Making a choice

[Bartekk]

Hi everyone,

I'm new here but hopefully plan to be somewhat regular. Over the past year or so I've become interested in photography and I've been taking some shots with my communist era SLR's and I love it! A couple months ago I decided to start putting away some cash for a dSLR and I'm getting close to picking one up.

Anyways, I'm sure youre all tired of seeing noobies posting questions about which camera/lens to buy but that's the beauty of specialized forums like this! I know all about composition and general film/photography stuff since I work in the film industry and I'm interested in it, I take pictures mainly of my wife, daughter, dog, portraits basically, lots of closeups, wildlife and general walk around stuff. So that's what i'll be using my dslr for.

Now, I've been reading alot and I still have (and will have) many questions. Since I don't know many people who are interested in this stuff I figured I'd ask you guys because this forum looks really experienced and I've seen some good info here as well as some great talent! ;)

Alright, so here are a few Q's...
I'm leaning towards an XT or an XTi, but I'm also interested in the D80 and Nikons in general. I'm hearing the CMOS on the XT's are better for high ISO's and I do like the fact that the XT's are smaller and more lightweight while still giving me killer results.

My budget isn't very big. I'm hoping to spend around $1k on a camera (with or without kit lens) and something like a 50mm 1.8f to start. I love the portraits my old school slr's take with a prime lens and nice bokeh so I think this would work for me? I know the 1.4 is better, but is it really that much better? Also, should I bother with a zoom lens for now? I'm a really picky person and from what Ive read I'd probably have to dish out quite a pocketful for a decent zoom in order not to get any distortion, softness etc.?

Now I'm thinking, should I get the XTi and the 50mm prime? Or just get the XT and the prime to save some cash, and potentially put the extra cash towards another lens? Will I find anything decent for the money I'll save if I but the XT instead? I mean will I see a big difference in the features over the two XT's and the difference in the resolution? Or should I go with a D50 and some Nikon gear since some people tell me Nikon lenses are cheaper? Also, some people say the XT's are softer, but as far as I'm concerned, if I lose the kit lens and slap something sharp like the 50mm prime, I'll probably get amazing sharp shots potentially better than equivalent nikons (d80?)?

Wow, I'm relaly blabbing, hopefully someone will have the heart to read this! :) Ok, what about macro lenses? Can you not just take closeup pics with a regular zoom? What makes them "macro"?

I'm also just planning on getting a polarizing filter. People tell me the circular Hoya is the way to go. Now do i need different filter sizes for all the lenses?

Ok I guess that's it for now so I don't kill you with all this babble. Anywhoo thanks for stopping by to read and hopefully I'll choose something awesome.

Thanks guys & gals,
Bartek

[coldrain]

I'd choose the XTi over the XT, not for the higher resolution but for the better AF system. The XT is a very nice and good camera, but its AF can be a bit unreliable.

And the added resolution and bigger better display for review are a nice bonus.

I like the image quality of the Canon cameras better, but that is subjective and personal. I also like the lens lineup from Canon better in most areas.

So my choice would still be XTi, over the D80.

[JTL]

One of the biggest knocks against the XT (and my only problem with it) is occasional focus inaccuracy. The XTi promises to remedy the situation to a great extent by using the excellent AF system from the 30D. So, with such a slight difference in price between the XT and XTi, I think the XTi will provide you with a far more satisfying photographic experience...

Dang, Coldrain beat me to it!

[Bartekk]

Thanks guys! It's things like this that I need to know because I've never owned a higher end digital camera so I have no clue what the AF is like. By AF we're talking about the accuracy and amount of areas you have the xti focus into in the viewfinder?

coldrain: I know there are probably equally as many people that like canons as there are nikoners, so I know what you mean. But can you elaborate a little on what specifically you like better about the image quality? Maybe you can point me to a few examples?

Oh and also, I'm a little weary about buying other lenses such as Sigma or Tamron and rather stick with the camera brand as I understand the image quality is usually better?

Cheers,
B

[Nickcanada]

Welcom to the forums, it sounds to me like you should get the 50 1.4. I have the 1.8 and it feels about as cheep as it cost. It is soft wide open too... You can get some good results from the 1.8, but if you are going to use it as your primary lens go with the 1.4. Here is a great discussion about the differences http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23902 That should answer all your questions about those two lens.

[JTL]

I know there are probably equally as many people that like canons as there are nikoners..Uhhh...that's not quite accurate. Nikon has approxomately 30% of the dslr market, Canon has 60%...so twice as many people like Canons...;)

[DonSchap]

Image Quality of name brand camera lenses is not necessary as good a third party. The low end lenses aren't nearly as sharp and unless you are ready to consider a $500.00 zoom... that's almost ALWAYS the case.

