap.