citizensmith

Sure creativity, composition, and timing are the most important things, but the same photo taken with a decent lens will be notably better due to things like contrast, saturation, distortion and such. In some instances the extra quality may be what brings an average photo up to a good photo.

 

Additionally at times where you are pushing the limits of your equipment (low light for instance) there are shots where a slow hyperzoom just won't even have the capability to make the shot.

 

Photographic ability is the primary factor, but equipment helps. Of course equipment doesn't make a good photographer is absolutely true.

I spend the least amount possible on a body that will just pass the grade, and then sink every available penny left into lenses. Did it for film, still doing it for digital.

 

Of course I'm actually getting pretty close to being happy with my lens collection (a couple of L zooms and a few primes) which is kind of scary in a good way.

He's got a well regarded L lens. He wants a fairly well regarded consumer lens.

 

So yes he'll lose optics. They'll be more distortion at the wide end, CA, and it'll be a bit softer. He'll be moving from an effective 39-112 lens to an effective 28-135 lens. He'll get IS but it'll be on a slower lens. At the long end the 24-70 is 2 stops faster than the 17-85 so there it only gains him 1 additional stop, and remember IS doesn't freeze action. If he wants the IS for indoor sports or something it will be little to no use.

 

So basically I think it would be a bit of a dumb move. He'd be better off spending the cash on a 10-22 or 17-40 if the lack of wide range is the problem.

Definitely a backpack for hiking. Not only does it distribute the weight better but you don't have that weight swinging around. On even a moderate hike having your pack secured in one place can make a big difference. The last thing you want is it swinging into a rock or catching on a branch as you scramble down a steep trail.

 

Personally I have a Crumpler budgie smuggler for everyday use (RebelD, 17-40 and 85) a LowePro PhotoRunner for long hikes when I don't want to carry much equipment (RebelD, 24, 85) and a LowePro Minitrekker for when I want to bring everything.

 

Once the minitrekker is full and I've added food, water and a tripod it can all get pretty damn heavy though. Particularly notable when I'm teaching a class to a bunch of people with digital P&S cameras and I feel like a pack mule. :)

I had one for a while and had no major issues with it. It's as good as the 75-300 lenses just lacking the extra range. Of course the 200-300 part is where those lenses are at their weakest so no huge loss. The 80-200 is very lightly built, of average focus speed, and doesn't allow FTM.

 

If you can track down a used 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 (not the 70-210 f/4) you'd have a great lens as its optically a bit better and offers ring-USM and a non-rotating front and such.

 

If the 80-200 is all you can afford, don't worry, you aren't buying a complete lemon, but remember it is just a $120 lens so don't expect miracles.

As consumer zooms go the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 is near the top of the pile. However its not a great portrait lens (not fast enough) and will distort more than the 28 prime. Sure you can get good portraits and wide angle shots, just the primes are better. The 28-105 was my goto lens for years on my Elan 7e.

 

And having said that if the only lens in my bag was the 50 f/1.8 I'd still be buying a 28-105 without hesitation.

But you'd be better of walking out with a Rebel D and some new lenses you bought with the difference in price.

 

With the money you save you could get a some nice L glass (17-40 f/4L or a 70-200 f/4) or a few primes (24 f/2.8, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8). That would improve the quality of your work more than the improvements from the 20D over the 300D.

>>Wait until the waranty runs out or you may end up with an expensive paperweight?

 

I've seen a ton of posts talking about how cool the hack is. I've never seen one single post saying it killed anyones camera. Should tell you something as the bad news always spreads way faster than the good.

 

Oh, and it worked for me.

 

And as others have said, no way to check how much your rebel has been used aside from looking for signs of wear and tear. There are just too many things that mess with the file numbering system for that to be reliable, and only the 1 series cameras record number of shutter actuations.

Doesn't matter what side you cut from but you need to cut out a chunk that shows the full name of the lens.

 

The point in the cut out bit is not to show what you bought (the receipt, warrantee and UPC pretty much cover that) but to prove you have an actual real product and not just a bunch of stuff you copied from someone.

 

Most rebates just ask for the original cut out UPC and not a random chunk of box. Not sure why Canon is doing it that way.

 

And make sure to copy everything before you send it in. Rebates always seem to have a fairly high rate od screw ups no matter who the company is.

And please stop using IE or photoviewer as they both suck.

 

Go to www.irfanview.com and download their excellent freeware image viewer.

Then go to www.goggle.com/downloads and get their excellent freeware image organizer.

 

Both will let you resize very easily. Irfanview will also then let you stick the image as a wallpaper.

