First time SLR buyer - Canon + Lenses?

[Village Idiot]

Well, the 50mm f/1.8 is sharper at f/2.8 than the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 when both are @ 2.8

I wouldn't use f/1.8 unless you're doing something specific.

 

[K8-90]

I wouldn't use f/1.8 unless you're doing something specific.

Sorry, you lost me! What do you mean by specific? I intended to use it for low-light, indoor stuff (ie. inside a barn) - is that what you mean? Thanks!

 

[Village Idiot]

Sorry, you lost me! What do you mean by specific? I intended to use it for low-light, indoor stuff (ie. inside a barn) - is that what you mean? Thanks!

I mean the aperture @ f/1.8. Is a little soft and the DOF is tiny. Take a picture of a face with the focus point on the nose and you'll get the tip of the nose in focus and nothing else because of the shallow DOF. shoot at at least f/2.8-f/4 if you're shooting people in doors.

If you're getting creatvie and have an idea, then go for it; f/1.8 can create some unique pictures, just don't buy the lens thinking that since you can shoot at such a wide aperture and take pictures with less light that you'll be using f/1.8 all the time.

Wide apertures can allow you to get a picture in lighting conditions that a smaller aperture would not, but just keep in mind that like balancing ISO, shutter speed, and aperture normally, that aperture has more of a trade off besides letting in light, specifically when you start getting into the extremely wide ones.

 

[K8-90]

Oh, I see. I'm glad you pointed that out, because you caught me making a big mistake! I forgot to consider the DOF...

I was planning on using it for capturing subjects at least 20 feet away, in low light...

 

[K8-90]

I dug this thread up instead of starting a new one...

Alright. So I went to the camera store to day, and finally got a knowledgeable and friendly associate. But he was a good salesman. So I just wanted to verify some f what he said, to make sure he wasn't just cashing out on my inexperience...

This is my 'starter' lineup...

Canon XSi
Canon 50mm f1.8
Sigma 18-200mm DC OS
Filter's for both lenses
Slingshot 200
sandisk Ultra SD card
extra battery

So. It seams reasonable. I had planned to get the Tamron 18-250mm (macro capable) rather than the Sigma. But he made a good point, that the Tamron has IS, where as the Tamron doesn't.

He made it seem mandatory that I get filters for my lenses, for protection. Is this true? I know many people do, but even so. Also, he said that I should get the good quality ones (read: expensive). He never mentioned what kind of filter. I was thinking polarizing. Can you keep those on all the time? Does this have any negative effects?

The other thing he was adament about was that I get a Ultra/Pro'highend SD memory card, because a lower end one cannot write as fast, which means I could lose shots. I know it is true, but it significant?

Lastly, he "advises" getting a warranty. I probably would on the body. Should I do so for the lenses?

Thanks in advance!

PS. I was looking at Henry's, if that makes a difference. The other store arround here is Vistek. It looks real nice, but when I went in, the customer service sucked. Totally over staffed, and yet no one offered any help :S

 

[uplander]

Any ideas on this lens: Tamron SP AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di-II XR LD ASL IF Lens ? I'm drawn to it because of its zoom, which also leaves me worried. I don't see it being effective at both ends. But it is also a good price... So, as a walk-arround, start-up lens, what do you think?

While we're at it, what are your thoughts on Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM ?

I'll sell you my Tamron 18-200 I never really use it much.

The Canon 70-300 is a decent lens but not for an indoor riding arena.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

This is my 'starter' lineup...
Canon XSi
Canon 50mm f1.8
Sigma 18-200mm DC OS
Filter's for both lenses
Slingshot 200
sandisk Ultra SD card
extra battery

I found this review of the Sigma 18-200 lens:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/321-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-os-canon-test-report--review

Are you certain that you need to cover the whole 18-200 range in one lens? There are higher-quality combinations of two lenses that would cover this range. Of course, for the same $379 price, you're probably limited to the EF-S 18-55 IS kit lens (comes with the Rebel XSi) and the $270 EF-S 55-250 IS telephoto.

A UV filter doesn't do much for a DSLR, but it provides something cheaper to scratch than your favorite lens. A multi-coated filter will have less flare than the single-coated Canon filter. Tiffen is an inexpensive brand. B&W is a premium brand.

 

[PhotoDudeMS]

DO you have your heart set on a Canon Xti? I know several people who have the cannon and either don't know how to work it and find it confusing, or say that they paid way too much for what it will do.

Personally I shoot with a Nikon D40. I prefer Nikon for several reasons. First, Nikon holds over 200 individual patents on their glass alone. Think about that. JUST THE GLASS. I have compared images of the same resolution, and comparable lenses, and same subject and settings, but one was shot with a canon and the other with a Nikon. The nikon's focus was crisper and the color was brighter.

Another argument for Nikon, and no I don't work for them. It is generally recognized that National Geographic has some of the best photographers in the biz, right? Those guys have free reign. They can shoot whatever equipment the darn well please, and the shoot NIKON. Go out, make some calls, pull some strings and see if you can find me 1 - just 1- NatGeo Photographer who shoots with a Canon.

My suggestion is that you would at least look into the D40x. It is small, and light much like the Xti, but is cheaper and more durable than the canon. I personally know a guy who dropped a D40x with the kit lens from a 3rd floor balcony onto pavement and he only cracked his UV Filter. That's one tough little camera.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...al+Cameras-_-Nikon+Inc-_-30113086]New Egg.com That comes with an 18-55mm nikon lens.
You can also get a 55-200 nikon lens for about $200 .

As for a tripod I reccomend that you get the Tiltall Classic. They run around $100 and are great for everything.

That kit should put you right around $1k. Check it out, you may be a nikon fan yet.

