d_l1

If you're happy with the quality of the pictures you got, you'll be surprised of what cheap prime lenses can do.

 

1, Get a 28/2.8 and a 50/1.8. They both accept 52mm filters. You can get both for less than $160 on ebay. Then buy some filters.

 

2, Sell your 28-80 and with your remaining $ get a used 100mm macro. The old non-USM is quite good.

I sold my 75-300 IS for 70-200/4L because the 75-300 is too slow(focusing). I do miss the IS. I think it's really helpful.

 

I do agree with R.M. Watkins. Maybe L lens is too big a step. If you need a faster focusing lens, get 100-300.

Michael, I'm sure a lot of people will disagree.

Charlie, I'm no way a pro, and I'm a Canon user...

 

The other day I was given a F5, N80, 80-400 VR, 80-200/2.8D(non-AFS), and 105/2 DF lenses to try out. And OMG, that thing is slow! And loud! (makes me wonder how they do sports photography with Nikon) No full-time MF, I had to turn the ring to MF. However, I've not tried AFS...

$445 is too high. $350~$400 is fair.

28-105, 24-85, and 28-135 IS are all good choices. I just sold my 28-105 on ebay today for $175.

 

If you want a telephoto, 70-200/4L gets my recommendation. If that's out of your budget, 100-300 is good lens at a good price.

Sathish, you need to calibrate your camera before using eye control. It takes time to calibrate but I found it works perfectly for me.

The battery pack, BP-200, does have a vertical shutter.

Kevin, I have a S&F Toploader 65aw for my Elan 7e with BP-300. It fits. I'm not sure about Elan II though. But since 70aw and 75aw are bigger than 65aw, I think it will fit.

Terri, try some NPZ800. Very good color, very fine grain.

 

As for lenses, Minolta 70-210 f4 doesn't get many positive reviews. I'd recommend a third party 70-200 f2.8.

I kinda agree with Chad here.

 

Ti doesn't have the conventional SLR look, I don't think that makes it ugly. It's just unique.

I'd go with the Rebel Ti, just for the Canon system. Ti has some improvements over the Rebel 2000 which I think is worth the extra $$.

Which 28-105 are you talking about?

 

I have mk II version and the standard 58mm Hoya CP and I don't get vignetting at all.

 

Kevin - I think the lens hood caused the problem.

The optical quality is about the same but 1.4 is built much better with full time manual focusing.

 

"And obviously, money does matter to me..."

 

Get the 1.8.

70-200/4L + 2xTC.

No, Mark, I don't develope and print myself. I send films to my local lab. you're probably right about developing. But for almost all three rolls? Oh well, who cares, they are all great lenses.

Maybe you're still undecided.

 

I have both. They are all great cameras. The 3 is definitely worth the price. The AF system ROCKS! But, as others said, lenses are very important. For photojournalism, 70-200/2.8L is like a must have, right? I say spend the money on lenses first. Then choose the body. Have you considered EOS A2/A2e(EOS 5)?

Not even phone numbers on the website. Just emails. Scam.

Of course. They(extenders) are designed for telephoto lenses.

 

Why do you want to add a 2x to your 24-70? Why not just use 70-200?

 

I have no experience with the tubes.

Dimage 7i (or any Minolta) does not accept interchangable lenses!

Just got another roll(Superia 100, don't have any slide film right now) back. This time shot through my EOS 3. I'm totally convinced my 70-200/4L is the sharpest lens I own right now. It also has the best contrast and color. Your 70-200 might not be sharper and contrastier than your 135, but mine is(also sharper and contrastier than 200/2.8L). I'll try to get the results online in a minute.

Alan, what are you talking about?

I have Elan 7E and use it on my Bogen 3001D(I think that's the number) tripd. It's a bit short. Other than that, nothing to complain about. I also have Bogen 3061(?) ball head. It works great for me. I got them from B&h for around $130.

Ok, here's another question I've been thinking about.

 

I remember I've read somewhere that lenses perform the best when shooting at normal distances, which means that images from a lens focused on a target 20 feet away will be better(or at least sharper) than the images from the lens focused on the same target 5 feet away. So the focusing distance affect image quality, is this true?

Yeah, I was wondering about that. BP300 almost touches the mounting ring(w/o converter). But I guess you dont need that if you don't use converters.