[catscratch]

In my limited experience:

The 17-40L is not an all-rounder. It's not wide enough at the wide end (27.2mm) and not long enough at the tele end (64mm). It's a wide-angle for 35mm sensor cameras like the 5D, and not really great for a 22mm sensor. I used the 17-40L for a while on my 20D, and it never really was enough for any application.

I would recommend a much cheaper Sigma 18-125 lens as your all-rounder, with the Canon 10-22 wide-angle lens for all of your wide shots. The Sigma is not a good lens overall given it's hunting autofocus, archaic motor, and desaturated colors, but if you know how to use it, it can be an amazing lens. It's actually crisper at F8 than the 17-40L! It will give you 28.8-200mm which is enough for portraits and day-to-day use, and the 10-22 will give you 16-35.2 for all of your wide angle shots.

Out of all my lenses, which include 70-200L, 17-40L, 28-135 IS, and a ton of primes, these two are the ones that I use the most. They're made for 22mm sensors, and are one hell of a lot more practical than anything else in my collection. They're not the best optically, but they don't suck (unlike, for instance, the 28-135 IS, or pretty much any wide-tele zoom other than the Sigma).

P.S. the trick to overcoming the Sigma's hunting AF is to focus at full tele then zoom out. The trick to getting the right colors is to make them a bit colder, though I'm not sure by what degrees K, and up the saturation when you convert your RAWs. The trick to geting incredible sharpness is to shoot at F8

though it's not too bad wide-open either.

Cheers,
Cat

 

[MrEcted1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimitris I have a 20D and I love it. Maybe you should look around for a used body since now that the new 30D is out there might be many people giving them away for $800. I can bet you that the build quality of it is much better than XT or D70, D50. Also low light performance is much better as well. Dont cheap on the body cause it will be something you will carry around for a while. You do realise that since you are buying such a good camera you need to use good lenses with it. Try getting a nice all around lense for starters and see which side you are using the most (wide, tele). Then get a nice prime lense.

I'm sure the 20D is an excellent camera, however there are a few things that keep me from buying it, even at $800.00 used.

If I get that with no frills for $800.00 then I can expect a big investment after puchasing a new lens, a case (if it doesn't come with one), memory...etc. I will probably end up spending upwards of $1300.00. I'm sure for the amature photographer that's a great investment, however, I was looking at the Nikon D50 and it seems to suit the bill for me. It's easy enough for the beginner to learn, it's got most of the features i'm looking for and from what i've been reading, the stock lens isn't half bad either (most even say it's better then the Rebel XT stock lens). Plus I can get one brand new for less then $580.00 with lens and all. I understand I will still have to buy some gear such as the memory, but the lens is the biggest purchase and if the 50D comes with a half-way decent lens then i'm all for it!

I figure that this is a good camera to start with because if I really get into photography then I will end up purchasing a higher end camera after a few years(such as the 20D of this day and age) and keep the nikon as my backup. I've looked at some pictures that the D50 produces and even with the stock lens I find them amazing for my eyes.

I really appreciate your input though!

 

[JahJahBinks]

Digital camera is still maturing, maybe with $800 you can buy a 20MP 10 years from now, however the lense will hardly be any different after 10 years. So if you are on a tight budget, you should get one that your budget allows and focus on improving your skills.

 

[Senn20]

Get a Nikon D50 and a Nikkor DX 18 - 55mm to start with. If you need a zoom, get this one.

Don't bother with third party lenses. Nikon makes perfectly good budget lenses in the sub $200 range.

When you upgrade in a few years, then invest in some better lenses for your new DSLR body. Keep the budget lenses and the D50 as a backup.

 

[Jim_T]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senn20 Get a Nikon D50 and a Nikkor DX 18 - 55mm to start with. If you need a zoom, get this one. Don't bother with third party lenses. Nikon makes perfectly good budget lenses in the sub $200 range. When you upgrade in a few years, then invest in some better lenses for your new DSLR body. Keep the budget lenses and the D50 as a backup.

I have no beef with the D50, or with Nikon in general or Senn20 for posting, but do realize that those links basically go to a sales pitch (complete with referral links so you can buy the equipment and support Ken Rockwell), and shouldn't be considered objective. I do disagree with the final bit of advice, though. I'd try to avoid budget (and kit) lenses altogether, if you can. Wait an extra month or whatever and get a really good quality lens that you'll be happy with for years to come. Believe me, once you start using better lenses, you won't want to use your budget lenses ever again. Same with cameras - I kept my 10D as a backup, but I really can't see myself going back to it now that I've got something much better. Maybe if my 5D broke or something, but in that case I'd probably get another 5D. Just my $.02.

 

[lan]

I know people are pitching such and such cameras but you should really go to a store and check the camera out. if it's DSLR, see if it's comfortable in your hands and all.

