stein_andersen

<p>Sounds good. Thanks guys!</p>

<p>I'm looking at midrange tripods, and have come up with this:</p>

<p>Feisol Tournament CT-3342, with the CT-3342CCKit center column and the VH-40A tilting centre column adapter.</p>

<p>This way, I can use the legs and a ballhead without a centre column, the legs with a centre column OR the legs with a pan/tilt centre column.<br>

It seems to be pretty lightweight and well built.</p>

<p>I'd really like a Kirk, RRS, Arca-Swiss or Acratech ball head, but they're expensive, and the Feisol CB-50D head looks decent and is cheap.</p>

<p>I was thinking about the setup listed above with the feisol head and a proper arca-swiss compatible quick release clamp.</p>

<p>Does this sound like a good idea? It looks like a lot of bang for the buck, and appeals more to me than the obvius Benro alternative.</p>

<p>Comments are welcome. I've never handled a Feisol tripod, so I'll be going in blind, and would love to hear from Feisol owners ams others with knowledge and experience.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

 

<p>...And what about the Feisol Tournament CT-3342 as an alternative?</p>

<p>I'm looking at tripods, and my favourite so far is the Benro C-297</p>

<p> Does anybody know the difference between the C-297M8 and a C-297EX?<br /> <br /> Is it correct that the Benro tripods with tilting center columns are as rigid as their conventional column counterparts when the column is upright? ...Or maybe that's just the M8? (And then the EX (Gitzo Explorer clone?) is a little flimsier?)<br /> <br /> My second option is a C-257M8 with an optional AC-23 short centre column if necessary.<br /> <br /> Also: If I was to pull out all the stops and get a Gitzo 2531EX at more than twice the price; would I notice any difference?<br /> <br /> Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Sugestions for elternatives as well, of course.</p>

<p>Sorry for digging up an ancient thread, but this is very relevant to me.<br /> <br /> I'm looking at tripods, and my favourite so far is the Benro C-297M8 (Does anybody know the difference between that and a C-297EX, btw?).<br /> <br /> Is it really the case that the Benro tripods with tilting center columns are as rigid as their conventional column counterparts when the column is upright?<br>

<br /> My second option is a c-257M8 with an optional AC-23 short centre column if necessary.<br>

<br /> Also: If I was to pull out all the stops and get a Gitzo 2531EX at more than twice the price; would I notice any difference?<br>

<br /> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>You've used both? PS: I'm talking about the NEW Sigma 10-20 with a f/3.5 aperture. Not the old f/4.5-5.6 one.</p>

<p>I'm sorry. I mean "10-20mm", of course.</p>

<p>I took a chance and ordered the new Sigma 10-22mm f/3.5 from B&H. Has anyone tried it yet?</p>

I too am looking at these lenses, and what makes me lean towards the Canon is that the online reviews cklaims that the Sigma has more cromatic aberration, and the fact that Canon Digital photo professional has presets for lens corrections for the EF-S lens.

How about a Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM?

Tokina 50-150/2.8 ?

What recently helped me choose was a review in a reputable swedish mag that

apparently uses Hasselblad's "optical test bench" for lens testing, where they

claimed that the Canon 100/2.8 macro is softer at smaller magnifications than 1:1.

 

I was attracted to these two lenses because of their internal focus, but I also

considered the Tokina 100/2.8 macro.

 

Disclaimer: I based my decision solely on reviews I've read, with no personal

experience whatsoever. I'm happy with my choice (The Sigma) though.

OK. I wouldn't know. It has a newer generation chipset after all.

Great, but why wouldn't you be able to make that shot woth the XTi?

 

The reasons why I want to make the very same upgrade is vanity, size, build quality/magnesium housing, brighter VF, Digic III ...and did I mention vanity? ;)

So, I guess the general concensus is that there will be 1,6x crop mid range prosumer bodies around in the future as well. Anyway, I ordered a 17-55 yesterday, trusting that it'll be excellent and that it'll survive my next camera upgrade. Thanks again!

I ordered the 17-55 yesterday. I'm sure it will be great.

Thanks, Guys. Excellent input!

Wow. Great responses! Thanks again to everybody! I'll let you know what I decide.

Thanks. But my worry was that I might be stranded at the entry level if I bought decent EF-S lenses now and wanted to upgrade to a body at the level where the 40D resides now, in a couple of years' time.

 

My options are:

 

17-55/2.8 IS USM, EF-S 10-22, Sigma 150/2.8 Macro and EF 70-200 L

 

or:

 

24-70 L, Sigma 12-24, Sigma 150/2.8 macro and EF 70-200 L

 

I guess I could get the Sigma 12-24 instead of the EF-S 10-22, so that the only lens "in limbo" would be the 17-55.

I'm in the process of getting a nice set of lenses. My plan was to get the EF-S

17-55 and EF-S 10-22, and later on some 70-200 (or 300). I also have a Sigma

30/1.4 in my bag and a Sigma 150mm Macro on order.

 

I have a 400D now, and will get a 40D or similar when it's time to upgrade in a

couple of years' time.

 

Can I trust the APS-C/1.6X crop sensor to stick around, so my EF-S lenses won't

be rendered useless if i buy the 40D's follower in a couple of years and it has

gone full frame? Is there any chance canon makes everything but the Rebel line

full frame in a few years, and If so: Should i buy full frame lenses now just in

case. Knowing myself; I bet I'll wanna upgrade in a couple of years. I don't

*need* FF, but if that's the only thing to upgrade to when it's time to do so,

I'd hate to invest a lot of cash in EF-S glass now.

 

Wha do you think?

I thought the same thing. What noise?

Regarding the price: The lens hood and case is included with the 24-70L, bur on the 17-55, those are $90 extra.

 

The L is "cooler" of course, and I will get a wide angle zoom to complement either one of them, so I could get by with the not very wide 24-70, but because of the IS and the fact that being able to use just one lens as a walk-around lens sounds pretty attractive, I guess the 17-55 is for me.

Thanks. The 430 EX sounds good, then.

 

About the power difference between that and the 580 EX II: Could soomeone please explain just what the 580 can do (with it's extra power) that the 430 can't to a noob who's never owned an external flash? When does the 430 get too puny?

 

Thanks again.

Thanks, Guys. I think I will go ahead and order the 17-55. I have a 30/1.4 already, and will order a Sigma 150mm macro in the same order as the 17-55. I think that'll keep me occupied for a while.

 

Later on sometime, I'll propably get the 10-22, and even later, a 70-200 and an 1,4x converter. That should make a good setup, I guess.

An ultra wide zoom and a proper tripod?