Is this a good deal?

[fishguyis]

Michael, again I have to thank you for all valuable your input. I was able to find a FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 lens for a very good price and at this time I think with that lens, and everything else, I will be all set.

 

Andrew, thank you very much for the lens reviews they are great!

 

Yvon and everyone else, I really appreciate your input, it has really helped me out.

 

I will update you as to what I decide!

[fishguyis]

Well things have changed in a large way.

 

After I spoke to my cousin who is a pro photographer, she did indeed suggest to get better glass. BUT she wasn't harping at all, she is a wonderful lady.

 

As it turns out, I now am able to significantly increase my budget for a camera.

 

As my cousin shoots Canon, and has some very good connections, I am now looking to get a EOS 40D. I am not sure what lens(s) at this time as we are supposed to go shopping on the weekend.

 

I am VERY excited!!!

 

Thanks again for everyone's help!

[renatoa]

Sure, things changed in the worse way... She gave you a good advice to invest in good glass, and you do the contrary, invest in a more expensive body, questionable better, tomorrow half valued. Hmmm...

 

Any wise photo market analyst will tell you that in this moment Canon is a company who reached his R&D limits, lost his #1 position and is in decline. They weren't able to issue a premium lens in the last 3 years, and is behind Nikon in every aspect of the pro gear.

 

Good luck...

[fishguyis]

Renato,

 

I appreciate what you are saying. Nothing is written in stone as of yet.

 

We will have to see what happens over the weekend, I am not at the point of being able to afford "L" lenses, and

I think the D300 with a good lens(s) is going to be out of my price range.

 

I still have yet to hold a D300 but I would like to it out this weekend as well. As I am in a different price

bracket, I will have to look at other bodies as well, and see which one appeals to me.

 

Cheers!

[renatoa]

I don't understand why you changed focus to pro gear, while your target is hobby, like me and many others here? At least this was my understanding from original post.

 

I hope is not the fascination of "big things" http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/07/is-full-frame-t.html

[fishguyis]

No it is not a fascination of "big things".

 

My cousin has gracefully offered to take me under her wing and if she is able to secure me a good deal on better equipment that will allow me to "future proof" myself, then I would be silly not to take advantage of it don't you agree?

 

I am not about having the best so that I can show off or be better then anyone else. I want to be able to get a complete set-up that will last me.

 

I know I have done a complete about face but I didn't expect to be able to purchase higher end equipment.

 

I have been interested in photography for a long time and I know I still have a lot to learn but I do feel that something in the range of the 40D or similar is not beyond me.

 

As a final thought and please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the 40D and D300 made for serious enthusiasts or semi-pro's?

[fishguyis]

Sorry not the D300 i meant to say the D200.

[andrewg_ny]

Yes. 40D & D200 are both serious enthusiast, entry-level pro bodies. I normally have Pentax leanings but that 20D deal also looked like a pretty good one. Sell that 18-55 kit lens if you can get anything for it and perhaps consider a EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS to go with it.

[michael_kuhne]

I agree with Andrew, the Canon 20D deal was a good one with two quality lenses, if going into Canon.

 

It is best by far when you get into this interest not to overdo at the beginning. Get something easy to use, but at the same time having all the tools.

 

Pros are generally not pushy, often nice, they just think differently, going for heavier made equipment and bigger, faster glass. It is the glass that, in reality, can be "future proof", the digital camera not so likely. The film model will not lose its stature to time, and may even gain. I have some big, "pro" type lenses, and they are very useful when I need their faster apertures, but for practical reasons I use smaller, lighter ones more often. Pros generally like bigger camera bodies, often made with a lot of metal. They like the feel and appearance of professional style, bigger=better. And they may shoot in very rough condtions, like hanging off a landrover shooting rhinos for a magazine.

 

But I also do not like a flimsy, plasticky, toy-like model, which so many compacts are. The K100D is relatively compact and fairly light weight, but still of robust build. The K200D is quite robust.