 

[kugino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_T I have no beef with the D50, or with Nikon in general or Senn20 for posting, but do realize that those links basically go to a sales pitch (complete with referral links so you can buy the equipment and support Ken Rockwell), and shouldn't be considered objective. I do disagree with the final bit of advice, though. I'd try to avoid budget (and kit) lenses altogether, if you can. Wait an extra month or whatever and get a really good quality lens that you'll be happy with for years to come. Believe me, once you start using better lenses, you won't want to use your budget lenses ever again. Same with cameras - I kept my 10D as a backup, but I really can't see myself going back to it now that I've got something much better. Maybe if my 5D broke or something, but in that case I'd probably get another 5D. Just my $.02.

i (mostly) agree with Jim_T...ken rockwell is an interesing guy...he's either loved or hated and most take his advice with a large chunk of salt. while he does pust nikon cameras, he does say quite often that the differences between canons and nikons and other cameras are very minimal...it depends on the lens collection you already have.

for beginning photography, i think the kit lens will be fine. as a newbie in photography, i don't think you're too concerned with lens distortion and various chromatic aberrations...getting into photography is all about seeing things in a certain way and developing a good eye. practice various techniques and learn how to use different features of the camera...whether the picture turns out great is secondary, IMO...that should be left for later. at least that's how i think as an amateur enthusiast...when your technique improves and your skills get better, then invest in better equipment...but for now, i say stick with the budget stuff. who knows, you might not even enjoy it. but even if you do, you can always sell your budget stuff...my two cents. good luck with whatever you choose...and post some pictures for us.

 

[Senn20]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_T I have no beef with the D50, or with Nikon in general or Senn20 for posting, but do realize that those links basically go to a sales pitch (complete with referral links so you can buy the equipment and support Ken Rockwell), and shouldn't be considered objective. I do disagree with the final bit of advice, though. I'd try to avoid budget (and kit) lenses altogether, if you can. Wait an extra month or whatever and get a really good quality lens that you'll be happy with for years to come. Believe me, once you start using better lenses, you won't want to use your budget lenses ever again. Same with cameras - I kept my 10D as a backup, but I really can't see myself going back to it now that I've got something much better. Maybe if my 5D broke or something, but in that case I'd probably get another 5D. Just my $.02.

Obviously, the best thing to do is save up for a bit and get some good lenses right away. They'll be with you for several camera bodies.

Actually, I threw an old Pentax kit lens in the trash a couple of weeks ago. The camera it belonged to is 20 years old and dying. I've been eyeing the D70s myself.

One bit of advice: Buy from a certified dealer. You won't get a warrany and documentation otherwise. Just go to a local camera store and try out a bunch of DSLRs in your price range.

 

[kwkarth]

Consider the Sony DSC-R1. The lens alone is worth more than any entry level DSLR. It's in your price range too.

 

[The Monkey]

Forgive me for the noob question, but do DSLR cameras take regular SLR lenses?

 

[Jim_T]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey Forgive me for the noob question, but do DSLR cameras take regular SLR lenses?

Not sure about other brands, but Canon DSLRs use regular EF lenses (and some can also use EF-S or "digital" lenses - called such because they're made for smaller sensors). You can't use older, manual-focus lenses without an adapter though. Depending on the size of the sensor in the DSLR, the lens might have a longer effective focal length - usually 1.5x (Nikon) or 1.6x (Canon).

You can learn more about digital photography basics here: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/

 

[majid]

Digital cameras depreciate even faster than computers, whereas OEM (Canon or Nikon) lenses keep their value amazingly well. Get the D50 or Rebel XT, they are light (DSLRs are much more densely packed with electronics than film cameras, and can be surprisingly heavy for the size), with image quality comparable to the more expensive models at the expense of advanced features you will probably not use.

The best camera reviews are on www.dpreview.com. The short version is that Nikons have slightly better ergonomics, and Canons have better low-light performance.

Get a good lens, and consider getting a "prime" (non-zoom) lens, which will be sharper and faster (able to take pictures in less light without flash). The lens I almost always use on my Rebel XT is the $1100 Canon 35mm f/1.4L, but the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is close in quality. Either of these will allow you to take natural photos in dark indoors settings without the need for flash and its "rabbit caught in headlights" effect. Here are a few examples:
http://www.majid.info/mylos/stories/...edding.html?25

 

[archosman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majid Digital cameras depreciate even faster than computers, whereas OEM (Canon or Nikon) lenses keep their value amazingly well. Get the D50 or Rebel XT, they are light (DSLRs are much more densely packed with electronics than film cameras, and can be surprisingly heavy for the size), with image quality comparable to the more expensive models at the expense of advanced features you will probably not use. The best camera reviews are on www.dpreview.com. The short version is that Nikons have slightly better ergonomics, and Canons have better low-light performance. Get a good lens, and consider getting a "prime" (non-zoom) lens, which will be sharper and faster (able to take pictures in less light without flash). The lens I almost always use on my Rebel XT is the $1100 Canon 35mm f/1.4L, but the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is close in quality. Either of these will allow you to take natural photos in dark indoors settings without the need for flash and its "rabbit caught in headlights" effect. Here are a few examples: http://www.majid.info/mylos/stories/...edding.html?25

What does the f/1.4 actually mean? I've only been shooting for 2 months with a dslr and I'm a noob trying to find my way?

 

[Jim_T]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman What does the f/1.4 actually mean? I've only been shooting for 2 months with a dslr and I'm a noob trying to find my way?

Short story: the smaller the number, the greater the amount of light going through the lens and striking the sensor (or film).

Long story: http://www.photo.net/learn/making-photographs/exposure

 

[XxATOLxX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman What does the f/1.4 actually mean? I've only been shooting for 2 months with a dslr and I'm a noob trying to find my way?

Wait, wait, wait... You have a digital SLR for and didn't use manual mode?

Really, the best way to learn is to mess around with the settings on your camera. Go on manual mode and start pushing buttons, etc.. Personally, I had a hard time learning about aperture, exposure, etc, just by reading a website. Mess around with your camera first and suddenly everything will become clear.