| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/07/2006 11:58:51 AM · #51 |
Wow, a lot of people really hate sony here!
Granted, I dont like their products that use the memory stick (and the other versions it has.) I liked their diskman and MD player.
I wont be buying any sony products real soon. Well except maybe for the PS3. :P
As for the cameras, I'd advise in getting the 20D. Its a great camera, not much difference between that and the 30D. (Unless you look at the LCD a lot. :D). Oh, and as someone else suggested, invest in the lens, not the body. :D |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 12:03:05 PM · #52 |
| I"ve heard nothing but good things about the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 why do you think the tamron is a better buy. I'm buying both of these lenses from ebay and they are selling well so I think I can get back what I paid for them in about a year if I decide to upgrade. The speedflash I'm not sure about and it will definatly be the last thing I buy. The grip is imperative with the XT for me as I have rather big hands and find the camera to be a little on the small side, plus the shutter in the top for vertical shots will come in great aid when shooting. I can't afford the IS lens but I know I will want them at some later point. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 12:14:35 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by tancredi:
I"ve heard nothing but good things about the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 why do you think the tamron is a better buy. |
I own both lenses. The Canon is very good, but the Tamron is GREAT. I think I've used the Canon once since I got the Tamron lens. If you want it, you can have mine for $200 with the lens hood (I might have a UV filter for it, too). It's in excellent condition. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 12:34:40 PM · #54 |
With $1700...
Since you are starting over, you could go with the Olympus E-1. It is under $700 and there is absolutely nothing close at that price - I mean it is a full-spec professional tool. I continue to be amazed at what I see coming out of that camera. This leaves you with over $1000 for a couple of good lenses. Remember also the fantastic Leica that is due out later this year with the release of Panasonic's SLR. That also works with 4/3 system.
...just thinking outside of the usual boxes. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:04:03 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by tancredi:
I"ve heard nothing but good things about the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 why do you think the tamron is a better buy. |
I own both lenses. The Canon is very good, but the Tamron is GREAT. I think I've used the Canon once since I got the Tamron lens. If you want it, you can have mine for $200 with the lens hood (I might have a UV filter for it, too). It's in excellent condition. |
I have a couple of auctions i'm watching right now and I've already bidded on so i'd have to get back to you. Is your lens the one with the flower above the focus right or the word macro. From the research i've done there's quite a large difference. thanks. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:06:06 PM · #56 |
In all honesty I don't think I would allow someone to give any product made by sony. I just happen to find them to be the most unreliable and overpriced manufacturer on the market. I sell cameras as my job and so many people come into the store just wanting a sony because of the name and I feel bad for every cybershot I sell.
Message edited by author 2006-06-07 13:06:32. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:15:36 PM · #57 |
Olympus cameras are known for having poor noise characteristics and strong, poorly implemented noise reduction algorithms.
Most of the benefits for choosing 30D and Sony A100 are benefits that affect shooting in lower light.
Just about any camera can make excellent shots in good light.
Heck, I got better shots with my S2 IS than a friend of mine who was shooting a D70 with an 80-400 VR a year ago because we were shooting midday in the 'sub-tropical' summer reflected off snow... Perfect lighting.
In the evening, I had to put my camera away because of low light. She kept on shooting for another half hour.
All of those pics turned out better than my pics at the same time.
Tancredi. Do a forum search for Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. You will find out all kinds of great things mostly about constant aperture lenses. Not the least of which is some useful info about wide apertures. They don't all directly affect you with the 350XT, but they would with a 20D or 30D.
If that's the widest lens that you plan on owning, take a look at the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or the soon to be released Tokina 16-50 f/2.8. The Tokina is on my wish list if it checks out in the reviews.
16x1.6 crop factor is equivalent to 25.6mm. 17x1.6 crop factor is 27.2mm.
It's not ultra wide, but if you can't afford to go any wider, that might be a great choice. The 24-70 f/2.8 is a seriously nice lens, and the 16-50 will have a similar range when compared to FF. It will still probably be damned sharp.
Might even raise some eyebrows in the heavily attended 17-40 f/4.0L camp.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:25:27 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by tancredi:
In all honesty I don't think I would allow someone to give any product made by sony. I just happen to find them to be the most unreliable and overpriced manufacturer on the market. I sell cameras as my job and so many people come into the store just wanting a sony because of the name and I feel bad for every cybershot I sell. |
Interesting point of view.
