first dslr advice, big vacation..

I'm shopping for a camera to take along on a trip through Asia. India, Nepal, Bhutan, I'm very excited! I'm a very novice photographer.. photography has always been an interest I've just never taken the plunge. So I'm after a quality digital camera to capture the experience.

I'll be doing still shots for the most part I assume. Would like to be able to capture really nice shots of people's faces, and also be able to get wide shots of mountains and valleys. Being able to capture a bird up in a tree with poor lighting would be great...

My budget is limited and was curious to what the forum would suggest for a camera and glass.

I have about 6 months to learn how to take some decent photos. Meanwhile I'm reading and trying to absorb the terminology.

Perhaps an xti with suggested glass? or a 30d? or go for the 40d and sacrifice some lens power for a better body?
What body would I have a reasonable chance to get the feel for while not wasting on bells and whistles that I might not?
Should I just go with an "all purpose" lens? Space and weight are of some concern..

rezion wrote in post #4194120
I'm shopping for a camera to take along on a trip through Asia. India, Nepal, Bhutan, I'm very excited! I'm a very novice photographer.. photography has always been an interest I've just never taken the plunge. So I'm after a quality digital camera to capture the experience.

I'll be doing still shots for the most part I assume. Would like to be able to capture really nice shots of people's faces, and also be able to get wide shots of mountains and valleys.

My budget is limited and was curious to what the forum would suggest for a camera and glass.

I have about 6 months to learn how to take some decent photos. Meanwhile I'm reading and trying to absorb the terminology.

Perhaps an xti with suggested glass? or a 30d? or go for the 40d and sacrifice some lens power for a better body?

An XTi was made for people just in your situation. You can do just about anything the big bodies can do with an XTi it's just hell of alot simpler. It's an excellant body to learn from.

If you can purchase the body and a EF-S 17-55 F2.8 lens (instead of the kit lens) you got the best all around setup for learning the art at a reasonable price in my opinion. If the 17-55 is too steep then you can go with the EF-S 17-85 F4-5.6 which is about half the cost.

rezion wrote in post #4194120
I'll be doing still shots for the most part I assume.

Sorry if this is obvious to you but don't expect to take anything but still shots with a DSLR. Unless you meant shots of still subjects...

hehe yea, mostly still objects.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was just reading posts about people equipment choices regarding 'action scenarios' and debating pro's and con's of features...

Thanks for the advice Rhilton. I think the Xti will be a good choice, especially given the price on the lenses.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM seems to be getting great reviews for a 'walkaround' piece. With the Xti's reasonable price it is within my budget.

What are the limitations of the lens?

rezion wrote in post #4194181
hehe yea, mostly still objects.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was just reading posts about people equipment choices regarding 'action scenarios' and debating pro's and con's of features...

Thanks for the advice Rhilton. I think the Xti will be a good choice, especially given the price on the lenses.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM seems to be getting great reviews for a 'walkaround' piece. With the Xti's reasonable price it is within my budget.

What are the limitations of the lens?

Unfortunately, I got the kit with the 18-55 crappy lens and instead of replacing it, I've been buying others lenses that do other things. I'm trying to keep you from making the same mistake. Maybe someone here can tell you more about the 17-55 - I've heard nothing but good about it from just about everyone.

xti, unless when you pick one up in a shop it is just too small. The image quality is very close to that of the 30D/40D, it's lighter, and it's a little less "stealable". You compromise a little on ergonomics and that's about it (for the purposes you describe, anyway).

Lenses - yes - 17-55 IS USM would be the pick. Worth saving on the body to get this lens. Drawbacks - none, really. It does what it claims to do, and does it well. The biggest drawback, I guess, is that it only goes to 55, but that is just the way it is. You could get the 17-85, but it does not compare favourably to the 17-55 in terms of image quality, in addition to being much slower.

You won't get useful images of small birds up a tree in a forest with this lens. You'll need at least a 200mm lens, and fairly fast, so that is big money, and a heavy lens. Not sure what to recommend there, maybe someone else has a great idea. Best I could suggest would be the 70-200 2.8 (maybe IS, but $$$), or a fast prime (200 or 300), or maybe the 100-400, dunno.

Consider a flash too - 430ex maybe. The inbuilt one is no great shakes on any of the bodies.

Much appreciated. 430ex looks nice and is also rated very well.

Bird in the tree.. 200mm wow. Surely not practical, and I wont bother googling for the price. I'm still a bit boggled with the terminology, appreciate the advice and reality check.

An Xti with the 17-55 is usm sounds like a stellar choice. I'll sleep on it and maybe pull the trigger in the morning.

rezion wrote in post #4194246
Bird in the tree.. 200mm wow.

Depends on the size of the bird and the tree, of course
A sparrow in front of your nose - 55mm will do it, a big pigeon at 10 m - maybe you'd get by with 100mm. A canary up a pine tree - get a telescope!

Wait and see what the birding experts say here, I could be off base.

If you *really* need the extra length, and just one lens, and can compromise on some other factors, the Sigma 18-200 OS is often recommended - could be worth a look. I have the Sig 17-70 - a bit longer than the 17-55, but no match in terms of speed (definitely) or image quality (arguably), and it doesn't have IS/OS.

http://www.tamron.com …cal-length-comparison.php



10-22/10-20/12-24
+
24-105 IS/28-135 IS
+ space depending 1-2 fast primes (28mm +85mm ideally) would get me around the world personally. (with my 350D)

You may also consider Sigma 17-70 in combination with XTi..
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=186589

Good luck on your trip, make sure you show us some pictures!
Welcome to POTN!

Pete-eos wrote in post #4194262
http://www.tamron.com …cal-length-comparison.php



10-22/10-20/12-24
+
24-105 IS/28-135 IS
+ space depending 1-2 fast primes (28mm +85mm ideally) would get me around the world personally. (with my 350D)

This is a good plan too, if you can give up on the one-lens-for-everything idea (which I may have wrongly inferred was an issue).

for example

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=397522

what sort of lens do you think was used?

1Ds Mk II 28 mm f/22 ISO 100 1/40 s lens max aperture was 2.8 - maybe 24-70L, or the 28/2.8 I guess.

Ain't EXIF information great!

rezion wrote in post #4194349
for example

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=397522

what sort of lense do you think was used?

Yes, but that can be acheived with the 17-55, no problem.

Aye.. I think the "walkabout" lens may be the best option.. especially if it can grab like that picture. I realize there is some give and take with the focus lenses. Given my ~6month learning curve I'm unsure if I'll truly be able to get my moneys worth in photos with all the snazzy lenses. Dirt, space, money and skill are all considered.

I actually am quitting my job and am planning backpacking for some time. So an extra 2k in lenses shortens my traveling time by many months : /. My brother just got back from a 9month tour of SE Asia and convinced my to go on an adventure.