Ready to make the switch ! Any last minute advise ?

Hi,

After much cogitating and deliberating I have possible worked out my

shopping list for 'Going Digital' and getting more 'into'

photography. I currently am a rank amateur.

<BR><BR>

My existing kit is...<BR>

<BR>

EOS 10 (Film SLR) - (Currently suffering from sticky shutter blind

caused by deteriorating rubber stop. I found a solution to this on

this site and should be able to keep it working)

<BR><BR>

Canon EF 35-135mm f4-5.6 USM.<BR>

Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-5.6<BR>

Hoya 58mm 1A filter<BR>

Hoya 72mm Cir-Polarizer<BR>

Hoya 72mm 1B filter<BR>

Canon RC-1 IR Remote.<BR>

<BR>

My thoughts for upgrading are....<BR><BR>

 

Canon 20D (I find 350D just too small)<BR>

Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM<BR>

Canon 420EX flash<BR>

Canon RS 80N3 Wired Release or 3rd Party Wireless (Adidt R3C3)<BR>

And later possibly Canon 50mm 1.8 + Canon 70-300 DO IS USM.

<BR><BR>

I'm considering to take a evening diploma course (UK A-Level

possibly), to force my interest and learn to get a decent return on

my investment.

<BR><BR>

However, the A-Level course still does to do a lot of film based

work and requires a good proportion of coursework to be done with

home-made Black+White prints. So I don't want to 'throw' my old kit

just yet.

<BR><BR>

My questions are...<BR>

<BR>

Is any of my old kit worth keeping to use on the 20D ?<BR>

If I was going for the 350D then at least the RC-1 would be useable!

<BR><BR>

Is any of my new stuff going to work on my existing 10 ?<BR>

Obviously not the EF-S lens.<BR>I'm hoping the 420EX will work with

my EOS 10, but it will not offer manual controls for FEC, Sych etc

which is not supported in the 10s firmware. I'm concerned the 580EX

will be just too complex and bulky.

<BR><BR>

Or should I forget about any course still dabbling with film and

find one that concentrates on digital, and forget / eBay my old kit?

<BR><BR>

Simon.

Yes, the 420EX will work fine on your 10S, albeit in TTL mode. However, I seem to recall

AF assist is disabled (it uses the body's AF assist lamp). You might be able to set FEC with

a custom barcode. I did it back in the day...

 

As for the EF 35-135 USM, it depends. It's a tiny and light lens with ultra fast ring-type

USM, rear element focus and FTM. It's behaves like a 55-215 zoom on a 20D and would be

nice paired with an EF 18-55 or 17-40 4L USM. With FF one of my fav walkarounds was

the 70-210 range, so a 35-135 on a 1.6 crop camera is perfect.

 

When I first bought a 10D in May 2003, I though I would sell most of my fiom bodies. After

the excitment faded, I found I really enjoy shooting both film and digital as they both have

unique and worthwhile attributes.

keep your old equipment. I went from film, to digital, and back and regretted selling my film equipment on ebay.

Forget the Canon 70-300 DO IS USM - remove this from you wish list. Is nothing special (= not v good) at 300 and it is expensive. Get acheap(er) 300 zoom or get a good 200 zoom.

 

It's only advantage is that it is small when not zoomed. You give up a lot to get this and pay for it too.

The Canon 17-85 is not one of the sharpest lens in the Canon lineup and has some pretty bad CA issues. I would consider getting a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 instead of the Canon 17-85. I know the range isn't is wide, but the image quality far surpasses the Canon.

 

You could possibly get a Tamron 17-35 (another excellent 3rd party lens) later for wide angle.

Trust me, once you are encumbered enough with the post-processing

workload and perifferal requirement overload, you will be longing for the

simplicity and the unique properties of your old film gear, hang on to it.

The 17-85 IS gets a mixed review: I tried two copies that were both very soft off center. OTOH, my copy of the 28-135 is very sharp, corner to corner on film and digital

 

Best thing about going digital , well one of the nice things anyway, is that you can do lens tests same day. Try to buy locally with a good return policy

 

That Tamron seems to get the best reviews of the superzooms, no knowledge of the 35-135, but if IS sounds good to you, that could be trade goods on the 28-135

 

In general I'd say keep all your current kit: film bodies are geting to be a dime a dozen, used, and your lenses will fit the 20D so you can experiment. Also, the film body will keep your 28mm a true 28, cheaper than buying a new wider lens for the 20D

 

No hands on experience with the 70-300 DO, but the example pics shown on various sites haven't impressed me so far

What do you want to shoot? Can you hold off purchasing until you get into your course? Perhaps gain experience first. You may find, for example, that you loaded up on wide angles but really enjoy telephoto work, etc....