What camera do you usually try to recommend that people do buy instead?
Perhaps a Canon Ixus?
Or a Nikon Coolpix?
Oh, aren't those Sony sensors and Sony LCD's?
Come to think of it, let's check inside the device and see what is there... how much of that is even made by Sony?
I teach English to a few Engineers here in Asia. We occasionally go over circuit boards and chips that they have designed. We did one just 3 weeks ago. Most of the bits and peices are from manufacturers for bits and peices... This is true of most brands.
I'm not a very big fan of Sony myself, but I don't think that is a very fair statement. I also know quite a number of people who use Sony cybershots who are quite happy with them. A good friend of mine has been using a 3MP cybershot for more than 3 years and still gets nice pics from it. Another friend of mine shoots the F727. He's pretty happy with it and took some nice pictures last saturday.
They all make lemons, but don't think for a second that they don't all use the same parts, with just the smallest number of exceptions. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:28:48 PM · #59 |
| My biggest problem is that right now I'm not able financially to afford much more than a $250 lens and at the most 2 of them. So being able to spend no more than $500 on lenses I thought I would be good with this combination. I would then have the 18-55 kit lens, the 28-105 USM, and the 100-300 USM given the 1.6x multiplier I would cover the 28.8-480 lengths. Having this much length at my disposal will help me find the type of shooting that I most enjoy. Then I can decide on which high quality lenses I want to invest in when I'm out of law school and making some money. It's my plan. I'm only 22 and have been doing photography for about 3 years with varying quality kodak cameras I went from the C630 (no manual control, 3x zoom) to the DX7440 (slight manual control 4x zoom) to the DX6490 (10x with a lot of manual control, my current backup) to the Rebel XT. You have to walk before you run, and the thing with these lense is that I think I can get very close to purchase price back on ebay if I buy them used on Ebay. These aren't brand new lenses and they have been holding at that price for some time. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:32:08 PM · #60 |
I had $1700 and bought the 70-200 ;-)
Now I need more money for more stuff! |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:38:24 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Originally posted by tancredi:
In all honesty I don't think I would allow someone to give any product made by sony. I just happen to find them to be the most unreliable and overpriced manufacturer on the market. I sell cameras as my job and so many people come into the store just wanting a sony because of the name and I feel bad for every cybershot I sell. |
Interesting point of view.
What camera do you usually try to recommend that people do buy instead?
Perhaps a Canon Ixus?
Or a Nikon Coolpix?
Oh, aren't those Sony sensors and Sony LCD's?
Come to think of it, let's check inside the device
and see what is there... how much of that is even made by Sony?
I teach English to a few Engineers here in Asia. We occasionally go over circuit boards and chips that they have designed. We did one just 3 weeks ago. Most of the bits and peices are from manufacturers for bits and peices... This is true of most brands.
I'm not a very big fan of Sony myself, but I don't think that is a very fair statement. I also know quite a number of people who use Sony cybershots who are quite happy with them. A good friend of mine has been using a 3MP cybershot for more than 3 years and still gets nice pics from it. Another friend of mine shoots the F727. He's pretty happy with it and took some nice pictures last saturday.
They all make lemons, but don't think for a second that they don't all use the same parts, with just the smallest number of exceptions. |
Even if they are made by the same parts when one breaks you don't call sony for support on the camera. Calling sony's tech support and getting an rma is quite difficult. Sony will consistently charge more than any other brand for the same specs. They can only use the ultra expensive and quite useless sony memory stick pro and/or duo. While I like the Zeis lens I find the shutter lag and battery life on sony's to be dreadful. When I'm selling cameras and people want to stay in the 175-250 range I am currently offering the Canon Poweshot A520, the Nikon Coolpix L3, Kodak C533, and the Panasonic DMC-LS2S. I have used all these cameras and in my opinion they out perform the Sony Cybershot seris in almost every way. Of course that's my opinion and I'm not saying that yours or mine are more or less valid. Everyone has their own propensities and has a right to feel what they want about perticular products. But if a customer asks me "honestly what do you think about Sony cameras?" I rarely have anything good to say. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:39:39 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by tancredi:
Is your lens the one with the flower above the focus right or the word macro. |
It's THIS one.
