Why do i feel this way!! HELP ME CANON!

On the lens limitations of the D40x. It WILL take the older lenses that don't have their own AF motor, they just won't AF with them since there is no in body AF in those cams.

Allrighty. I see the logic i guess. I reckon reading magazines and going to photography stores to look at gear is a bloodie nasty thing to do. And i suggest not to do it. Well actually just read magazines for the guides. Those glass displays that they keep camera gear in is bloodie tempting though. Its like candy for a baby like me

The thing is. Before DSLR photography i was into computers. So i brought the latest gear for my computer, you name it the latest core2duo chip, G80 gfx card, danger den Watercooling. The lot. Im a terrible person when it comes to properly saving and waiting on money.

I jump the gun. And the thing is. You cant afford to do that with photography. Because what you invest in is very costly. And potentially lethal.

and OMG those images were shot with a 300D must of been some L glass on those shots!

But why would anyone want to use L glass on a 300D :O

And yeah I will stay with canon. But I am extremely impatient. I guess its Nikon Rigorous marketing strategies.

Computers are different though. If you're a hardcore gamer who wants their games running butter smooth @ 19*12 with all the hardware features cranked up to full, then a fast Conroe paired with expensive video cards like the G80/R600 might not seem like so strange.

Mediation wrote in post #3905029
But why would anyone want to use L glass on a 300D :O

Why wouldn't they? Gear won't increase your photography skills. Experience and practice does. This is ESPECIALLY true since we're talking about bodies here.. you weren't even taking into consideration lenses - seems like a simple D40x managed to lure you away for some reason. I'll just say you should really focus more on shooting and less on looking at camera adverts.

Mediation wrote in post #3903439
Walked into the huge camera store in Queen street and stared at all the lovely equipment that i dont have

I wouldn't go there if I was you. I used to go to Auckland Camera centre but got crap service one day. Now I go to Progear at 3 railway street ,Newmarket.

That's where I got my 40D and found them good guys to deal with.

Mediation wrote in post #3905029
But why would anyone want to use L glass on a 300D :O

Uhhh, so they could take some good pictures. Maybe.

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #3905463
I wouldn't go there if I was you. I used to go to Auckland Camera centre but got crap service one day. Now I go to Progear at 3 railway street ,Newmarket.

That's where I got my 40D and found them good guys to deal with.

yah i told the guy there i would come and he can have a look at my 300D in order to make a swap deal with a 20D. But havent got round to it.

Yeah of course i would love to have an L lens but its difficult to way up the costs of glass vs body. If you know what i mean.

Mediation wrote in post #3905535
yah i told the guy there i would come and he can have a look at my 300D in order to make a swap deal with a 20D. But havent got round to it.

Yeah of course i would love to have an L lens but its difficult to way up the costs of glass vs body. If you know what i mean.

Glass should ALWAYS trump body, till you have the best in all the Focal ranges you need.

Id rather have a 300D and a 70-200 L than a 5D and 28-135.

wilvoeka wrote in post #3905562
Glass should ALWAYS trump body, till you have the best in all the Focal ranges you need.

Id rather have a 300D and a 70-200 L than a 5D and 28-135.

I second that! Good glass you can keep for years to come, a camera body has ha much shorter lifespan.

My advice: stick with Canon and if/when you get the itch for new gear, buy a lens!

If you want to spend some money now, take a look at for example the EF 70-200/4L with or without IS, both are very nice lenses which I suspect will work fine on your 300D.

Or, better still, do as I have done. Make up a list of what glass you need considering what you shoot. Then make a list of which L's that cover what you need and that you can afford if you save up. When you have the money, buy the lenses one by one. After a while you will have all the glass you need at such a quality level that when the day comes when you really feel the need for a new body you can buy any Canon body and you will already have the glass for it!

I now have:

EF 17-40/4L
EF 70-200/4L
EF 300/4L IS
EF 1.4XII extender

I just love to see the results from these every time! And as a backup for low light I still have my 15 years old EF 35/2 and EF 24/2,8; you can use your nifty fifty for that... Or you REALLY save and buy lenses with **/2,8 or greater!

Good luck!

/Per

wow, excellent advice. I decided to go back to my old roots and just get out and photograph and forget about the nonsense equipment...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Mediation wrote in post #3905535
yah i told the guy there i would come and he can have a look at my 300D in order to make a swap deal with a 20D. But havent got round to it.

Yeah of course i would love to have an L lens but its difficult to way up the costs of glass vs body. If you know what i mean.

well at the end of the day get what you can afford, L glass is nice to have but at the end of the day it will not stop you from taking photos. that's the key point, but when I can I am looking at upgrading the 28-135 with the 24-105 F4 add an extra L to the equipment list. but I know how to get good images from the 28-135 and it still works.