Hi Simon, IMO all you may need at present is , 20d + kit lens 18~55, 420ex, adidt remote (1/4 canon price) + 50mm 1.8, you have the rest. The course will be invaluable and shorten learning curves plus you may have access to equipment you may never afford for home use.

 

good luck & enjoy

Have you had on-hand experience with the model you have in mind? Did you enjoy operating it. Is shutter delay acceptable? Is depth of field a worry? All depends on your shooting habit. Be your own judge. I wish you all the best.

"Forget the Canon 70-300 DO IS USM - remove this from you wish list. Is nothing special (= not v good) at 300 and it is expensive. Get acheap(er) 300 zoom or get a good 200 zoom."

 

Roger, have you actually used the lens? I have been using it for more than one year now, and I am very happy with it. I shoot Velvia 100F slide, print up to A3 size. Granted, at 300mm, there are better lenses around, like the primes. But at 300mm, the DO lens is better than the cheaper zooms that also go to 300mm.

 

If you don't use the lens, you should not talk about the results it delivers.

 

Simon, the DO lens is not cheap, but it is very good indeed. Heck, if it is good for professionals like Michael Reichman, I guess it is good enough for me. More important than pixel peeping, is to get the shot.<div></div>

I would echo J. W. Wall: you didn't tell us what you want to take pictures of, which would be

very helpful for giving useful advice.

 

As for your film gear, I'd hang onto it for a while. Chances are it will simply gather dust, but

you never know.

I was--still am--a rank amateur when I made the switch to digital. And I'm sooo happy I did! Some people think photographers should use film until they have a good understanding of photography. I disagree. Switching to digital helped me to play with my settings and get instant feedback.

 

As far as your equipment goes, you need to ask yourself an important question:

Was I happy with the quality of shots my current lenses provided?

If yes, then keep the lenses until you find a reason not to be happy with them.

If not, what about the lens made you unhappy with it? Too short? (it might not be too short on the 1.6x crop digital.) Too long? (Then it's going to be way too long on the 20D.) Not fast enough? (If so, then you might want to consider primes or a costly L lens.)

 

Also, keep your film camera. Even if you don't take a film class now, you may want to later. Or you may want to shoot b&w or infrared.

Simon, I've found digital to be far less forgiving of shortcomings in technique than film. I'd recommend two things,

 

1. Push the 50mm prime further up your shopping list.

2. Plan on doing a higher percentage of work from a tripod, if you haven't got one then get one. It's a personal view, and one that's not been widely explored on the net, but I'm convinced camera shake is relatively more intrusive with digital than with film.

Paulo, I'm sure you're happy with your $1200 lens, but EVERY review and anecdote I have

ever read indicate that the 70-300 DO IS is an inferior lens even to the 75-300. In fact, it is

the 'most inferior' x-300 lens in the Canon lineup. Strange bokeh and slight halos at open

aperture seem to be the curse of that lens.

Andrew: Paulo threw down the gauntlet and asked whether you had used the 70-300 DO lens, and I suspect from your last answer that the answer is 'no', but you've read a lot of reviews.

 

I have one and yes, it can generate some unusual (but not unpleasant) effects wide open, but it is acceptably sharp by most standards throughout its range, and very sharp indeed when stopped down. It is well made, the focussing is swift and quiet and the IS simply the best.

 

IMHO it is the best compact travel zoom on the Canon block. As they say, the one you have with you will produce better results than the one you left at home because it was too heavy. It is noticeably better than the 75-300IS (which I used to have).

<I>Simon, I've found digital to be far less forgiving of shortcomings in technique than

film.</i><P>

 

This probably depends on film type. I've found digital far MORE forgiving of wide contrast

ranges than slide films.

LOL! One can always count on the usual suspects to put down digital every time someone asks for help in purchasing a *digital* camera. Sounds like it's time for a good colonic cleansing guys...you are getting a bit too cranky.