 |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:43:15 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
They all make lemons, but don't think for a second that they don't all use the same parts, with just the smallest number of exceptions. |
The difference is that Canon won't balk when you need warranty service over a defective Sony part. I bought a refurbished Powershot A60 for my daughter a few years ago and the sensor died. Despite being WAY out of warranty AND refurbished, Canon fixed it for free as part of a program to repair a batch of bad Sony sensors. The bad news is that it died again a few weeks ago... |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 02:49:13 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
My $.02
Next year there will be a body that smokes the 30D and you̢۪ll probably want to upgrade. Good glass will always be good glass and will work with that new canon that smokes the 30D. If the XT does everything you want and need, get the XT and spend the money on good glass. My philosophy, you upgrade the body every couple years, so why buy more then you need? You keep the lens, so why not buy the best you can?
Looking at your work you do great with portraits and landscape and you don̢۪t seem to shoot telephoto a lot. So I̢۪m guessing that your 75-300 will suffice for telephoto for now and you like shooting portraits and landscape.
|
The problem with the XT is it DOESN'T do everything I, personally, want (whether I really NEED it for not). I like the heavier build on the 30d, I love the wheel, and that large screen is awesome. If I wouldn't have played with one I'd still be thinking the XT. But as far as canons go, it's really just between the 20d and 30d for me.
As for investing in good lenses, I fully agree. This is where I see the importance of not buying more than I need to get what I want done. I want a better runaround lens that is good for people shots. The Tamron is perfect for that. I can't think of another lense I'd use enough to be worth it for now.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 03:10:28 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by NightShy:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
My $.02
Next year there will be a body that smokes the 30D and you̢۪ll probably want to upgrade. Good glass will always be good glass and will work with that new canon that smokes the 30D. If the XT does everything you want and need, get the XT and spend the money on good glass. My philosophy, you upgrade the body every couple years, so why buy more then you need? You keep the lens, so why not buy the best you can?
Looking at your work you do great with portraits and landscape and you don̢۪t seem to shoot telephoto a lot. So I̢۪m guessing that your 75-300 will suffice for telephoto for now and you like shooting portraits and landscape.
|
The problem with the XT is it DOESN'T do everything I, personally, want (whether I really NEED it for not). I like the heavier build on the 30d, I love the wheel, and that large screen is awesome. If I wouldn't have played with one I'd still be thinking the XT. But as far as canons go, it's really just between the 20d and 30d for me.
As for investing in good lenses, I fully agree. This is where I see the importance of not buying more than I need to get what I want done. I want a better runaround lens that is good for people shots. The Tamron is perfect for that. I can't think of another lense I'd use enough to be worth it for now. |
Sounds like the 30D with the Tamron is what you'll be happiest with. Better to get what you want then regret it everytime you pick up the camera.
|
|
|
|
06/08/2006 03:16:24 AM · #66 |
Tancredi, for a 500 dollars approximate lens kit, check this mix:
Kit lens
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 (you won't be ditching this one later to upgrade)
Sigma 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 (I think that's the aperture range) APO MACRO
That will set you back around 550-600 dollars.
The Tamron is excellent and doesn't need to be replaced later, or at least not until you are looking to spend 10+ grand on lenses.
The Sigma is a really decent telephoto that has some almost passable "macro" capabilities (actually a little shy of the true mark, being only a 1:2 ratio, but that's pretty decent for small stuff)
Don't forget the 50mm f/1.8. Very affordable and very worthy.
Check B+H photo to get started on checking out prices... You may find better prices locally... or not...
There are better lenses, but that's great bang for the buck.
Further, you might want to consider your own thread in hardware... Forum searches also work pretty well.
Good point Shannon, although I had to push pretty hard to get decent service at my local Canon Service center when I had some lens issues shortly after buying my camera.
Considering the huge percentage of cameras using the Sony sensor, I would count it pretty likely that you won't get left out in the rain with performance.
It's also hard to compare the level of quality from cheap plastic digicams that are currently flooding the market to higher end machines that are made with a bit more of a view to quality from the ground up.
It's a tough call and ultimately, only time will tell. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/01/2026 03:26:57 PM EST.
