Its time to move up….

[GaryS]

I got interested in photography about a year ago, when I bought my Canon S2. Since then I’ve had a ball learning all I can, and taking as many pictures as my free time allows. My keeper rate is rising as I go (although sometimes its still frustratingly low!), and I’m getting addicted to the comments that I get on some of my shots….

But…. I’m getting more frustrated with the S2 as my skills improve. Shutter lag, poor low light performance, missed focusing, no flash hot-shoe, and mostly, large DOF are driving me crazy.

An SLR is in my future. I’ve been researching, reading and testing in store, and I've worked out this starting kit.

- Canon XTI body
- Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5
- Canon 70-200 f4L
- Canon 430EX flash

I expect that I will continue to add to my lens collection as time goes on….

My concerns with this kit…
Sigma 17-70. Is the f4.5 on the long end going to be a problem? The alternative is the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. Optics on both seem to be well-regarded, so which will I miss more, the reach to 70mm, or the speed of 2.8?

70-200 F4L – Lack of IS is my concern. The 70-300 has the awesome IS for the same price, but its slower. Which will I miss more, the IS or the speed? The F4L IS is way out of my price range (for now ;-) ).

I’m looking for your opinions here…. not tech specs.


Note: I take pictures of everything. My kids, their sports, macros, landscapes, night shots, out in the street. Not so many of other people yet, but I’m working on it…

[coldrain]

I think you will miss the IS and the extra 200-300mm reach more than the 1 f-stop difference. Only real reason to choose the 70-200 F4L USM may be if you want to use a polarized light filter on your tele lens. Because the 70-300 IS USM has a rotating front element.
I'd choose the 70-300 IS, because IS will be verrry nice to have.

About the 17-70 and 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro issue, I might just choose the 18-50 because you will not miss the 50-70 mm range all that much. But it is a toss up, I guess. The 17-70 allows you to have a bit more "macro": 1:2.3 vs 1:3.

[DonSchap]

Normally, I would stay out of a debate like this ... so that's what I'm going to do. :D

Good luck!

[GaryS]

Oh come on Don! I fully expected you to jump in!

My local shop is not a fan of Tamron, so they don't stock them. The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 was on my list, but I won't buy it if I can't try it out first, especially when it seems to be very comparable to the Sigma. If you feel that the Tamron is enough of an upgrade to the Sigma that it would be worth buying sight-unseen, say so.

I know you like the Sony, but I have a personal 'thing' with the Sony corporation (I disagree with their business practices). I won't give them my money, regardless of how good or inexpensive a particular product of theirs is.

I do appreciate your 'good luck' though!

[DonSchap]

Okay ... twist my arm ... :o

I have a lot of the current TAMRON lenses. That's just a fact, nothing more.

When I speak with other local shutterbugs concerning SIGMA glass, they refuse to use it, because of past negative experiences, yours truly included. Unless SIGMA has something truly UNIQUE, their glass will not be in my bag.

As far as the TAMRON 17-50mm f/2.8 goes ... this is an award winning piece of glass which has honestly earned its accolades. The TAMRON 28-75mm f/2.8, its direct predecessor and another award-winning lens, was designed for use on non-APC-S sensors and 35mm-flim. It won rave reviews, year after year. With the advent of the APS-C sensor and DCF (1.5 or 1.6x) ... the manufacturers had to create the wider lens to accomodate it, hence the arrival of the 17-50mm range ... which, after the DCF multiplier, it translates right back to 28-75(80)mm. Like I said, all the manufacturers did this, it was no secret that it was necessary.

Can you expect top-drawer performance, out-of-the-box? I would be very surprised if you couldn't. This truly is a special lens, delivering exactly what it promises.

I own both lenses (17-50 & 28-75) because I still shoot 35mm-film on occasion. I can shoot both lens side-by-side, the 17-50 mounted on the EOS 20D & the 28-75 mounted on the EOS-3 ... effectively getting identical images on both types of media (electronic and emulsion). That's kind of neat, actually.

