DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Blowing my tax refund!!! Help me spend gov't $$$
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 11 of 11, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/29/2009 08:20:11 PM · #1
Well, it's tax season and I am expecting a fair chunk of change back (around $2500.00 CAD). I want to use this to get a prosumer camera and lens. I have been reading everything I can get my hands on, and have sorta settled down my options to a less extensive list. Now if I were to get some feedback from people who have experience with any of the following, I would definitely like to hear what you have to say.

My first setup selection is:
1. Canon 50D ($1200) with one of the following lenses
a. Canon EF 17-40 mm F4.0 L USM ($825): Cheapest L out that I can find in a focal length I like. But is a 4.0 too slow?
b. Canon EF-S 17-55 mm F2.8 IS USM ($1200): Faster than the previous with some UD and aspherical elements, but no red stripe :(
c. Canon EF 24-70/2.8L USM ($1379): A bit longer (which I don't mind), but not as wide. I'd like to do a lot of landscape shots. Is the difference negligible? It is also physically longer, almost 13cm, which scares me.

2. Nikon D90 ($1070)
a. NIKKOR AF-S 16-85 mm DX f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II ($700): I don't know much about nikon model conventions, maybe I should read up more on this topic.
b. Nikkor AF-S DX 17-55 mm F2.8 G IF-ED ($1,375): Big jump in price, but I\'m guessing image quality and speed is probably worth it?

Maybe some other things to consider are that I'd like to take shots of the landscape, and my friends snowboarding/biking etc. I am also looking for a lens that won't hinder me when walking around. I expect to pick up new lenses in the future to compliment whichever lens I get now). I am also not particular about going with Canon or Nikon as I have heard really good things about both these cameras. The D90 recording feature isn't really a selling point to me. Also, if there is something out there that you don\'t think I have considered, feel free to prod me with it. Prices are those of a camera shop in town, and seem to be better than any I have seen online surprisingly.

Thanks for your input guys and gals, I can't wait to partake in some of the challenges.
 01/29/2009 08:42:16 PM · #2
I think you should just relieve yourself of the burden. Just send me the money and I'll be glad to take it off your hands for you. Just pm me and I'll send you my address...

Seriously, if you want to shot landscapes, 17mm isn't really that wide. You'd be, IMO, better off getting the Canon 10-22 and the Tamron 28-75 f 2.8 with the 50D and some similar combination if you decide Nikon.

As for which camera to get, don't just evaluate their feature list. Go to the store, hold them, navigate the menus and see which one you feel is better for you from an interface point of view.

Originally posted by Buzzle:
Well, it's tax season and I am expecting a fair chunk of change back (around $2500.00 CAD). I want to use this to get a prosumer camera and lens. I have been reading everything I can get my hands on, and have sorta settled down my options to a less extensive list. Now if I were to get some feedback from people who have experience with any of the following, I would definitely like to hear what you have to say.

My first setup selection is:
1. Canon 50D ($1200) with one of the following lenses
a. Canon EF 17-40 mm F4.0 L USM ($825): Cheapest L out that I can find in a focal length I like. But is a 4.0 too slow?
b. Canon EF-S 17-55 mm F2.8 IS USM ($1200): Faster than the previous with some UD and aspherical elements, but no red stripe :(
c. Canon EF 24-70/2.8L USM ($1379): A bit longer (which I don't mind), but not as wide. I'd like to do a lot of landscape shots. Is the difference negligible? It is also physically longer, almost 13cm, which scares me.

2. Nikon D90 ($1070)
a. NIKKOR AF-S 16-85 mm DX f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II ($700): I don't know much about nikon model conventions, maybe I should read up more on this topic.
b. Nikkor AF-S DX 17-55 mm F2.8 G IF-ED ($1,375): Big jump in price, but I\'m guessing image quality and speed is probably worth it?

Maybe some other things to consider are that I'd like to take shots of the landscape, and my friends snowboarding/biking etc. I am also looking for a lens that won't hinder me when walking around. I expect to pick up new lenses in the future to compliment whichever lens I get now). I am also not particular about going with Canon or Nikon as I have heard really good things about both these cameras. The D90 recording feature isn't really a selling point to me. Also, if there is something out there that you don\'t think I have considered, feel free to prod me with it. Prices are those of a camera shop in town, and seem to be better than any I have seen online surprisingly.

Thanks for your input guys and gals, I can't wait to partake in some of the challenges.
01/29/2009 08:47:26 PM · #3
I honesely don't think you can go wrong with either Canon or Nikon. With that said, you should look at the features of each model that you are thinking of, and then decide on what you need in order to get what you want. Go to a camera store and hold each one, as each camera will feel very different. As far as lenses go, the better glass will cost you. What you get when you spend the money on the lens is better image quality and speed. If you are shooting landscapes, wide is good but not always the look you want. For sports usually a mid to long tele is the best choice. Again, more money usually equates to better image quality. Being a Nikon shooter, I can't really say much about how the Canon lenes perform other than from the results I've seen here and in other places. The 17-40 from what I can tell is a fantastic lens and if you are shooting landscapes, the speed of the lens is not an issue as you will be stopping down to get more of the scene in focus. The Nikon 17-55 is a great lens. Very sharp, very fast but expensive. However the image quality is fantastic. Just a thought, you might want to consider the Nikon D300, as this is more on the same quality level as the 50D. The N90, is just a step below the D300 but I think the video option is the selling point for many. You said thats not a big deal so I thought I'd throw out the D300 as an option.Both actually have the same sensor I believe, so still image quality will be a wash, but the D300 is rugged as hell and if you are shooting snow sports that might be a deciding factor. Good luck and can't wait to see what you get and the shots you get with it.