 

On to the poster's question:

 

Your choice of camera and lenses if fine. I would tend to agree with the poster that suggested to get the kit lens and the 50 f/1.8 for *starters*. Reason being, as you get more familiar with the camera you may wish for different lenses than the ones you are thinking of getting now. In any case, it would save you cash and you can always buy the other lenses any time.

 

The 420EX is a fine flash that can be controlled from the camera but, which lacks manual control of any sort. For that reason, I eventually sold mine and bought another 550EX. I like the Manual setting on the 550EX and the power adj. from 1/1 to 1/128. Very oftem, I use it in that fashion.

 

All of it, regardless of whay you ultimately buy, it's very good stuff and will keep you buys for quite a while.

 

Now, I can go back to LMAO ;)

You cin always tell when a lens ain't that good on a count of the guys who gone an dumped a truckloada cash on it is the only one's singin hims to it an cuttin down everone elts who had the sense not to. The 70-300 DO IS mite be bettern the 75-300 IS but it ain't no 3X better that's fer darn sure an on a 1.6 digi body you ain't gonna see no diffrents less you gotta good imagination cos most of where both them lenses suck is cropped off.

go ahead and get the 50mm F1.8 lens now. It will be your only fast lens and your sharpest and cheapest. use the other lenses you have for now to learn with, later get the 17-40L AND 70-210L AND keep your current flash for use on both cameras.

No, I haven't used the lens. I already spent $1200 on my 300 f/4L IS, and I could hardly

justify another 300mm (and consumer-grade at that) for the same amount of money.

 

Steve's dead on with this one, though. The ONLY people singing praises for the DO IS

zoom are the owners, and many of them aren't singing praises but damnation.

 

Check ANY 70-300 DO IS review if you don't believe me. Notably the one here on

photo.net, which seems to be quite level headed.

 

I will admit that the lens is extremely compact, but this in and of itself doesn't make it an

ideal travel lens.

Most opinions of the 75-300 DO lens are so-so. Many complain of the ring;-like highlights and less than stellar image quality. However, many bought it because of size/weight & reach. Even if they recognize making a compromise, it's one they wanted to make fort the specific reason of size.

 

If your MAIN need is portability then, I don't think you can find a better lens of the same size. If your main goal is image quality then, don't buy it.

Ok, here are my 3 cents:

 

1) You are talking about using film AND digital in tandem. Therefore. . I would ignore EF-S lenses. Why buy a $600 lens that does not fit your film body? The only possible exception would be to get the kit 18-55 EF-S for $100.

 

2) The 35-135 will work on a 20D. Therefore, you don't TRUELY need any lenses. Although. . you will really be deficient on the wide end. To cover the wide end, I would recommend the $100 18-55/EF-S, or the $650 17-40/4L. The really good thing about the 17-40/4L is that it is just as good on a film body as on a digital body. . and will add significant capability to your film rig.

 

3) The 70-300/D0-IS. For $650, this is a really good lens. oh wait. . .it's $1100. Read this review, and see if you want to shell out for it. . .http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/70_300/index.htm

 

And yes. . Reichman does use this lens. He is a pro. With a matching pro budget.

 

4) Don't abandon film. Film will do things digital cannot.

Thanks everyone for your comments!<BR><BR>

As always, I am stunned by the quantity+quality of responses to posts on this forum.<BR><BR>

Based on the the replies my shopping list is being revised...<BR><BR>

I think I'll ditch the EF-S 17-85 (Saving £380 inc hood)<BR>

I really dislike the EF-S 18-55, but the difference between body only and kit can be as little as £30, and it will eBay for more than that if I don't want it.<BR>

I'll take many of yours advise and get a 50mm prime, probably the f1.4.<BR>

I'll upgrade the 420EX Flash to the 580EX as it will work better on my EOS 10. (Giving access to FEC, 2nd Curtain Synch etc)<BR><BR>

 

One last question...<BR>

The 50mm is highly recommendend by all especially the 1.8 due to it's very low cost (<£100), but it will act as a 80mm on a 20D.

<BR>

I rarely hear much noise about Canon's 28mm f1.8 which will provide 50mm with the 20D. Is it worth considering instead of 50mm 1.4 ?

<BR><BR>

Simon.

I forgot to add earlier: Tamron and Tokina both have a 19-35 lens (might be the same, but I think not) that is a surprisingly good picture taker for less than $200, and probably can be found on Ebay for a really good price. I had the Tokina. Something to consider in lieu of the 18-55