kayuh_laju

<p>First child yeah.</p>

<p>Get the camera now.. which I suggest the D90. <br>

However, I would recommend a 35mm instead of 50mm because you want to get close to the child. The 50mm simply too long. <br>

If you have slightly extra cash, get the reasonable price 18-70mm F3.5-4.5, yet have stunning optics.<br>

If you want it easy & snappy, especially with babies, get the 35mm.</p>

<p>Again, get the camera now & practice with it to get the shot that you want for your first child. The practice is priceless.</p>

<p>For kit lens, get the 18-70mm.</p>

<p>If you're looking for constant F2.8 lens, I recommend you the Tokina 16-50mm. It has much better built and faster AF the the Tamron and Sigma.</p>

<p>I love my 18-70mm.</p>

<p>My D90 has the AF 50mm f1.8 when shooting in low light condition. Where conditions permit, I actually prefer my AF-S 18-70mm f3.5-4.5.</p>

<p>Before I bought the 18-70mm, I rented the AF-S 17-55mm and borrowed (from friend) the AF-S 16-85mm VR. The 17-55mm is just too expensive for me, and the 16-85mm is just too slow (f5.6 at 85mm).</p>

<p>I compromised on price and performance and bought the 18-70mm, and actually quite happy with it.</p>

<p>Technical officer 1: D700 sir, yes sir.</p>

<p>Captain "Smith": Are you sure?</p>

<p>Technical officer 1: Positive sir, D700 sir, yes sir.</p>

<p>Technical officer 2: Canon 5D Mark II sir, yes sir.</p>

<p>1. Going to Central Asia - Get a proper camera bag. A simple one would be Tamrac Zoom 7, better still get a small camera backpack such as Tamrac Adventure 7.<br>

2. Get the new D60 with the basic 18-55mm VR kit lens. Don't risk buying secondhand body when you said the trip is of a lifetime. A better option, and money aside, is to get the D90.<br>

3. Buy the D60 now, get really familiar with it before the trip. If you don't, point and shoot camera will do better job.<br>

4. Get a small yet reasonably sturdy tripod, to take photos of yourself and when the shutter speed is low.<br>

5. Make sure you have a least an extra spare battery (more is better), and don't be stingy on the memory cards as well.<br>

6. Shoot in RAW+JPEG, when you think you really need to capture "that moment".<br>

7. Get a camera/lens cleaner kit. They usually contain a blower, brush, lens cloth and special cleaning liquid.<br>

8. If you think the 18-55mm is too short, consider the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm IF ED VR lens. It's cheap yet deliver quite amazing results.<br>

Having said all that, IMHO point 3 and 5 are the most important.</p>

<p>I bought my D90 3 weeks ago and using it with AF-S 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 and AF 50mm F1.8 lenses.<br>

Let me give you my review based on yout consideration:<br>

1. Photography in existing light - I just put in the 50mm F1.8 and set my ISO at auto (maximum of 800) and I am happy with 99% of the outcome.<br>

2. Plan out shot - Put it on the tripod, use Liveview to compose your image and go back to normal mode to use remote trigger to avoid camera shake.<br>

3. Don't want to feel like toy - My Canon 400D feels like a toy, but the D90 feels solid and dense. The D90 grip also fit my entire palm for convincing grasp.<br>

4. Outdoor photography - I put it in my backpack and went mountain biking with my 50mm!<br>

5. Lenses - The new 35mm F1.8 should be suitable for travel and low light situations. As for the 18-200mm, I tested it before I bought the secondhand 18-70mm and I found that the 18-70mm is much sharper and slightly faster in focusing.</p>

<p>Drawbacks - On paper it has only one cross-type sensor which make D90 a little undesirable, but in practical I'm reasonably happy with the performance of the other normal sensors. However, I still wish it has 9 cross-type sensors.</p>

<p>Go for the Pentax K20D. The photos from the camera is just sharp, contrasy and colour-well balance.<br>

It also has built-in camera stabiliser that is very useful, and the weather sealing is just as good as the super high end camera.</p>

I had the same dilemma before.

I decided to save more money and later got the Sigma 100-300mm F4 EX IF HSM. It is sharp and fast enough for

my girls' cheerleading actions at F4. With my small 400D, it gave me a whopping 480mm focal length which I think

is quite long for me.

Try going here (http://www.naturephotographers.net/je1001-2.html) for nature photograher review and also go to

photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/328-sigma-af-100-300mm-f4-ex-hsm-apo-lab-test-report--review)

for technical review.

I initially bought a 580. After some cost-benefit (at least to my benefits..) analysis, I decided to invest on a 430 and

ST-E2 about 6 months after that.

The reason is very simple. I don't like direct flash and so do most of my clients, whose includes my wife.

When I only had the 580, I had to flash bounce here, flash bounce there. Some images were OK, but mostly were

not to my liking.

Then I got the 430 and ST-E2. Firstly, the ST-E2 makes the camera lighter and more balance compared to mounting

the 580, hence I'm more mobile now.

Secondly, no direct flash, only lights from two sides (or one.. depending on the situations such as window lights)

which is beautiful and natural looking.

Third, the ST-E2 had solved my lens hunting problems when capturing photos in low light situations such as in

restaurants, churches, mosques and "wild" parties. It also got rid of the annoying focus-assist flash strobes, the

Canon's dSLR feature which I hate the most.

Forth, they all act as a mini studio for my wife's restaurant food.

A word of caution, get one or two spare batteries for the ST-E2 or you need to change your setup during an event.

If you're sticking to 450D, here are my suggestions of the lenses:

1. Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 (significantly better than the kit lens and 17-85mm F4-5.6, and quite small),

2. Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 (for portrait with great background blur, and can also be double for still life, and still smaller than Canon 70-200mm F2.8)

3. Sigma 100-300mm F4 (good optics compared to the 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS)

I was contemplating to get either the Canon 17-55 F2.8 or 17-40 F4L about 2 months ago.

I finally chose neither, and got the Tamron instead because of its competetive and low price, and good technical data/reviews from Photozone.

I never regretted it. The pictures are much sharper than I expected, and I love the size of the lens. The money that I saved is now going towards the new 50D.

I tried to rent a 24-105, but I could get a shop here in Malaysia that rent that particular lens. They have the long zooms. So, I couldn't try it in low light condition yet.

Steve, you're right. The old Elan II/50 has the AF assist beam built into the body and it is far more effective and less annoying than on the 400D. Bring it back Canon...

I have a 28-135mm f3.5-5.6IS lens. I was using the film Elan 50 camera before and last summer I plunged into the

digital world. I bought the 400D.

I was very happy with the lens when pairing it with the Elan. But with the 400D, the autofocus seems to hunt a lot in

low light situation e.g. normal indoor lighting. It never happened when I used the lens with the Elan. I also have

50mm f1.4 and there is no problem on both cameras.

I tried to increase the ISO, but to no avail.

Is it the 400D or the lens?

If it the lens, does the 24-105mm f4L has the same problem when pairing it with 400D?

By using the 400D, I lost and missed the wide 28mm focal length. So, I'm thinking of either the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 or

the 17-40 f4L. Please give some insight on these lenses as well.