First Time DSLR Buyer Seeks Opinions

[Moses]

OK, I have been hanging around here from time to time over the last three years and have salivated over many of the Canon DSLRs. I used to have a Minolta Maxim back in the eighties, but the whole film-get it developed routine got tiresome. When I thought I decided about buying a DSLR, I figured I should probably wait since it wouldn't be long before something better and cheaper came out. Well, that's ALWAYS going to be the case, so I'm now thinking I should jump in while I still have my eyesight (glaucoma patient).

I certainly have read all the threads here and many reviews elsewhere, and figure that is part of the reason why I'm torn between lenses. I think it's often confusing to read opinions over various lenses because they can be both good and bad.

About 3 years ago I bought a Canon G3 thinking it had enough manual control and resolution to take some really great pictures (and I have seen some really nice ones taken with the G3). For me though, the G3 is a constant source of frustration with the lag in shutter release when I have the perfect picture framed. Unfortunately, when the G3 is "ready" the prefect picture is usually gone. Landscapes are pretty good with this camera, but people are definitely a different subject. The G3 also is frustrating when I want to take a picture and many times I'm too close and can't back up far enough or quick enough to capture the shot.

So, not wanting to go too far, I figure the 20D will be the best fit for me. Being one that tries to buy the best the first time around so I don't have to buy again later, I definitely want to buy only the body and get a lens or two that would better suit my purpose rather than getting a kit. No offence to anyone who has the 18-55mm, but after seeing it in person and reading the reviews, I think I would rather buy something a little more.

I am into a lot of landscape and architecture photography, but I would like to get into people in portraits and street scenes too. I thought wildlife would be very rewarding too. Also, macro photography has always fascinated me, but I quickly found that you could spend some real money on that kind of dedicated equipment (I'm talking the 2 to 5 times magnification here--not the dual purpose portrait/macro lenses).

So, to get started, here's what I'm seriously considering.

Canon EOS 20D, 8.2 Megapixel, SLR, Digital Camera (Camera Body)
Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Autofocus Lens
Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon 77mm Haze UV-1 Glass Filter (L-39 Sharp Cut)
Hoya 77mm Circular Polarizer (S-HMC) Super Multi-Coated Glass Filter - Thin
Giottos Rocket Air Blower
Two (2) Lexar 2GB 80x CompactFlash Card with Write Acceleration (WA) Technology
Canon EH11-LL Semi-Hard Case for EOS 1v & EOS 3 Cameras with Medium Lenses
What I'm not really sure about is the 17-40 or instead, the 16-35. I know the 16-35 is nearly two times the cost, but I keep hearing complaints about the f4 on the 17-40. I would really like the option of using a wide zoom indoors so I don't have to worry about how close or far I am before trying to get a shot. I suspect I would use the 50mmf1.4 for more staged photos where I'll be positioned at a "planned" distance from my subject.

I had already bought a Bogen / Manfrotto 3021BPRO Tripod (Black) with 3047 Deluxe 3-Way Pan/Tilt Head, but am very dissatisfied with the weight and pan and tilt head. So I was also contemplating a 4.4 lb Bogen / Manfrotto 055MF4 Magfiber Pro Carbon Fiber 4-Section Tripod Legs and pairing it up with a 468RC4 Pro Ball Head, but this is another near $600.00.

I already bought the 550EX Speedlite, so at least I don't have to add that now.

I won't even bring up the subject of camera bags yet.

So, what would some of you more experienced photographers choose for a main lens if you were planning the type of photography I listed; the 17-40 or the 16-35? Or would you recommend something entirely different? Keep in mind, I want a lens that's a super wide zoom that has the focus and zoom totally enclosed. Color and sharpness is also very important to me.

[lkorell]

I think your equipment selection is very well thought out. The 17-40 is a great lens and so is the 50 1.4. The only thing I would have done differently is I'd have bought the 580EX instead of the 550. I think it is a winning combo with the 20D. The WA cards are good but don't be surprised, Canon does not support WA technology. Those cards are still very good though and fast enough.

One note, the 17-40 is not super wide on the 20d which has a 1.6x factor. I believe there is a 10-22 out there but I have not used it. I'm sure other replies will come with more info on this.

Lou

[lkorell]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=59666

Try the link above from this forum on the 10-22. It's a new Canon lens and there are some nice samples of what the lens can do.

[Europa]

I'd go with a higher quality Circular Polarizer.

[Moses]

... The only thing I would have done differently is I'd have bought the 580EX instead of the 550. ...........The WA cards are good but don't be surprised, Canon does not support WA technology. Those cards are still very good though and fast enough.

