Got the Go Ahead to Buy New Camera

[customdusty]

So I've got the approval to go out and buy a new digital camera for "us". My fiance has an 8.0 mp Kodak that is a pretty nice camera, but it doesn't do that well with the bright and vibrant color and macro shots on the reef. More important to "us" is our 16 day honeymoon in Europe this summer - an integral part in justifying this purchase.

I don't want to spend a small fortune, but I do want great image quality and flexibility for shooting scenery as well as close ups in my reef tank.

I'm really a noob when it comes to photography, but think I would really enjoy it.

I've done some reading on the forum, how to choose a DSLR, etc... I've come to realize that I know so little about the subject that it is hard to understand the nomenclature/etc. and make sense out of some things.

Where do I start?

 

[Recty]

I think since you already said what types of pictures you want to take, the next most important thing is your budget. When you say not a small fortune, does that mean not over $5000 or not over $500?

 

[customdusty]

My budget is flexible. I obviously want the best possible system for the least amount of money, doesn't everybody?

I'm not sure what it would even cost to get what I want - In a case like this I usually like to spec out a few different options - good, better, best.

Where I need some help is determing exactly how my needs and wants translate into products and their respective costs.

That being said, I'd like to start out spending maybe $1,000-$1,500. If I do better great, if I need to spend more, so be it.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542177-REG/Canon_2756B001_EOS_Rebel_XSi_a_k_a_.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425812-USA/Canon_1242B002AA_EF_S_17_55mm_f_2_8_IS.html

These will put you juuuust over budget brand new (~$1600) but deliver very formidable results. I put the camera in the "good" category and the lens (what is really importiant) in the "best" category. Carrying 5 lenses around during your honeymoon would be the pits, so you likely would only want to bring 1 mounted on the camera anyway. The 17-55 f/2.8 IS should be able to take you through your honeymoon solo. It delivers respectable wide angle for general scenery, and a flexible f/2.8 aperture with image stabilization for low light scenes. A "normal" focal length good for portraits is necessary for any honeymoon, and tack sharp images delivering beautiful color and contrast with minimal chromatic abrasion or vignetting to speak of is always a plus.

The main problem with this lens (really the only problem to speak of) is that it is an ef-s mount. The more expensive Canon DSLR cameras (5D or 1D series) will not be compatible with it. The less expensive Canon DSLRs (notably with a smaller sensor delivering a 1.6x crop factor) will work with any recent canon lens. Again lenses made specifically for these crop sensor cameras (i.e. 17-55 IS) will not work with the more expensive camera bodies.

Aside from the compatibility with higher quality camera bodies, this lens preforms very well in all categories. The 17-55 excels at capturing fast movers making it a superb fish lens. It will freeze your tangs in place where other lenses will fail. The 17-55 is not suited for macro however, and you will need to purchase this one later down the road for coral closeups:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/194451-USA/Canon_4657A006_100mm_f_2_8_USM_Macro.html

 

[customdusty]

Wow, thanks for the great input. You read my mind.

I guess I am on the right track with my research because I had already chose the body and the macro lens you suggested.

I'm just trying to figure out what would be a good general purpose lens - which you built a good case for already.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

For my personal general purpose lens, I chose this one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/559072-USA/Canon__24_70mm_f_2_8L_USM_AF.html

This would put you even further over budget, but it is the absolute "best-est" at its job IMO. The 24-70 was built with professional photographers in mind, and as such is compatible with every Canon DSLR ever made. The perk also extends the film SLR's Canon has made in recent history. This lens is my baby.

The 17-55 IS may be better on a crop bodied camera (such as the 450D) for its wide angle attributes. While I put the 17-55 in your "best" category, it would mate nicely with this one, which I will put in the "better" genre:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...sp&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=submit
The 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS is another EF-S lens which WILL NOT WORK with the more expensive cameras. It is not well suited for low light either. Indoors, early morning, and sunset light will hamper the lens' abilities. In the middle of the day (perhaps for your future kid's T-ball game) it will produce very nice results. *I would only buy a 55-200 if I owned an 18-55 or 17-55*. The 70-200 mates perfectly with my 24-70 and is my other baby. All of the 70-200's are excellent. The 70-200 f/4 is considered by many the sharpest zoom made. I have the 70-200 f/2.8 IS which lets me take pictures of the town block party using the street lights as my only light source.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

You may want to check you the Sigma 18-50 EX DC Macro as another alternative. I still prefer the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS or 24-70 f/2.8 though. The "Sigma 18-50 EX DC HSM Macro" hasn't been released for Canon yet but should be coming soon. You don't seem to be in the position to wait for it though.

EDIT:
Tamron 17-50f/2.8 is another option to consider. Again I suggest the Canon but there are other options out there.

 

[customdusty]

I would really like to get the macro lens and also the "general purpose" lens now, when I order it. I'd like to start practicing for a few months and learning everything so I'm ready to go come June for my travel. Also, and quite obviously I'm a reef junkie who is dying to start getting macro shots of my corals - and darn it, I want it now.

That being said, I do understand that the lenses are such a very important part of the system and I want to choose them properly.

Should I at all be considering other brands of lenses to help control costs?

Suggestions for other general purpose lenses with this in mind? If there is one out there that it closer to the $500 range that will meet my needs, I think I've got a done deal.

(Again, most of what I consider general purpose will be scenery of my travels and some portraits - mostly daytime, outdoor)

 

[hypertech]

Honestly, the XSi kit lens is pretty decent. I was surprised (I don't use it much since I bought the 24-105L, but I do bring along, it hasn't been relegated to the closet.

