arthur_reyes1

Elan IIe, Rebel II and a Holga (I know...its not EOS, but its a fun camera)

50/ 1.8

20-35/ 3.5-4.5

28-105/ 3.5-4.5

100-300/ 4.5-5.6

100/ 2.8 Macro

Various filters

Bogen 3401 tripod with Kirk Ballhead.

Can't afford the L lenses. But for my needs, the setup has given me excellent

results and I've been extremely happy with what I've got. Hoping to go digital

someday, but not ready to make the jump. Maybe when a camera with 1Ds

features, but with the 300D price tag comes out, I'll make the switch. Yeah I

know...it'll be awhile!

I have the lens. I love it. The zoom gives me nice flexibility. Sometimes you can't "zoom with your feet" if you had a prime lens. The lens is also fairly light. I always use it stopped down and it gives great results. I can't afford the L series wide angle zooms, so the 20-35 is an excellente alternative. I use it mostly for landscape photos.

Cool picture!!! I like it!

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't think the A2 supports ettl flash. So if you'll eventually want e-ttl, you might have to consider another camera. I have the ElanIIe. Great camera with lots of features that one can grow into. Also, regarding the "mode" dial issue on the A2...I know two folks that have the A2 and the "mode" dial has given them issues. They say it is quite annoying.

Good luck.

-Art

Hello Par

Pardon my ignorance, but wouldn't bracketing the shot with your film camera be just as easy?

As for the answer to your question...I'm clueless!

I'll see what others have to say.

-Art

Chris

I took a trip to Australia 3 years ago. Most of the pictures I took were for photo album use (prints no bigger than 4x6). I had to travel light so I couldn't take my tripod. The two lenses I used a majority of the time was my 28-105 3.5/4.5 and my 20-35 3.5/4.5. The 28-105 stayed on my camera 90% of the time and I used the 20-35 the rest of the time. I got plenty of excellent shots. So... to stay in your budget of $500, I would suggest the 28-105 or the 28-135IS. Good luck and have fun.

-Arthur

Yes...

Make sure to do what KG said.

A few times I've 1. Forgotten to label the roll and 2. Change the CF setting.

Each time I had to develop the roll of film just incase it was exposed and I did a mid-roll rewind. Turns out each time I did it, the roll was unexposed to begin with.

So lame...you think I'd learn from my mistakes.

Hmmm...I think I'm going to start painting a red line around all my lenses. If I can't have L lenses, at least they'll look like L lenses. And who knows, maybe my photographs will even improve. Woohoo!!

Amen to that brother Irving!!!

Troll or not, the guy has a point!

I've gotten excellent pics with my Holga camera and that only set me back $20.

Buy what you can afford and go take pictures. Its not always about how sharp your pictures. Composition says alot.

Just my 2 cents.

The 28-105 is a great lens for the money. I have it and I've gotten excellent results with it. I also have the 50 1.8. Also an excellent lens. And the cost is cheap too. Its the sharpest lens I have, next to my 100mm macro. Side story regarding the 28-105. I was out taking photos of Pigeon Point Lighthouse on the California Coast a few years back. Ran into a professional photographer (Darrell Gullin). I had actually seen some of his work before. Nice stuff! So he asked me what lens I was using. It was my 28-105. He said it was an excellent lens. So if he thinks it was an excellent lens, its gotta be good right? Then he gave me 2 rolls of some Kodak slide film for free!

Earthman, earthman, earthman.

I must say...you are quite amusing.

Go out and take pictures. Enjoy what you have! Trust me...everything will be groovy!!!

Adrian, You say you love your IIe. But is there anything that you don't like about it? I have the IIe as well and I love the camera. It has served me well. As a previous poster has mentioned, the next step up would be the EOS 3 but that doesn't have a built in flash. Like you, I also like the convenience of a built in flash. However, if you were to get an EOS 3, the 220ex flash is small and compact, but the trade off is that it is not that powerful compared to other canon options, and it doesn't swivel or tilt. What lenses do you have? Perhaps instead of upgrading your camera, maybe you could invest in some L lenses instead. So anyway, if the IIe has served you well, I say there's no need to upgrade. My next upgrade will be a DSLR, but I won't be doing that for quite sometime. I'm waiting for a camera with a full-size sensor that's well below the $1000 limit. Perhaps I'm dreaming, but until then, my IIe will be with me for the long haul.

Hi Jen

From reading your post, you say you are unfamiliar with Canon equipment. But it sounds like you may have quite a bit of Nikon equipment. If so, have you considered going the Nikon DSLR route? You may or may not have thought about it. But to add my 2 cents: If you were to go with the Canon 300D and all its other accessories, you'd have two camera systems. Wouldn't make sense to stick with Nikon, if you do in fact already have Nikon equipment? My apologies if you've already thought of this and I'm just blabbering. -Art

But Bob... the website is in Geman!!!

Is there and english website?