 

While you are downloading things quit with this Internet Explorer crap and get yourself Firefox from www.mozilla.org. It's free, beats IE and you'll be waving goodbye to 95% of the pop-ups, browser hijacks and and good bunch of viruses.

 

Your life will be a whole lot easier with some better software installed. :)

I agree with Greg. Not just that, but if you've got one and its fine you don't go about posting about how cool it is that it doesn't have a back focus problem. The posts only come from those that do have problems further distorting the issue.

 

So sure there may be a few out there with a slight focus problem and you may end up with one. Maybe you should be a lottery ticket as well, play the odds. And look at the number of recalls that go out on cars. Something that could potentially put your health at risk, and it never stops people buying them.

 

My 70-200 f/4L on my Rebel D works perfectly and is a wonderful lens that I'd never hand back. Go ahead, you won't regret it.

>>If you don't like it, you can sell it here or on *bay for a profit.

 

That of course depends on how much you buy it for first.

 

The metal mount is superfluous on such a small lens and the focus motor is the same. However it has a distance scale (if you ever wanted such a thing) and as others have said is somewhat better built.

 

So do you want to spend $70 on a new Mk2 or whatever someone is asking on a better built Mk1 that no doubt has some milage on it?

If you think you'll get 40 purchases then figure out what you'd like to make in an evening and divide by 40. I think 3 to 6 quid a print would be reasonable depending on the cost of your frames.

 

You may also want to print out some blank forms that folks can fill out who would like a nice 8x10 mailed to them later. I know it wasn't something you mentioned, but printing out some forms will cost you very little, and that way you stand a chance to make some extra money from the evening. A nice 8x10 could go for 8 to 12 quid so could really help profits.

I have a friend who does something very similar. He has a bank of 3 computers, networked to his central PC (all on a rolling cart) and people just look at the photos, write down the numbers of those they like, and fill out a form. He generally prints later and provides 8x10s.

 

The twist with his set up is that he also has a large selection of backdrops available from his personal photography library. The clients also get to pick a backdrop and they are the photoshoped in. Given a plain background this is quick to do and reasonably effective. It can look cheesy but it is very popular.

 

For onsite printing I use an Epson Picturemate. The quality is marginally behind the Canon Dye Sub printers but it still quickly produces decent, smudge proof prints. Its also about half the cost of the Canon printers to use (29cents a print vs around 55 for the Canons). I tend to chose photos myself and stick the flashcard in the printer if I have to, or a laptop if I have time/space/helper.

 

You can't really use the Capture utility as you'll be getting in the way of whomever is on your computer. Better to have a few flash cards and just swap them back and forth regularly.

Check on ebay and sell whichever one you'd get the most money for. When I went digital I had two film bodies, an Elan 7e and a 1000FNS. I sold the Elan for $240, and all the 1000's were selling for then was around $75. As all it would be is a back up body I happily took the extra cash and added it to my lens fund.

Funny this. A couple of posts up there is someone asking if its wrong to put a 70-200 L lens on a 'lowly' Elan 7E. The general response is that it is the right thing to do as you are better spending your money on glass rather than bodies. The point is also made that spending $1500 on a body and then skimping on a $150 lens is kind of stupid as you are really wasting the money you spent on the bodies.

 

If you can't afford a 70-200 f/4 L then sell one of those two bodies and use it to buy some decent lenses.

 

Or, get the 75-300 and look on the bright side, it comes with built in 'soft focus' mode for the 200-300mm focal lengths (which you can't disable). Oh boy, then you could slap a cheapy teleconverter on it and really see what people mean when they talk about soft and crappy looking photos. :)

 

It'll look great on your 1V though.

FWIW I think I've made my decision.

 

I'm going to get my hands on a 17-85 to check personally the quality as it sounds very variable. If I get one I like and keep it I'll pick up (as soon as I can afford it) a 20 f/2.8. This way I have a high quality, reasonably wide lens, and a walk-around lens. And I'm over budget. Ah well.

 

OK so that relies on me finding a 17-85 I like, and then finding the extra cash for the 20, but clearing the 4 'wide' lenses out my bag will certainly help with that. Lets see if I end up selling it and switching to the 17-40 6 months down the line. :)

 

Thanks for everybodies thoughts on this.

Thanks for the feedback. It looks like as much as I'll be continually wondering what the extra 40-85 range and IS would be like the 17-40 is the way to go. Selling the 18-55, 24, and 28-105 (yes I do currently have too much glass) will help pay for it and lighten my load. If the 17-40 shows to have the same optical snap as my 85 and 70-200 I think it'll be a well used lens.