One note, the 17-40 is not super wide on the 20d which has a 1.6x factor. I believe there is a 10-22 out there but I have not used it. ........
Lou

Lou, The 580EX wasn't out yet when I bought the 550EX. I haven't really looked at the 580EX closely, is it really that much better than the 550EX? I suppose I could get the 580 sometime later and keep the 550 as a slave, but right now, I'm already spending a fortune and would rather put the money into glass.

I saw that thread about the 10-22 and it does sound like it would be great to get as wide as 10mm, but it's so new, I haven't seen any reviews or substantial experience with it. It's also pretty narrow on its range.

Do you think the Sandisk 2GB Extreme cards would be better than the Lexars? Or can the 20D take advantage of the Sandisk 2GB Extreme III cards?

[Moses]

I'd go with a higher quality Circular Polarizer.

I thought the Hoya Circular Polarizer was about the best you could buy.

Were you talking about this one instead?:

Hoya 77mm Super HMC (Multicoated) Circular Polarizing Pro 1 Glass Filter (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=306011&is=REG) $ 224.95

[Mike H]

That sounds like a really great starter kit, very well thought out.

I would go with the 16-35/2.8L over the 17-40/4L, though it's a really close call. Which is best depends on your budget and on how often you'll need the f/2.8 setting. That's hard to predict for someone in your situation because as you shoot you'll start to discover all kinds of new possibilities with a DSLR, and your interests may broaden. That potential is why I recommend the faster lens. The good news here is that by all accounts they are both superb lenses, and you really can't make a mistake. If you go with the slower lens and change your mind, that lens will hold its value well, and you'll find it fast and easy to sell (either here or on Ebay). Check out the comparison article for these two lenses on the Luminous Landscape site.

I know you didn't want to get into camera bags yet, but you will need something for carrying all of that around. My main bag these days is the very inexpensive Lowepro Micro Trekker 200. It's only $60, and looks very sharp in black. The kit you've described would fit into it nicely. People will tell you that it's too tiny, but mine comfortably holds most of what I need for a typical shoot. Monday I shot a charity golf tournament and concert, and I loaded the 1D Mark II, 16-35/2.8L, 24-85/3.5-4.5, 70-200/4L, lens hoods, a set of CF cards, cleaning supplies, and extra batteries, and still had the side pockets free.

Backpacks are great because they're behind you; they don't catch on or bump people or things as you move through crowds--or a museum or shop. The other great thing about a back pack--and why I'll never go back to a shoulder mounting bag--is that it distributes the weight evenly. If you have disk problems (like many of us), backpacks are it!

I hope this helps.

Mike H

[gramps]

It looks like you have been doing your homework. Now PLEASE don't go and buy from some outfit that has a poor rating.

[JZaun]

Moses,
Excellent pick's.. If I had bought what you list I wouldn't have sold 2 lens to upgrade in one year :)

JZ

[lkorell]

The 580EX is a bit better than the 550 but if you do more landscapes than people you are ok with the 550. I agree that later on the 580 would make a better main flash and you could use the 550 as a slave.

I think there are some comparisons on CF cards that show the Sandisk Extreme III ahead of the Lexar in speed for the 20D. Either way though, those are both really good cards. I never get more than 1GB cards because I shoot weddings and don't want to trust too many images to a single card.

Regarding the 16-35 vs. 17-40, there have been several comparisons done of those and there are benefits to either lens. Both are super but the 16-35 is very expensive for the extra speed. Again, you have to assess what kind of shooting you are doing. Remember that f4 is not a really slow aperture for lanscapes. When I think landscape I generally am thinking DOF, so I'm not interested in shooting at 2.8 for that!
I use my 17-40 for weddings and have not found that I need 2.8 in most cases. It's a great lens for most situations. I use flash for some things and it performs great. The 20D is also terrific at ISO 800 so you don't necessarily have to worry about the lens at that speed.

For circular polarizers, I don't think you can go wrong with B+W or Heliopan. I've never used a Hoya polarizer so I can't comment on them.

[Moses]

Mike H: Thanks for pointing out that review on the Luminous Landscape site. After reading that review and considering I would most likely use either lens at the widest end most of the time, it makes me lean more towards the 17-40. Regarding the bag, I was thinking more towards the shoulder bag, but your points sound really valid about the weight distribution and being out of the way walking around. I hadn't really thought about a back-pack style because I was concerned about quick and easy access. Do you find that to be a problem? Looking at the back packs, I would probably want to go with the next size up with the Mini Trekker that has the tripod harness for $110.00.

