Feedback on Package - DPChallenge Forums

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

07/08/2005 12:03:07 AM · #1

Folks, I MAY have acquired $3,000 (give or take) to spend on new camera and lenses. I require true macro capability, highest quality glass possible within budget, true wide angle but necessarily extreme, a decent throw on telephoto, and of course a good dSLR. Has to be new.

Current thinking runs 20D and the following (Canon) lenses; with rebates this brings me in just under 3K:

� 20D body
� 17-85 4.0
� 70-200 4.0L
� 100 2.8 Macro
� 50 1.8

I'm open to non-canon lenses of veryhigh quality if they help me a lot on price. The 12-24 sigma is extremely tempting but it's 700+ dollars and leaves a big hole in the midrange compared with the 17-85.

I'm unlikely to go Nikon just because of the 2 Mp difference, but I might be able to be convinced.

Immediate feedback required, thanx...

Robt.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

07/08/2005 12:05:00 AM · #2

How much is the 17-85?

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

07/08/2005 12:05:02 AM · #3

If you need more reach you could add a 1.4x extender to this collection.

Balko

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/08/2005 12:06:37 AM · #4

I would recommend the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. It's a lens you will keep forever. With this one, you get what you pay for :)

I've got the 17-85 as well as the 24-70 2.8L and the Sigma 105 macro.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

07/08/2005 12:06:43 AM · #5

This looks like a good starter collection to cover your lens ranges within a budget. I did the same thing when I started out with my 10d and I no longer use any of the lenses I purchased originally.

Get the 20d and the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L. Get additional lenses later and keep the camera you have now.

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/08/2005 12:08:31 AM · #6

Nikon is the way to go. Much better flash system and you get 1/500 flash sync instead of 1/200 on the 20d...among other things.

Seriously though, a decent comparison...

//www.kenrockwell.com/tech/20dd70.htm

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/08/2005 12:12:31 AM · #7

Not to mention, 2 mp isn't jack. You won't notice the difference in an 8x10...just read that comparison.

Also...70-200 f4L is a bit slow. 70-200 f/2.8 true VR will run you $1400'ish and will compliment a d70 very very well. Of course there is a cheaper, 80-200 f/2.8 (optically, just as good) you could get...or even the Sigma which is heavier in a 70-200 f/2.8 with HSM focus supposed to be just as fast as the AF-S on the 70-200 Nikon.

Don't sell yourself short. If you don't need the 5 fps on the 20d, don't waste your money on an inferior product...3 fps is faster than you think!

jemison

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Sigma 100-300mm F/4.0 EX IF HSM for Nikon

07/08/2005 12:13:45 AM · #8

Robert,

I've got the 100 Macro, and it's a great lens. Wish I could get the kit you are talking about...maybe the 70-200f2.8IS sub.

MrYu

Nikon D70

07/08/2005 12:17:12 AM · #9

z

Message edited by author 2005-07-12 11:09:57.

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

07/08/2005 12:20:04 AM · #10

100 Macro is set in stone. 17-85 is 600 bux. Flash sync doesn't mean diddly to me, I won't be using external flash. I'm a natural light photographer.

The 70-200L looks wonderful but it's gawdawful pricy. NOBODY is discussing non-canon/nikon lenses basically. Isn't there supposed to be a really good sigma or something in the 70-300 range?

Keep it coming.

Robt.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

07/08/2005 12:21:38 AM · #11

Originally posted by bear_music:

I think your style of photography would benefit more from a great wider angle. Spend less money on long glass. For the price of that 17-85, I would seriously consider the 17-40 f/4L instead.

nico_blue

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

07/08/2005 12:26:58 AM · #12

the 20d with the 100mm macro and 50 f/1.8 looks good... the mega pixel advantage over nikon does make a difference imo (i am presuming you will be making large prints to sell)

i think you can do better than the 17-85 and 70-200 f/4... the 70-200L is supposed to be amazingly good (not sure how well it fits into your budget), the tamron 28-75 is another good lens in that range but you will prob also want something to cover the wide angle as well.

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

07/08/2005 12:27:26 AM · #13

Don't underestimate the Tokina 12-24, which seems to have excellent reviews and a much more affordable price, as well as the Tamron 28-75. Just some food for thought.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

07/08/2005 12:36:32 AM · #14

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I think your style of photography would benefit more from a great wider angle. Spend less money on long glass. For the price of that 17-85, I would seriously consider the 17-40 f/4L instead.

17-40 is great but it left me with a hole in focal length, plus 17-85 is a reasonable walkaround range. I could probably walkaround with the 17-40 and the 100 macro, but still... I'm not overly concerened with speed of lens, I usually use a tripod anyway and I have the 1.8 50 for real low light situations. Speed is nice, but not at the expense of coverage.

Robt.

