Newbie intro + upgrade to 20D or buy new lens for DRebel dilemma...

[smoothjazzgal]

Hello all! First, thank you for an awesome forum...I've been hanging out since August and learning so much! I appreciate the time spent by the seasoned photographers in helping out the folks who are new to digital photography without an "I'm better than you" attitude (which is quite prevalant on another forum in which I occasionally lurk).

I've been interested in photography since childhood, and I've always had a good understanding of the basics (aperture, shutter, etc.). However, I never seriously pursued it beyond more advanced point & shoot type photography for many reasons, mostly just being busy with schooling and life in general. I'm now at a time in my life where I'm finally able to get serious. I'd currently describe myself as an advanced amateur and a make-money-on-the-side semi-pro (if that makes any sense!)

My style of photography varies widely. I love to experiment with everything...if it exists, I've probably shot it! My favorite subjects, however (the area that is making me some money on the side) are children...candid & portrait. I think the greatest challenge here (but one that I really enjoy) is shooting a photo that really shows a child's personality while still being artistic.

Now, fast-forward to my current dilemma. I would love to upgrade from my DRebel to a 20D, as well as add a 24-70 f2.8 L lens to my currently measly stash :D Problem is, I can currently afford only one choice at this time (the other will have to wait a few months). I've been constantly back-and-forth on this...yesterday I knew for sure I was going to order a 20D today, but this morning I woke up thinking the lens might be the way to go...AAAHHH!!! I would love to have many of the more advanced (relative to DRebel) features of the 20D, but then again I would really like the 24-70 for doing double-duty on portrait work & some walk-around type use. I know I can only ultimately decide for myself, but could any of you offer any insight as to why you would choose one or the other? Maybe a few more pros/cons on one side of my list could tip the balance a bit.

Thank you!
Kristi

[kawter2]

just one thought.. if $$is an issue, your value holds a LOT longer with lenses

[CyberDyneSystems]

Kristi,

Welcome to the forum :)

We might be better equippend to advise you if we had more of an understanding of what lenses you currently have,...

That said,. based on
1) What you describe as your intended subjects
2) The fact that I value glass over Camera bodies
3) The assumption that the Rebel is still basically a "new" camera to you..

I'd definitely grab the lens!!!

If a Zoom is what you want,. then you have chosen the absolute best for your intended subject and use.

Otherwise,. you may want to consider either looking at primes,..
Or a less expensive Zoom from another manufacturer.

Either way,. I'd say get the glass :)
It will have far more impact on your images than moving to a 20D will.

[pcasciola]

I'd have to say definitely lenses instead of 20D in your situation.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but since cost is a concern, you really have to check out the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 Xr Di. It's about $800 cheaper than the Canon 24-70L, and unless you are a serious pro, you are really not going to see much of a difference. Many people consider them very close, and you will see from the lens recommendation thread that it is very highly rated among our members.

You didn't mentioned what other lenses you have, but for the cost of the 24-70L, you could get the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 Xr Di, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2.8 softfocus, and a 420EX speedlight. Plenty to get you started for the portraits and candids you mentioned, as well as a good quality, fast walkaround lens.

[smoothjazzgal]

CDS - the other lenses I have are 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS and 50 f1.8 II (and of course, the DRebel kit lens). I know these lenses have decent walk-around and portraiture value, respectively, as far as less-expensive lenses go, but I was thinking that the 24-70 could sort-of combine the two functions into one good lens (since $$$ is an issue right now)?!? I suppose I should get out a can of Raid since the "L" bug is biting really hard right now?!? Or rather, the debit card?!? :D

Thanks for your replies so far!

[Tom Reid]

I vote buy the 20D. It's well worth the upgrade from the Drebel. The glass on the camera is said to be the most important thing but the technology in the 20D is light years ahead of the Drebel. I betcha once you buy it and see the differences in quality of photos you'll somehow find the funds for that lens!!

[smoothjazzgal]

pcasciola - I did notice the Tamron 28-75 in the sticky, but I wasn't certain if the quality is as comparable. Since you say it is indeed comparable, I will certainly consider it... especially at the cost. Thanks!