Chris
 01/29/2009 08:49:05 PM · #4
Well... I think there are some things to work thru first..... and I know this is impossible to figure out :-)

- Despite what people tell you... You are buying into a lens collection, not a body.
- Have a look at the lineup of lenses in both and the prices and see what you think you will need.
- Then I suggest you think about the flash system (if you care about that type of shooting).... Canons is well more limited in some areas [I'm allowed as I have Canon bodies and Nikon flashes].
- Also go and hold both cameras... while bodies change, the general style & layout is consistent and some prefer one over the other.

Bottom line is either systems will do what you talk about in your post..... it depends where you see yourself going after a while that might give one a nudge over the other or if one just feels better then the other with lenses & layouts then you got it. Your not going to make a bad choice in those two options to be honest.
 01/29/2009 08:49:35 PM · #5
well, somehow I OWE money this year, so I will just sit here and be bitter and unhelpful.
 01/29/2009 08:50:25 PM · #6
But I will help with one thing... The 24 isn't wide enough for landscape in a lot of situations, go with a 10 if that's your passion
 01/29/2009 09:02:28 PM · #7
And remember you have a 1.6 conversion on the 50D so the 17-40 is really a 27-64. Another thing to consider because we tend to keep lenses longer than bodies if you intend on going full frame in the future EF-S lens will not be compatible. I carry the 17-40 f/4 wonderful lens I have just moved to the 5D MK II from a 350D I like outdoors photography and it mounted more often then not. Wide enough for most things.

01/29/2009 09:10:37 PM · #8
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Seriously, if you want to shot landscapes, 17mm isn't really that wide. You'd be, IMO, better off getting the Canon 10-22 and the Tamron 28-75 f 2.8 with the 50D and some similar combination if you decide Nikon.

Thanks Spazmo, I didn't consider doing something like this. I'll look around and see if it over my budget.

Originally posted by cryan:

Just a thought, you might want to consider the Nikon D300, as this is more on the same quality level as the 50D

I have thought about the D300, but I thought it would be too hard to find an epic lens with the price of the body being what it is. I don't really want to go used either.

Originally posted by robs:

Despite what people tell you... You are buying into a lens collection, not a body.

I put a lot of stock in that statement robs. That's one reason why I have included lenses that cost more than the body itself. I'd rather take the plunge now and get a good lens that I'll use forever than buy one that I'll replace in 5 years for something of better quality.

Originally posted by Jdroullard:

But I will help with one thing... The 24 isn't wide enough for landscape in a lot of situations, go with a 10 if that's your passion

Good point. I guess right now I really want a lens that can do a lot of things well, and then I'll specialize in the lenses in the future. Perhaps the 17-55 or 24-70 will meet my needs for now, and then I'll pick up the 10-22 as soon as I can.
 01/29/2009 09:24:50 PM · #9
Keep in mind on the Canon crop sensors like the 40D and 50D that 10-22mm is equal to the 16-35mm on a full frame camera like the 5D...
 01/29/2009 09:48:48 PM · #10
I just upgraded from the d80 to the d90, and I really like it. Shares some common features with the D300, has a beautiful LCD, better features overall, and it was an easy choice for me.

It is hard to imagine you would regret either choice, IMO. If you go d90, I find the 18-200mm VR zoom to be a great walk around lens, and the VR feature really does work well. I recently got an 85mm f1.4 (pricey bugger--but well worth it) and a 50mm 1.4. As it stands now, I hardly use anything else than the 85mm.

For either camera, I would recommend a battery grip from the start: better vertical grip operation and extra juice (along with the holder that gives you the AA backup option).

I am not familiar with Canon dslrs, but I was at a workshop recently and a guy there had a canon: it had one "command wheel" that he could thumb: the d80/d90 has two: one in front so you can, for example, in full manual mode, use the front one for aperture and the rear one for shutter speed without taking your eye from the viewfinder--just index finger on the front, thumb on the back. This particular Canon model required a separate button to be pushed to determine which thing was being adjusted by the single wheel (sorta like the Canon G9/10 that I have). I don't mind it on the G9/10, but on my dslr it would drive me crazy. I am using full manual 99% of the time.

One subtle, nice feature on the d90 that I like is an full Auto Flash Off selection on the top knob--when you want to do some auto candid work, street stuff, you can select that and not worry about the flash popping (normal Auto means you have to turn off the flash every time you enter Auto mode)

Best Bet is to go to a store and get each one in your hands. You will probably be able to tell right away, or pretty fast, which one feels right, which user interface is most intuitive to you.

Good move to go for good glass from the start--you will change bodies someday, but good glass will serve you well for years and years. Kit lenses are generally not the best glass.

D90 vid is "fun" but not a driver for me either way.

Have fun shopping!!!

Message edited by author 2009-01-29 21:50:39.
 01/29/2009 10:25:24 PM · #11
40D and 10-22, 17-55 and 70-200 F4.

You should be able to get a new 40D - it's as good as the 50, cheaper and some say sharper (too many pixels on the 50).

the 10-22 is an awesome lens.
the 17-55 is excellent and IS is handy - great for indoor work - you can handhold to 1/5 second or so!
70-200 F4 - not expensive, L so you'll be a cLub Member ;), and it's an excellent lens.

In the US that list would run about $3000. all you'd need is a flash to be able to handle most anything. Buy some of it used and you should be well within your budget.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 10:14:48 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 10:14:48 PM EDT.