 

The Canon 20,30,40D and the Nikon D200,300 and Pentax K10, K20D are full, large body models. I have an excellent film body in that category of design, which I like very much. But when doing a lot of walking, hiking, etc. I tend to much prefer taking a compact model instead, yet I want it to still have practically all that I need and like. So no matter what, I do not want to be without a really good compact model. Canon does make some good compact models, like the XSi (see its report in August issue of Popular Photgraphy along with 4 others) and its performance will be very close to the 40D. You can see that performance examined in that report. However, the XSi has no top LCD panel, which I like, and of course, there is no in body SR to supply that with all your lenses.

 

Most people start off with a campact model for a couple of years, easy to use and carry, as they proceed to expolore and to learn. Then if later they decide to get a larger size body, the compact one is kept as backup, and alternate when going compact is important. And it is of a type that a novice friend or family member can easily pick up and use. Pros don't usually think compact.

 

A favorite setup of mine when trekking a lot is to take a compact SLR (film ar digtial) with a fine compact prime lens shoved into my heavy duty leather "fanny" belt pouch. This way, I can go about with nothing hanging around my neck or shoulders. Did so at a big outdoor car show last summer with friends at a NJ boardwalk. In this case, I used film, and the FA 35mm f/2 lens, because I was to have sets of prints made for my friends. The MZ-6 is perfect for this use. Here are a few. There's one of me, taken by a friend, showing the belt pouch. Just try that with any of the above larger camera bodies.

 

For digital, I'll also throw in two taken in Gettysburg, and nearby areas in Pennsyvania with the K100D, again using my beltpouch for camera carrying, while riding a bycycle! And to show I do not refrain from coupling the K100D with an expensive lens, my Pentax 77mm f/1.8 Limited. SR was used. No significant post process manipulations, just straight shots.<div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

Here's another...<div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

And another-<div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

One more-<div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

PA photos-<div></div>

[renatoa]

"40D & D200 are both serious enthusiast, entry-level pro bodies. "

 

I wonder where we are with our gear...

[michael_kuhne]

And one more-<div></div>

[fishguyis]

Well the 20D deal fell through as the seller is in Italy and I am not interested in making a purchase internationally.

 

Michael, fantastic shots LOVE the macro!

 

You make a good point in the fact of the camera being more portable. I love to take nature shots, having a smaller camera would make a lot of sense, plus if I were to get a high quality lens then at least the optics won't go out of date :)

 

I really like the idea of the Nikon for their 18-200 VR lens, I think that would be a great starter lens. For Canon the 24-105 "L" lens is really nice but pricy.

 

As i mentioned in my last post, I am going to go to Vistek with my Cousin and I will try the XSI, D80, 40D and the 200D again and see which one I am really comfortable with.

 

Thanks again for all the great advice!

[michael_kuhne]

I admire the D80 especially. Very good build, with nice on-body control layout like pro style, instead of in menues, yet still compact!!! I have a good friend who shoots with Nikon. Has one pro style and one semi pro body. Some fine top Nikon lenses. But all film- no DSLR yet. I have been showing him all about the D80, and he is very interested. Also, fine, sharp, JPEG images right from the camera. Sometimes this is an important convenience factor!! It is for me. The D200 does not do well here, and the D300 is better, though not quite as good as the D80. The D60 is not too great here either. Check that new issue of Pop Photography with the test reports, which touch upon this matter. Pros tend to think along the lines of heavier equipment, and also in terms of lots of post processing for image corrections. Good thing to learn over time, to help with some occasional imperfections, but to me, good up front results are a convenient advantage.

 

But you see, my friend is already long years into a lot of Nikon gear. So that is his best option, and a good one. Again, yes the 18-200 VR is a good all around lens. But not a fast lens. To get a fast lens as well with VR, you'll need a big wad of dough, as well as carry a lot of weight!! Nikon also has some very good, fast prime lenses in the 50mm and mid tele range, portrait, etc. but then you don't get VR!! They do make a 105mm macro lens with VR, but it costs like mad!