 

Any other comments would still be appreciated.

So this has been talked about some in previous posts but I'm still

undecided.

 

I've currently got a 18-55, 24, 24-85 and 28-105 (the good one)

sitting in my bag. I'm thinking of either getting a 17-40 (and

possibly keeping the 24-85) or a 17-85 (and definitely keeping the

24). FWIW I've also got a 85 and a 70-200 and those stay. I'm using

a 300D.

 

What I'd like is a decent wide lens to pair with the 70-200, and often

act as a single lens walkaround. I'd have no problem with the 17-40

if it wasn't for the somewhat limited range (27-64), large size, and

apparently cumbersome hood. I'd have no problem with the 17-85 if it

wasn't for the significant number of reviews complaining about

softness, distortion and CA when wide and open.

 

Some specifics I'd love to hear opinions on are...

 

17-40, how often to people find themselves running into the long end

of the range? How cumbersome to people find it, particularly with the

hood mounted? Do people use it without feeling the need to carry

other lenses?

 

17-85, optically how does it compare to lenses like the 28-105 and

24-85 as these are what I'm used to using as normal zooms. Optically,

how much of an improvement over the 18-55 is it?

 

I realize the 17-85 is bit expensive, but as I'll be selling some

stuff to help pay for either lens the comparative costs I'm fine with.

I also have no problem with EF-S lenses as I don't see a larger

sensor in my near future. Lastly, no thanks, don't want a 50 f/1.8

:) Had one and never used it.

 

Thanks for your input

I'm with Eddie. A rebelD will take better pictures than a 20D if you can afford to put a decent lens on the rebel, and just a beer bottle bottom on the 20D.

 

With film cameras the lens was more important than the body. With digital that isn't as true due to the variety of sensors found in the bodies. The difference in sensor quality between the 20 and rebel is not as significant as the difference in optical quality between a 90-300 and a 70-200 f/4L. Sure its all round a better camera, but I think you kind of shot yourself in the foot by blowing all your cash on the body and leaving none for the lens.

 

To (kind of) answer your question though, a Canon 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 would be a great choice for you but are only available used.

You could maybe give a little more room for Pros and Cons. Also, the link to image bit, does that need to be a specific link to an image file, or just to a place you can go and easily grab one?

 

Aside from that, thanks for the effort, its certainly appreciated, and I'll be more than happy to add some information on the bags I own.

Go ahead and get it. It's not going to cost you $150 because you'll save the box and stuff, and then in 18 months time when you are ready to get a 70-200 f/4 you can sell it on ebay for $130. I did exactly that. So don't look at it as a $150 lens. Look at it as a $20 lens rental.

 

And to agree with a lot of the other posts. It's a very average lens, but good value for money. You're not expecting miracles so I don't think you'll be disappointed.

USB 2 has a higher maximum than firewire but also higher overhead usage, resulting in real life maximums of something like 300Mbs for USB2 and 330Mbs for firewire. So, firewire is faster but the difference is minimal. Getting either is good, but make sure your computer has the necessary input. Getting a USB2 card reader for an older USB1.1 computer is pointless. Sure it will work, but you loose all your speed advantages.

 

Beyond that though, card readers make life easier. On more recent OSs (Windows XP or 2000) you won't have to worry about driver installation, and copying the files of the card can then be done using Windows Explorer instead of some (often annoying) software solution.

 

On a side note, I have an old Olympus that is set up to connect just like a USB thumb drive when you plug it in. You plug the cable in, and Windows opens up a window showing you the files on there, no drivers needed. Its a real shame our current technical marvels have not provided some basic conveniences like that.

>>Extended warranties sell for more than what the expected cost of repairs will be.

 

Not sure that's exactly true. Like rebates, making a profit on selling warrantees relies on the majority of the buyers never using it. Your $150 warrantee may well cover you for $1000 worth of repairs, but seeing as the next 10 people never use it the company still makes money.

 

Having said that I totally agree on the don't bother advice. Home insurance riders are the way to go. Cheaper, and they cover you for the things more likely to kill the camera (glass of wine, cliff, theft, etc) than a sudden failure 366 days after you bought it.

Yup, its autofocus only with pushbutton electronic zoom control. Probably looked very high tech in its day. No idea about the optics specifically, but it was a 'kit' lens. You may be better off picking up an 80-200 f/4.5-5.6 (3 similar versions - Mk1, Mk1 USM, Mk2) as it'll give you manual focus control as an option, and should also be pretty cheap.