suzanne_d

<p>I have the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS Lens and LOVE IT. Now I understand the difference in quality of an L lens vs. a much, much cheaper lens. I love the photos that I get from this lens. For me, the IS is very important since I hand hold most of my photos.</p>

<p>I've owned a G3 and a G9. I am mostly a semipro dSLR user but like to have a small camera also, yet want high quality images. The G series does just that. I am so tempted to buy a small megazoom yet haven't due to my fear of poor image quality. I've taken some fabulous photos with my G9 and always carry it with me as a second camera or when I want to travel very light.</p>

<p>When I went from a "kit" lens to the Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens 5 yrs. ago, I couldn't believe what a difference it made in the quality of my photos. This light weight Tamron lens is superb and stays on my dslr most of the time. What a great lens.</p>

<p>Weight & security are critical with international backpack travel. I traveled in Europe with my XSI with a superb Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens (love this lens) plus a Canon G9 pocket camera 35-135. Believe me, there will be many times that you won't want to pull out a big camera or big lens and a little high quality P & S is wonderful and has a little telephoto capabilities also. Having a second backup camera is important to me. Years ago I dropped my SLR on pavement on a photo trip in the Canadian Rockies without a camera shop in site. It was awful.</p>

<p>I love my XSI that I bought used as an inexpensive light weight body as a back up to my Canon 40d. I love both but actually prefer the XSI for its simplicity. It's great for hiking. I haven't had WB problems with it any more than other SLR's I've owned. In the big picture, Canon lenses aren't quite as pricey as Nikons and, in my opinion, the lens are your biggest investment and most important. A camera body changes every few years but I keep my lenses.</p>

<p>Last October I spent 2 1/2 wks. exploring the South Island of New Zealand by car. I brought a Canon 40d and a Canon XSi plus a Tamron 17-50, Canon 70-200 4.0 L, and a Tamron 11-18 WA. I find it to be such a hassle constantly changing lens so it was a real treat to have two camera bodies with lenses already attached. When I was on a difficult long mountain hike where weight was a big issue, I carried my XSI with the 17-50 plus a little Canon G9 pocket camera. I almost always tuck away my G9 in my pack as an extra camera because I've had the unfortunate experience of dropping my SLR on concrete and breaking it on a photo excursion! Never again will I go on a trip without a spare camera. It has saved me more than once since then.</p>

I absolutely love the quality of my G9 photo's. Sometimes I just don't want to carry my dSLR!

While I shoot with a Canon XTi most of the time, I LOVE my Canon high end G9 P & S. I had a G3 which also was superb. In fact, I still have it and it shoots fabulous pics. I love having the video capabilities of a P & S. If your wife just wants fabulous shots with minimal hassle, get her a G9.

April is a wonderful time to go there.

Help, I just can't decide if the more professional camera of the 40D/50D is worth the extra weight compared to my

Rebel XTi. Most of my photography is done while hiking & traveling. I love nature and landscape photography.

I consider myself a serious amateur, often geting called upon to do friends & family weddings when they can't afford

a professional photographer. Also, I volunteer to do some family portrait work outside for low income families.

I'm concerned that the 40D/50D will just feel so heavy lugging it on the hiking trails that I'll end up substituting it for

my G9 P & S and regret upgrading.

To those of you who upgraded from an XT/XTi, has it been worth the extra weight? Did you notice an improvement in

your photo's? Is it a much more pleasurable camera to shoot with?

Should I sell my XTi and get a 40D, 50D or maybe just an XSi (light but with spot metering which I want) or just keep

my XTi? With camera body technology changing so rapidly, I'm not so sure that it is worth the cost of upgrading to

the more semi pro camera.

Bulky, HEAVY camera....is it really worth it when most of my photography is out in nature and I have to carry it often

for miles UPHILL in the mountains? Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts with me.

Hi Sam,

I have the Sigma 70-300 that I thought I'd use but haven't. I bought it last year for a trip to Alaska, used it a few times and haven't touched it since then so it is near perfect essentially new. I'm going to sell it because I just bought an 18-250 Tamron lens today which will serve my needs. I just hate carrying more than one lens so consequently the long lense isn't carried since I rarely need telephoto. If you're interested in a great deal, email me photog4funn@earthlink.net I live in San Diego