New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Canon Thread - Page 6

post #76 of 2514
6/26/07 at 5:08pm
Get the XT and get a grip. I got my BG-E3 grip and extra batter in mint condition, though used, for $60 shipped. =T
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #77 of 2514
6/26/07 at 7:38pm
The BG-E3 isn't going to change the fact that the XT's grip is thin as a pencil.
Reply
post #78 of 2514
6/26/07 at 8:02pm
I guess from using an XT primarily and recently with the grip, my friend's 30D felt awkward.

For me, the XT is pretty small, but the grip helps alot. It's not a huge difference in size, but jsut being able to move my pinky position onto the grip made a huge difference in comfort.
Reply
post #79 of 2514
6/26/07 at 8:55pm
Getting a grip might also make it easier to hold the camera with your left hand. The best way to shoot is to have almost all the weight of the camera on your left hand, and your right hand barely grasping the hand grip at all. That way you're less likely to get camera shake when pressing the shutter.
Reply
post #80 of 2514
6/27/07 at 3:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davesrose View Post
Getting a grip might also make it easier to hold the camera with your left hand.
Why is that?

When using short lenses, the grip usually just gets in the way of my left hand.

Don't get me wrong I love my BG-E3 and my pinky would be positively lost without it, but I don't see how it helps the other hand.

Unless you hold the vert grip with your left hand and the standard grip with your right...
Reply
post #81 of 2514
6/27/07 at 9:05am
I had the same decision to make just recently actually (had a slightly larger budget though) and was considering some of the older high-end bodies. Everyone is making a good point here though: With the 1D, you are getting some of Canon's best work in a camera - something they've been mastering over decades. You are not, however, getting their best work from a digital perspective, as the medium has expanded greatly since the 1D was released.

Personally, I would get the newer technology and upgrade the body in the future. If you want a better body than the XT without making some of the sacrifices of the 1D's sensor/CPU, the 20D or Nikon D50 or D70 may be worth checking out.
Reply
post #82 of 2514
6/27/07 at 12:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrvile View Post
Why is that?

When using short lenses, the grip usually just gets in the way of my left hand.
Not everyone's hands are the same I said the grip might help keep most the camera weight on your left hand. Maybe I should have stressed MAY OR MAY NOT I find, for myself, I like to keep most of my left hand on the camera body and have some of my fingers wrapped around the lens.
Reply
post #83 of 2514
6/27/07 at 12:49pm
Thread Starter 
Yeah I use my left hand nearly the same as Davesrose. My left fingers don't leave the lens and the weight is mostly on my left hand. Kind of like an organic tripod ring.

I would agree on getting cheaper body and better lens. Not too cheap a body though. I wouldn't get the 10D. Get XT or 20D.
Reply
post #84 of 2514
6/27/07 at 12:56pm
exactly what I am thinking.

I decided to get a rebel xt body rather than the 1D, 10D, 20D, pentax k100d, evolt e-410, or nikon d40.

Now, next phase - a sharp walk around lens (somewhere from 15-25mm to 90-145mm) with good AF capability on low light for around $300. Any luck?
Reply
post #85 of 2514
6/27/07 at 1:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ooztuncer View Post
exactly what I am thinking.

I decided to get a rebel xt body rather than the 1D, 10D, 20D, pentax k100d, evolt e-410, or nikon d40.

Now, next phase - a sharp walk around lens (somewhere from 15-25mm to 90-145mm) with good AF capability on low light for around $300. Any luck?

The 17-85 is closest to the focal length you want, but it's not a low light lens, sharpness is OK stopped down, and it's way more than $300. (around $490 or so). The 17-55/2.8 EF-S is much sharper, a lot faster, but even more $$$.

Basically, the only thing you're going to find that's fast and cheap will be a prime. Zooms in this price range will be slow (f/3.5 - 5.6 or so), and hence useless in low light. They all have sliding apertures, which means it might be fast on the wide end, but slower on the long end.

Actually, you can hardly even get a good prime for $300. The 50/1.8 is ok stopped down, and it's cheap (around $70). It's an ok lens, but nothing special.

Your best bet will probably be to check out the third party lenses, like Sigma, Tamron or Tokina. The Sigma 17-70 /2.8-4.5 is around $360, and it's close to your budget and focal length needs. The sliding aperture is the killer, though. No idea on the sharpness, tho.
Reply
post #86 of 2514
6/27/07 at 1:37pm
I picked up a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for a good price from lan. It generally goes for slightly below $300 used. ~$380 new. It's not great in low light, but I don't know how bad it is either.
Reply
post #87 of 2514
6/27/07 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davesrose View Post
Not everyone's hands are the same I said the grip might help keep most the camera weight on your left hand. Maybe I should have stressed MAY OR MAY NOT I find, for myself, I like to keep most of my left hand on the camera body and have some of my fingers wrapped around the lens.
Oh I see. I guess that works. I generally like to have the lens or camera sit in the palm of my hand while I'm shooting, but with the grip that's more or less impossible with shorter lenses. But to each his own.
Reply
post #88 of 2514
6/27/07 at 1:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ooztuncer View Post
exactly what I am thinking.

I decided to get a rebel xt body rather than the 1D, 10D, 20D, pentax k100d, evolt e-410, or nikon d40.

Now, next phase - a sharp walk around lens (somewhere from 15-25mm to 90-145mm) with good AF capability on low light for around $300. Any luck?
Two lenses that you should really consider are the Tamrons 17-50 or 28-75, depending on which focal length you prefer. Sigma also makes a little-known 24-60 that is very good. Unfortunately there aren't a lot of really good lenses from the ~17-~90 range besides the Canon 17-85IS, but it's kind of slow and not that sharp until it's stopped down.
Reply
post #89 of 2514
6/27/07 at 2:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by laxx View Post
I picked up a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for a good price from lan. It generally goes for slightly below $300 used. ~$380 new. It's not great in low light, but I don't know how bad it is either.
If you mean AF performance, it is slower then more expensive lenses. But its optics are very good and it stays at 2.8: so it can keep a good, fast exposure in low light. I think Tamrons are good for the money

I've found buydig has some good prices on Tamron....they have decent, fast service

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=TM2875EOS
Reply
post #90 of 2514
6/27/07 at 2:42pm
I got a Canon 10-22mm and I have been enjoying getting wideangles back in my life. I am checking out the used market and I see some 1DS bodies go for less than $2k. Would you guys recommend this body over a 5D or is the new body a better IQ deal?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Head-Fi's Best Sellers