From: EOS 33 + Sigma 28-135mm, to: Something similar digital

[olz]

Hi there :D

The case:
Generally i just want to change from analogue to digital photography. Currently i have a EOS 33 with a Sigma 28-135mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL IF MACRO. I have been very happy whith this camera, and changing to somethin similar would be the 350D/XT or 20D:350D = 5975 dkr. (Denmark) ~ 1040 USD
350D-kit (EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6) = 6600 dkr. ~ 1150 USD.
20D = 10780 dkr. ~ 1875 USD
20D-Kit (EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6) = 11580 dkr. ~ 2015 USD.
I have read this forum, and my general impression, is that the EF-S 18-55mm. isn't that good. It's not USM and furthermore it won't give me the same tele as the Sigma that im used to. If buy the 20D i can't afford to upgrade the glass, so an alternative would be buying the the 350D house with something similar to my Sigma:350D+Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM = 11173 dkr. ~ 1950 USD.
350D+Canon EF 28-135mm f: 3,5-5,6 USM IS = 9700 dkr. ~ 1690 USD.
Which one do you think are the best sollution? Should I stick wit the 20D, which is the digital camera that are most comparable to my EOS 33? Or the cheaper 350D with a better allround lens? :rolleyes:

By the way. Im flying to Manado (Indonesia), with a 2 day shop in Singapore this summer. Would it be cheaper to buy the equipment there? I also heard that the 350D and 20D kits is sold with a USM lens in Asia. Is that true?

Thanks for a great forum!
Kristian Olsen
Denmark

[RichardtheSane]

The camera body would be fine fo both. I have an EOS 33 and the 20D is just that bit bigger. The 350D is smaller than the 20D, so it really is down to you to decide on features.

I would strongly recommend you select teh 17-85mm lens as on the 20D or 350D this would cover the same field of as your sigma 28-135

[olz]

The camera body would be fine fo both. I have an EOS 33 and the 20D is just that bit bigger. The 350D is smaller than the 20D, so it really is down to you to decide on features.

I would strongly recommend you select teh 17-85mm lens as on the 20D or 350D this would cover the same field of as your sigma 28-135

Thanks for the answer!!! I just saw that i could get the EF-L 17-49mm f/4 for approximately the same price as the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. Which one is the best buy? I am going to use it for travel and i wont go buy new glass in the nearby future. Hmm. Im going insane. :confused:

[ScottE]

I have the 17-40 and it is a good lens, but I consider it a little short for all purpose use. The 17-85 is a better general purpose lens and it has the advantage of image stabilization for hand held low light situations.

You already have a Sigma 28-135 in Canon EF mount. Why aren't you keeping that and using it on your 20D/350XT? If you were happy with it on your EOS 33 there is no reason it wouldn't be just as good on your EOS digital camera. If I was keeping that lens, I would supplement it with the Canon 10-22 for wide angle pictures.

That is similar to my current walk around, general purpose gear. I carry a small camera shoulder bag with my 20D, Canon 28-135 and Canon 10-22. I don't like walking around with my camera hanging loose.

Scott

[MrChad]

Do you like the Sigma glass have you looked at the Sigma 18-125mm DC.
I use mine on a Drebel and I love it, I actually like the combo better then my Elan 7 and 28-105 EF.

[lostdoggy]

I just check out the XT and found harder to grip then the 300D, but 20D fits just right for now.

[olz]

Again. Thanks for the answers.

I never thought about keeping the Sigma. Hmm. I just thought selling the EOS 33 and the Sigma as a kit would be easier, but it's not. And the price is so low i might aswell just keep both the camera and the lens anyway. And i already have UV and a circular polar-filter for that lens. The only minus about the Sigma that i already have, is that it somtimes produces rather grainy pictures, espicially in low light. Some of it is because of my amateur skills, i guess but i don't know how much.

Nice with some ideas! I will also take a look at that Sigma 18-105mm. - nice range.

The 10-22mm gets good feedback on this forum. Looks like a really fine lens.

[ScottE]

Grainy pictures are usually the result of the film, not the lens in low light conditions. In digital you will find grainy is replaced by noisy in the same conditions, but the effect looks almost the same.

Poor quality glass results in fuzzy rather than grainy and if you can get sharp pictures in good light you shouldn't blame the lens at all.

Scott

[Andy_T]

The 18-55 lens is decent for the price (at least for the 100 EUR you pay in the rest of Europe for it).

As to buying in Singapore, I think any place would be a lot cheaper then Denmark... the 20D with kit lens is about EUR 1300 in Germany.

But I maybe would not want to buy an expensive item like the 20D so far abroad ... what happens if you have issues with it? Lenses ... not that much of a problem, but the body...

Best regards,
Andy