Camera & Lense Recommendation

[TheReefGeek]

I guess that is an option, going with the 20D and just the 17-85 lense instead of the Rebel XT with 17-85 IS plus 70-300 IS.

But I think I would miss the telephoto too much, and the difference between the rebel xt and 20d is going to take me a long time to notice. By the time I could say that I should have bought the 20D, then I will just buy the latest and greatest body, which will be better than the 20D.

Did you go with Canon battery grip, or 3rd party?

[reeferaddict]

Originally Posted by TheReefGeek

I guess that is an option, going with the 20D and just the 17-85 lense instead of the Rebel XT with 17-85 IS plus 70-300 IS.

But I think I would miss the telephoto too much, and the difference between the rebel xt and 20d is going to take me a long time to notice. By the time I could say that I should have bought the 20D, then I will just buy the latest and greatest body, which will be better than the 20D.

Did you go with Canon battery grip, or 3rd party?

That would the the 30D... lol

I went Canon all the way. Their grip also has vertical controls on it so you don't have to fumble for buttons if you're shooting in portrait orientation. It was actually one of the deciding factors as I really like having the dual controls and grip. Nikon doesn't make a grip, and the 3rd party grips for Nikon are cheaply constructed and don't have the vertical shutter release.

If you really want to go that route and will miss the zoom I can fix you up with a decent Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 for $100. It has a crack on the barrel, (purchased retail at a discount that way), but is optically clean and works perfectly. It was one of the cheap zooms I bought with my previous system and wasn't a bad lens, especially for $100.

[TheReefGeek]

I am definately leaning more towards Canon now, especially with the vertical grip information.

Good info on the sigma, i'll let you know once I figure out what the heck I am ordering. (will be within the next week or two so I get it in time for my honeymoon)

What about flashes for canon? Do you have one you recommend? There is a knock off brand Sakor

They Canon EF 70-200mm F4 L USM, does this have image stabilization though? I will be doing mostly handheld photography, more than tripod.

My use of the camera is for aquarium pictures, and nature pictures primarily.

[reeferaddict]

Originally Posted by TheReefGeek

I am definately leaning more towards Canon now, especially with the vertical grip information.

Good info on the sigma, i'll let you know once I figure out what the heck I am ordering. (will be within the next week or two so I get it in time for my honeymoon)

What about flashes for canon? Do you have one you recommend? There is a knock off brand Sakor

They Canon EF 70-200mm F4 L USM, does this have image stabilization though? I will be doing mostly handheld photography, more than tripod.

My use of the camera is for aquarium pictures, and nature pictures primarily.

Rory - the 70-200 f4 L doesn't have IS... that being said IS will do nothing for your aquarium shots as it compensates for camera shake not subject movement. Same goes for nature shots. IS is AWESOME when you are shooting a static subject at 200 mm and want to hand hold using a shutter speed of less than 1/200. No matter what, get a tripod, I recommend a Monfrotto 055 with a ball or grip head. Don't waste your money on a cheaper one, these ones fold and splay into any configuration you can imagine and pack nicely.

I went with the 580EX and 430EX flashes. Again on the expensive side, but ETTL II works superbly and the through the lens communication totally takes the guesswork out of flash photography. If you get a 3rd party flash, Sigma is the only one worth it's salt, the rest are junk... ask away, anything I can do to help & I will.... I read up for a month before I bought and had the added experience of buying a sub par system before that to know what I really wanted.

[TheReefGeek]

I appreciate the help, thank you so much.

This may be a dum question, but why do you need two flashes?

The IS on the 17-85 will help with hand-held aquarium pictures won't it?
For nature shots, I mean walking/hiking, and I see landscapes and animals I want to shoot, won't the IS be a help there?

The price difference between the 70-300 IS and the 70-200 F4 L is very little, which would you recommend then, the 70-200 even though there is no IS? My other lense would likely be the 17-85 IS.

Maybe I am missunderstanding what IS really does, can you explain?

Do you have any experience using extension tubes for macro photography without an actualy macro lense?

[Ruth]

Yup I would be willing to sell my lens as well for a good price if reeferaddicts deal falls through. I think you would be way better off to just save up and buy better quality lenses though.

[TheReefGeek]

Ruth, how much would you want for your lense?