Gramps: I was planning on buying all of this equipment at the same time from B&H. The only concern I have is the potential of receiving a bad lens that has to be exchanged and then I would have to deal with the return shipping and time, but the no tax is a BIG plus.

Jerry: I hate buying better after the fact, so I always try to get the best I can afford. I already made a mistake with the tripod I bought and now have to buy what I really want after spending more than $200.00 on an over-weight behemoth. :)

Lou : The 550 will have to do for now, the bill right now is getting way too big (ouch). The only reason I was thinking about the two 2-Gig CF cards is when I travel, I won't have enough space for all the photos, otherwise I could make due with just a single 1-Gig card. I think I will change my mind and get the Sandisk Extreme III cards if the 20D takes advantage of that technology. About the Hoya? I may be wrong on the brand, maybe someone could render an opinion about Hoya filters?

All: So I guess my potential list has changed somewhat:


http://www.uploadpixels.com/upload/1109529160_uploadpixels.com_CamEquipList.jpg

You notice that I added the 24-70mm f/2.8L to the list, but I'm seriously thinking of waiting on that for a while due to the bill getting out of hand. :o
.
.

[Persian-Rice]

I think you will use the 24-70 more then the 17-40......... Just my opinion.
Both are really great lenses. The 24-70 is faster and has better range for everyday use.

[Mike H]

Mike H: Thanks for pointing out that review on the Luminous Landscape site. After reading that review and considering I would most likely use either lens at the widest end most of the time, it makes me lean more towards the 17-40. Regarding the bag, I was thinking more towards the shoulder bag, but your points sound really valid about the weight distribution and being out of the way walking around. I hadn't really thought about a back-pack style because I was concerned about quick and easy access. Do you find that to be a problem? Looking at the back packs, I would probably want to go with the next size up with the Mini Trekker that has the tripod harness for $110.00.

Quick access can be an issue depending on what you are shooting. I usually carry the camera and the primary lens that I will be using for that session in my hands (for example, the 70-200 for a portrait session), while the rest of my equipment sits in the bag. The backpack may reduce your tendency to change lenses because it takes a little longer to get the new one out and pack way the one you're just removed. But overall, I'd rather put up with that than have another shoulder bag.

Mike H

[CyberDyneSystems]

Moses,. this looks like and awesome set up!

[Johnny V]

>Gramps: I was planning on buying all of this equipment at the same time from B&H. The only concern I have is the potential of receiving a bad lens that has to be exchanged and then I would have to deal with the return shipping and time, but the no tax is a BIG plus.

I returned a defective Rebel and a lens in Decemeber and January. B+H emailed me a prepaid shipping label both times...don't worry about exchanging from B+H...it's a top notch place.

[Moses]

I think you will use the 24-70 more then the 17-40......... Just my opinion.
Both are really great lenses. The 24-70 is faster and has better range for everyday use.I'm thinking I would use the 17-40 more based on what I was used to with a film SLR I had with a 28-85 on it. Although the 24-70 certainly would be nice to have for the long end, I'm afraid it just wouldn't be wide enough on the 1.6 of the 20D. If I don't get it in this first round, that will definitely be the next on my list.

Quick access can be an issue depending on what you are shooting. I usually carry the camera and the primary lens that I will be using for that session in my hands (for example, the 70-200 for a portrait session), while the rest of my equipment sits in the bag. The backpack may reduce your tendency to change lenses because it takes a little longer to get the new one out and pack way the one you're just removed. But overall, I'd rather put up with that than have another shoulder bag.

Mike HMike, I think what you say makes a lot of sense. The semi-soft case I have on my list will be good to carry just the camera in front and haul everything else on my back. Thanks for the advice!

CDS: Thanks! I guess you can tell I've been hanging around here for a while. Most of the time it's just reading though.

Has anyone had any experience with Hoya Polarizer filters verses the other brands?

[Johnny V]

I been very happy with Sandisk cards.

[musthavemuzk]

here is info on CF cards

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007

sounds like a rather nice setup ya got working there.

Monty

[Moses]

Say I was thinking, doesn't someone make a portable storage device that would hold about 40 - 90 gigs for transferring photos from a flashcard in the field? I would want to use it without a laptop, so it would need to be capable of connecting directly to the 20D and transfer everything from the flashcard (or plug the flashcard into the portable drive).


Also: I was wondering if anyone knew whether or not B&H would bargain on a single $4,500 purchase? Maybe free shipping or something. It would be nice to receive the package by next Friday as I have that day off.

