Introduction (and a lens question...)

[ScottJE22]

Greetings to the Forum! I've been a loooong time lurker on Pekka's site(s) from way back when he was shooting a G1...

The Short Story

I'm unloading a Maxxum 5 and three lenses to buy a Digital Rebel and a single lens to get me started. I have a baby on the way in 4 weeks so I'm right now leaning toward the 28-135 IS lens. Any thoughts? Anything better out there for all-around shooting in the house and hospital?


The Slightly Longer Story

I've always loved taking pictures. I don't claim to be very good, but I don't feel that I have had a chance to really develop my skills with any film cameras that I've owned. I shoot a bit for a while, get them processed, and get frustrated. With digital, I shoot, check, adjust, shoot again, check again, adjust, etc....

Back in 1997 I bought a Canon A2 and a Tamron 28-200. I later added one of the big flashes (540EX?) to my "kit." I used it on a trip to Philadelphia and NY and on my honeymoon in 1998.

In March 2001, I sold it on eBay and (inspired by Pekka's work) bought a Canon G1 for myself. I took this little wonder everywhere and took pictures of EVERYTHING! After a trip to DC, I came home with the best pictures EVER!

Figuring I'd improved my skills enough to warrant an inexpensive film camera, I bought a Maxxum 5 and three lenses. On a summer 2002 trip to Yellowstone and Grand Teton, I shot about 18 rolls of film with it and came home to mediocre results.

In summer 2003, I left the Maxxum at home and took the trusty G1. This time I came home with fantastic pictures of the Rockies! They were head and shoulders above the pics from the Maxxum. For me, I always tend to get better pictures with digital. The immediate feedback and the lack of concern over processing costs allow me to experiment a LOT more and really find that PERFECT shot!!

When the DRebel came out last year, I immediately regretted selling my A2 body, lens, and flash. No problem, I figured, Minolta must be getting ready to come out with a digital Maxxum........ I waited.... and waited.... all the while wanting a DRebel but telling myself Minolta would get on board.......

My son is on the way in 4 weeks and I decided it's finally time to upgrade the G1. I know I won't be shooting any film. The Maxxum has been in the bag in its closet since I came home from Yellowstone in 2002. Sad, really, but I've used the G1 for everything.

Well -- it's time. I'm going to invest in Canon and stick with it this time. I am trying to unload my Maxxum (I hate eBay so I'm trying to trade it through B&H...).

Having said all that, I know I won't get much for the Maxxum setup, and the baby is on the way so I'm not made of money. I want to get in with the right equipment the first time so I'm looking for the right lens to get started.

Whew -- if you've read this far, thanks!! I would welcome any lens suggestions you might have...

Thanks all!!!! :D

[Belmondo]

Well, that's quite an introduction.

We're thrilled to have you. We'll be wanting to hear more about that new baby in 4 weeks.

If you've been 'lurking', then you already know we're not horribly uptight about very much here. We just look forward to your continued participation and maybe some baby pictures when the time comes.

Tom

[ScottJE22]

^^^ That's why I included the "short" version :D

I can't wait for the baby and if I get my DRebel in time, you can definitely count on plenty of pictures...

[msvadi]

Just for your information, there will be a DSLR from Minolta this Fall.

Regarding the lenses for Canon. Since you are going to shoot in the hospital - low light, no flash, you need fast lenses. Get 50mm 1.8, it's less than $70. If I were you, I would order it right now. The demand for it too high and there is a waiting period of several weeks. You have to call B&H to pre-order it.

[burkdog]

I got my camera and bought some lenses for the same purpose... my wife had a baby on the 12th of this month. I had managed to acquire a couple of lenses before the big event, and experimented with most of them the day the baby was born.

I definitely recommed the 50mm 1.8. I had to pay a little more for it to walk out of a store with it ($89 plus tax) because it is in such demand. I think it was well worth it. I got some very good pictures with it. I also bought the rather expensive 24-70mm L dealy. I liked shooting with it because of the zoom. I also got some good pictures with it. I used my 85mm 1.8 some too, but not as much.

I have heard very good things about the 28-135 and almost bought it instead of the 24-70, but decided to buy the better lens and not have to worry about a possible upgrade in that focal range later.

Let me see if I can get some of the pics. up...


http://www.pbase.com/image/28893808.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/29063747.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/29063735.jpg

You can click on the link at bottom to see more of the pics if you like. You can check out the exif data stuff to see what lenses I used.

Get ready to be up all night, every night!