Tom - It is mighty tempting to go for both and slap one or the other on the 'ole credit card (especially since it's close to being paid down!):D

***ETA a question - As far as slower AF goes on the Tamron 28-75, just how slow is it? What I mean is, is it going to be annoyingly slow or something I probably wouldn't notice much, considering the 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS and 50 f1.8 II lenses I'm already accustomed to ???***

[Headcase650]

For the cost of the 24-70 2.8 L you could have a sigma 24-70 2.8 ex and a 70-200 sigma 2.8 ex. The sigma ex series of lenses are very good and if you get one with HSM then your not giving up much over the canon. True, the "L"canons are better but if your not a pro and dont need a lense built like a tank then why pay 2 to 3 times more for a marginal increase in image quality.

Side note,
I just recieved my 20D yesterday and all I can say is this thing makes me want to toss my digital rebel. My plan was to use the rebel as a backup but now it just seems so uncapable.

I also have all the lenses you have but also the tamron 28-75. As far as focusing goes its faster than the 50mm 1.8 and on par (maybe just a tad slower, not to noticable) than the 28-135.

[tim]

I really like my Tamron 28-75 lens, but I also really like my 20D. For what you're doing (studio work) IMHO the lens upgrade will give you better results than the camera upgrade will. If you were doing fast action work i'd say get the 20D, but since you're not, I won't say that :)

[smoothjazzgal]

Headcase - Thanks for the Sigma lens suggestions...I'm loooking up some reviews now.

tim - Actually, I do quite a lot of action work when shooting candids of kids running/jumping, etc...which is one of many reasons for wanting to upgrade to 20D to get the higher burst speed. I'm finding the DRebel 2.5 fps to be annoyingly slow more often than not.

[pcasciola]

Oh, I didn't realize you were talking about action candids. Then it's a tougher choice, because with the 20D you will not only get the much larger buffer and 5fps, but the AI Servo is another huge benefit in that case. You will especially notice the speed difference in JPEG mode, were the 20D feels almost limitless. I've taken 20-30 continuous action shots without filling up the buffer, and the buffer is completely emptied in under 10 seconds every time. 20D upgrade + Tamron 28-75/2.8. You should be able to do both for under $1000.

[tim]

I used Ai Servo last night for the first time, it does a pretty damn good job. The Tamron could be a little quicker to focus, but for the price it's pretty nice.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Kristi,

Now that I see your existing lens collection,. I might offer this,

Making the switch from the 28-135mm to the 24-70mmL will certainly be a dramtic switch,. but now that I see your thinking of upgrading a focal range you allready have covered,. I would offer this;

Rather than make the incremental improvement that the "L" zoom will offer,.
Why not jump straight into "prime" territory?

Look at the 85mm f/1.8 USM as portrait lens?
It also happens to focus faster than any other lens we have mentioned thus far....

Just a thought.

[johneric8]

I dont mean to sound absurd here but sometimes the high dollar lenses are overrated in some areas. I take better pictures with my lenses then lots of cats with L lenses. Dont delay on getting the 20D. Make do with your lenses they sound fine for now. However, the 20D will bring you so much joy where as if you buy the lens you want and attach it to the rebel I think you will be depressed wishing it was a 20D. If you have the 20D you will be loving it so much you will live without the lenses for a while until you can afford it. Trust me, this is the way to go for you I feel it in my rock n roll bones!

[cc10d]

Well I agree that the 20D is the best for the buck right now in its burst speed class. Also it will give you a faster focus and a more precise focus when using a f2.8 or faster lense. So if you could do it, you might get the 20d and the Tamton 28-75 f2.8 for the slightly better resolution than the 28- 135 IS and the more precise focus that the 20D gives with the 2.8 lens. Your first lens choice is the best, but it is spendy. It would give a bit more wide angle, may be important in close shooting. The Tamron is not quite the L, but it is close optically. Not so sure about the build, but mine has not given me any trouble. I think in quick work around kids you may find a fixed lens a bit limiting in fast moving situations. Outside your 28-135 will of course have better reach. Even with the 28-135 and 20D you will find faster focus and better than the dreb. IMHO

I know you will like the 20D. If I recall correctly the rebXT is not any faster in burst , than your Dreb I have had the Dreb, 10D and 20D. I like the 20D best of course. No, I love it...

