Getting 10D - Introduction & Questions

[kendersplace]

Hello all. Just introducing myself to the forum. Looks like a great place to share knowledge.


I am currently an owner of a Nikon D100 and some nice glass to match. I've been shooting film for about 15 years, all my own processing and printing.

Took the jump to digital about 5 months ago with the D100, but I've got to say... I'm not happy with it. I've helped many other D100 owners figure out how to get their cameras to "work", but no matter how much I learn, I'm just never happy with the results.

Exposure and contrast are terrible, very poor shadow rendering and even with custom tone curves, the fix is only marginal. Add to this fuzzy images that I just can not get in sharp focus no matter how sturdy a tripod, fast shutter, and high quality glass I throw at it. Very frustrating. As for night photography, forget it. NOISE!! (I can get any end effect I like given some effort in photoshop, but I shouldn't have to spend 30 minutes to get an image looking the way I think it should have right out of the camera).

I nearly purchased the D60 when I got the D100 instead. I'm glad I didn't now with the introduction of the 10D. This 10D really looks like a god send. All the 10D images I've seen just blow me away.

Please note this will be my first ever Canon equipment. I will be dumping my Nikkor lenses along with the D100 and re-purchasing everything from the beginning. So my options are pretty much wide open.

That said, I'd like some feedback and advise as to equipment. I've read lots of other threads on this also here in the forum (very helpfull). I am an "advanced amature", so basically it's a hobby and I make some $$ on a job every now and then. I shoot motor sports (sportbike races - zoom and fast focus important, but a fast (ie f2.8) lense is not required as light is usually fine. I really like night photography and weather photography (got quite a collection of lightning on Velvia slides). I shoot a lot of macro (my wife won't live w/out a macro lense, so it's kind of a must), and I would need a wide to tele "general use" lense.

I currently have a spending limit of $3000 (US) to get set up again. Here's the plan:

- Canon 10D Body Kit
- Canon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 USM
- Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 USM IS
- Canon 550Ex Flash
- Macro?

For the macro I first thought the Canon 50mm, but I really think the Canon 100mm USM 1:1 Macro is much better. Will put me over budget, but in the long run, I figure I'll be better off for it and happier. For those w/ experience, how fast is the 100mm USM on focus compared to other USM lenses? Still pretty quick or is it a long and painfull focus (like other "entry level" AF macros from Phoenix or whatever?).

This is my best guess for setup. I really don't see the need to invest in "L" lenses as I've never been able to tell the difference in the actual print (no can of worms intended, I just can't justify the expense for "L" glass). That said, is there a better way to spend my $$? I really like the zoom and crop options offered by the above combo, but maybe a selecton of primes would be better? What about Sigma? Are they putting out good lenses these days?

Thanks in advance for any feedback and looking forward to participating here in the forum.

Thanks,

-K

[brunz]

Your lenses are ok but not very fast. Throw in a 50 mm 1.8 at less than 100 bucks. Makes a fast ,sharp 80 mm portrait lens with the multiplication factor. I have a D30,D60 and 10D. The 10D seems to be a lot nicer,especially when it comes to autofocusing. One lens that I really like is the 20-35 usm 3.5-4.5. It's only about $300 and it is razor sharp.It's one of my favorites. I'm not a big fan of the 550EX flash..I have 3 of them and they are all inconsistent on exposures. I usually just use a 283 vivitar and I get better exposures. I really like all of my Canon digtals and I get 16x20s out of my D60. It's an amazing camera and the 10D is nicer. Hope this is of some help. Brian

[Pekka]

USM is usually a bit faster and much less noisier than old one.

Sigma makes good primes and people have given good reports on especially their 70-200 zoom.

About your lens setup: one suggestion would be

35-350mm f/3.5-5.6 USM L
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro
Sigma 20 or 24mm

You can see some lens ratings and comments on
http://www.cmpsolv.com/photozone/resultEOS.htm and http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

[lziering]

I think the 50mm marco is a more useful lens than the 100mm. Given the focal length multiplier effect, the 100mm ends up a 160mm. Seems kind of long for a marco. The 50mm ends up at 80mm which to me seems about right. Guess it depends on what you shoot.

Also, unless you really need the IS feature the 75-300mm IS lens is not all that sharp or fast.

[rickyd]

I agree with lziering, skip the 75-300! I have one and it gathers dust while I shoot my 70-2002.8L which I got used without the IS for a very reasonable price.
I shoot a lot of macro (intraoral) D60, 10D and would recommend you go with the proper 100mm 2.8L macro. yu have obviously had good equipment in the past and this lens will make you a happy camper. good luck.