Anyway, I digress ...

As "Coldrain" tends to insist, SIGMA had to rework their original design to produce MK II of the 18-50mm. Can I say, at least, that I'm not surprised? To be honest, all the manufacturers are in an uphill struggle for "king of the hill" rights to the best lens technology. TAMRON had to rework their new 70-200mm f/2.8 four times before they FINALLY released it just to show. They wound up with the lightest weight & shortest minimum focal distance of any of that class. Heck, it won't even be available until the Fall 2007. Even Tokina, who showed the 16-50mm back in August, at Photokina 2006, in Germany, still has yet to release it to the buying public ... and its already April 2007.

If you do buy the TAMRON 17-50 f/2.8 ... I would doubt, very much, you would be dissatisfied with its performance. It's a good working lens, holding its value.

There, I said it ... :cool:

[GaryS]

Thanks Don, I appreciate your opinion.

And thanks to Coldrain too.

[AdamW]

I agree with Coldy. I have the Sigma 18-50, and I think you'd really like the constant f/2.8 more than you'd miss the 50-70mm range. As a brand new 70-300 IS owner, I can't say enough about the wonders of IS. My hands aren't steady to begin with, and the coffee doesn't help, but IS is every bit as impressive as you heard.

[cdifoto]

If I was on a budget I'd probably go with a refurbed 20D (not much more than an XTi), Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 18-50 (kind of a toss-up really) and 70-300 IS.

The prosumer line of bodies is a quantum leap from the entry level. Not only in build but handling and ergonomics as well. If you go to Adorama.com to purchase you can add a Mack warranty of your choosing so you're still covered.

[aparmley]

My honest opinion - buy the cheapest body you can and the most expensive glass.

Having said that. . .

if it comes down to the 70-200 F4 or the 70-300 IS - get the 7-2 F4 L because if you plan on shooting any type of action with your telephoto (kids sports) you'll be disappointed in the AF speed of the 70-300 IS. That doesn't mean people don't get good captures of sporting events with the 70-300 IS - it will just be more difficult to do so because this lens does take a while to AF (keeper rate will be low) - One of the biggest surprises I found after I bought it.

Third party alternatives - My experience has taught me to pay extra for Canon USM. Why? Its quick and reliable. But, if you don't need fast AF then its not a necessity. If the lens you're considering for purchase will be used to shoot static objects then 3rd party AF motors will do fine. If you plan on shooting anything that moves USM will give you a higher keeper rate, period.

I know I haven't helped much but thats all I felt my experience can help you with.

[cdifoto]

My honest opinion. By the cheapest body you can and the most expensive glass.

Having said that. . .

if it comes down to the 70-200 F4 or the 70-300 IS - get the 7-2 F4 L because if you plan on shooting any type of action with your telephoto (kids sports) you'll be disappointed in the AF speed of the 70-300 IS. That doesn't mean people don't get good captures of sporting events with the 70-300 IS - it will just be more difficult to do so because this lens does take a while to AF (keeper rate will be low) - One of the biggest surprises I found after I bought it.

Third party alternatives - My experience has taught me to pay extra for Canon USM. Why? Its quick and reliable. But, if you don't need fast AF then its not a necessity. If the lens you're considering for purchase will be used to shoot static objects then 3rd party AF motors will do fine. If you plan on shooting anything that moves USM will give you a higher keeper rate, period.

I know I haven't helped much but thats all I felt my experience can help you with.

I agree. But unfortunately budgets usually blow the ideal right out of the water. :(

Makes me glad I went broke fairly early on and got used to being poor! :D

[GaryS]

Its not that I'm on a budget per se, I'm just trying to be sensible (if that is even possible!). I'm not a pro and I'm not going to be, so I don't need to guarantee even shot is perfect. Its just my hobby and I want to be REALLY good at it! :)

Andy, you definitely did help! The 70-300 does AF faster than the 75-300, it was slower than the f4L. If it gives you problems, its nice to know that.

