Author | Thread |
|
12/28/2007 07:19:11 PM · #76 |
You can't lose with either combo. Both brands are great and do a good job. Canon has more of a variety of glass, cheaper glass, and is readily available used as well. For example, you can't get a Nikkor 70-200 f/4.
I'd suggest a 40D + 350D instead of the 400D. You can get a 350D for under $500 brand new these days.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 07:20:01 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Yeah well the guy in that pic thinks 5D's can swim!
;-)) |
hehe!!!
|
|
|
12/28/2007 07:26:43 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by SamDoe1: You can't lose with either combo. |
Agreed.
Originally posted by SamDoe1: For example, you can't get a Nikkor 70-200 f/4.
|
No but you can get a nice used 80-200 2.8 AF-S for $600ish. It has the same optics as the 70-200 2.8 just no VR. Killer bokeh and really sharp! I find I can hold it pretty steady.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 07:28:49 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
No but you can get a nice used 80-200 2.8 AF-S for $600ish. |
True... about as close as you can get to that with Canon L glass is the 200mm f/2.8 prime at around $650ish.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 08:26:56 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: awesome. i am definately renting lenses until i can afford my own. that totally solves the lens situation. now, i just have to make one last decision:
d200+d80
or
40d + xti
any arguements? |
I shoot with a D200 and D70(backup) and am very happy. The D200 rocks, in my opinion. It all boils down to personal preference though, whether you go Canon or Nikon, both are just as good. |
|
|
12/28/2007 08:39:31 PM · #81 |
Be aware that the D80 takes SD cards while the D200 takes CF. |
|
|
12/28/2007 08:47:06 PM · #82 |
I honestly feel at home with a nikon in my hand. it just feels right.
in general, canon and nikon glass are near the same prices for around the same specs right?
also VR = IS. right?
so if i go canon, the xti is not worth it as a backup? xt is better as the xti provides no real extra benefits that i will care about, seeing as though its a backup?
can the same be said about the d80 as a backup? would i be better off with a d40 or d40x, since its just a backup?
|
|
|
12/28/2007 09:03:36 PM · #83 |
i forgot to mention that i would really like to get a primary/backup combo that shares its components/accessories, like the 20d and 40d share batteries, etc.
i also forgot to mention how you guys feel about refurbs. i wanted to get refurbs from adorama and buy the additional warranties.
that brings up one more question: how do you feel about buying an extra 2 yrs warranty coverage for like $50? scam or worth it? seems like an awesome deal to me, and I never buy warranties. |
|
|
12/28/2007 09:15:12 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: in general, canon and nikon glass are near the same prices for around the same specs right? |
For the most part, yes. Canon has a few more lens options than Nikon does though.
Originally posted by rsvirani: also VR = IS. right? |
Yes
Originally posted by rsvirani: so if i go canon, the xti is not worth it as a backup? xt is better as the xti provides no real extra benefits that i will care about, seeing as though its a backup? |
Right, the XTi doesn't really have that many benefits over the XT. At least not enough to warrant the $200 cost premium.
Originally posted by rsvirani: can the same be said about the d80 as a backup? would i be better off with a d40 or d40x, since its just a backup? |
No. The D40/D40x cannot autofocus with all lenses like the D80/D200 can. The D40 also has fewer AF points. It's a pretty striped down body.
Originally posted by rsvirani: i forgot to mention that i would really like to get a primary/backup combo that shares its components/accessories, like the 20d and 40d share batteries, etc. |
The rebels don't share batteries with the x0D series. They do use the same memory cards though. The D200/D80 use different memory cards but the same batteries. Fun huh? Neither of the two will use the same battery grips.
Originally posted by rsvirani: i also forgot to mention how you guys feel about refurbs. i wanted to get refurbs from adorama and buy the additional warranties. |
I personally don't have an issue with refurbs, they come with manufacturer's warranties and people have actually looked it over to make sure it works. Results, however, may vary.
Originally posted by rsvirani: that brings up one more question: how do you feel about buying an extra 2 yrs warranty coverage for like $50? scam or worth it? seems like an awesome deal to me, and I never buy warranties. |
Don't have an answer for this one...
Message edited by author 2007-12-28 21:16:42.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 09:18:33 PM · #85 |
You really can't go wrong with refurbs, especially since you'll have a backup.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 10:05:16 PM · #86 |
status: deciding between 20d+40d, or d80+d200.
i can get both combos refurb for exactly $1900.
thats my last decision to figure out.
i also wanted to ask what is canon's counterpart to the sb-600. |
|
|
12/28/2007 10:07:00 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: status: deciding between 20d+40d, or d80+d200.
i can get both combos refurb for exactly $1900.
thats my last decision to figure out.
i also wanted to ask what is canon's counterpart to the sb-600. |
I'd do the 20D and 40D since everything is interchangable between them. Canon's counterpart to the SB600 is the 430EX. You may also want to look into the Sigma EF500 Super.
|
|
|
12/28/2007 10:25:09 PM · #88 |
Couple of points. There are more Nikon lenses available than Canon. Canon has changed their mount a few times but in over 50 years Nikon has used the same bayonet mount. With the D200 you can use almost every lens Nikon has made.