I know I'm going to hate myself, in the morning... heck, there are some that probably hate me right now, but I'm going to go out on a limb here (probably only to get it sawed off after me) and suggest a marriage between a Canon XTi & a TAmROn SP AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) lens. (There, I said it... OK "Coldy"? Mark the calendar)

You might just be able to get this combo going for your proposed budget, perhaps a little more... but it will pay you back for the investment. A great lens and a new promising body. It's a healthy start for the type of shooting you said you wanted to do. This zoom lens will cover your 50mm needs, give some wide angle capability and also toss in low-light for just a bit more than the f/1.4 Prime. I would consider going here, FIRST... then think prime when you're ready to lock in on a fixed focal length.

I love flexibility. :D

[Bartekk]

It seems I got my facts wrong then, thanks! :)
Thanks for that link Nick, looks like the 1.4 is a little bit better both in bokeh and sharpness. What about the 28mm 1.8f USM? I know someone selling it for around $450US used.

[Bartekk]

Any more words of wisdom based on what I wrote in the 1st post? ;)

Thanks again!
B

[aparmley]

It seems I got my facts wrong then, thanks! :)
Thanks for that link Nick, looks like the 1.4 is a little bit better both in bokeh and sharpness. What about the 28mm 1.8f USM? I know someone selling it for around $450US used.

I believe the 28 1.8 regularily sells for 399.99 NEW (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=102851&is=USA&addedTroughType=search)

[forno]

Hi Bartekk,

I have an XT with 18-55 kit lens and the 75-300II zoom, when I bought the camera i was really pushing the budget and for my money I got alot of focal length. While it may not be the be all in lens quality it has got me out there doing what I bought the camera for. If I had a better budget I would have bought better lenses ofcourse, not that I am un happy with what I have.

I am going to get the 50 f1.8 (budget again) and suely get some other lenses aswell later. From my travels here it seems some of the talented ones have 3rd party lenses that have produced banger result so that may be the way I go.

If you search topics I have started you will be able to see what these 2 lenses have been able to do in my hands, dont read anything into my senoir member status as it means nothing more than I am here often

cheers

[some guy]

How about a 30D?
if you are new to dSLR, the kit lens for 100 bux is quite a good buy... as a learner lens. There are lots of beautiful pix taken with the kit lens. Don't understand why people are so quick to dismiss it.

[Bartekk]

Thanks for the replies forno & some guy! :)

I'm not sure about the 30D? I don't think I'd personally see a huge difference between that and the XTi, plus it's heavier too. I really like the fact that the XTi is lightweight and more portable (my wife likes that too, even though she still thinks the XT's are "huge" in her tiny hands!). And I think it's more expensive too, right?

Ok, so I dug around a little more and here's what I found. Do you guys think that an XT or an XTi body along with a 50mm 1.8f and a Sigma 18-50 2.8f or the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (to replace the kit lens) is a good combo? I'd use the 50mm for nice portraits with some bokeh and the other lens for "walking around". Or should I even bother with the 50mm if I'm going for a f2.8 lens anyways? I also understand that both these lenses can do f2.8 at any focal length? Which I hear is a good thing? Pardon my idiocy ;)

I'm thinking best bang for the buck here since I don't have a huge budget. So I've read a little and found out that the sigma & tamron are both great lenses that produce surprisingly sharp, contrasty and good toned images and good prices too (maybe I can find them used?).

Thanks mates!
B

PS: great pics some guy! looks like we're neighbours! ;)

[coldrain]

Bartekk, The Canon Digital Rebel XTi is a fine choice. Some may prefer a 30D, some a 5D, some a Nikon D200 or something else. This does not mean that the XTi is not a very good camera all of its own.

The weight/size arguement made me decide on the 350D (XT) 1.5 years ago, instead of a Nikon D70 and Canon EOS 20D. Hands have nothing to do with it, I have big hands anyway. I did choose on size and weight grounds (and on the fact that the 350D has excellent image quality anyway), because I like to take it along all the time, and while traveling weight and size is important (to me anyway).

I also chose the Canon EF 70-200 f4 L over the Sigma 135-400, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 because if weight and size reasons. And I chose the back then very new Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC also in part of its compact build.

I still am happy with my choices, and if I had to do it again today I would choose the 400D (XTi), I would wait for the Tokina 16-50 f2.8, and I would have a hard time choosing between the 70-200 f4 L and EF 70-300 IS USM.
And the rest of my gear would probably stay the same as it is now.

No matter what some people say, there is not a very big difference in the capabilities between the XTi and the 30D. And the weight and size difference is quite big. So, that is a valid arguement.