[cdifoto]

Its not that I'm on a budget per se, I'm just trying to be sensible (if that is even possible!). I'm not a pro and I'm not going to be, so I don't need to guarantee even shot is perfect. Its just my hobby and I want to be REALLY good at it! :)

Andy, you definitely did help! The 70-300 does AF faster than the 75-300, it was slower than the f4L. If it gives you problems, its nice to know that.

Based on your initial list, I assumed you were on a budget. If you can spend more you should say so. It's not easy to recommend glass without knowing how much you're willing to pay.

Hell if you have the money, get a 30D, 17-55 IS, and 70-200 2.8 IS. Throw in the 10-22 while you're at it. ;)

[GaryS]

Based on your initial list, I assumed you were on a budget. If you can spend more you should say so. It's not easy to recommend glass without knowing how much you're willing to pay.

Hell if you have the money, get a 30D, 17-55 IS, and 70-200 2.8 IS. Throw in the 10-22 while you're at it. ;)

You forgot to include fast primes! :)

[DonSchap]

Sorry ... :o

Budgets and glass ... oh if we could, eh?

As they say, the best gear in the world doesn't make a photographer. Then again, not having superior gear leaves you to question: What if ...

What if I did have that EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM? Would this image be superior to the one I took with the economical 18-200mm?

What if I slap this lens on the front of a EOS 1Ds MkII, will the magic happen? Will I see God?

The questions abound when you are not using the "top-of-the-line", don't they? If there is room for improvement, then you haven't shot the "ultimate shot." And ... doesn't that just take something away from the experience? When you know that if you had spent just that extra $7500 on the darn lens ... you might have gotten published?

Budgets ... vs success, I say.

I just like taking images. Have fun. :D

[AdamW]

You forgot to include fast primes! :)

And a small (but tasteful) gift for each of us. :D

[aparmley]

The 70-300 does AF faster than the 75-300, it was slower than the f4L. If it gives you problems, its nice to know that.

Really? Thats hard to believe, I think everything I've read reported that the 70-200 F4 AFes faster than the 70-300 IS?

[forno]

get a 30D, 17-55 IS, and 70-200 2.8 IS. Throw in the 10-22 while you're at it. ;)


I plan to:p

[coldrain]

Really? Thats hard to believe, I think everything I've read reported that the 70-200 F4 AFes faster than the 70-300 IS?
That is what he said.... :D

[Vich]

You forgot to include fast primes! :)
And a macro!

Don; your lineup sounds sweet! A little bulky (the 70-200 f2.8 IS) for "one step up from the S2", but awesome!

IMHO; f4 is still fairly slow glass. I've not used the 70-300 IS but with USM, it's probably not all that bad. I'd go that route ... small/lighter too.

The XTi looks pretty sweet too. If I weren't shooting weddings where it gets banged around some, I'd get that over a refurbed 20D (sorry Don), but that's just me. It's a tall leap above the XT ... the thing that gave Don such a rub on consumer models. It takes really great photos. (Or maybe; I'd use if for a week and get cramps ... donno, never used one).

Maybe Ref will chime in here about it's performance, but that wedding he shot with me had very few missed shots from his XTi. Also; smaller is a good thing for some situations.

[coldrain]

In case you would now be considering the tamron 17-50mm over any of the two sigmas, check out this thread where I just now posted samples from a comparison test between the 17-50 f2.8 tamron and the 18-50 f2.8 macro sigma.

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?p=214986#post214986

If these (very consistent...) samples are anything to go by, go for the Sigma and don't look back at Don Schap chasing you wielding some Tamron stuff...

[GaryS]

Andy, you are right. Every spec I've read says the same thing. But here's the difference. Everyone who buys a 70-300 says its more than fast enough for them. Everyone who buys a f4L says that the 70-300 is too slow and you MUST have a F4L. So... who to believe. Your opinion matters to me because you have the 300, and are saying that there are times that it frustrates you. Which gives me a way to gauge whether it would matter to me or not.