[stv737]

I have a Drebel and the 20D and if you are shooting moving kids the 20D is leaps and bounds ahead of the the Drebel, the AIServo is a nice thing to have. Like CyberDyneSystems said you may want to consider the 85mm f/1.8. The 85mm f/1.8 and the 20D is an awesome combo. If you feel like it take a look at my site. The bigger Volleyball pics and the little kid on the motocross track were both taken with that combo. Another thing to consider is the amount of noise if you crank the ISO up on the Drebel. The volleyball shots are all at ISO 1600 and the motocross track was indoors so I used a combination of ISO 800 and ISO 1600 there is no way the Drebel can focus like the 20D in tough lighting conditions and there is no AI Servo at those speeds on the Drebel. http://covingtonsportsphoto.atspace.com

[ijohnson]

The lens will still be a great lens when you get your next camera (or the two after that) but there will always be a better camera in 6 months.

Buy the lens and have fun with it, then buy the 20d when the prices are stupidly low like the 10D right now. The 300D is still a good camera. My roomate has one and it seems to do just fine.

I take pictures of kids ALL the time, being that I am a kindergarten teacher. The most valuable purchase I ever made was good lighting equipment. You can get that 28-135 or the 50-1.8 into a workable aperture range and get very good results if you have enough lighting power. That could be cheaper than a 24-70L for sure.

[Andy_T]

I am wondering why nobody has suggested looking at the DRebel XT so far.

Granted, I love my 20D, but if I was buying a camera now, I would certainly compare it to the DRebel XT to decide whether I'd rather invest the price difference in a nicer camera or in nice glass. (OK, I just read that the 5 fps is important for you. Well, it's your call 8) )

I also have the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI and love it. Of course, I think that the Canon 24-70/2.8 L will be better, but most likely not 800 $ better.

Best regards,
Andy

[smoothjazzgal]

Thank you for all of your input! CDS and stv737 - the 85 f1.8 is mighty tempting. That lens has been on my "portrait" list for quite some time now, but I've never really considered using it for action photography due to lack of zoom. The example photos (on Steve's sports site) show that it can indeed work for some incredible action shots! I'm a fairly firm believer in zooming with my feet whenever possible anyway.

The noise level (or rather, the lack there-of) is also impressive to me in the motocross and volleyball photos. I've done a considerable amount of indoor/low-light shooting recently w/ my Rebel on ISO 800 or 1600 (mostly with my 28-135 lens) and I'm just not happy with the amount of noise I've been getting. It probably bothers me more than a lot of people, though...just one thing that I'm personally really fussy about. I've been thinking about Neat Image or another comparable NR program to help w/ this. Neat Image and Noise Ninja are both affordable for me and I like the examples I've seen from each program.

Andy - I've been soaking up all the info I can on the XT, but so far I still find the 20D to be more suitable for me. I am still seriously considering the Tamron 28-75, though!

[pcasciola]

TI've done a considerable amount of indoor/low-light shooting recently w/ my Rebel on ISO 800 or 1600 (mostly with my 28-135 lens) and I'm just not happy with the amount of noise I've been getting. See, this is the type of info you should have thrown out there in your original post. I was originally thinking you really didn't need the 20D, but then you mentioned doing a lot of fast burst action shots, and now about ISO 800/1600 noise levels. High ISO performance is one of the best features of the 20D. One of the few categories where it can actually stand tall with the 1D Mk II.

Here's an ISO 3200 example from my 20D, using the new Noise Ninja plug-in for Photoshop, but there really was not much noise there right out of the camera:
http://www.casciola.com/pics/seton_hall_8185.jpg

[smoothjazzgal]

pcasciola - Sorry, I'm realizing my original post was a bit too general and I gave the impression that I'm doing mostly portrait-type work. I'm actually about 50/50 between portrait and candid, with atleast half of my candids being action shots (kids running, playing, just being kids, etc...both indoor and outdoor). That ISO 3200 example is fabulous! Thanks for sharing it.