cham

i have a 580ex and i just got a 550ex...

 

when buying my first flash (the 580ex) i did consider both the 420ex and the 430ex... the 420 has no manual mode and so that ruled it out... the 430ex isn't that far off a 580ex in terms of price and pretty much everyone i spoke to said the 430ex is great to start with but you'll eventually upgrade to a 580ex in the end if you end up using the flash a lot... that together with the better GN and wireless master utility (although i use an st-e2) made it worth, buying for the extra money...

 

then the last few weeks i've been considering a 430ex again to use as a secondary flash... but then noticed that a second hand 550ex is about the same price... sure it doesn't look as nice but then i suppose i'm only using it for a secondary flash so i'm not too worried about setting the zoom myself.

well to be honest the only reason why i bought the 350d (besides the price saving meant i could spend on lens/flash etc) was the size and weight of the 350d... admittedly it's not exactly the most ergonomic design but for carrying about everywhere (and i never leave home without my camera) it's great... otherwise i would get the 20d

all this time and i didn't realise i could connect my 350d to the computer... you'll have to forgive me i'm still used to a manual camera

I almost bought the 20d instead of the 350d for the same reason as i moved over from a Pentax Mx, and i have to admit at first it was like staring down a tunnel to the image, but in all honesty i don't even notice it anymore and i'm glad i bought it because i do a lot of traveling with my camera so i needed something small and light, but personally i think if you can really afford the 30d then i'd wait for it's successor

 

I like the small size of the 350d most of the time but if i'm shooting in a studio setting and i'm constantly shooting for about an hour or longer, as in don't put the camera down, it can really wear out your hands

i'd got with the sandisk too i'm a complete convert, however do you mean the ultra II or extreme III? i didn't think there was an ultra III?

thanks so I guess it's the 420ex for me then

I'm glad you asked that question because I was about to as i'm looking for a slave to go with my 580EX but i have to admit i do tend to use my 580 on manual a lot of the time.

 

so wait the 420ex can't be used as a wireless slave with the st-e2?

are you using a direct connection? or are you using a card reader? also what's the size of the memory stick... i have to admit i did notice that 1gb from my sony p-10 was a lot faster than 512mb from my 350d, but then changing to a faster sandisk card has really improved this.

This is my problem, I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one.

 

i think i'll borrow a friend's 550 try that out at some of the shoots and then try and hire a fast quality lens and see which one i use more...

 

if only i could win the lottery everyday i wouldn't have to think about these things :)

I find that with the 580 in place i can't fire it as a 2nd curtain sync if it's just set on the custom functions on the camera... so i have to set it on the flash instead.

 

but i would say it's easier to set it on the flash because you can access this quickly instead of going through the menu system on the camera.

well no there are times when the second flash would come in handy when i'm doing portraits or shooting bands... but then there are times when a longer focal length would come in handy...

 

just interested to see what people would rather spend the money on that's all

I've now come to the stage whereby I have the money to upgrade a little and I

know this is an odd question and I know i'm going to get the "it depends on

the type of photography you want to do" answer

 

but just as an opinion if given the choice of a new lens such as a 17-40L or a

second 580EX and save the extra money for something later what would you

choose? forget about values etc... just basically Lens or Strobe?

i'm still not sure why everyone compares the nikon d70s with the 350d and now the d80 with the 400d... surely the d80 is going to have more on it because it's more expensive... just like the 350d compared to the d50? considering the 350d and the d50 are the entry level cameras is it not worth making the comparison on those instead?

I can't check right now as I left my 350d at work for some stupid reason... but I don't think you can use a custom white balance on fully automatic... if you go to the settings i think it will only let you select auto white balance...