Don S --- Budget vs success? I'd like to think we can get success even on a budget!

I tried the 30D and its definitely nicer... But its a lot bigger too, more to lug around. I'm not that serious yet.

17-55. LOVED IT! It is perfect, without a doubt. But its almost 3x the price of the Sigma/Tamron. I can definitely understand why some want it and why they pay for it too, but its too much for me now. I'll put it on my Christmas list!

Thanks for all you comments....

[aparmley]

That is what he said.... :D

LMAO @ myself. Thanks Coldy. ;)

[Vich]

LMAO @ myself. Thanks Coldy. ;)
Wow!

Andy breaks 3,000!

And today makes his 2 year's of service! (April 13, 2005 join date).

Way to go Andy. So, exactly 1,500 posts per year. Just over 4 posts per day.

[aparmley]

Andy, you are right. Every spec I've read says the same thing. But here's the difference. Everyone who buys a 70-300 says its more than fast enough for them. Everyone who buys a f4L says that the 70-300 is too slow and you MUST have a F4L. So... who to believe. Your opinion matters to me because you have the 300, and are saying that there are times that it frustrates you. Which gives me a way to gauge whether it would matter to me or not.

Don S --- Budget vs success? I'd like to think we can get success even on a budget!

I tried the 30D and its definitely nicer... But its a lot bigger too, more to lug around. I'm not that serious yet.

17-55. LOVED IT! It is perfect, without a doubt. But its almost 3x the price of the Sigma/Tamrom. I can definitely understand why some want it and why they pay for it too, but its too much for me now. I'll put it on my Christmas list!

Thanks for all you comments....

DP -

No problem; glad I could help. I'd say believe me because Peter is a believer and Peter is never wrong! Speaking of Peter, WTF has he been lately? Pete lets see some more model shots brother!

But really DP, the most important thing to consider and while being the most important is really the hardest thing to do it seems, focus on lenses (pun very much intended). Lenses are your bread and butter. Camera bodies for the most part, "ehhh not so much" (Borat voice). I agree with Don, used 20D + 70-200 F4L*, 50 1.8 (you just gotta), and say the tamy 17-50 - oh another must - flash, 430 at the least, used 550 or 580 EX. I know its hard to buy used - its very hard - but consider this, buying used will allow you the best possible upgrade path - you'll get a very good camera at a great price, you'll learn all the basics you need and more, you'll capture wonderful images, then when its time to consider the newest body, you'll be able to pull the trigger because 1. its a substaintial upgrade 2. you didn't spend much on your first body and now that you have a good foundation you can appreciate and take full advantage of the new body.

Anyway, I just felt like stirring the pot a little bit. :p

[RichNY]

Hell if you have the money, get a 30D, 17-55 IS, and 70-200 2.8 IS. Throw in the 10-22 while you're at it. ;)

Add the 85 f/1.8 and a 580EX and that's the exact kit I started with.

[michaelb]

Your choice of lenses depends on what you like to shoot.

I don't shoot moving objects very often so a fast lens (fixed f/2.8) and USM wasn't the most important thing to me, thus I chose the Simga 17-70, which I love.

When I need a fast lens (or if I'm shooting portraits) then I take out my 50mm 1.8 (which is a lens that you have to get, IMO, for $80).

If you need a fixed f/2.8 lens then I would get the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 macro, which is a beautiful lens; as Coldrain stated it is right up there with the Tamron 17-50 in image quality and I like the build quality of the Sigma better (don't tell Don S.!!)

I like to have "psuedo-macro" capability in my walk-around lens as I often shoot close-ups often, which the Sigma 17-70 and new 18-50 offer.

Here are a few 17-70 examples:

[chrisl]

Dusty,

The worst thing you can do on these forums is ask for opinions on purchases because you will get so many conflicting opions. So let me add to the confusion :D

As you know from the "Some S3 Pics" thread I made the switch a few months ago and went thru the same decision. So here's what I learned.

