davyjo

<p>I'd definitely talk with your homeowners insurance company if you are not a professional photographer. It's worth a call. Many policies cover personal property losses away from home.</p>

 

<p>I've owned the 50/1.8 lens for 5 or 6 years. It has been my "winter walk" lens for several winters. When I don't want to take the 17-55 IS out in the cold, I put the 50 on and it works, very well. It has also been my portrait lens of choice ( on the 30D, 50D, and now 7D) for all of those years. I have had two 1.4's that haven't given significantly better image so I've sold them.<br>

It takes great images, has stood up to the trials I have thrown at it, and keeps working.<br>

Would I like to have USM and full time manual focusing? Sure! But for the $80 I spent on this lens it is the best value in my camera bag by far.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Simply knowing the date the lens was manufactured, while interesting, doesn't tell me everything I really need to know when I buy a used lens."</p>

<p>You are right Tudor, it doesn't tell you everything but is does tell you something. One piece of information. Combine the datecode with the reputation and word of the seller and you should have peace of mind.<br>

Personally I think it is a useful piece of information.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I like the tripod ring to allow instant switch from landscape to portrait orientation of the camera. You don't have to fumble with a ballhead or flip the camera on an L-plate. Just loosen the collar and spin the camera/lens.</p>

<p>Go for the 5D II if money isn't a worry. It is a superb camera for portraits and weddings. If you were shooting sports or wildlife I'd go for the 7D.<br>

You will be very happy with the 5D II or 7d but plan on spending lots on quality lenses.</p>

 

<p>Buy a 50 1.8 and give it a try. You can pick up a used one here or on fremiranda.com for $75-$80. Take a bunch of pictures and see how it works. If you find it lacking sell it, you'll loses the cost of shipping ($5?) and buy the 1.4. If that one is lacking watch out. The 1.2 is a lot of money!<br>

Some of my favorite pictures were taken with the 1.8...on a 5D II! Yeah a $80 piece of plastic on a $2500 body.</p>

<p>I imagine that the 17-55 IS would really shine on the 7D. I wouldn't hesitate to put it up against the 17-40 or 24-70 L glass. I had one with my 50D and it is a great lens. I just sold it because I also picked up a 5D II and replaced it with the 24-70, i also replaced the 10-22 with the 17-40.<br>

I think you should buy a 7d!</p>

<p>Back pocket of my jeans.</p>

<p>I picked up a 28-105 a couple months ago for $85. It is a little beat up but the glass is clean and it works perfectly. It lives on my Xti (third body). It's what I grab if i want to toss a camera in the truck or motorcyle to take along which is lamost everyday.<br>

It takes wonderful images outside in decent light and it's compact and light. It does like to be stopped down a bit but it is not junk.</p>

<p>Just a slight correction, James. The 1D has a mid-sized sensor. It has a 1.3 crop factor.</p>

<p>Don't buy anything until you try the 28-135. It should be more than adequate for a while.<br>

After you've tried it, then figure if you need wider or longer?<br>

The one lens I would own for a 50D is the Canon 1-55 IS. BUT, its not a cheap lens.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It might be a micro adjustment issue, but my Mk II is dead on with all my lenses.<br>

If you Google any problem with virtually any product you will find a lot of information out there.<br>

Stop one of those lenses down a couple stops and see how well it works. Or concentrate on where you are placing the active focus point. If you are using <strong>all </strong>the points it may be very difficult to find where the camera is actually focusing.</p>

<p>The 10-22 is a very good lens. I'd say the image quality from it is as good (or better) than the 17-40 on a full-frame camera.<br>

17mm is wide on a 7D but a 10-22 is a LOT wider! Once you try the ultra-wide, you'll probably be hooked.</p>

<p>I use the Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home. It will a body mounted on a 70-200 2.8 IS, a 24-70L, a 580EX II, a bunch of batteries, filters, CF cards, Cybercyncs, a 50mm 1.8, and a bottle of water. No, I really don't put a bottle of water in with all that stuff, but I could.<br>

I'm not a fan of backpack but that is a choice we all have to make.<br>

Sometimes I carry two bags, and a tripod, and stuff in my pockets.</p>

<p>Some of the off brand LP-E6 batteries are sold with a charger and come with instructions NOT to charge them with the Canon charger. Just something to keep in mind.<br>

I've been using non-Canon batteries in my XT, 30D, 50D, 5D, XTi for years without any problems.</p>

<p>A 60%<br>

T 20%<br>

M 20%<br>

P 0%</p>

 

<p>I think you should own both. I do and I am very happy!<br>

If I was going to own one body it would be a 5D Mk II. Full frame and the pixel density to crop like an APS-C.</p>

 

<p>I'd certainly keep it. I do a lot of walking and always bring a camera with me. Sometimes it's the 5D with the 24-70L, or the 50 1.8 or the 17-40L or the 70-200 2.8 IS or the Zenitar 16mm Fisheye or the 300mm 4 IS or the 100mm Macro.<br>

OR I grab the 50D with one of those. One lens for the walk and of course whatever I take a picture of that day has to fit with that camera/lens combination. I find the challenge of using what I have in hand to be very entertaining and a good learning experience.<br>

Either body with the 50 1.8 is a compact and very useful combination. If I always took the 24-70 I'd get mighty lazy and a lot less creative.<br>

So my answer is: Keep it.<br>

AND USE IT.<br>

Just put it on the camera and take pictures of the kids/dogs/wife/trees.<br>

Zoom with your feet!<br>

Play with the f/1.8.<br>

HAVE FUN!</p>

 

<p>I own both the 5D and 50D. I find they complement each other very well.<br>

Portraits, landscapes, wide angle, low light? 5D<br>

Telephoto, sports, macro? 50D<br>

Not sure which I'd select if I could only have one. I'd probably trade both for a 5D II though. You should be able to crop the middle out of one of those images to match the 50D's image.</p>

<p>The only thing that I'm sure of is that I have saved the image on the bunny and I'm going to use it. SOON!</p>

<p>I gave my wife a new mainsail for our 33 foot sailboat for Christmas. That was about as good as the vacuum cleaner for the anniversary. If you really want to push her over the edge, buy <strong>her</strong> something!</p>

<p>I own both the 50D and 5D. I agree that the 5D would probably be a better bet.<br>

I disagree with the assertion that the 50D hasn't been a success. It is a great camera. If you crop the heck out of a shot you will get crappy pictures. If you shoot it like you would a 35mm you will get fantastic images. How often do people shoot a 35mm expecting to get a 8X10 out of 1/4 of the negative?<br>

Either camera will produce wonderful images. Just remember, the photographer is quite a bit more important than the camera.<br>

AND good glass is important. More so than a "good" body.</p>

<p>I'd say the image is pretty well exposed and the flare conveys a sense of being there, looking into the sun. My eyes surely couldn't produce that image.<br>

I like it.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>