-Art

Therese

I have the 100-300. I love it. I too can't afford L lenses, so I have all the canon "consumer lenses". The 100-300 is quick to focus, nice solid construction and overall it just feels good. My father in-law has the 75-300IS and I've tried it a few times. It is a nice feature that I sometimes wish I had, but not enough to make me want to exchange my 100-300. I've gotten quite good at learning to brace myself and hold steady while shooting at 300. Yeah, IS would be nice, but I think good camera holding technique is just as good too. Also, with 400 speed film I can get some good shot hand-held, and even better with a tripod. I think the 100-300 USM would be a great choice.

David,I was just going to suggest K&S, but then read the rest of your question. Anyway, maybe you could try Adolf Gasser. They located in SF. I've heard good things about them but I'm not sure if they rent lenses. -Art

I think its a great photo.

I like the way the trees frame the bridge.

I haven't seen a photo from that vantage point before. Where was that photo taken with respect to the Opera house?

Keeble and Schucat Photography. California Ave in Palo Alto

I agree with Vandit. People are to quick to blame the equipment and in my opinion, the easiest thing to fix first is the person taking the photo instead of the equipment. Peter, I don't mean to get on your case, but do you think your technique could use work? Are you using a tripod? I have the same lens and print 99% 4x6 and I think the lens is plenty sharp for what I need it to be? Good luck with your work! -Art

Jorge, what kind of statement is that? I do realize you're entitled to your opinion but I carry around an SLR and 99% of my prints are 4x6. I have lots of reasons for carrying around an SLR and I'm sure lots of folks would have similar reasons. My photos go in albums for others to enjoy the pictures. I use them to document life's adventures. An SLR with the assorted lenses I have give me amazing flexibility to be creative, where a disposable point and shoot would not give me those options. I do like to think I have an artistic eye. With an SLR I can control depth of field, I can create movement or freeze action by controling shutter speed. All kinds of things. A disposable P&S will not give me those option. Also, with the lenses I have (granted they are not L lenses, but the canon "consumer zooms") I can get shots that a P&S will not give me. With my 100-300, I can zoom in on things to get different perspectives. With my 100mm macro, I can get 1:1 magnification that at P&S will not give me. That is why I use an SLR for 4x6 prints. 4x6 prints are the perfect size to put in albums. Yes I've made 8x10 and 11x17 prints, but I'm not about to put those in photo albums.

Eric.

I have the USM version and have also used the non-USM version. From pics I've taken I see no difference optically. (Although I've never done any detailed test like the ones posted on this site for other lens comparisons). The USM version is quick to focus and very quiet. I do like that it has FTM focus. I guess the only thing I don't like is that the front element sticks out so darn far. The non-USM version had the front element recessed, so it was protected. Also, it did not have internal focusing like the USM does. That said, I liked that lens too. Both give sharp images with great contrast.

Jordan...will you be using one of the lenses with a DSLR or an SLR. If so, the 1.6 or 1.3 crop factor my influence your choice. That said...I have the 20-35 and I've been extremely happy with it. I use it with my Elan IIe. I use it mostly for landscapes and I've gotten great results. I think the zoom gives me great flexibility. Also the lens is very lightweight. Its a slower lens than the 20 and 24, but since I'm not shooting in low light, it doesn't matter. Yeah, some may say get a prime and "zoom with your feet". But sometimes zooming with my feet is not an option, else I fall off a cliff or into water. Good luck with your lens hunt!

Ditto with what Yakim and Melissa have said. Keep the IIe and use the $ for a nice lens or the 420/550ex flash. I have an ElanIIe but not the 7e. However, I have used the 7e a few times. In my opinion, the cameras are pretty much identical. The advantages you gain are not significant. The IIe pretty much has similar features. In terms of the white autofocus assist light. I find it rather annoying. My wife's rebel has that kind of light and I find it distracting when it goes on. I'm glad I decided to keep my IIe. I think its a great camera. Plus... I like that silver look to it!

Dave,

If you're looking for a small, cheap, compact flash to be used as fill flash only, the 220ex is perfect. Small enough to stick in your pant pocket. But it doesn't swivle or tilt though. I think its around $140, maybe less. I have the Elan IIe, 220ex flash, but no lens hoods for any of my lenses. So I can't answer your question if the lens hood will get in the way of the flash. I would imagine it wouldn't because it sits well above the camera. -Art

I'd say go with the Elan7e. The Ti is a great beginner camera. But the 7e has more features that you might like in the future. I'd be afraid that if you got the Ti, soon down the road you will have wished that you got the 7e. (If your going between those two bodies it sounds like the $$ situation isn't that big a factor). So why not go for the camera that you can grow into. As for the 28-105 lens. It is a great lens and will make for a great all-purpose lens for which you can grow into and experiment with photography. Make sure it is the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, not the f/4.5-5.6. Also, the 50mm 1.8 is a nice cheap, but excellent lens. Consider that in addition to the 28-105. I had these two lenses when I got into photography and I think they make a nice set to start with. Enjoy!