 

Check though i could be wrong as I always use M when shooting... but what everyone has already said get yourself a bigger CF card and shoot in raw... its great for when you forget to set the white balance because you have to shoot quickly or when the conditions keep changing. looking at a raw file compared to it's jpg convertion you'll also see better edges and i've noticed when converting to a jpg i have to boost the saturation 20-30% to get it looking like the original

to me that sounded like a... we can't say yes for legal reasons but as we're sales people we're not allowed to say no...

personally i would definately get the 50mm f1.8 if you can get a mk I version it's apparently a lot better, because the build quality of the Mk II is really bad but as for images you'll see a definate improvement over the kit lens

"If you have worked for your money, established yourself in life, and your bills are paid you do whatever you want. If your a kid and have bills, are not established enough in life yet, and need excuses to get out of doing homework, GROW UP. You were right WORTHLESS "and pointless" POST."

 

yeah i think you missed the point of the post there eric...

 

yeah do whatever you want but it's like Fisher (with NASA) who spend about $16 million developing a pen that could be used by astronaughts in zero gravity to show their superior technology in the cold war... the russians used a pencil...

 

the point is... why spend all that money on equipment that you'll never use to the full potential... maybe people are thinking well i'll look good with this L glass... in reality taking pictures you should have used a compact camera for make you look like twat.

 

for instance i made a post about macro lenses the other day... now I can afford to spend however much on a canon 100mm macro lens but the question you have to ask is why would i want to? I've never done macro photography... is it a good investment? no... for the same reason i could have bought myself a hummer... but i didn't

you know i never thought about an m42 adapter starting to really kick myself for selling off my old lenses now...

 

because i was so used to the split prism on my pentax i had thought about replacing the focusing screen and looked into it.

 

this article tells you how to do it and gives details of where to get one of these etc

 

http://www.camerahacker.com/Tools/Installing_Haoda_Screen.shtml

 

what's the af confirm adapter?

yeah i know exactly what you mean, personally i think people should be made to learn on manual camera...

 

when i went to digital i bought an xt and the kit lens, which i know isn't the greatest combination, but i wasn't going to spend twice that on the 20d get a serious lens for that and then realise that preferred to shoot film.

 

no matter how bad the kit lens is, if you can take a piece of art with it then doesn't that make you better than someone that shoots with L glass and a FF camera but produces an average image?

 

I have to admit though when i'm walking around london take photographs there are a lot of photographers out there walking around with FF camera's and lenses that can only be described as an extention... and they're shooting snapshots of their family on auto mode... so I second your thoughts!

thanks jim I think i'll check out that lens as it's that cheap...

 

lol about sigma though... maybe sigma do it on purpose so that you have to keep buying new lenses? lol

Hi Bob, I did come across these just after I clicked post, but by unbranded I didn't mean non-OE brand just completely unnamed "canon fit"

 

The kenko ones do look good though and they're about half the price of the 50mm macro lens, but have you had any problems with them getting stuck on the mount of the camera?

looking at the prices for canon branded extension tubes aren't cheap but the unbranded ones will mean my apeture is stuck fully open which one a f1.8 lens can't be a good thing. The 50mm 2.5 is about the same price as a set of these canon tubes though so maybe i'm better off as if i need to sell it, it should be easier to do so

 

maybe i could get an m42 adapter then an extention tube and that way i can control the f-stop as i have manual lenses for that, anyone know if this is possible?

"I've been shooting like a madman since i opened the box and enjoying almost every minute of it"

 

who cares if you overpaid... the point is you thought it was worth that much and from that comment it sounds like you feel that it was worth more!

I might actually give the tube a go although I'd probably use the 50mm 1.8 lens as the kit lens really is a piece of crap... 17-40L is next on my list which is why i don't want to spend too much on the macro lens until i know it's worth it.

 

thanks for the help though :)

I'm looking into Macro photography which hands up i have to say i've never

even tried before but as always i'm not going to discount it before i've tried

it. a fast focusing usm isn't important to me just a good lens that's fairly

cheap (don't want to break the bank on a test) so what lenses should I be

looking at?

 

are there old canon lenses which are available on the secondhand market that

are worth a try? is it better for me to just buy some adapters or are these

completely useless?