[mvonditter]

OK, I have been hanging around here from time to time over the last three years and have salivated over many of the Canon DSLRs. I used to have a Minolta Maxim back in the eighties, but the whole film-get it developed routine got tiresome. When I thought I decided about buying a DSLR, I figured I should probably wait since it wouldn't be long before something better and cheaper came out. Well, that's ALWAYS going to be the case, so I'm now thinking I should jump in while I still have my eyesight (glaucoma patient).

I certainly have read all the threads here and many reviews elsewhere, and figure that is part of the reason why I'm torn between lenses. I think it's often confusing to read opinions over various lenses because they can be both good and bad.

About 3 years ago I bought a Canon G3 thinking it had enough manual control and resolution to take some really great pictures (and I have seen some really nice ones taken with the G3). For me though, the G3 is a constant source of frustration with the lag in shutter release when I have the perfect picture framed. Unfortunately, when the G3 is "ready" the prefect picture is usually gone. Landscapes are pretty good with this camera, but people are definitely a different subject. The G3 also is frustrating when I want to take a picture and many times I'm too close and can't back up far enough or quick enough to capture the shot.

So, not wanting to go too far, I figure the 20D will be the best fit for me. Being one that tries to buy the best the first time around so I don't have to buy again later, I definitely want to buy only the body and get a lens or two that would better suit my purpose rather than getting a kit. No offence to anyone who has the 18-55mm, but after seeing it in person and reading the reviews, I think I would rather buy something a little more.

I am into a lot of landscape and architecture photography, but I would like to get into people in portraits and street scenes too. I thought wildlife would be very rewarding too. Also, macro photography has always fascinated me, but I quickly found that you could spend some real money on that kind of dedicated equipment (I'm talking the 2 to 5 times magnification here--not the dual purpose portrait/macro lenses).

So, to get started, here's what I'm seriously considering.

Canon EOS 20D, 8.2 Megapixel, SLR, Digital Camera (Camera Body)
Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Autofocus Lens
Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon 77mm Haze UV-1 Glass Filter (L-39 Sharp Cut)
Hoya 77mm Circular Polarizer (S-HMC) Super Multi-Coated Glass Filter - Thin
Giottos Rocket Air Blower
Two (2) Lexar 2GB 80x CompactFlash Card with Write Acceleration (WA) Technology
Canon EH11-LL Semi-Hard Case for EOS 1v & EOS 3 Cameras with Medium Lenses
What I'm not really sure about is the 17-40 or instead, the 16-35. I know the 16-35 is nearly two times the cost, but I keep hearing complaints about the f4 on the 17-40. I would really like the option of using a wide zoom indoors so I don't have to worry about how close or far I am before trying to get a shot. I suspect I would use the 50mmf1.4 for more staged photos where I'll be positioned at a "planned" distance from my subject.

I had already bought a Bogen / Manfrotto 3021BPRO Tripod (Black) with 3047 Deluxe 3-Way Pan/Tilt Head, but am very dissatisfied with the weight and pan and tilt head. So I was also contemplating a 4.4 lb Bogen / Manfrotto 055MF4 Magfiber Pro Carbon Fiber 4-Section Tripod Legs and pairing it up with a 468RC4 Pro Ball Head, but this is another near $600.00.

I already bought the 550EX Speedlite, so at least I don't have to add that now.

I won't even bring up the subject of camera bags yet.

So, what would some of you more experienced photographers choose for a main lens if you were planning the type of photography I listed; the 17-40 or the 16-35? Or would you recommend something entirely different? Keep in mind, I want a lens that's a super wide zoom that has the focus and zoom totally enclosed. Color and sharpness is also very important to me.

I would go with the 16-35.. Money no object, I would add either the 70-200, or my personal fav. the 35-350. Not cheap, but that's what I have on 90% of the time. (on the camera) you pervs:lol:

[Jon]

Say I was thinking, doesn't someone make a portable storage device that would hold about 40 - 90 gigs for transferring photos from a flashcard in the field? I would want to use it without a laptop, so it would need to be capable of connecting directly to the 20D and transfer everything from the flashcard (or plug the flashcard into the portable drive).


Also: I was wondering if anyone knew whether or not B&H would bargain on a single $4,500 purchase? Maybe free shipping or something. It would be nice to receive the package by next Friday as I have that day off.

Several companies (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=3369) do. Your choice - CD, DVD, hard drive (assorted capacities), viewing screen, MP3 capability . . .