[CyberDyneSystems]

For shooting indoors .. the low light abilitiy and price of the $75.00 EF 50mm f/1.8 are hard to beat!

Nice to see you have finally stopped lurking... trouble is your timing... we allready have our "Scott" quota filled.. I'm afraid you'll have to wait till one of the other "Scott's" leaves, or is banned before we can let you post any further...

We have the same trouble with Ian's and Tom's... we just can't let anymore in :)

Welcome!

[Mthorpe_Davies]

I'm going to say it, people don't get upset, since you have Minolta lens why not wait a couple of months and get the Digital 7. It will be a more expensive body than the 300d but you already have Minolta lens so you won't need to invest in any and it has inbody IS. The camera will be a brand new design and as a newer design than the 300d probably better. I think this would be a cheaper solution for you especially with a new baby on the way, those little guys are expensive.

[Olegis]

Another vote for the 50mm f/1.8 MkII. Unbeatable value !
You can try and get the 50mm f/1.4 for even lower-light capability but these are about $220 more expensive - I don't think that the price difference worth it.

[ScottJE22]

I'm going to say it, people don't get upset, since you have Minolta lens why not wait a couple of months and get the Digital 7. It will be a more expensive body than the 300d but you already have Minolta lens so you won't need to invest in any and it has inbody IS. The camera will be a brand new design and as a newer design than the 300d probably better. I think this would be a cheaper solution for you especially with a new baby on the way, those little guys are expensive.

Hi -- thanks for the feedback! This is of course something that I've been thinking about for the last couple weeks... I drew the line down the middle of the paper and this is what I came up with...

First, I've never been overly thrilled with the Minolta stuff I have. It's not as if I have any high-quality glass.

Second, I've always regretted selling the Canon that I had.

Third, I also think that there is a larger support base for Canon (e.g. this forum).

Fourth, if I'm going to jump ship and switch platforms, now is the time to do it and try to start building my Canon kit the right way.

And finally, who knows when the Minolta body will be out! Based on what I've found, maybe as early as Fall or as late as Spring.

Based on the comments above, I think I'll save some $$ by holding off on the 28-135 IS lens and getting the 50 / 1.8. That should keep the cost, after the trade, to a minimum. Then NO MORE SWITCHING PLATFORMS!!! :D


Oh -- and sorry about exceeding the "Scott" quota -- but I should warn you in advance that there will be yet another Scott in just a few more weeks!! :D

[CyberDyneSystems]

Your logic is sound.. if it is a state of the art digital system you are looking for,. Canon is the obvious choice tostart with :)

[ScottJE22]

Got my quote back from B&H today and WHOA! -- looks like I'll be going through the eBay hassle. Based on what I've seen Minolta stuff going for on eBay I can get more for the body and one lens than they're willing to give me for everything.

I have one more quote submitted to KEH and then it's eBay for me.. :roll:

[Canuck]

This is interesting...
Well I can't question the wanting to go Canon...it is the way to go, IMHO. Being that you have film experience (Minolta/Canon A2), I'd suggest the 10D. I think you might have enough experience for it. The Digital Rebel/300D is a good camera, but I think you'd do yourself better w/ a 10D. Definitely get Big Ed (BG-ED3), and a few extra batteries. Also, get a couple of CF cards so you don't have all your eggs in one basket so to speak. I currently use 2x 512MB CFs and have a 1GB Lexar 40X CF card on order. I also have the BP-511 that came with the 10D and one extra HL-511 (made by Hahnel) bought here in England. There is also 2 more 511s on order to supplement the 1+ year old ones I have. There are a few airshows coming up so it was time to supplement what I have already.

Ok for lenses, you get what you pay for. There is the gamut from plain crap lenses to stunning lenses. I have seen both sides. Just keep im mind that it can and does get expensive in a hurry, but can have one kicking setup when it is all said and done. It all is how much you want to spend. The cheapest lens I use currently is the Canon 24-70mm F2.8L and the most expensive is the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8EX. I also have the Canon 16-35 mm F2.8L. There are some really good F4 L lenses out there if you don't like the idea of plunking better than a grand for a lens. There is the 17-40mm F4L and others. If you want to go other than Canon, like Sigma for example, CDS put it best, "Clean and simple!" That is if it doesn't say EX/HSM leave it alone. Sigma too makes some great lenses and some crappy ones. I guess the best question goes back to you. What are you planning on taking pics of? This will assist us recommend lenses.