[hugodrax]

the Nikon D100 is a decent camera maybe you still need to learn how to take good pictures. getting a 10D will not provide you satisfaction if you are lacking in the skills of taking digital photos correctly. your lens selection is poor if you want to take good pictures. if you want to blow 3k why not get the body 1500 and 1 24-80 2.8L zoom instead?

[Vaio]

Here is what I have currently with my Canon 10D setup (just got my 10d this past Thursday)

10D Canon
50mm 1.4 lens (better construction than the 50mm 1.8)
75-300mm 4 - 5.6 II EF lens (non Ultra sonic)
24mm 2.8

Here is what I have noticed;
Some shots have been sharp on the 75-300 but nothing to impressive so far. Hoping to later get the 70-200 2.8 with the 1.4 extender

The 50mm is truly impressive...

have not tried the 24mm 2.8 but when I do I will get back with ya.

By the way I have the 380EX flash (discontinued)

[TheClone]

K you might want to take a look at State Street Direct. I ordered their 10D package IV. They swaped out the out the included lens for a Cannon 24-70 2.8L USM for a total of $3370.00usd. All with USA warranty. Ask for FrankOstrow.

http://www.ssdonline.com/detail_page.cfm?ProductID=8363A013&affid=Z66&URLID=PC

[kendersplace]

Thanks everyone for the great feedback.

I hear mixed opinions regarding the 75-300. Some say it's tack sharp, others say it's a dog. I will be using the 75-300 a lot shooting sportbike motorcycle races, where the USM fast focus is really a plus for me. I currently shoot the Nikkor 70-300 (non AF-S) and its focus is way slow and I'm not impressed with the sharpness. I have considered getting a "real" tele lense like the Canon 70-200 L along with a tele extender, but I'd have to sacrifice on the wide angle end due to running short of $$.

I considered the L lenses (and the Nikkor pro equivelant for the D100) and I was just never impressed with them, not enough to justify paying 3 times as much money that is. I've rented some true "pro" lenses for the D100, shot tripod mounted and everything else to better the image - but still resulted in soft, noisey images which required a lot of post work. I've got a pile of test images from the 10D from around the web, and I would consider all of them perfectly usable out of the camera.

Maybe if I was doing lots of huge enlargements it would justify the L. I currently use online digital printing services and have always found the "consumer" lenses to perform just fine for this. I guess it's all in the opinion of the viewer.

As for the performance of the D100 - I have actually been very active on the dpreview forum and wrote some in depth articles about the D100 and the custom tone curves. I've put it through a slew of very controlled tests, and I've never been happy with it. Even the test shots of the test targets at dpreview clearly show the short commings of the D100. Even in Raw with high quality Nikkor glass, the test target is horribly soft when compared to a 10D or D60 with a Canon L lense.

Thanks again, and I'll give serious considerations to all suggestions made here to see if any suite my needs.

-K

[Cal Maier]

You may want to check out the Canon 70-200mm f/4L lens. Although it is 1 stop slower than the 2.8 it is just as sharp and very fast focus. It is also much smaller,
lighter, and less expensive than it's 2.8 cousin.

Another strong player in zoom lenses is the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM lens. This lens is rated by some to be as sharp as the Canon L lenses and again is quite a bit less expensive.

I am presently using the Canon 70-200mm 2.8L non IS and I would have a tough time parting with it but I would certainly consider the f/4 version as my second choice.

Hope this helps,

Cal

[kendersplace]

cal maier wrote:
You may want to check out the Canon 70-200mm f/4L lens. Although it is 1 stop slower than the 2.8 it is just as sharp and very fast focus. It is also much smaller,
lighter, and less expensive than it's 2.8 cousin.


Cal,

I had actually looked at this lense, not sure why I didn't give it more consideration. Can you add a Canon or Sigma 1.4 tele extender to this lense? From what I've read in a few places, I get the idea that the tele-extender won't pass on all the camera's advanced functions (or even AF for that matter) to lenses not as fast as a 2.8. In other words, that you must have the 2.8L or equivilant to use the 1.4 tele extender. Is this true?

If I can use this lense with the tele extender as well as without it, then this may be a better solution for me.

I may also pick up the 75-300 IS used as planned, then save some $$ and get the 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6 USM L which is the real solution to my lense needs, but is way out of my price range right now. Can start w/ the 75-300 then upgrade in a few months. ?? maybe?

Thanks.