Tripods???? Bags??????? Lenses???????

[FotoPhreak]

I am slowly getting my act into gear getting a decent setup.

I recently bought the DRebel, I have been researching a bit on various other things.

This is where I currently stand:

I am interested in taking sports, outdoor ~ landscape and portrait photography (basically everything).

As stated now have the 300D.

Am about to make a purchase and have the following on the list as definates:

2*512 SanDisk Memory Cards
50mm f1.8II Prime

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Undecided are the following:

Tripod - I have absolutely no idea on, have done no research, but I am after something obviously sturdy, but light enough to not be a big issue when bushwalking.

--------------

Bag - I have done some research, mostly looking at Lowpro bags. I think I will stick with this brand unless others can convince otherwise, so next question is which model. I have looked at the backpacks and the side bags ... whilst the backpacks look great for walking, I'm thinking my issue might be that I would need more gear than just my camera, so getting a top-loading side bag might be more sensible in that it can fit into a bigger backpack.

What do others think? If you agree, with the kit as it is soon to be (300D,kitlense,50mm,either/both 17-40 or 70-200) what size/model?

----------------

Lense - I have majorly been tossing up between the 70-200L f2.8 IS (with the added dilemma of whether it be with or without IS, or drop back to f4) and the 17-40L.

As said I want to shoot both sports and landscape, so I'm starting to think I will need both of these lenses eventually. But an additional thing that needs to be considered is that I would like to get into concert photography.

So any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks to all those who have helped me in my other posts.

I am loving beeing a converted Canon user, and soon to be L-guru.

[Scottes]

Nice list of desires. :-)

You won't go wrong with the 70-200 2.8 IS, that's for sure. Add a 1.4 TC and you're up to 98-280 f/4 but you can only AF on the center focus point. For sports you might need/want more reach and more focus points. If it's a cash issue I'd get the 70-200 2.8 non-IS and the 100-400 IS for an extra $500ish. (Well, that's me, and that's what I'm doing. Other may think differently, of course.)

If you have the Rebel did you get the 18-55? Reportedly a very good lens for the money - not in the 17-40L class but it might get you by on the short end for a while. Otherwise the 17-40 is probably the best buy in lenses in this range.

There's a long thred about the LowePro Omni Trekker here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22105. Nice family of bags, the Trekker series. Shoulder or backpack, large and everything is easily accessible. The Omni is the large one but they make smaller. Also look at the Tamrac Velocity series of "sling" bags. They might be a bit much with the lenses you're talking about, but add a couple more an a bunch of doo-dads and the top-loaders get small quickly.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I agree completely :)

As far as lense,. you have the 18-55mm so put the 17-40mm off and go straight for a 70-200mm

Tripod,. look at a Manfrotto 3001pro.

http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=2&itemid=768

Then you'll want a ball head either something like this;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=269

...or a standard one like;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=1955

[FotoPhreak]

Thanks guys.

I'm starting to come around to your way of thinking CDS, 70-200 for now.

Unforunately, thanks to you largely :? , I am still perplexed as to what brand or model to get ...

You've got me thinking about Sigma now, and then of course there is the f4's.

I think I've decided that if I'm going to get a 2.8 then 'may as well' get it IS'd.

What exact models of Sigma do you recommend (I think I vaguely remember you saying you had them)?!?

I'm sorry but haven't had a look at websites yet, I'm sure they'll give me some good info on bags/tripods.

Anyone else care to way in on the 70-200 f2.8IS, f2.8, f4 debate?!?!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Sigma only makes 70-200,. and it is f/2.8
Canon makes three

...the F/4 model and two f/2.8 models one with IS and one without.

The way I see it, Sigma makes four EXtremely well made zooms;
70-200mm f/2.8
100-300mm f/4
120-300mm f/2.8
And the largest mondo monster of them all;
300-800mm f/5.6 :shock: :shock: :shock:

After that the 50-500mm is an EXceptional lens,. but not quite as pro level as the afore mentioned.

They also make some decent wide angle and mid range zooms but they don't compete as well as there telephotos for some reason,. in fact Sigma sems to focus on telephoto zooms... with the exception of the 70-200mm all of the lenses listed above are totally unique,. and some like the 100-300 and 120-300 are in classes all by themselves.

The Primes are very good too,. wide angle, macro and telephoto.

But Freak,. if you can swing the Canon with IS,. then I say go for it,. you will never look at anpther 70-200mm again. Otherwise grab the Sigma and see how it suits you... but especially since you are leary of Sigma with one bad experience,. I think you should go Canon... for your own peice of mind.

[FotoPhreak]

I agree completely :)

As far as lense,. you have the 18-55mm so put the 17-40mm off and go straight for a 70-200mm

Tripod,. look at a Manfrotto 3001pro.

http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=2&itemid=768

Then you'll want a ball head either something like this;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=269

...or a standard one like;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=1955

I checked these out finally ... look pretty impressive, but the cost?!?!?

Surely not all tripods are that wallet consuming?

Is it that these are just particularly good/new models?

[Mikesht]

I agree completely :)

As far as lense,. you have the 18-55mm so put the 17-40mm off and go straight for a 70-200mm

Tripod,. look at a Manfrotto 3001pro.

http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=2&itemid=768

Then you'll want a ball head either something like this;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=269

...or a standard one like;
http://www.bogenphoto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=8&itemid=1955

I checked these out finally ... look pretty impressive, but the cost?!?!?

Surely not all tripods are that wallet consuming?

Is it that these are just particularly good/new models?