Prof_Fate

07/08/2005 12:41:20 AM · #15

SKip the canon 17-40. get the Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX DC. Can be had for $150 or mroe less than the canon, is faster, more range and as sharp.

If you want the 12-24 (and i do too) the consider the tamron 28-75 2.8 Di for around $300.

You can go with a non-canon macro lens and save some money there too. So save the money on the 17-40 and canon macro and get the 12-24!

you have not metioned incidentals...batteries, memory cards, etc. The 50mm 1.8 could be one of the later incidentals, since it is cheaper than a 1Gb memory card.

For a long lens, sure the canon 70-200 2.8l IS is nice, but at $1600+ it would be the ONLY lens in he'd have. get real.

Sigma has a nice 70-300 f4-5.6 APO super macro 2,but it is not in the class of the other glass mentioned here.

Tokina has an 80-200 2.8 Pro lens for about $550 after rebate - it is as good as L glass and lots less moola. It is now next on my list...and a TC to go with it of course.

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 00:42:33.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

07/08/2005 12:47:15 AM · #16

What about the Canon 10-22 or the soon to be released Sigma 10-20? I have the Sigma 12-24 and it's great. If it had been available, I would have looked at the Tokina 12-24 as well, I hear good things about it.

At the long end, one of Sigma's best lenses is the 120-300 f2.8, but it would eat almost your whole budget. There is a f4 version too, and it is highly regarded, but expensive at ~$900.

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

07/08/2005 12:49:49 AM · #17

That would be a nice kit Bear. I have the 50mm 1.8 and the 70-200mm 4L and won't be parting with either for a very long time.

As Laurie mentioned check out some of the Tammies, Tokinas and Sigmas...I have the Tamron SP 17-35mm 2.8-4 ($447 AR) and it is an awesome crisp lens. Now I'm looking at the Tamron SP 28-75mm to complete the range for me.

The 70-200mm is a tad bit short for birding but any other events that I have shot it has been the perfect range (sometimes not short enough).

I did pick up and you may want to consider the Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x Teleconvertor/extender. It is made of the same high end Hoya Glass that the Tammy TCs are made of... Can be picked up for 100 less than the Canon and it doesn't have that nib (like the canon) that prevents the whole range of lens to be attached, only lenses that won't mount are EFS. Picture Quality is comparable to the Canon.

yido

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

07/08/2005 01:03:47 AM · #18

If you are seriously into Macro, you probably need a softbox or a ring flash. Sigma make a cheaper one than Canon and their new 150mm EX macro lens seems to be getting good reviews. That set up might cost you a grand. Secondly, if your next priority is a wideangle lens, consider the Tokina 12-24, optically better than the Sigma 12-24 and $500. If your last priority is a decent telephoto, you just might have enough money left over for a 70-200 f4L lens or if you don't consider the Sigma 70-300 APO II lens, very good for less than $200.

If you are considering a wideangle lens, macro, walking around lens, and a telelphoto of pro level lens, I don't think you can do it on a less than $2000 budget (Minus the $1100 for the 20D).

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 01:12:24.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

07/08/2005 01:04:13 AM · #19

Looks like the camera equipment will have to wait. Some guy handed me this photo and told me to instruct you to send me the money to turn over to him in exchange for Karma's release.

Just send me the money and I'm sure he will release Karma. :P

bledford

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

07/08/2005 01:38:57 AM · #20

Here's what I would do with that money, knowing what I know about my camera (Digital Rebel 300D), the new XT and using cheap lenses:

- Digital Rebel XT = 819.95
- Canon 17-40 f4.0L = 654.95
- Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro = 449.95
- Canon 200mm f2.8L II USM = 634.95
- Canon 50mm 1.8 II = 74.95
- Canon 1.4x Teleconverter = 279.95

Grand Total = $2914.70 before taxes and shipping (3018.10 to my door from BHPhotoVideo.com)

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 01:39:24.

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/08/2005 01:50:42 AM · #21

350XT - $780 (Buydig)
100mm Macro - $450 (BH)
50mm 1.8 - $80 (Buydig)
Tokina 12-24 $490 (BH)
Tamron 28-75 $350 (Buydig)

Total - 2150 leaves room for the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM around $800. :)

M

07/08/2005 02:05:53 AM · #22

POOOOR Karma.... Ken you're ourageous!

For those espousing the Digital Rebel, I have considered it but remember I'm a retired pro used to high-end feel, and this is a long-term investment as well. The 20D feels more solid to me, and it looks better sealed, and I've heard it has longer shutter life and better build tolerances, so... Convince me it ain't so...

Robt.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

07/08/2005 02:10:23 AM · #23

Originally posted by bear_music:

edit: And by "POOOOR Karma" do you mean you are not paying the ransom? :(

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 02:11:56.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II