I choose the 30D over the XTI strictly becuase of the 5fps. That's it.

As for the lenses I got the 70-200 F4 IS over the 70-300 the reason being I want only contstant aperature lenses. For the short end I got the EFS 17-55 2.8. Is Canon better than Sigman or Tamron? I don't know and that discussion is endless. But my only recomendation is get a zoom that starts around 17 for the 1.6X crop and make sure it's constant aperature, either 2.8 or F4. For the long end I say have a look at the Sigma 100-300 F4. Excellent reviews and it's a fast constant aperature lense.

Next I bought a used 85 1.8 off the fredmiranda forum. Buying used is not a bad idea and will save you quite a few bucks. There's alot of folks on these forums that roll over equipment that's less than 6 months old. Right now there's a guy selling a 50 1.4 (I'm drooling) that's less than one month old over here (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=14). The other forum to check is DGRIN.com

Since you're a fellow canuck like me I recommend buying from either Aden Camera (Call the store at Yonge & Gerrard and ask for ED) or B & H in NY. Both of these are cheaper that the big H.
If you want more details on why PM me.

Good luck and I'm happy to see you're not considering the Dark Side.:)

PS:
Fast is for low light not just fast moving objects.

[GaryS]

Chrisl... In photography, I almost feel like you have to ask for opinions and just deal with all conflicts. Everything is so subjective, you can't figure out anything from a spec list. There have been tons of great responses here (including yours), I just have to sift through it all!

Oh, and Dark side? N***n? I was thinking of saying I decided on a D40 just to see if coldy's head would explode! kidding!!

MichaelB, I was hoping you would chime in. I knew you had the 17-70, and your photos with it have been great.

I'll add a 50mm prime soon.... 1.4 or 1.8... I'll decide after I get some practice with everything else!

Andy's thoughts on upgrades... I agree with that thinking 100%. But my wife, not so much! I can buy stuff, no problem. But replacing working stuff with more working stuff, that makes her crazy!

[cdifoto]

Andy's thoughts on upgrades... I agree with that thinking 100%. But my wife, not so much! I can buy stuff, no problem. But replacing working stuff with more working stuff, that makes her crazy!

Make her happy then:

1D IIn (or 1D III), 16-35 f/2.8L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 580EX.


And tell her it was her idea to buy once and be happy! :D

[danielg]

Dusty, I can't wait to see you make the transition :)

[forno]

Make her happy then:

1D IIn (or 1D III), 16-35 f/2.8L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 580EX.


And tell her it was her idea to buy once and be happy! :D

Might try that, I have just the opportunity coming up hey Ceedub:D

[GaryS]

Forno, why are you replacing your Tammy with the Canon 17-55?

[cwphoto]

Might try that, I have just the opportunity coming up hey Ceedub:D

Oh yeah, play the emotional card. ;)

[aparmley]

Wow!

Andy breaks 3,000!

And today makes his 2 year's of service! (April 13, 2005 join date).

Way to go Andy. So, exactly 1,500 posts per year. Just over 4 posts per day.

Thanks Vich. I hadn't noticed but your right! Hard to believe just 2 years ago I was wanting to upgrade from my Sony PSC-3200 (I think thats the one) a piece of crap 3.2 MP point and shoot with a fixed lens. I upgraded to a Canon A95 and within a few months of that had my Digital Rebel XT + 50 1.8. How time flies! How fitting, on my 2 year annv. to the day I'm very excited about package(s) arriving today!

[aparmley]

Andy's thoughts on upgrades... I agree with that thinking 100%. But my wife, not so much! I can buy stuff, no problem. But replacing working stuff with more working stuff, that makes her crazy!

