alexander_lalla

The special kit comes with a lens and an extra battery, plus a bag. Unfortunately a 2 GB CF 60x card is like $80, so buying an extra one is pushing it, budget wise. The non-special kit comes with a lens as well, but the lens has a larger range and seems to be less quality.

I am definitely going over my budget. The total price comes to about $1600, but it comes with the Canon EOS 40D, I think a 15-70mm lens (but I don't remember at the moment), a bag, 2 batteries and a 2 Gig CF card 60x. Anything I am missing or should reconsider?

Is there any reason to get a zoom lens, like the 17-50mm, for any purpose other then to zoom? Even when I use P&S cameras I hardly ever zoom, after working with video it is ingrained just to physically move closer or further to avoid distortion of the background.

 

I read up on the Canon EOS 40D and it is really good, most of the complaints are trivial. However, I have been unimpressed by the XSi and the XTi. Through out my research the Olympus and Pentax are up there with Canon and Nikon, but I just haven't heard a lot of fuss over them. Time and time again I hear if you are serious about photography, go with Canon or Nikon. While their bodies might be rather equal, it seems Nikon and Canon have a better and more wide range of glass. Even the digital SLR guide on the this site only barely mentions the other brands, and just a little on Olympus because of its Four-Thirds concept. They suggest that Canon and Nikon are a better investment due to their glass.

"Canon EOS 40D ($940) Canon EF-S 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS zoom lens ($170) Canon EF 35 2 prime ($240) or Canon EF 28 2.8 prime ($180) Canon EF 50 1.8 prime ($90) or Canon EF 50 2.5 Macro prime ($250) if you want the cheapest macro out there (although it only offer 1:2 magnification, it's probably enough for you)."

 

If I go with the 40D, what is the most basic lens I would need just to run around and learn about my camera? The Canon EF 50 1.8 prime?

Is there any reason to go with Canon over Nikon, other then the price?

Specifically, I want to set up scenes using clay and found items, and make miniature sets, and photograph them. Basically making a tiny studio (macro/studio). I also want to be able to do portraits, for example putting up a sheet, and taking photographs of a model friend, I also want to be able to just walk around outside and take photos, whether it is flowers, landscape, the sky or simply just interesting people or things. In this site's buyers guide, they suggested getting a lens similar to your own eye's perspective, in order to learn better. So I don't entirely mind waiting on zoom. I want to be good and I am less interested in using it as a P&S.

Hello everybody, I would be very grateful if some of you could help me make an

informed decision on which DSLR camera to buy. I have been doing a ton of

research, but have been unable to make a decision. My budget is around $1000 and

I am very much an amateur. Which means I wouldn't mind the kit lens because I

plan on taking a long time learning about the camera and photography. I come

from a filmmaker background, so I am already familiar with manipulation of

light, etc... My intentions with the camera are to be all purpose. I want to be

able to handle macro/studio work such as miniature models using clay. I also

plan on using it for street, portrait and landscape including skies. As I said

before, I am an amateur so I plan

on taking my time, playing around and getting to know the camera and reviewing

the techniques and technical side. I am also aware that you spend your money on

glass, and upgrade the body later. However, I don't make a lot of money so I

would like to buy a rather nice body that will last me, so I can focus on

getting a nice collection of glass, then much later upgrade the body.

 

Thanks in advance!