Canon 30D vs Canon 350D vs Nikon D80

[JoshSiao]

Hey, a fellow saint? SASS has a 30D? I'm in SAJC but a thru-blue saint since P1.

For a 30D I would say its in the middle of being pro and entry lvl. This is great for serious non-professionals. I will recommend the 30D over the 350D for the larger grip and increased stability it gives. 30D also has a larger screen but thats not important in getting good shots as its just to check composition and exposures. 30D also has the 5fps which is useful for sports. I say useful if you like to burst for sports that is. Other than that its not too different from the 350D. I prefer it over the 350D really just for the grip. I tend to hold the camera more than hanging it around my neck. I cannot say for certain of the D80 as I have never used it.

For lenses, may I know if you are really just shooting sports, or are you assigned indoor events as well? If you do indoors then you need low f/stops.

The canon kit is very fine unless you like to shoot wide. Its sharp above f/8. If you really don't like the kit, then you can replace it with a Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-70. I personally won't get a EF-S lens or IS together with it for that matter. I want EF for the flexibility of using FF cams in future and IS is too much of a luxury. Just need to practice your postures for stability. I wouldn't get the EF-S 17-85 IS its the worst mix lens I can imagine. Non-constant f/stop and EF-S. You'll really want a constant aperture at all focal lenghts for sports so that you don't miss good shots due to exposure changes.

For telephoto, I will only recommend the 70-200mm f/2.8. IS is more useful on a telephoto then on a wide to medium telephoto like the 17-85mm. But again its more of a luxury. If you are shooting sports only then a 70-200mm f/4 is more than enough; its lighter as well. the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is heavy.

Hope this helps. I am in SAJC photograhic society by the way which is very poor. Having only a overworked Nikon D70 and Lumix FZ-30 and overworked photographers. lol

 

[Big Kahuna]

Being a newbie my self....I always find it very hard to justify to spurn my hard earn money to buy an old camera body and start shooting with expensive lens.....because obviously we're still not sure on what type of photographies we are in and we "hope" to shoot everything with an all in one lens....."hope"fully the sophisticated body can compensate our lauzee skills.....if not.....next time when save enought still can change the lens to a pro-grade's.....and "hope"fully it will turn out right :sweat: Only when we collected enought good lens then we will look back....sigh.....we should have buy pro-grade's lens initially and compromise a bit on the body....because by then you just reallized that your cam body has obsoluted and the lens is not :sweat:

Base on what I read so far I think TS obviously already half decided on the 30D.....but need extra voice to convince.....so here I go.....go for the 30D......it's the best among the 3 :lovegrin:

If TS do not have enought money then buy prime lens first like a 50mm.....then when save enought.....buy the next one maybe a power zoom or a wide angle depending on your shooting habit :thumbsup:

 

[CYRN]

ya..

im leaning toward Canon.. Wish to start a new.. my Grand Uncle uses Nikon..

so.. back to main point.. which camera do you guys recommend? what lenses should i get?? i dun think need a wide angle.. but i sure need telephoto lens for sports as i will be taking sports photo for school.. i would like to start from 17mm or 18mm.. end at 200mm or 300mm..

my idea lens:
1) Sigma 17-70mm
2) Sigma 70-200mm
3) Sigma 70-300mm
4) Sigma 18-200mm
5) Nikkor 18-200mm VR (if i get Nikon)
6) Canon 17-85mm IS (if i get Canon)
7) Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS (if i get Canon) :lovegrin: (too far $$$)

Nikon D80 + 18-200 VR seems to be all-in-one solution with minimum cost.

However, I understand that 18-200 VR might not have stock in the usual shops CSers frequents.

Canon 30D + 17-85 IS is gonna be relatively more expensive.

 

[Stratix]

heh. i'm from a Polytechnic, and no, we dont even have cameras the last time i checked. =(

anyway, since you're 15, starting out, i seriously recommand a 350D, or the 400D and get the fastest lens you can afford.

why no 400D? the 4 more AF points and 10mp is useful at times. But then again, if you dont need the above mentioned functionality, then save that 200 bucks to get a flash or something.

a 350D / 400D + EF-S 10-22 Canon + 17-50 f/2.8 (Tamron) + 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma = lethal combination to last for a while =)

 

[jeromevo]

Hey, a fellow saint? SASS has a 30D? I'm in SAJC but a thru-blue saint since P1.

For a 30D I would say its in the middle of being pro and entry lvl. This is great for serious non-professionals. I will recommend the 30D over the 350D for the larger grip and increased stability it gives. 30D also has a larger screen but thats not important in getting good shots as its just to check composition and exposures. 30D also has the 5fps which is useful for sports. I say useful if you like to burst for sports that is. Other than that its not too different from the 350D. I prefer it over the 350D really just for the grip. I tend to hold the camera more than hanging it around my neck. I cannot say for certain of the D80 as I have never used it.