So that must mean no new purses unless her current purse blew a hole in the bottom right? Or no new shoes until the ones she's wearing falls apart right! :D "Never go to bed when you can stay up and fight all night!" Words to live by!:rolleyes:

[RichNY]

Here''s a great gift for the little womam: http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm?postID=91

She gets a new purse, your get someone to lug 1/2 your glass;)

[cdifoto]

Here''s a great gift for the little womam: http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm?postID=91

She gets a new purse, your get someone to lug 1/2 your glass;)

How does she expect to walk those dogs AND zoom/compose at the same damn time? Me thinks she needs a P&S for the dog walking... :rolleyes:

[michaelb]

Chrisl... In photography, I almost feel like you have to ask for opinions and just deal with all conflicts. Everything is so subjective, you can't figure out anything from a spec list. There have been tons of great responses here (including yours), I just have to sift through it all!

Oh, and Dark side? N***n? I was thinking of saying I decided on a D40 just to see if coldy's head would explode! kidding!!

MichaelB, I was hoping you would chime in. I knew you had the 17-70, and your photos with it have been great.

I'll add a 50mm prime soon.... 1.4 or 1.8... I'll decide after I get some practice with everything else!

Andy's thoughts on upgrades... I agree with that thinking 100%. But my wife, not so much! I can buy stuff, no problem. But replacing working stuff with more working stuff, that makes her crazy!

I've got the same issue as you....my camera budget needs to be "wife approved"!!

I would definitely recommend a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, whatever else you get....they allow you to be creative with DOF as in shots like this....



http://farm1.static.flickr.com/154/399303548_4b8ab91d1b.jpg


Good luck and let us know what you decide on and then post some pics!!

[chrisl]

So that must mean no new purses unless her current purse blew a hole in the bottom right? Or no new shoes until the ones she's wearing falls apart right! :D "Never go to bed when you can stay up and fight all night!" Words to live by!:rolleyes:



LMAO. I gotta show this to the wife.
...
Hmm, on second thought. I better not.:o

[GaryS]

Oh man... There are no worse words to hear from Fedex than

"Canada Customs Clearance Delay"

[adam75south]

Oh man... There are no worse words to hear from Fedex than

"Canada Customs Clearance Delay"

that sucks man. sorry to hear that. how long does it usually go on for? or do they charge you extra money or something?

[forno]

Forno, why are you replacing your Tammy with the Canon 17-55?

Sorry mate, I only just spotted this:o

I wanted the IS and USM for low light performace.

Side by side the Tamron and the Canon are pretty close optically but the Canon is better in every department and sharp as so on the whole its a significantly better lens, albeit at a price

[danidabi]

I've got the same issue as you....my camera budget needs to be "wife approved"!!

So I guess I'm lucky cause I am the wife in my relationship. I buy shoes, purses, and my camera equipment:p

Although my husband's hobby is more expensive: 4x4 jeep and dune buggy. So he might just keep quite because he buys vehicles were as I buy an object I can stick in my pocket.

[GaryS]

It seems that Customs is holding it until I pay the local taxes on it. No big deal, I expected to pay them. On smaller shipments, you can just pay Fedex when you pick it up. But on a 'high value' shipment, you need to pay first! The annoying part is just the delay...

Forno, no worries mate. I figured as much, and I agree, but the 17-55 was going to be too much $$$.

Danidabi... I was just going to say that I don't remember seeing any 4x4 pics on your flickr, but I checked first and there they are. Very cool.

I'm taking the kids to their first stock car race on saturday night, so I want to get it by the weekend!

[cwphoto]

Although my husband's hobby is more expensive: 4x4 jeep and dune buggy. So he might just keep quite because he buys vehicles were as I buy an object I can stick in my pocket.

Hey this hobby can be expensive too. Sometimes the content of my car is worth more than the car itself!

[danidabi]

^^I totally believe you when you say it's expensive. I have the S3 and have already spent 1k on the camera and gear. I have a beater car and my gear is more more...When I buy a dslr next yr it will be expensive but I deserve it after doing nothing but school for the past 4 yrs.

[drama]

Congrats :)
Do post some pics here
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29900

[Vich]

Sorry mate, I only just spotted this:o

I wanted the IS and USM for low light performace.

