david_ahn

Phishing, not just spam. I got the same phishing email, links to udeth dot com.

 

Pretty sly, I was fooled at first; better than usual image quality, the top link does go to photo.net, but every other link goes to udeth.com. No doubt to get your credit card information and/or identifying data.

<p>You may be able to pick up a 50D with 28-135 IS on Craigslist.org for about $1K (I almost bought it, but decided to wait for the 7D). The lens can then be sold for $300-350, resulting in a net cost of $700 or so for the body. My rationale for the 50D is that it has 50% more pixels with the same per-pixel sensor noise, giving you much more "headroom" before you start lusting after more megapixels.</p>

<p>As for a lens, I'd strongly suggest you rent/borrow a 50mm f/1.4 and try it as a main walkaround lens and see if you can live with the tradeoffs. Aside from the lack of wide angle focal lengths, and having to walk to frame your shots more, you will get phenomenal indoor shots at ISO 1600 w/o a flash with awesome background blur. And with the extra 5 megapixels, you don't have to have the perfect framing, you can crop a ton and still get the detail you want!</p>

<p>If you like landscapes, consider a 15mm f/2.8 fisheye (Canon or Sigma depending on best price; reviews say both are very sharp). You can get awesome fisheye shots or use a fisheye to rectilinear filter to get standard rectilinear ultrawide landscapes (rectilinear ultrawide primes are expensive!).</p>

<p>You may be able to pick up a 50D with 28-135 IS on Craigslist.org for about $1K (I almost bought it, but decided to wait for the 7D). The lens can then be sold for $300-350, resulting in a net cost of $700 or so for the body. My rationale for the 50D is that it has 50% more pixels with the same per-pixel sensor noise, giving you much more "headroom" before you start lusting after more megapixels.</p>

<p>As for a lens, I'd strongly suggest you rent/borrow a 50mm f/1.4 and try it as a main walkaround lens and see if you can live with the tradeoffs. Aside from the lack of wide angle focal lengths, and having to walk to frame your shots more, you will get phenomenal indoor shots at ISO 1600 w/o a flash with awesome background blur. And with the extra 5 megapixels, you don't have to have the perfect framing, you can crop a ton and still get the detail you want!</p>

<p>If you like landscapes, consider a 15mm f/2.8 fisheye (Canon or Sigma depending on best price; reviews say both are very sharp). You can get awesome fisheye shots or use a fisheye to rectilinear filter to get standard rectilinear ultrawide landscapes (rectilinear ultrawide primes are expensive!).</p>

<p>I agree with Thomas. Many technology columnists don't understand the technology they write about. Or the nature of the people creating and pushing the limits of the technology, making the "impossible" possible. Remember when the "experts" said Y2K was going to bring the world to its knees?</p>

<p>The 5D Mark II's larger sensor and better low-light performance will give you better video, especially in dark scenes. But in other respects (still frame rates, better metering & focusing), the 7D's dual DIGIC IV chips will outdo the 5D Mark II's single DIGIC IV, and the 1.6X crop factor will give you more of a reach for wildlife photography. I'm planning on adding a 7D to my 5D Mark II to have the best of both worlds.</p>

<p>Between the 5D Mark I and the 7D, if 8 fps and video aren't necessary for what you do, I vote for the 5D. Due to its full-size sensor with larger pixel size, its high-ISO performance is probably better than the 40D/50D/7D. These are 3 iterations of Canon APS-C sensors that increase pixel density without improving noise (though with smaller pixels, keeping noise the same IS improved noise). I'm basing this on photos from a beta 7D unit (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10042-10239).</p>

<p>As others have mentioned, not on your menu but the best setup is a 5D Mark II for landscape & available light and a 7D for sports/wildlife. (Have 5DMk2, will buy 7D.)</p>

<p>Between the 5D Mark I and the 7D, if 8 fps and video aren't necessary for what you do, I vote for the 5D. Due to its full-size sensor with larger pixel size, its high-ISO performance is probably better than the 40D/50D/7D. These are 3 iterations of Canon APS-C sensors that increase pixel density without improving noise (though with smaller pixels, keeping noise the same IS improved noise). I'm basing this on photos from a beta 7D unit (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10042-10239).</p>

<p>As others have mentioned, not on your menu but the best setup is a 5D Mark II for landscape & available light and a 7D for sports/wildlife. (Have 5DMk2, will buy 7D.)</p>

<p>Sorry so late to the party... assuming still subjects, the 24-70 gives you 1 stop of aperture over the 24-105, but the IS on the 24-105 gives you 3 stops of stabilization, resulting in a net 2 stops advantage for the 24-105 ASSUMING a still subject.<br>

Add to that the weight, focal length, sharpness advantages, and in MOST situations, the 24-105 is the better lens.<br>

David</p>