I can tell you this much: before I bought Manfrotto 3001 I had a cheapy tripod, but rarely used it- too long to set up, too flimzy. Since I got this wonderfull thing, I shoot most of my pics with a tripod- setting is a snap and quality of a pictures definitely improves. So there you go, best reason to buy it for me- well constracted and light to carry tripod is more likely to be used. Good luck.

[FotoPhreak]

I can tell you this much: before I bought Manfrotto 3001 I had a cheapy tripod, but rarely used it- too long to set up, too flimzy. Since I got this wonderfull thing, I shoot most of my pics with a tripod- setting is a snap and quality of a pictures definitely improves. So there you go, best reason to buy it for me- well constracted and light to carry tripod is more likely to be used. Good luck.

Thanks, your probably right.

BTW, how light is it exactly ... I don't mean the exact weight ... say compare it to something, maybe the DREBEL without lense?

[dn7elson]

BTW, how light is it exactly ... I don't mean the exact weight ... say compare it to something, maybe the DREBEL without lense?

Some of the tripod heads weigh 3-6 pounds by themselves. Add another 3-5 pounds for the legs and you have it.

Before you worry too much about the tripod weight, take a look at the weight of the 70-200 lenses. They will make you forget that the camera body has weight :? The Canon 70-200L 4.0 weighs a bit less than its f2.8 counterparts (about 1/2 of the 2.8IS) I purchased this one as I planned to use it mostly outdoors where the additional f stop did not play as much of a factor, and assumed that I would tripod mount it a reasonable percentage of the time. Your planned uses may lead you to a different choice. Note that the tripod ring is an added cost ($130.) for the f4 where it is included with either f2.8 lens.

[skuntz8843]

Have you actually tried doing any research? There's lots of info on the WWW.

[Tom W]

Have you actually tried doing any research? There's lots of info on the WWW.

This is part of the "www".

[Tapeman]

Look for used tripods. I found my Gitzo 1228 carbon fiber tripod & 1275 ball head for $300.00 les than new. It is very light & sturdy enough for most situations.

[dejal]

I think you might be able to save a couple of bucks on the ring,
$109.95
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/ador/catmra.html

+
$77.95
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/ador/catmr.html



BTW, how light is it exactly ... I don't mean the exact weight ... say compare it to something, maybe the DREBEL without lense?

Some of the tripod heads weigh 3-6 pounds by themselves. Add another 3-5 pounds for the legs and you have it.

Before you worry too much about the tripod weight, take a look at the weight of the 70-200 lenses. They will make you forget that the camera body has weight :? The Canon 70-200L 4.0 weighs a bit less than its f2.8 counterparts (about 1/2 of the 2.8IS) I purchased this one as I planned to use it mostly outdoors where the additional f stop did not play as much of a factor, and assumed that I would tripod mount it a reasonable percentage of the time. Your planned uses may lead you to a different choice. Note that the tripod ring is an added cost ($130.) for the f4 where it is included with either f2.8 lens.

[xxlt]

FotoPhreak...Hello :D
My advice on the bags issue. Is to buy the largest camera bag that you're are allowed to stow above your seat on the airlines. I now have more bags then my wife has shoes (well almost) :P . I guess my point is to start Large and work your way down.

bill fr Ohio w/DRebel

[geoff@rio]

Good advice re bags and tripods. Manfrotto are built like tanks and will last your lifetime and can be then handed on to your next generation. Bags! Yes go for Lowepro, get the biggest you can afford as before long you will finds that you accumulate all manner of must have accessories that need to be carried around, just in case (pardon the unintended pun)! Don't bother about the weight of it all just get out there and enjoy using all this gear:wink:

[Icecamp]

I know you said you didn't think you wanted a backpack, but the Computrekker AW is a new bag from Lowepro designed for the Digital photographer. I just got one for Christmas and so far I am really happy with it. I am planning on purchasing a 10D or it's replacement this summer, but right now the bag is carrying: EOS 3 body 80-200 f/2.8 L attached, 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, 300 f/4 L, 1.4x TC, Canon G2 and various filters and whatnot. It has a pocket for my laptop when I go on an extended trip. It also has a flip out tripod carrier, and the AW cover sewn in the bottom. The tripod does get in the way to access to the main compartment, and the front pocket is kind of a pain to get in with its large overlap over the zipper, but for the most part I like the bag, and I really like having everything in one place.
Tamrac has several top load models that will take 2 camera bodies several lenses and a laptop. I have found Tamrac's quality to be on a par with Lowe, but in general I have found their prices a little higher for the same bag.
I have a Bogen 3021 tripod that replaced a Bogen 3001, I got the 3021 for the extra height, and the quick release leg locks. It's a little heavy, and the leg locks will pinch you something fierce if you're not careful, but for the price IMO it can't be beat. I save some weight with an Acratech head, although I think the 300mm is pushing it's capabilities.
As for a lens, someone mentioned you already have an 18-55, in that case I would also be looking for a tele zoom. The 70-200 f/2.8L is an excellent lens, but it is also pricy. If you don't plan on using a tele converter, and don't need a USM, the older 80-200 f/2.8L if you can find one used is an excellent optical lens and can be had in mint condition for under $800. The auto focus is noisier and not quite as fast but not annoyingly so.
Yes all of this stuff is pretty wallet bending, but it's pro level equipment and will last a lifetime of photography. In my experience buying something because it's cheaper might cost you more in the long run, when you have to get something else that will do the job. :cry: Just get a little at a time, let your friends and relatives know you are working on photo equipment, have them get you gift cert.s to your favorite camera shop.:D
Jim