[reeferaddict]

Originally Posted by Ruth

Yup I would be willing to sell my lens as well for a good price if reeferaddicts deal falls through. I think you would be way better off to just save up and buy better quality lenses though.

No need to commit here - I was just offering up a cheap way to 300mm...

[reeferaddict]

The only dumb question is the one you never ask....

I got two flashes because they work as a master/slave combination so that you can have one off camera to provide lighting from a different angle to cut down on glare and provide fill flash etc. Straight on flash photography throws harsh shadows and highlights that scream "FLASH SHOT". I also got an ST-E2 flash transmitter so I can use both units off camera as slaves wirelessly. Both are about the same except the 430 will only act as a slave and the 580 is more powerful and will act as a master or a slave.

OK... on to IS...

When you are shooting, to eliminate blurry photos due to camera shake the recommended shutter speed is 1/focal length. So if you are shooting a 300 mm lens your shutter speed should be less than 1/300. This has absolutely no bearing on "stopping motion" in your photographs, this is just to eliminate blur due to shaky hands including the most steady of hands. If you have IS you can take the same shot at 1/30 or 1/60 allowing you to use a smaller aperature so you can get a larger depth of field or to be able to get the shot using available light instead of using a flash.

Here's where IS conflicts with moving subjects - To "stop motion" in a photograph you have to use a shutter speed of at least 1/60 or 1/125, even higher if you have a fast moving subject. As you can see, IS will let you shoot at shutter speeds lower than that even with a long lens, but the lower shutter speeds will make anything moving in your frame turn out blurry. I would learn to shoot without IS ... experiment with it on the 17-85 lens and you will quickly learn when to use it and when not to. Having said that, I would definitely go with the 70-200 4L. The lens is PRO quality, excellent build and more dust and weather resistant, as well as having flourite elements and low dispersion glass as all "L" lenses have. All these factors add up to superior contrast, sharp and fast autofocus, and almost a total elimination of flare. I have to warn you though, "L" glass is almost as addictive as reefkeeping!

As for macro, I don't yet have a true Macro lens. I am leaning towards either the EF-S 60 2.8 macro or the one Ruth has the EF 100 2.8, but now I see Sigma has come out with a 70mm 2.8, and I used to have a Tamron 90mm 2.8, a very sharp macro lens indeed! I think I will stick with Canon though as both those lenses are compatible with Canon's ring lights and serious macro work will require a flash so you can shoot at smaller aperatures to have greater depth of field. The shots I put up of the Powder Blue tang were using a 135 2.8 prime with an extension tube. The extension tubes work great with a prime lens to get macro shots. All they do is lengthen the distance between the lens and the film plane to allow for a closer focusing distance. For example the lens I used for those shots normally has a minimum focusing distance of 4 feet or so, slap on an extension tube and I can focus down to 4 inches or so but lose the ability to focus to infinity. As you can imagine, lighting an object only 4 inches from the front of the lens can provide some lighting challenges, especially with a flash head that sits up on a camera's hot shoe so far away from the lens... this is why I have flashes that can be mounted off camera and why I'll eventually get a Macro Ring Light flash unit.

BTW - the built in flash on the 20D will be adequate for probably close to 75% of your flash shots, and you can get cheap slave units to augment that until you can afford a bigger flash...

[TheReefGeek]

Great info, well explained, I actually followed it all!

Ok, so a flash is not necessarily a "must have" accessory to start. That might help offset the thousands you are going to cost me in L glass now.

Of course I do have some further questions now!

1. Can you describe how you take macro shots of your tank? Is your lens right up the glass? Are you handheld or tripod? Do you use flash's or is the aquarium light enough? Can a macro extension tubes be used on a zoom lense, or just a prime?

2. If you were just starting, and wanted to take some nice macro shots of your tank, have a decent travel/walk-around lense, and also have a decent telephoto for outdoors, which 2-3 lenses would you recommend?

I think I am leaning towards a Rebel XT, the savings compared to a 20D or 30D I will put towards better glass. I figure in a year or two, if I am able to max out the Rebel XT and it is holding me back, I can upgrade to the latest and greatest body, and use my existing glass. Whereas paying more for a body will mean worse glass, so down the road upgrading will be even more $$. Sound like a decent plan?

And this all started off with "honey, our digital camera doesn't have enough zoom"!!! Just like reefkeeping, "honey, those clownfish sure look cute".