For lenses, may I know if you are really just shooting sports, or are you assigned indoor events as well? If you do indoors then you need low f/stops.

The canon kit is very fine unless you like to shoot wide. Its sharp above f/8. If you really don't like the kit, then you can replace it with a Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-70. I personally won't get a EF-S lens or IS together with it for that matter. I want EF for the flexibility of using FF cams in future and IS is too much of a luxury. Just need to practice your postures for stability. I wouldn't get the EF-S 17-85 IS its the worst mix lens I can imagine. Non-constant f/stop and EF-S. You'll really want a constant aperture at all focal lenghts for sports so that you don't miss good shots due to exposure changes.

For telephoto, I will only recommend the 70-200mm f/2.8. IS is more useful on a telephoto then on a wide to medium telephoto like the 17-85mm. But again its more of a luxury. If you are shooting sports only then a 70-200mm f/4 is more than enough; its lighter as well. the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is heavy.

Hope this helps. I am in SAJC photograhic society by the way which is very poor. Having only a overworked Nikon D70 and Lumix FZ-30 and overworked photographers. lol

thanks for you.. thanks even more for being a Fellow Saint like me.. Yes SASS has its very own 30D.. u have a PM..

heh. i'm from a Polytechnic, and no, we dont even have cameras the last time i checked. =(

anyway, since you're 15, starting out, i seriously recommand a 350D, or the 400D and get the fastest lens you can afford.

why no 400D? the 4 more AF points and 10mp is useful at times. But then again, if you dont need the above mentioned functionality, then save that 200 bucks to get a flash or something.

a 350D / 400D + EF-S 10-22 Canon + 17-50 f/2.8 (Tamron) + 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma = lethal combination to last for a while =)

not sure y.. but i dun like the 400D.. i think its due to the Status Display on the Colouful LCD.. i dun really like that.. other than that.. i also have been using a 350D so its better choice for me..

im not using the wide yet so confirm 10-22 is out.. i also had been reading.. many say that Sigma 70-200 is over-weighed..

 

[Stratix]

thanks for you.. thanks even more for being a Fellow Saint like me.. Yes SASS has its very own 30D.. u have a PM..



not sure y.. but i dun like the 400D.. i think its due to the Status Display on the Colouful LCD.. i dun really like that.. other than that.. i also have been using a 350D so its better choice for me..

im not using the wide yet so confirm 10-22 is out.. i also had been reading.. many say that Sigma 70-200 is over-weighed..

over weighted? the Canon L ones are heavier! with or without IS... at least from what i felt. Sigma's alot cheaper thou =)

 

[jeromevo]

over weighted? the Canon L ones are heavier! with or without IS... at least from what i felt. Sigma's alot cheaper thou =)

agree on price.. not sure about weigh.. but many say it is a unreasonable weigh..

 

[wanzw]

another point to note. dun get a sigma 1st hand. the price drops like crazy/

you can get a 70-200 sigma at around 750 dollars at BnS. like stratix said. absolutely lethal. 2.8 tele less than 1000 dollars is unheard of hehe.

and to JoshSiao:
welcome to the world of JCs. they intend to overbudget on useless academic stuff. my JC only have one D70 + sb 600 and a sigma 18-125. WTF lens. the dust in the viewfinder is absolutely GG.

 

[user111]

Hi all,

i had been looking at clubsnap for awhile.. cant sign what in the past.. not sure y but now i had sign up and This is my first post.

I am not a newbie & not sure what i m..

I do not have my own camera. I have been using my teacher FujiFilm Finepix S5500, my school FujiFilm Finepix S9500 & Canon EOS 30D..

in my cca, i have been using a Canon 350D (no vertical grip), 18-55mm filtered kit lens & Canon 75-300mm.. also the Nikon D50, 18-55mm filtered kit lens..

In school there is no speedlite for S9500 or any lens filter.. the 30D (no vertical grip) has a 18-55mm filtered kit lens, sigma 70-300mm, 580ex.

so thats all about my intro..

i would like to have my own camera..

as you guys know, i have been using that 30D & :heart: its lots.. that is my first choice

so its like this:

1) Canon EOS 30D (The one i like & most pro)
2) Nikon D80 (average)
3) Canon EOS 350D (cheapest)

one thing i would like to let all of you know.. im not rich & not here to show off anything..

im not considering for 400D

if i get the 350D or D80, i would get sigma 18-200mm or 28-300mm.. but if im getting a good 30D.. im considering of getting better lens as my kit lens like 17-85mm IS.

so please help in my decision..

thanks,

350d and 400d are too small to hold comfortably. same for the upcoming nikon d40. dont understand why they choose to design such small cameras .

dont buy the sigma superzooms. the quality is useable but one day (very soon) u will outgrow them. decide what subjects u want to shoot first (on a more predominant basis)then get the lens for it.
another thing is that getting original brand (ie non third party lens) is better in the long run. if u cant afford then dont buy so early. wait and save first. once in a while a really good offer springs up in the 2nd hand market then u may decide if u want to jump for it.

