amlan

<p>When you move to Mark II do you still intend to keep the 50D or get rid of it ? If you still plan to continue using 50D, the Tamron is a very good choice for the f/2.8 and VC. But in the future if plan to shoot only with the Mark II, I don't see any point in investing in the Tamron. I have the non-VC version, it a very good lens and I have printed images up to 20*30, using it on a 30D without any issue. </p>

<p>Whatever everybody mentioned about ergonomics are very true. I also personally like the XXD models way better than the Rebels, just because they way they feel in my hand. Having said that, I had the opportunity to use the XT1i from one of my closest friends who just bought it. Finally Canon started putting some rubber onto the Rebels. The back LCD is a huge improvement over 20D, its bigger and has much higher resolution; although the camera is still small, the feeling is better than the old Digital Rebels. But I think the biggest improvement is the processor. 20D uses a DIGIC II, whereas the XT1i uses a DIGIC IV. With the newer model you might see some difference in IQ at high ISO. Given a choice I would pick 40D over XT1i but with 20D I would go with the newer one. <br>

FYI : I personally owned a 30D for about 3 years and a 40 for last 3-4 months. </p>

<p>I just bought a 40D from e-Bay last week. The camera arrived in great cosmetic condition. I paid around $540 for it. When watching auctions on e-Bay for several weeks I noticed that 40D in good condition sells for around $500-650 depending on shutter counts and general condition of the body. So $400 looks like a very good deal to me provided the camera has been cared, lightly used and is in good condition.</p>

<p>Thanks everybody. I am not very sure at this point what I plan to do. 5D is out of question since I invested heavily on APS-C lenses. T2i is a great body but having owned 30D (and Elan 7 even before that) I personally don't like the Rebel ergonomics at all.</p>

<p>Alan - Nice demonstration. I am sure I should be able to take it apart ... but putting the pieces back ? won't bet on my ability to do that!</p>

<p>Nathan - That was the first thing that came to my mind as well. The timer was indeed off!</p>

<p>In an unfortunate recent event my old faithful 30D left me behind and went away (wherever he is, hope he is doing well). Out in the world to hunt for an "used" body I met a guy who was selling his lightly used 40D. The camera looked really in great shape, almost out of the box. He said he wanted to get rid of it since he bought a 7D. To test the camera I attached my Tamron 17-50/2.8, and tried shooting. And then came the surprise moment - it focused properly but won't do anything after that, no shooting. I changed the lens, tried different setting still no result. The guy looked a bit baffled, he tried one of his lenses, this time the camera fired but then again went into the silent "focus-only" mode! </p>

<p>The person was nice and honest, apologized and told that since he did not feel comfortable he won't sell it before getting it fixed from the Canon (the camera around 10 months old so it was still under warranty). A couple of days later I got an e-mail from him saying that he contacted the Canon and fixed the issue by simply blowing from an air canister. Canon tech support told him to give it a try because they thought that after being in storage, the shutter button was possibly sticking due to accumulated moisture and dust. </p>

<p>I am going to take a second look at the camera since it was in really great shape and I thought the guy was honest, but now I also feel a bit concerned about the incident in general. I did some Google searches and found related threads here and elsewhere; although this is not a frequent issue but sometime it does happen. I would appreciate any thoughts from those who experienced it re: how it was fixed, whether the problem came back again or not etc.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Amlan</p>

 

<p>5D was in the market for nearly three years before 5D II came in. And it has only been a little more than a year and a half since the 5D II was introduced. I seriously doubt Canon has any plan of updating the 5D II. Even if they do, 5D II will still remain a great camera and I am sure you will not regret investing in it.<br>

Amlan</p>

<p>Kate,</p>

<p>I own the Tamron lens for last 3 years. Before buying it I had the same dilemma like you and finally could not justify paying a grand for the Canon. I have been extremely satisfied with the Tamron. Just for curiosity I rented the Canon once and compared it with the Tamron. The only difference I found was slightly faster AF with the Canon. I did not find any difference in IQ. However, the IS on Canon was a certain plus (but now you can get it on the Tamron as well). Both these are great lenses. The Tamron also put my once beloved 50/1.8 to rest ... if you talk to the owners of either the Canon or the Tamron many will vouch for their prime-like IQ (even wide open).</p>

<p>Personally I like the combination of Tamron 17-50/2.8, 85/1.8 and 430EX - that combo should come at the price of the Canon.</p>

<p>The 15-85 garnered good reviews so far but personally I would rather have f/2.8 than IS. Under certain situations e.g. indoor/low light shooting with fast moving subjects (kids, pets) is way better with the former. But its just a personal choice.</p>

<p>BTW, for a $1100 lens Canon doesn't even include a hood, which Tamron gives for free!</p>

<p>Amlan</p>

<p>Dammm ... why didn't they do this in the very first place ? The 17-50 remains attached to my 30D for 90% of the time ... I would have bought the VC version without a blink!</p>

