| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/25/2007 04:39:41 PM · #26 |
| I upgraded from the 300D to the 30D and got the 24-105 when I did. Love that decision. The lens rarely leaves the camera ('cept for when I have fun with the 10-22, another one I'd highly recommend) and while I'm not the ribbon hog Jason is, I'd say the 24-105 is a very, very good bet. |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 04:59:07 PM · #27 |
I'd be really interested in knowing who has actually owned what it is they are giving opinions on.
Image quality between the Rebel 350 and 30D is not 'equivalent', nor are the cameras close in other areas of performance. Having owned both, the 30D defintely gives better images out of the camera. The other features it offers made it a buy decision for me (spot metering jumps to mind immediately).
The 24-105L is a great all purpose lense. No, it is not F2.8. No, it is not a 500mm prime. It is a great, all purpose lense that you can feel good about having on the camera because it is going to deliver for you in 95% of the situations you are in.
You are not going to take a massive hit if you buy and then later sell a 30D. I bought mine and sold it 8-10 months later for a whopping $100 less than I paid for it. 20D's are still available at retail shops - the 30D is not going to become a dinosaur any time soon especially when the next step up the ladder will cost you another $2000...
Anyway, off my soapbox. Just get tired of the FUD. |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 05:01:35 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I'd be really interested in knowing who has actually owned what it is they are giving opinions on.
Anyway, off my soapbox. Just get tired of the FUD. |
What is FUD? And, I only give advice on what I have owned. |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 05:32:35 PM · #29 |
| My advice is to sit down and figure out what is limiting you in terms of taking photos that you enjoy. A new body or lenses might give you more resolution or a sharper picture but not necessarily better pictures. I'd rather use $2500 to take a week off work and go shooting in the mountains rather than buy new equipment. |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 05:39:14 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If the 5D is your "dream body", then wait for it to be replaced by Canon and buy a used one. |
That's what I did. The 20D came out and dropped the prices of the 10D (BHPhoto still had them online). I bought a 10D then and I'm still using it.
Maybe I should do that with the 5D. I'll wait until the 5D MarkII comes out and buy a new 5D.
Thanks DrAchoo |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 05:42:34 PM · #31 |
I appreciate all the advice I can get, especially those who have experience in the aforementioned equipment. Thanks all.
With respect to Jason's comment, this brings about a new way of considering purchasing equipment. Just after I bought my 350d they came out with the 400d. Of course, given my rebates and store credit at the time, I don't regret it... much. =)
mohhomad - I understand what you're saying. Luckily, living in Denver, I don't have to take the week off. A weekend will suffice. =)
Any more takes on the relative quality between the 350d and 30d? If it's incremental, perhaps I shouldn't bother, get some decent lenses for now, and go full-frame when I can fully appreciate it? |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 05:59:09 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Any more takes on the relative quality between the 350d and 30d? If it's incremental, perhaps I shouldn't bother, get some decent lenses for now, and go full-frame when I can fully appreciate it? |
Go look at the dpreview of the differences between the 20D and the 350D. The 20D has the SAME sensor and SAME image processor as the 30D, just with a few more features like the spot sensor. They say that if you did a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two at 100% crop. If the faster frame rate and the better build is worth it to you, then do it. If not, then probably don't. Just my suggestion. And I have used a 20D before, but not a 30D.
|
|
|
|
06/25/2007 06:17:40 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
Go look at the dpreview of the differences between the 20D and the 350D. The 20D has the SAME sensor and SAME image processor as the 30D, just with a few more features like the spot sensor. They say that if you did a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two at 100% crop. If the faster frame rate and the better build is worth it to you, then do it. If not, then probably don't. Just my suggestion. And I have used a 20D before, but not a 30D. |
I'm thinking this is mainly true, but maybe not entirely. I bet at 1600 on an underexposed shot you could fairly easily tell the difference.
|
|
|
|
06/25/2007 06:26:43 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
Go look at the dpreview of the differences between the 20D and the 350D. The 20D has the SAME sensor and SAME image processor as the 30D, just with a few more features like the spot sensor. They say that if you did a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two at 100% crop. |
No one has made the claim that there is an image quality difference between the 20 and 30.
OP can save 100 bucks by buying a 20D, and be that much closer to owning a 3rd gen body with less resell value...
If you mean 350 and 20/30 share the same sensor, that is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
06/25/2007 06:29:42 PM · #35 |
you could go the Sony route they are coming out with a ff body and the carl Zeiss optics are the best you can buy
|
|
|
|
06/25/2007 07:13:13 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
No one has made the claim that there is an image quality difference between the 20 and 30.
OP can save 100 bucks by buying a 20D, and be that much closer to owning a 3rd gen body with less resell value...
If you mean 350 and 20/30 share the same sensor, that is incorrect. |
They are saying that you can't tell the difference between a 20D and 350D image at 100% crop.
And yes doc, I'm sure you can. But then that poses the question to the OP of whether that's worth however much more money is spent on the body to him. To me, it wasn't. I'm better off putting my cash into lenses and upgrading later when I feel that I've outgrown my rebel or it breaks, whichever comes first.
|
|
|
|
06/25/2007 07:58:54 PM · #37 |
Thank you all.
My eventual goal is the 5D, so making a stop at the 30D would probably just be a drain on my funds.
I think I will buy at least one nice lens in the short term (probably a 24-105-ish range because I find I like the 18-55, but it's not quite long enough, unless there's a convincing argument for the 24-70), perhaps a decent tripod or maybe I'll venture into lighting, and save the rest as the start of my 5D piggy bank, which will undoubtedly be cheaper once obsoleted. And by then, maybe there'll be other options as well.
Your comments and advice has been invaluable. Thanks!
-Jeff
Edit: Hmm, 24-70 f2.8L, or 24-105 IS f4L... choices choices...
Message edited by author 2007-06-25 20:20:52. |
|
|
|
06/25/2007 08:52:47 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Hmm, 24-70 f2.8L, or 24-105 IS f4L... choices choices... |
Go try them out. Each has advantages. I test drove both, and the IS and lighter weight of the 105 won out for me. That said, I'll be picking up the 24-70 at some point here. I may keep the 24-105, but my end kit (which I wish I had just bought from the start) will be the 24-70, 70-200 2.8 IS and a sprinkling of primes. |
|
|
|
06/26/2007 02:46:08 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Thank you all.
My eventual goal is the 5D, so making a stop at the 30D would probably just be a drain on my funds.
I think I will buy at least one nice lens in the short term (probably a 24-105-ish range because I find I like the 18-55, but it's not quite long enough, unless there's a convincing argument for the 24-70), perhaps a decent tripod or maybe I'll venture into lighting, and save the rest as the start of my 5D piggy bank, which will undoubtedly be cheaper once obsoleted. And by then, maybe there'll be other options as well.
Your comments and advice has been invaluable. Thanks!
-Jeff
Edit: Hmm, 24-70 f2.8L, or 24-105 IS f4L... choices choices... |
Hell I say get'em both. What do I know though.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2007 09:35:02 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Go try them out. |
What he said. Rent them. You would be spending over $1,000 when you buy them, so it's worth $40 each to rent them and try them out. See for yourself.
Luckily, I live in Los Angles and there's a place down the street that rents lens (Sammy's Camera). There's got to be a place in Denver too that rents them. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/27/2025 01:55:17 AM EDT.