Now I just have to figure out how to use the 40D

Mediation wrote in post #3903439
Why is it that i feel like something new. Why cant i be happy with the gear i have. What the hell. I started off this year very satisfied with what i brought. But somehow i have the urge to shift.

What have you people done in the past to prevent this? How have you become smarter and more logical in photography gear... Why is Nikon eating away at my Canon self

you are suggering from GAS (Gear Squisition Syndrome)

The solution is to GO OUT OUT AND TAKE PICS

It wil help you remmber that photography is about aquiring (taking) pictures not about aquiring stuff.

Mediation wrote in post #3905690
wow, excellent advice. I decided to go back to my old roots and just get out and photograph and forget about the nonsense equipment...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

After my eye opening experience this afternoon and shout for help on the good old canon forums.

Nice shot!

Well for me i dont have any needs in lenses. I honestly just walk around snapping anything. I dont go to sports events or anything. All my pictures are just from walking around. Now i need to set a plan for myself. I brought the Sigma lens for a walk around. But it gets annoying with its limited length

The Sigma is reportedly an excellent lens for its focal length range. If you tend to shoot more towards the telephoto end than the wide angle end, then perhaps something with a bit more reach might be better for your needs.

At the same time i also want a good walk around lens that would be affordable. Would this be a good lens to buy?

Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Autofocus Lens
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …e_Angle_Telepho​to_EF.html

Its not an L lens. But its affordable. I looked at the samples. But there is not much of a contribution at all. It either means that this lens is not worth it. Or im just silly. Is this good for someone like me?

The question is: what's affordable to you? What's your budget?

If the telephoto end of things is where you prefer to be, then the Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS might be a better fit for you. It has more reach than the 28-105 and to complement that, it also has image stabilization. Photozone shows that it's also slightly sharper than the 28-105.

And you can get it used for around $300 - $350. By "used" here I mean, basically, that in many cases it'll be completely unused -- it comes in kit form with the newly released 40D, and many people who bought a 40D don't need the lens and are selling it on the classified forums here on POTN: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=14 (just search that forum for "28-135" and you'll get a number of hits for that lens).

Anyway, aside perhaps for the issue of reach, your Sigma 17-70 is one excellent lens from everything I've read, and if your gallery is anything to go by, you've already gotten lots of really good shots from it, like the one you just posted. I suspect you'll do very well with the 28-135, too (I wouldn't sell the 17-70 since you might want to be able to cover that range sometimes -- being able to switch lenses is one of the biggest advantages of a DSLR, after all, so why not use it?).

The B&H link for the 28-135 is here: http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …elephoto_EF_28_​135mm.html

If you want even more reach, you might also consider the Sigma 55-200. There's a really good thread on it here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=291362

It might complement your current 17-70 a bit better than the 28-135, and it's a LOT cheaper to boot. The B&H link is here: http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …00mm_f_4_5_6_DC​_Lens.html

Well, if your gallery is anything to go by, I'd say you do a bit more than that!

Hope this is of some help...

Wow very good write up. Read it twice

Thanks for pointing out the other options. I have been told that the Sigma that i have is good enough to cover my lengths. I think i will just save up from now on. But with all these options i am kind of almost once again lost!

Because really i am happy with the two lenses i have. The 50mm is used for my model (ex g.f :O). And my 17-70mm is good for a walking around lens.

I guess i should just keep saving and see what i should do. hmm

ahh thanks simon good term!

Mediation wrote in post #3906108
Wow very good write up. Read it twice

Thanks for pointing out the other options. I have been told that the Sigma that i have is good enough to cover my lengths. I think i will just save up from now on. But with all these options i am kind of almost once again lost!

Because really i am happy with the two lenses i have. The 50mm is used for my model (ex g.f :O). And my 17-70mm is good for a walking around lens.

If you're happy with the lenses you have then all that's left for you to do is to shoot some more.

If you want to experiment with a bit longer reach, the Sigma 55-200 is probably the least expensive way to do so while retaining good image quality -- it's amazingly cheap at $150 from B&H.


I don't know what your finances are like. If they're really tight then I'd just continue to save and use the lenses you have. You're doing really well with them so I'd just keep going. If your finances are in good enough shape that $150 plus shipping isn't going to put much of a dent in them then I'd be inclined to go for the 55-200 simply because it would give you more of a range to play with, and something new to learn.

And it's way cheaper than a Nikon D40x.

Anyway, you're taking way better pics than I am so keep shooting!

ah ha yes i see. How about i save up enough money to get this lens here instead of a new body.
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens

Its nicely priced and would be my first L lense thoughts?

wicked. I cant wait. It will take me about a month to save up for this lense. Provided that i dont go out spending money on alcohol etc. YAY!