Camera & Lense Recommendation

[Ruth]

I have the 70-300 lens that you are referring to and would not recommend it. The picture quality is just not there.
I think you would be better off to go for one good all around lens with an F of 2.8 or lower. JMO

[TheReefGeek]

Ruth, which telephoto lense would recommend then?

[Ruth]

I think I posted a link to the one I prefer on a previous page on this thread. 70-200. Of course the one I would really like is a 600mm IS lens but right now that is a bit out of my price range.
http://http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Tel...QQcmdZViewItem

[reeferaddict]

Originally Posted by TheReefGeek

Hmmmm, researching a bit more, with a vertical/batter grip on the Rebel XT, that might be a nice camera.

If I was to buy two lenses of decent quality, would these be good choices:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens

I know these are not as fast as 2.8 or 3.5, but price is a problem.

These are very similar to the Nikon lenses I was going to get, but both of these have image stabilization in them, wheras the Nikon ones I was thinking of, do not.

I got my 20D with the 17-85 lens for $1500 landed off eBay - the deals are out there - just watch for positive feedback. IS gives you up to 3 stops more of hand held ability, and I notice a larger percentage of keepers. There's nothing wrong with the Rebel XT either... I had the original 300D and was quite satisfied with it - what I did wrong in that system was to buy cheap glass. I had the battery grip with the 300D, (as I do with my 20D), and coupled with that, the Rebel felt like a pro camera in my hands. I think they key is the glass, which is why I went this way, now when I want to upgrade to a full frame camera I have the lenses that will deliver image quality I demand.

I really think your decision is subjective. Analyze what you want to shoot - then buy accordingly. If you'll never shoot sports or in low light, then you won't need 2.8 lenses. The caveat of big aperature glass is the learning curve required to use them as the depth of field is paper thin, especially when the subject is close, making the lenses seem "soft" when the aperature is wide open. Once you use them and discover the "sweet spot" of the lens though, you won't be able to go back to consumer lenses. Primes are almost always faster and give much better image quality than zooms, even the 135 soft focus at $300 gives as sharp if not sharper images than my $1800 70-200 2.8L IS... all I can say is research research research... dpreview and Fred Miranda are probably the best two sites to do this.

*** A note about buying on eBay ***

I bought my whole system and never had a single problem. Don't use UPS for shipping across the border. Their brokerage fees are outrageous, $58.00 minimum... USPS charges $8.00... Hong Kong or Far East eBay retailers will mark your shipments as "gift" or "commercial sample" so you don't have to pay GST or PST, and there is no duty on digital cameras or accessories. I found that buying accessories like filters, remote shutters, and flash accessories was cheapest this way - close to 50% savings over even Adorama. Again I stress to watch for positive feedback, and don't buy anything without using Paypal.

[reeferaddict]

Originally Posted by TheReefGeek

Ruth, which telephoto lense would recommend then?

The 70-200 f4 is widely regarded as the "best bang for your buck" and has "L" glass to boot... can be had for around $5 - 600 used - $7 - 800 new.

[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?