[Bartekk]

Cool, thanks for the info! I'm not sure if I'll need a crazy zoom like you bought so I may wait a little with that. I noticed you have the sigma 18-50, how do you like it? And you're saying you would wait for the tokina, why is that? Is that a good lens to look forward to? price/quality?

B

[coldrain]

The 18-50 EX DC is a decent lens. On an XT it can be a bit unreliable in focussing (as can the Tamron), but on an XTi that should be a lot better. The Sigma has a slight yellow-ish colour cast. With custom whitebalance that does not matter, but in some sunny photos it can really show up when you set the camera to sunlight WB for instance.

The Tokina 16-50 is as yet untested (not available yet), but it is by the same designers as the 12-24 f4, and that lens has great colour and contrast... So my guess is that it will be a very nice lens.

Both the Sigma and the Tamron are good choices though, and they are available now. The Sigma is being replaced by a new version, and will probably deliver a better performance due to new optical elements. It also will allow closer focussing than the old Sigma I have and the Tamron, hence the macro addition to its name.

[Bartekk]

Cool, that's good to know!
I may just wait to buy the gear a little while. Am I correct that all these lenses are due out pretty soon this fall?

[coldrain]

Sigma says the new and improved 18-50 f2.8 macro is available in october, I can't tell you about the Tokina, and the tamron of course is available now.

[sunnythepsychocat]

Canon tends to have new technology on mid end cameras first, before Canon has it on high end cameras. On the other hand, Nikon tends to put new technology on their high end cameras first before Nikon has it on mid end cameras. In a sense, it is good for us since we don't need to go for high end cameras for that new technology.
Also, I know you can use old Canon lenses as long as they are EF lenses. I don't think you can do the same with old Nikon lenses.

[sunnythepsychocat]

Since people mentioned third party lenses. I will ask these two questions.
1. Are Canon lenses the best?
2. Is price the biggest reason for going for third party lenses?


Thanks in advance.

[Bartekk]

Hey all, I have another question.

I went down to the local store to check out the D80 and the XTi and while I was down there I asked a bunch of questions about lenses. I said I was interested in the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 lens and also the new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. I tested the Tamron on the XTi and it performed very nicely, superb build! Anyways, she mentioned that she's not that technical with lens technology but she was under the impression that a lens with a constant ap throught the focal length isn't as good of a lens that one in which the ap changes with the focal length? Is this correct?

Thanks!
B

[Clyde]

Hi,

Welcome to the forum, it looks like you are asking the right questions, and should wind up with a kit nicely tailored to your purposes.

You mentioned that you are picky. It sounds like you might lack patience with equiptment if you know there is better stuff available. With that in mind, I'd recommend the 50 1.4 as a starting kit. It does what it does extremely well. It is sharper at f/2.8 than any of the high quality zooms, and it opens up to a huge f/1.4. This gives you a super thin DOF, which leaves very little tolerance for focus inaccuracies. Here is where the USM motor and XTi's AF system pay dividends.

You should have fun playing with that for a good period of time, all the while noticing where you would like more range. This will enable you to decide if you want a wide 16-50 lens, or maybe a longer 28-75. You might decide you really only need zoom in the telephoto range. There you'd probably be happiest with coldrains suggestions, a canon 70-200 L or the 70-300 IS.


Anyways, she mentioned that she's not that technical with lens technology but she was under the impression that a lens with a constant ap throught the focal length isn't as good of a lens that one in which the ap changes with the focal length? Is this correct?



Generally the higher quality zoom lenses offer some wide aperture throughout the focal range. So any lens manufacturers f/2.8 zoom will generally be better than their, say, f/3.5-5.6 alternative. Also, since wider apertures require more (expensive) glass, users expect to pay more, and also get more for their money.

Good luck,

Clyde

[Bartekk]

Thanks for the kind reply! :)

That sounds like a great option. And yes, I would be unhappy to know there is something better out there! I'm constantly worried something will be released on to the market just after I buy something.. :P

As for the 50mm 1.4...it looks wonderful. But I'm having a hard time justifying paying 3x the amount of the 1.8! I've seen beautiful shots with both and the margin between the two seems very small. Yes the 1.4 has a better build and USM, but it's still hard for me.

If I do only get a prime to start though, this may be a good option for $300ish dollars I think. But I'm still torn if I'd like just the prime or if I'd like some range!!
The 28-75 seems a little long for me, but it's a fantastic lens. I'd probably want something wider with the same quality of glass such as a 16-50 (I do not want to spend a fortune on an L lens tho, hence the interest in 3rd parties)

Thanks,
B

[unix04]

[edit] sorry....i saw the xti/30D thread and realized the answers were all in there...please disregard ^_^