<p>If using ambient light is important to you, strongly consider the Tamron 17-50/2.8 which is optically and pricewise very close to the Canon you mentioned. Canon has a much pricier version 17-55/2.8 IS which is also excellent. Both these lenses are optically very good. Constant 2.8 might give you more freedon under low light and might be good for better bokeh in portrait shots. Keep in mind you would lose reach to the longer end by about 15-20mm ... don't know if that is important for you.</p>

<p>"Because carrying one thing around is easier than carrying two things around." - true that you carry less equipment but also give up a lot of functionality ... at the end of the day its more of a personal choice. I still wonder what percentage of people who buy a DSLR for this feature would finally consider the camera as a replacement of a camcorder. At least to me its more like feel good feature - "I am happy that I have it on my camera"! Anyway, who cares, Canon is happy ... they got their market share :)</p>

<p>That just creates even more confusion to casual buyers ... can't wait to see posts like "Which camera - 40D or 50D or 450D or 1000D or 500D" :)<br>

With so many good much cheaper camcorders being on the market, I really wonder why the video mode on DSLR's have become so fascinating!</p>

<p>On a cropped body ... the Tamron by all means. Gives you more reach and a constant 2.8. I own the Tamron and have extensively used the Canon after borrowing from a friend (before buying the Tammy to decide). while 17-40 is a great lens, I personally felt f/4 is a pain under indoor condition in low light. The Tamron is pretty sharp even wide open at 2.8 ... in demanding situations it lets you shoot handheld without crancking up the ISO. </p>

<p>Ditto what the above posts say. With the extra $500 you will get the IS and a slightly better low light AF on the Canon. Like other posts I would also recommend the Tamron over the Sigma. I personally own the Tamron and been extremely happy with its IQ.<br>

Be cautious about the purchase though if you plan to upgrade to a FF soon.</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Rm5I</p>

<p>All three are fine cameras. You can't go wrong with any of these. Here is a <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos1000d%2Ccanon_eos400d%2Ccanon_eos450d&show=all">comparison of the three</a>. They are fairly identical in most respects but as you can see XS was introduced very recently. One major difference IMO is XS has a live-view mode (like P&S digicams) - which may or may not be of any importance to you. XSi is certainly the best of the bunch with spot meter and slightly better ergonomics. As suggested above get a Canon 18-55 IS (NOT the non IS version) lens and you should be all set to experiment and learn. Have fun.</p>

<p>Another vote for Tamron 17-50 & Canon 70-300 IS. As suggested above there would be a hole in the 50-70 mm zone in that case ... Tamron 28-75 and Canon 70-300 IS would fill that in but then on a 40D you have to sacrifice the wide angle need.</p>

I think Canon (and probably Nikon as well) makes much more money from the sale of APS-C camera's than they do from the FFs. Besides as many have already pointed out its easier to fabricate the sensor for a cropped body ... at least from the marketing perspective I don't see any reason why the cropped bodies would vanish.

Many of the Canon's competitors are optically good but when it comes to keeping distortion controlled at wide angle none of them even come close to its performance.

It will be shown as "H" in the top LCD. However, if you check info on individual images, they will show 3200.

<br><br>BTW, IMO the easier way to change ISO to 3200 would be a combination of the ISO button and the QCD ... and it would stay there until you change it again.

Another vote for Tamron 17-50/2.8 and Canon 55-250 combo. 17-85 is a fine lens but if you are really want to take indoor pictures without using the Auto Mode, this lens won't help much at the longer end of the zoom. The Tamron also comes with a hood ...

What does <a

href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=400&Camera=396&Sample=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&LensComp=100&CameraComp=396&SampleComp=0&FLI=0&API=2">this</a>

tell you ?

 

<br><br>Yes, its a bit noisier than Canon USM lenses, but people fuss too much about that ... these are not

musical instruments! At 2.8 I could barely differentiate between this and my 50/1.8 and certainly not in prints.

Great walk-around lens, no regret that I bought it.

If you care about image quality stay away from the 28-300/18-200 type zooms. Keep the 18-55 ... selling it won't

fetch you a fortune anyway and its a decent lens. For longer reach, if you can afford get the Canon 70-300 IS, if

not EF-S 55-200 would be a better choice than those 18-200 type super zooms.

I did some extensive research on this in last couple of weeks and finally decided for the Canon. A few things to

note -

<br>

 

<ul>

<li>Canon's image quality is excellent, many people rate it as L-quality. The Tokina 12-24 is also optically very

good though.

 

<li>On a 30D the Canon will be 16mm equivalent while the Tokina 12mm (and Sigma 12mm as well) will be 19mm

equivalent ... for wide angle use those extra 3mm WILL often count!

 

<li>Canon's distortion is much much lower than any of the other lenses

 

<li>Finally, if these do matter to you ... except for the Tokina 11-16 - Canon is the fastest at the widest

setting and Canon's total coverage (10-22) is at least at per if not better than the most

 

</ul>

 

<br>You may want to check <a href=" http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm">this

review</a>

I had a similar problem with my 30D and 50 1.8, just a couple of months after I purchased it ... did exactly what

Derrick suggested above and it was fine. Could be due to some erratic behavior, since I have never seen it again

didn't research what exactly was the real problem.

 

<br><br>I am 100% certain that is not the case but I hope you don't have any polarizer attached to both the lenses!