 

The K200D has an even better built body, with weather sealing, not as many on body controls as the D80, but does now have the handy RAW button, and SV mode for instant control of ISO. I would like the K100D to have more on body controls, but for the cost- and the handling and build are good! If not constantly switching settings, the menu controls are ok, and not hard to use at all, even for me. Not a major impediment.

 

Again, I think the best way to get into this is go cheap, yet good with all the tools, gain lots of experience since you have the range of tools, and later you can decide whether to sell what you have at very little loss, and/or go for some really good glass. Then you can explore, try it all out, with little $$ outlay, and virtually no loss, and go from there. Your need differs from that of a pro in many practical ways. You are the one who has to find out what kinds of specific interests you will develop, and then what equpment will further your designs. You will be the one who pays for, and has to carry the stuff!!

 

The photo samples presented are to demonstrate the quality the "cheap" K100D is capable of, with good glass, and having exceptional low noise performance even at ISO 1600 without sharpness loss due to noise suppression, as in Renato's fine example. And also the use of SR. My K100 shots were out of camera JPEGs at default settings. I believe I shot in manual mode for the first, and aperture priority (AV) mode for the second.

 

Even with VR, the 18-200mm could not have gotten the quality or substance of some of these shots, with the same subject and circumstances, even if mounted on a D80 or D300. And if you put on a Nikon lens that possibly could, and without lugging big stuff, you'd likely be losing the VR.

 

Last year I spoke with a very experienced Nikon photographer who still shoots with his 3 year old 6mp D70s. People say now obsolete, says he, yeah in three years now they all go "obsolete". No such thing as a future proof camera body. But, he said, I still get excellent quality, and the camera has what I need. So if I'm still getting good images, it's not obsolete.

[fishguyis]

Well I have decided to try before I buy. I will stick with Canon as I am going to be shooting with my cousin and

she will be teaching me (and she shoots with a 5D) so I can use her lenses as well.

 

I rented a Canon XTI (they didn't have an XSI) with a 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM Zoom Lens, a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

USM Zoom Lens , and a 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens to play with until Tuesday when I have to take it back.

 

The nice thing with renting is that the price of the rental goes towards the purchase of the camera (of course I

have to buy a camera that day). But at least I can get a good feel for the camera and get an idea of the lenses.

 

I am looking at the XSI for now as I really don't think I need the 40D. There is a great rebate program on the

40D when you buy it with a kit lens, but I don't think I will use the kit lens so therefor it wouldn't be as good

of a deal.

 

I have had a little time at my In Laws (they have beautiful gardens) to play with the 100mm Macro lens and WOW

it's awesome!!!

 

The 24-105 L lens is a beautiful piece. I am also looking at a 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens. I rented to the 28-135mm to

see the difference between that and the 24-105mm, it's a nice lens but you can really tell the difference in

build between the two when you compare them one after another.

 

Michael, having good quality pictures right out of the camera is important to me as I am still learning Photo

Shop and I would rather spend the time composing the picture in the camera rather then spending a lot of time

post processing. I am really enjoying using the rental XTI and I think the XSI will work out very well for me, we

will see.

[michael_kuhne]

The 24-105mm f/4 is a very nice lens. should be- at over $1,000. Hefty solid build. As I said, pros go expensive, and don't usually go compact.

 

The 28-135mm is a stop or so slower, at longer FL, but a good lens, though providing just semi-wide on a DSLR. Also not small. Bigger lenses tend to interfere with the built-in flash (which pros usually turn up their nose at), but it is a handy device at times for quick use, such as some quick fill flash in brighter light, and when something happens suddenly, where there in not enough time for use of another flash unit. I have often found it very useful, though I have many other flash units. That lens is made with IS, which is a good thing, and costs around $400 from B&H. It was origianlly designed for film bodies, and too bad you will not have one to learn with. And for having many print sets made, a good deal at K-Mart. Slides do not lie. Great learning tool. What you shoot is what you get, and your chosen setting must be right on- no electronic modification of the image process. Without that film consideration, since the Canon kit lens is junk, I recommend you consider the EF 17-85mm f/4-5.6, at about $500, which has IS and will give you wide angle to pretty good moderate telephoto. Very versatile.