Side by side the Tamron and the Canon are pretty close optically but the Canon is better in every department and sharp as so on the whole its a significantly better lens, albeit at a price
Oh GREAT! Now you got me thinking about this. :D

I thought I was done buying stuff for quite a while. sigh. Got 4 weddings coming up and they're actually starting to pay something now. f2.8 with IS and WA is sounding like a nice combo, even though it might be a tad soft on at 17mm (or so I've heard ... from only 1 or 2 sources).

[chrisl]

So Dusty, what did you get and from where?

[FLiPMaRC]

LOL! I'm also on the "Wife Approved Budget" :D

[nap]

Dusty, I can't wait to see you make the transition :)

Me too, I can't wait to see MYSELF make the transition!

[GaryS]

I ended up buying at B&H. I went into Henrys to see if they would work on the price a bit, as they were 20% more than B&H (even after exchange, taxes, shipping etc). They weren't willing to even come close, so I just went the online route.

I ended up with:
- XTi body
- Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX Macro
- Canon 70-300 IS USM
- Extra battery
- 2gb Sandisk Ultra II
- Remote shutter release
- 430EX Flash
- Slingshot AW200 bag

I ordered it Monday with overnight delivery, and it was hung up one extra day in customs. I got it Wed afternoon.

Woo Hoo!

Everything looks good, and I can't wait for the weekend to get out. I'll get some pics up here once I have a few I can be proud of.

Thanks so much to everyone for their advice (and jokes). Now that I have a Canon dSLR, I'll participate more often in this forum!

gs

[XaiLo]

Congrats dustyporch, hope you have a lot of fun dude ;)

[chrisl]

Dusty, Congrats.
Ain't the price difference crazy.
I bought my 120-300, filter, 1.4 Extender, shipping, converstion for less than just the lens at Aden which was already $600 cheaper than Henrys.
Would have been even cheaper now with the value of the dollar.

Looking forward to seeing your pics.

[GaryS]

Yes, the price difference is pretty crazy. I don't mind paying a bit more to a local store, but this is hundreds of dollars. None of my old filters fit either lens, and I"ll need a beefier tripod... Henrys will still get some of my money.

Now I need to sell the S2... and update my sig!

[danielg]

Dusty, congratulations on the Xti :) Keep the S2. I sold my S3is and afgter awhile I found it too cumbersome to be lugging my 30D and lenses around so I got myself a G7 and whaddya know. I take my G7 with me everyday as it is relatively small and now I use my G7 more than my 30d , my 30D sees action only when I need to shoot something important :)

[chrisl]

Dusty,

I agree with Daniel. I kept my S3 though I do carry my 30D with me most of the time. I haven't shot with the S3 since I got the 30D but if I need a second body in a pinch then I have one.

As for the tripods check out the Amvona stuff on Ebay. I have both a CF tripod and mono for less than half of the manfrottos. Watch the auctions they start at .99 cents.

[nqjudo]

Dusty - What did the snag you for at customs? I agree with the price issue. It's ridiculous. I went to NYC a few months ago and bought some new macro gear. I saved 570USD compared to local or on-line Canadian prices.

[GaryS]

Customs only charged me for PST/GST. Camera gear is duty free.

The annoying thing is the process. Customs tagged my box as a 'high value shipment', so it had to be assigned to a broker (which Fedex will handle with your permission), and then I had to pay the taxes to Fedex before Customs would clear it. It added a day to the shipping time.

The retailers in Canada all want to sell everything at list price, which is their right of course. It drives me crazy that there is not more competition here to help drive prices down.

Maybe I should open a camera store....

[chrisl]

[QUOTE=dustyporch;224848]
The annoying thing is the process. Customs tagged my box as a 'high value shipment', so it had to be assigned to a broker (which Fedex will handle with your permission), and then I had to pay the taxes to Fedex before Customs would clear it. It added a day to the shipping time.

QUOTE]


I found that out with the Sigma 120-300. I forgot what the threshold value is.

[GaryS]

The fedex guy said it was $1,600... but that sounds too high to me.

gs