 

[K8-90]

I'll sell you my Tamron 18-200 I never really use it much.

I'll keep that in mind, but unless you are willing to cut me a great deal, I'd rather not pay shipping from the States to Canada... But thanks for the offer!

I found this review of the Sigma 18-200 lens:xxxAre you certain that you need to cover the whole 18-200 range in one lens? There are higher-quality combinations of two lenses that would cover this range. Of course, for the same $379 price, you're probably limited to the EF-S 18-55 IS kit lens (comes with the Rebel XSi) and the $270 EF-S 55-250 IS telephoto.

Hmm. Good review, thanks! I'm quite disappointed about the quality of the bokeh! From the examples, it's down right ugly! Hmm...
No, i don't need to cover the whole range in one, though it would be conveniant. I just thought that this was a better value for my money than the kit lens. What do you think? I guess I look for a eview of the the 18-55mm now.

DO you have your heart set on a Canon Xti? I know several people who have the cannon and either don't know how to work it and find it confusing, or say that they paid way too much for what it will do.

Personally I shoot with a Nikon D40. I prefer Nikon for several reasons. First, Nikon holds over 200 individual patents on their glass alone. Think ... I have compared images of the same resolution, and comparable lenses, and same subject and settings, but one was shot with a canon and the other with a Nikon. The nikon's focus was crisper and the color was brighter.

... generally recognized that National Geographic has some of the best photographers in the biz, right? ... They can shoot whatever equipment the darn well please, and the shoot NIKON. ...

My suggestion is that you would at least look into the D40x. It is small, and light much like the Xti, but is cheaper and more durable than the canon.

As for a tripod I reccomend that you get the Tiltall Classic. They run around $100 and are great for everything.

That kit should put you right around $1k. Check it out, you may be a nikon fan yet.

Nope, I'm not dead set, I'm open for suggestions :mrgreen:
I considered the D40 at the beginning, but have since ruled it out. I've used one at school, and I was kind of disappointed by it... However, I have never tried an XSi otside of the camera store. I would possibly go Nikon, but it wouldn't be for the D40...
And thanks for the tripod recomendation - I'll check it out

 

[JustAnEngineer]

What do you think? I guess I look for a eview of the the 18-55mm now.

I think that your list was okay. Don't let me dissuade you. As a noob, I find on-line lens reviews helpful for my learning, but hard on my pocketbook. :lmao:


The Rebel XSi's kit lens is better than the XTi's and adds only about $100 over the $800 price of the camera body alone.
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/181-canon-ef-s-18-55mm-f35-56-is-test-report--review

This is the new cheap ($270) telephoto zoom:
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Can...on-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report--review

You had the $85 "nifty fifty" EF 50mm f/1.8 II on your list already:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.8-II-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Can.../160-canon-ef-50mm-f18-ii-test-report--review

What you spend on lenses can only go up and up from those three low-end possibilities.


Many folks recommend the $580 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM as a better choice than a cheap telephoto zoom lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Can...anon-ef-70-200mm-f4-usm-l-test-report--review


P.S.: Both www.adorama.com and www.bhphotovideo.com take international orders. I don't know what the import duties might be.

 

[K8-90]

I think that your list was okay. Don't let me dissuade you. As a noob, I find on-line lens reviews helpful for my learning, but hard on my pocketbook. :lmao:


P.S.: Both www.adorama.com and www.bhphotovideo.com take international orders. I don't know what the import duties might be.

Haha! No kidding! I was totally set on the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L...
Then I checked the price :shock:

Yeah I checked both their sites, and they look great! But I just feel safer sticking locally, incase their are issues, questions, whatever.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is very nice choice.

Yeah? have you used one? If so, do you have any photos I could see? (Especially at the ends)

I got the 70-300 IS a few months ago. It is not as well-constructed as my other two lenses (17-55 2.8 IS and 100 2.8 macro). It also focuses a bit more slowly and noisily than those two, and it's not as sharp. However, at $540, it was a lot less expensive than the $1700 70-200 2.8 IS and a $280 1.4x teleconverter.

These are all small JPEGs (1/4 of full resolution) direct from the EOS 40D without retouching:
Bradford pear tree at 70mm
Hibiscus at 300mm
Bougainvillea at 300mm
Squirrel at 300mm
Cardinal at 300mm
Egrets at 300mm
Yellow-bellied flycatcher? at 300mm
Here is a 1:1: crop of the same bird:
Flycatcher at 300mm

 

[PhotoDudeMS]

If you don't like the D40, look into the new D60. They sell for $599 US with an 18-55mm nikon lens. Great Lens. I have one. I love it.

Something that I should mention about the tiltall is that it is tall. I don't know how tall you are, but I am 6'3'' and need a tall tripod. Just extending the legs, and not the shank at all, it is about 5' 3'' tall. Add a camera body onto that and your viewfinder is about 5'7'' in the air. It will raise to about 7'. Great for me, not so great for a shorter person. It is heavy too. About 8 lbs. If you lug it around alot, you'll want something lighter. As I said I'm rather large, but for someone smaller It could cause a problem.
I got my tiltall classic from B&H for $110USD

I have friends and know professionals that shoot cannon and I'm not trying to make up your mind for you, but I see an obvious technical superiority in the Nikon products over the Canon Equivalent.

 

[PhotoDudeMS]

PS: You mentioned wanting to stay at about $1000. Is that Canadian?

 

[K8-90]

Ok, I'll take a look at the D60. Great price, and if the quality is like you say it is, sounds awesome!

Haha, yeah. I'm short. Pushing it to reach 5'3.5". That half inch is very important, lol. So the camera would clear my head, haha! But I suppose I don't have to extend the legs all the way...

And yes, I'm talking Canadian dollars.

Thanks!