 

But it's not a faster zoom lens, just average. You, see, with either Canon or Nikon, you cannot get a very wide to tele zoom that is faster, and still has IS/VR/SR, unless you pay a lot, like the big pro style Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS at about $1,000. Not so important, for having IS at wider FL, but can be important for tele range, even at 50mm. Renato got the shot he did because of SR, and for such conditions you often also need a faster lens in lower light, even with SR, to prevent your shutter speed from dropping too low, particularly with still scenes. One reason the 50mm f/1.4 is still popular. With a zoom, f/4 is faster than average, and f/2.8 throughout zoom range is fastest of all. With Pentax, you have a lot of choices besides average speed zooms, like kit lens, etc, like DA 16-45mm f/4 at about $350, new coming DA 17-70mm SDM f/4 at about $550 (will only AF with newer cameras), highly rated Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 at about $400, fine Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 with macro at about$450, and fine Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 at about $350... and more, all having SR!!! The Pentax 50mm f/1.4 tested best among all brands by Pop Photo, to be replaced but still can be had new for $200, and of course with SR!! The Canon 50mm f/1.4, with no IS, costs well over $300.

 

My favorite compact model other than Pentax is the Nikon D80 for reasons I gave. The XSi appears to be a good compact model, but has no top LCD panel, which I like to have. Pop Photo test indicates somewhat soft out of camera results due to noise suppression, especially at higher ISO. Rather typical for many Nikon and Canon models. Recommended was to increase sharpening setting from default. To complement the Canon zoom I mentioned, there is a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 with IS. I also would recommend, besides the 50mm f/1.4, the Canon 24mm f/2.8 at about $300, which should be a very good compact prime of moderate wide FL, very versatile walk around high quality prime lens.

[michael_kuhne]

BTW the Canon 105mm macro runs about $500 or so. Sigma makes an excellent rated 105mm macro, which many of us have, since it it very well built and at $400. Of course, with Pentax also having SR! hard to hold very steady at 105mm, especially for close shots, and using higher aperture setting to increase depth of focus field will drop shutter speed. So SR is very useful for this kind of lens. My dusk shot was with using SR, as I was on my bike, and had no tripod. Without SR, no shot.

 

Nice of your cousin to teach you some of the ropes, regardless of the equipment issues. The type of gear she uses was easy to predict, and understandable.

[orly_andico]

My colleague has the 17-55/2.8 IS (he sold his 24-105/4L IS as he preferred the f/2.8 over the longer reach, besides the 24-105 is not wide on a crop-sensor camera). The 17-55 is great, an L in everything but name (and weather sealing).

 

HOWEVER a 450D / XSi + 17-55/2.8 IS costs around $1500. You can get the K200D + 16-50/2.8 DA* SDM and have equivalent kit, for quite a bit less ($1200) AND you get weather sealing.

 

I came from Canon (but didn't have L lenses, although I got to borrow..) and if you're looking for a fast wide zoom, very few beat the quality of the 16-50/2.8 and its partner the 50-135/2.8 (and you get IS with both).

 

However almost all the other lenses (the primes in particular) cost more in the Pentax system, compare the 300/4 DA* SDM with the Canon 300/4, for example. Of course you can use ancient Pentax lenses on the Pentax system without much loss of functionality...

[michael_kuhne]

Orlando, you are right about the price difference in primes in some cases, but if you want to get a Canon tele prime with IS, you are looking at some serious $$$!!

[fishguyis]

Well I am going to Vistek tomorrow morning and I will let you all know what I end up with.