In regards to the flash, it is undisputed that the Nikon CLS and speedlights are superior.
D200-D80 SB-800 and SB-600 and you are set. You can use the SB-600 and SB-800 off camera wirelessly.
If the Nikon feels better in your hands I say you are good to go. |
|
|
12/29/2007 12:52:58 AM · #89 |
good advice still keeps rollin in.
why do you say sb-800? do you think its worth the extra money?
the only thing thats going to annoy me with the d80/d200 pair is different mem cards. it doesnt matter too much seeing as though the stuff is cheap and i got an archos & cpu to empty out onto. but do htey both use the same batteries? battery grip?
what about the 20d and 40d pair? do they use the same batt/grip? |
|
|
12/29/2007 01:14:23 AM · #90 |
fwiw, I believe you can get SD to CF adapter cards.. so you could use the SD memory in the D200...
Might want to look into that...
|
|
|
12/29/2007 01:20:04 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: what about the 20d and 40d pair? do they use the same batt/grip? |
Yes.
|
|
|
12/29/2007 01:20:32 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by rsvirani:
what about the 20d and 40d pair? do they use the same batt/grip? |
Yes and yes...
|
|
|
12/29/2007 08:29:47 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by Lonz: Question for jmlelii and Prof_Fate: What gear did you use on your first "real" wedding. One that was solely shot by you.
Just curious how you think it turned out. I remember on my first wedding I was more nervous than the bride and groom. |
30D, 20D as backup
sigma 18-50 2.8, tamron 70-210 2.8, metz 54MZ4 flash, sigma EF500DG Super backup. I may have had other lenses but I don't recall.
9 or so Gb of CF cards, lots of batteries.
|
|
|
12/29/2007 08:59:57 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by option: Originally posted by Prof_Fate: many words |
While I agree with most of what you wrote... not everyone can afford a $2000+ photog for their wedding, and there aren't many photographers with $30k in gear that would be willing to shoot for under $500. |
WRONG! Completely and utterly WRONG! that is the WRONG mentality - get out of that mindset IMMEDIATELY!
I can't afford a Ferrari or a mansion and a 40 foot yacht - and no one is giving me a discount to get one! 'But it's not the same' you say and I say YES IT IS!
Photography is a luxury, NOT a necessity. No one needs it.
People will spend money on what they value. They'll live in a ghetto and drive a Lexus for example. If they drove a cobalt they could afford a better house/neighborhood. It is their choice how/where they live.
If they choose not to spend the money on the photography then that is their choice. Friends have point and shoots so they'll have pictures, don't you worry about that.
If you feel the need to be chartiable with your photography there are more deserving folks out there that newlyweds that will very much appreciate your discounted/free services.
Originally posted by option:
As long as the customer is made well aware of the risks associated with hiring a cheap photographer, I don't see anything wrong with it.
|
So they deserve a pro photographer because they can't afford one, but one that can't do the job cause he's too cheap (or poor) to buy good gear or have experience is OK. What kind of twisted logic is that?
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Once people pay you - pay you ANYTHING at all, they have expectations. They hired a professional - in their mind and legally too. Just like you do when you hire someone. Be that to cut your hair, wash your car, paint your house, etc. I've never heard anyone say "I hired a guy to change the oil in my car. He put in used oil, spilled a bunch on my driveway, got my steering wheel dirty, but for $3 I'm OK with that"
Bullsh!t.
If you can do the job, charge market rates.
If you cannot do the job, don't friggin' do it for money.
If you need to learn, get experience, then do that - the old fashioned way by going to school and working for someone else.
Join the local Pro organizaion - PPA has local chapters. Go to meetings. Meet other photogs, ask to assist and second shoot (for free if needed) and learn. A friend did that - he second shot 28 weddings (in 14 months under 4 different photographers) for free. He knows more about shooting weddings than I do, has more experience, and has been shown more things by more photogs than me.
And it shows in his bookings, prices, etc.
What, you don't have the time and money to join PPA and wait a year? Then you are only hurting yourself. I learned this the hard way. You can listen to me or learn it the hard way too. I had no one to tell me this 3 years ago. So that is why I am telling you , and anyone else that will listen.
|
|
|
12/29/2007 09:16:15 AM · #95 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: any input on 40d vs d200? would it be bad if i used a refurb d80 or xti as backup to them? |
Except for the newest nikons (D300/D3) they suck at higher ISO (800+). Weddings are shot at 800 or more. Yes, you can shoot weddings with a nikon, but 90%+ of wedding photogs I know, read about, etc shoot canon. Canon will cost less over the long run - more used gear (cheaper to buy used, easier to sell gear too).
40D is worth the money IMO. 1D quality images, 9 stops of dynamic range (equals film and then some. You can work a RAW file to get 11 stops!)
Much better focus, faster to focus, write, get the next shot, etc.