[ScottJE22]

Canuck -

Thank you so much for your reply! Naturally I considered the 10D, but I think that's just too much $$ for me right now. I'd rather buy the more affordable camera and a nicer lens that I will always have even when the DRebel gets replaced by whatever the successor to the 10D is...

In terms of what I take pictures of, my dad lives in Wyoming so when we visit there I take a lot of scenics. Occasionally some wildlife as well. With the little one on the way, though, we probably won't be out there for at least a couple years. Right now I'm most interested in preserving our baby's first weeks and months. The 50 / 1.8 II seems like the way to go for me right now. More affordable than the 28-135 IS.

I'm thinking that by the next time we travel out west I'd like to have one of the 70-200 lenses (realistically the 4 not the 2.8) and perhaps an extender for those wildlife shots.

When I bought the A2 I bought a crappy lens and always regretted it. Since I'll no doubt upgrade the camera many times while keeping the same lenses, I'm committed to doing it right this time!!

Thanks again for your comments!!

[Canuck]

Canuck -

Thank you so much for your reply! Naturally I considered the 10D, but I think that's just too much $$ for me right now. I'd rather buy the more affordable camera and a nicer lens that I will always have even when the DRebel gets replaced by whatever the successor to the 10D is...

In terms of what I take pictures of, my dad lives in Wyoming so when we visit there I take a lot of scenics. Occasionally some wildlife as well. With the little one on the way, though, we probably won't be out there for at least a couple years. Right now I'm most interested in preserving our baby's first weeks and months. The 50 / 1.8 II seems like the way to go for me right now. More affordable than the 28-135 IS.

I'm thinking that by the next time we travel out west I'd like to have one of the 70-200 lenses (realistically the 4 not the 2.8) and perhaps an extender for those wildlife shots.

When I bought the A2 I bought a crappy lens and always regretted it. Since I'll no doubt upgrade the camera many times while keeping the same lenses, I'm committed to doing it right this time!!

Thanks again for your comments!!

ScottJE22,
I was only thinking that if/when the successor to the 10D comes out, the original 10D should drop in price and the (for the sake of argument) 10D Mark II will be all the rage...

Ok, so the 17-40mm F4L seems like a winner for the wide angle. I would suggest the 24-70 that I have, but is is about 2x the cost, and if you got the 70-200 you'd be covered 24-200mm that quick. I have a gap in the 70-120 mm range as you may have noticed. It kinda sucks, but I got over it. There was a time that all I had was the 120-300mm for real lenses. Then the 16-35 came in and was in the gap of 35-120. That is when the 24-70 came in to play and I have dealt with the 70-120mm gap now for some time, since mid March. It will be fixed...some day.

I can't comment on the 50mm F1.8II, but from what everyone has said it is a really good lens. I have a few sites I use to get a sneak peak at what I don't have. They can be found and more in the "all the best links" thread. Just stuff to consider.

[Mthorpe_Davies]

I think you need to sit down and have a serious think about what exactely you want and how much money you want to spend. If you buy the cheap canon lens you will be back in the same boat that you were in with the A2. It's a tough choice get it now and satisfy the immediate urge or wait until you can afford to get what you really want.

[ScottJE22]

I think you need to sit down and have a serious think about what exactely you want and how much money you want to spend. If you buy the cheap canon lens you will be back in the same boat that you were in with the A2. It's a tough choice get it now and satisfy the immediate urge or wait until you can afford to get what you really want.

You are like the other side of my conscience, Mthorpe_Davies... :? and I do appreciate your candor. Heck - if I listened to every single tip in this thread, I'd have to re-finance my house to expand my lens collection!

I guess it was my understanding that the 50 /1.8 II was an inexpensive lens that represented a good value, not a cheap lens... I have the money to spend and I can afford the DRebel and a decent lens without putting us in the poor house. After what everyone has said about the 50, I just thought that might be a more economical way to go than the 28-135 IS. From what I'm reading here, the 50 would give me a great setup for low-light hospital and nursery situations... If I can save $200-$300 by going with the 50, and have a lens that is better suited to what I want to do, isn't it a win-win?

I've decided for sure I want to dump Minolta. And I don't care to shoot film anymore. So I guess the choice is to use the G1 for a little longer and see what comes out next, or get the DRebel and get started taking pictures. But if I keep waiting for the NBT (next big thing) I might NEVER buy a camera.

Thanks to all for the input so far!! I keep checking back every hour or so and I can't believe how helpful this forum is!!