 

I have looked and looked (at the reviews of lenses) and I am going to take a good long look at the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, and the 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, and non IS. I will also look at the Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS.

 

Orlando thanks for the info on the lenses.

[michael_kuhne]

Mike, all I got to say is, you are considering a lot of really expensive, heavy duty pro stuff for a guy just starting out. Sure, the stores will love to sell you whatever is more $$ anytime, as long as you cast an interest, they will encourage. Rather like putting the cart before the horse. Even though your cousin knows what she is doing, she would tend to reach for what she is used to, and serves her needs.

 

You really don't know enough yet about what you are doing, in terms of your needs. You don't know yet, so you're jumping around all over the place between different classes of equipment. You nailed it in that you don't need to start out with an entry level pro model like the 40D. The compact and easier to handle and use XSi is better. That is why most people start out with less expensive, but good stuff, to gain experience. They ease in with easy to use gear with the tools for full range of use and to learn with. Then, when or if they find they really NEED what a big expensive pro piece can offer, they buy just that one piece, or so. I own some pro lenses. Most of the time I do not need what they can do that others cannot, so I leave them sitting behind, and take something more convenient. But I know why I bought a particular piece, and use it for that need.

 

I know that expensive gear is very impressive, and shows quality. But it is important to regard it in terms of how it can serve what you'll be doing. One thing to ask, for instance, is why would you consider the 17-55mm over the 17-85mm? Why would you pay $1,000 for a pro short zoom lens, maybe another $1,000 for another big pro tele 70-200mm lens, when you know not yet which focal lengths, or apertures, or lens types, serve you more often and best for your particular shooting style? You might even wind up preferring to rarely use a zoom, but mostly primes!! We have a number of experienced photographers, here, including some pros, who are just that way! All this and more money for a camera body just to stay with Canon? What would that 70-200mm f/4 do for you over the 70-300mm also having IS??

 

The Sigma 18-200mm is not an alternative. It is a completely different animal compared to the other lenses mentioned. It is what is termed a superzoom. No pro I've heard of would be caught dead using a superzoom. IMO that is to their disadvantage. Superzooms can be a decent all around versatile lens, but the real use for them is events or circumstances where you need to instantly go from a wide shot (as in group or scene) to a tele shot (as in individual or closeup) without time to change lenses, and there is plenty of light, or flash is an option. There are lots of situations like that. But superzooms do not really replace a shorter zoom/longer zoom combo, and certainly not a pro zoom. Pro zooms can do what they cannot and visa versa.

[orly_andico]

I think most new amateur photographers fall into two groups:

 

1) "I will get this expensive body... oops I don't have enough cash, I'll just use the kit lens"

 

2) "I need this L lens so I can get great photos under all circumstances"

 

But what does an L lens really get you? a fast aperture and fast autofocus. BUT.... many MANY times the limiting factor to the quality of your shots is (1) accurate focus; (2) how much light you have.

 

Now that f/2.8 L lens is great, you think if it's dark I'll use f/2.8 and I don't need no stinkin' flash. BUT at f/2.8 the DOF will be quite shallow and a lot of DSLR bodies have subtle front or backfocus issues that appear when you use fast lenses wide open.

 

So your photos aren't quite as sharp as they could be due to narrow DOF. The answer of course is to stop down... but then you lack light and the on-camera flash ain't good enough...

 

I now believe (after accumulating a vast collection of ancient Pentax lenses) that you should get the basic DSLR body, the kit lens, AND A GOOD FLASH.

 

The kit lens works great and is razor sharp at f/8. Since you have a powerful flash (the 540 is best... in my experience the Canon 420EX isn't powerful enough for bounce tricks) then the f/8 is no problem.

 

All lenses are sharp at f/8. And creating your own light sure beats chasing the fickle natural light. Definitely for events and gatherings a guy with basic DSLR body + kit lens + 540 GZ flash will beat the guy with midrange body + 17-55/2.8 IS and no flash.