Even an old 300D could be backup. Buying a backup is hard money to spend. Why? Cause you're buying something you don't plan to ever need to use!
What batts do the 350/400 take? The 300, 20.30.40 all take the BP511. It'll save you some headaches to have only one battery type to deal with.
I don't check on used gear prices, but I got my 20D used 2 years ago for $750 then. They got to be under $500 these days. Buy 2 of them then. Shoot for a year and get a 40D and sell off a 20D.
Sigma flash works just fine, the EF500DG super. I got mine used for $170 2 years ago.
Look for used lenses. Sigma or tamron 18-50/17-50 2.8. the 28-75 2.8. tokina 12-24 F4. All good. There is better out there of course, but these will do just fine. I found the first sigma 18-50 2.8 to be a bit soft at anything more than F4 or 3.5. So I replaced it as soon as I could afford to. I have a 24x36 inch print in my studio I shot with that lens. It works fine. Just be aware of it's limitations and shoot accordingly.
As your experience grows so will your desire, um, need, for better gear. "I wish I had a wider lens because the bride wants get-ready pics in her 9x10 bedroom" so you get a 10-22 canon.
"That reception was DARK. I wish I had a faster lens, more flash" and so you get that.
"Man her house was cluttered. I wish I had a lens that would throw the BG out of focus to hide that pile of laundry in the cornre" so you get a 1.2 lens.
You bring an assistant and let them shoot from teh back of the church while you walk about...now you get twice as many images, but need 2 long lenses.
A bride asks for you to take pics of the rings in a flower. You do the best you can, but then you add a macro lens - and do that shot more often.
I had a wedding where the bride/groom got ready at the church, in the bathrooms. They wanted photos. Wedding party was 27 people. 9 groomsmen and the groom. Can you say wide angle lens? Point being, I had the gear and got the shot. Gave them the image, not an excuse. Made them happy. I got more work.
|
|
|
12/29/2007 09:20:58 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo: Couple of points. There are more Nikon lenses available than Canon. Canon has changed their mount a few times but in over 50 years Nikon has used the same bayonet mount. With the D200 you can use almost every lens Nikon has made.
|
Hmm, no.
Nikon recently advertised that they have manufactured 30 millon lenses since they started making lenses. Many are the older manual focus lenses.
Canon has produced 30 millon EF lenses - since 1986 when they introduced the EF lens (focus motor in the lens, not the camera body).
Nikon: 30 million in 50 years.
Canon: 30 million in 21 years.
Canon has over 50% of the dSLR market, nikon 35% and the remaining 15% is split amongst Fuji, Oly, Sony, Pentax, etc
|
|
|
12/29/2007 09:38:20 AM · #97 |
I haven't seen many Lexuses in my neck of the ghetto. |
|
|
12/29/2007 01:00:35 PM · #98 |
damn guys. i really wanted to avoid getting stuck between nikon and canon.
honestly, these two pairs share enough that i am willing to take either.
however, i think that what matters most is lens pricing. even though i will be renting initially, i will be acquiring shortly after.
Question: On average, between canon and nikon, which make charges more for their lenses when comparing equally specced glass? If there is an agreeable difference in pricing (on average), is it enough to accumulate a considerable amount after purchasing several lenses over time? Is this amount big enough to be a deciding factor between the pairs? |
|
|
12/29/2007 01:13:45 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by rsvirani: Question: On average, between canon and nikon, which make charges more for their lenses when comparing equally specced glass? If there is an agreeable difference in pricing (on average), is it enough to accumulate a considerable amount after purchasing several lenses over time? Is this amount big enough to be a deciding factor between the pairs? |
From what I've seen, Canon lenses are sometimes cheaper than Nikon ones. For example: Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 goes for $1700 while the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L goes for about $1100, the Nikkor 105mm VR macro goes for $760 while the Canon (non-IS) 100mm macro goes for $450 without IS. But there are a lot of lenses, like the 70-200 f/2.8 IS/VR that are around the same cost. To me, there was enough of a difference to choose Canon over Nikon.
|
|
|
12/29/2007 01:34:45 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate: Originally posted by thegrandwazoo: Couple of points. There are more Nikon lenses available than Canon. Canon has changed their mount a few times but in over 50 years Nikon has used the same bayonet mount. With the D200 you can use almost every lens Nikon has made.
|
Hmm, no.
Nikon recently advertised that they have manufactured 30 millon lenses since they started making lenses. Many are the older manual focus lenses.
Canon has produced 30 millon EF lenses - since 1986 when they introduced the EF lens (focus motor in the lens, not the camera body).
Nikon: 30 million in 50 years.
Canon: 30 million in 21 years.
Canon has over 50% of the dSLR market, nikon 35% and the remaining 15% is split amongst Fuji, Oly, Sony, Pentax, etc |
I am talking the available lenses for the mount not the total made um yeah! You can't use a 30 year old canon lens on a rebel xt so yeah...
:-/ |
|
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: 08/26/2025 05:58:42 PM EDT.