There are still a few lingering deals on a XSi kit plus a 50-250? lens. The current Canon rebates ended this weekend but a few shops are still selling for that price. On your budget, you could get the XSi, the 2 lens kit, the macro, a tripod, and a bag.

For you travels, don't forget a good carrying bag. For your fish shots, don't forget a good tripod. The Manfrotto 190XB, 55XB (or PROB models), and 486 RC2/488 RC2 head are all good choices.

 

[customdusty]

I've already planned for all of the accessories - bags, memory, tripod, etc....

I'm just struggling with pulling the trigger on a $1k lens when I don't have enough experience to really have a good understanding of what it does and which lens would deliver the best results for the variety of pictures I'd like to take. I know I just want good pictures when I travel - and I travel a lot - but I also don't want to be carrying a huge selection of lenses on my adventures.

 

[hypertech]

So don't buy the $1k lens right away. Its a great lens, but the newer kit lens with IS is lots better than the old model - like I said I was pleasantly surprised with it.

There are some real winners out there for much less than that too. For example, the 50mm 1.4 is about $300 new and if that is too much, the 1.8 version (not built as well but still nice) is around $100. Plenty of people only use primes and it is a great walk around lens. Both of those hold their resale well if you decide primes are not for you. Most quality glass holds onto its value pretty good so if you buy a lens with a good reputation, you can sell it off without loosing too much.

You've got a couple months. Get the body and a decent lens and start working with it. You'll be able to figure out what you want for your style once you spend some time with the camera. There are also options out there for renting lenses so you can try it for a while before making the investment if that will help you in your decision making process.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14204071#post14204071 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hypertech
So don't buy the $1k lens right away. Its a great lens, but the newer kit lens with IS is lots better than the old model - like I said I was pleasantly surprised with it.

I have to admit I have never actually used the new 18-55 IS. I have shot plenty with my friend's old school 18-55 and it left a bad taste in my mouth. I still haven't brushed my teeth enough to get it out. I have heard the new version is worlds beyond the old 18-55.

 

[customdusty]

Ok, so back to the question - is there something perhaps in the lower price range (300-500) that may not have the Canon name on the sidet hat may be close to either of the following:

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens @ $1030.00
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AF Lens @ $1189.95

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

24-70:
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 $499.00
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 $349.95



17-55:
Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX macro (newer version) $419.00
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 $394.95



There are even more of course but I recommend sticking to these 4.

 

[nickb]

Before you buy, go to a camera store and look/hold/use the XSi. Some people (e.g. me) find that the ergonomics of the XSi don't 'fit'. In my case, the camera was too small to be comfortable in my hands. I found the Canon 40D/50D or Nikon D90 to be more comfortable than those on the Canon's. I also found the controls (buttons) on the D90 to be more comfortable. These are equally good cameras although they are a bit bigger and heavier. You need to hold them, take some pictures in store, etc. to see which one you prefer. The Nikon D90 is more expensive than the XSi but, with an 18-105mm VR lens, is still well within your price range.

 

[customdusty]

On my way to the camera store today to get a feel for the cameras. I was concerned about this and wanted to make sure they were ergonomic before I purchased - I've got what my friends and family call "bear paws" for hands.

 

[customdusty]

After my visit to the camera store I have found that I do not like the feel of the Canon XSi or anything in that series - it is simply too small to comfortably fit in my hands.

In comparing some features and handling other cameras, I'm now leaning towards the Nikon D90 - which I would have bought, but they didn't have it in stock.

I tried out a variety of camera bodies and different lens combinations to get a better sense of what all of the nomenclature actually translated into in application and learned several things:

1) I love Macro. I was only able to try out a 60mm 2.8 AF lens and would have liked to compare it to a 100mm or so - I wasn't able to however.

2) General purpose photography - I tried a variety of combinations 18-55, 18-135, 18-200, 55-200 and found that I really liked the 18-200mm.

3) Comfort and ergonomics of the system is absolutely paramount.

4) This stuff is heavy.

5) I also found out where really old men hang out during the winter when they can't hang around the pro shop at the golf course.

Based on my crash course, I just need to finalize my lens choices - I have compared costs to "similar" lenses by Nikon, Sigma, and Tamron:

Macro Lens Choices:

Nikon 105mm Macro $749.99
Sigma 105mm Macro $439.99
Tamron 90mm Macro $449.99

General Purpose Lens Choices:

Nikon 18-200mm $619.99
Sigma 18-200mm $439.99

Again, any experience on these lenses and some direction would be appreciated.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14208302#post14208302 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by customdusty
After my visit to the camera store I have found that I do not like the feel of the Canon XSi or anything in that series - it is simply too small to comfortably fit in my hands.

Why don't you look into Canon's beefier bodies such as the Canon 40D or 50D (both of which I consider superior to the D90)? You were set on Canon lenses and because the Rebel (their smallest camera) was too small your now going for the larger Nikon. Canon makes big boy cameras too. =)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...=canon_eos50d,canon_eos40d,nikon_d90&show=all

 

[customdusty]

I tried both of those Canons, and the Canons did have a great feel to them - ergonomically. I really liked the feel of them in my hand, equally so did I like the Nikon feel.

All in all, I found them very competitive - perhaps the Canon may be a superior camera, but based on how it felt to use each of them for an hour or so, changing lenses, trying out some features, navigating through menus, etc... and also paying attention to the price tags, I liked the Nikon.