 

[unseen]

k la guys.. just admit something la.. sometimes lazy la.. seriously.. do u use auto mode.. for me sometimes.. i personally using shutter priority & manual..

I've never touched auto mode on my camera before. When I'm really really lazy, I've go aperture priority. Auto is a no no. I don't even use auto selection of the focal points. It's the best way to screw up a perfect photo.

agree on price.. not sure about weigh.. but many say it is a unreasonable weigh..

:bsmilie: makes me wonder how much of photography you know, and how much you hear.
The canon one weighs 200+ grams more than the sigma one, and we're not talking about the IS version yet.
If the sigma one is unreasonable, you shouldn't even think about the canon 70-200. It's weight is preposterous.

another thing is that getting original brand (ie non third party lens) is better in the long run.

A very common misperception that no one can really prove, but very easily disproved.

 

[JoshSiao]

I've never touched auto mode on my camera before. When I'm really really lazy, I've go aperture priority. Auto is a no no. I don't even use auto selection of the focal points. It's the best way to screw up a perfect photo.

The canon one weighs 200+ grams more than the sigma one, and we're not talking about the IS version yet.
If the sigma one is unreasonable, you shouldn't even think about the canon 70-200. It's weight is preposterous.

I second it. My dial has never turned out of MASP modes! I only use P when I am lazy and the lighting is too tricky. Other than that its A or M.
I agree to the weight of the Canon 70-200mm. I have tried both, the sigma is just a paperweight compared to the Canon's brick weight. IS is 100 grams more than non-IS.

 

[yanyewkay]

i like the 30D, does that means i get the 30D??

im just 15.. a sec 3 student.. a school photographer.. next year im going to take alot for school.. estimate more than 15K.. most of all, i hate borrowing..

decent lenses..

Nikon D80 = Nikkor 18-200mm :lovegrin: or Sigma 18-200mm
Canon 30D = Canon 17-85mm IS, 70-200mm F2.8L IS (Dream) :lovegrin:
Canon 350D = Sigma 18-200mm (everything will be cheap, lol)

yups! as long as you like it just get it! It's better than going down the road later on and keep whining on how you would have taken better pictures had you bought the other camera instead.

Furthermore you hate borrowing. So just BUY BUY BUY!
It's the photographer that matters!

 

[with_brokenwings]

Hey, a fellow saint? SASS has a 30D? I'm in SAJC but a thru-blue saint since P1.

For a 30D I would say its in the middle of being pro and entry lvl. This is great for serious non-professionals. I will recommend the 30D over the 350D for the larger grip and increased stability it gives. 30D also has a larger screen but thats not important in getting good shots as its just to check composition and exposures. 30D also has the 5fps which is useful for sports. I say useful if you like to burst for sports that is. Other than that its not too different from the 350D. I prefer it over the 350D really just for the grip. I tend to hold the camera more than hanging it around my neck. I cannot say for certain of the D80 as I have never used it.

For lenses, may I know if you are really just shooting sports, or are you assigned indoor events as well? If you do indoors then you need low f/stops.

The canon kit is very fine unless you like to shoot wide. Its sharp above f/8. If you really don't like the kit, then you can replace it with a Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-70. I personally won't get a EF-S lens or IS together with it for that matter. I want EF for the flexibility of using FF cams in future and IS is too much of a luxury. Just need to practice your postures for stability. I wouldn't get the EF-S 17-85 IS its the worst mix lens I can imagine. Non-constant f/stop and EF-S. You'll really want a constant aperture at all focal lenghts for sports so that you don't miss good shots due to exposure changes.

For telephoto, I will only recommend the 70-200mm f/2.8. IS is more useful on a telephoto then on a wide to medium telephoto like the 17-85mm. But again its more of a luxury. If you are shooting sports only then a 70-200mm f/4 is more than enough; its lighter as well. the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is heavy.

Hope this helps. I am in SAJC photograhic society by the way which is very poor. Having only a overworked Nikon D70 and Lumix FZ-30 and overworked photographers. lol

hey josh!
anws, i agree with what josh said, except for only one thing.. i feel the F2.8 is a nice to have but the F4 is honestly good enough. really fast lens.

anws, ima saint too. youve got a pm..

 

[jeromevo]

Thanks for all help in decision..

ok.. this is what is heard.. the sigma 70-200mm has an unreasonable weight compare to other 70-200mm and its soft, not fast.. NO GOOD!! i had NEVER used any 70-200mm so i dunno.. its all hearing..

so now, i just got to pray hard to try get 30D.. heavy user here.. that be best.. lots of event to cover.. if not the next will be 350D.. i prefer 350D compared to 400D.. it doesn't matter to me even if 400D was 16 mpx & has 45 point AF.. i would prefer something i'm used to.. something i like.. also stated.. its the photographer.. not the camera... then last but not less if no choice then will use nikon.. d80..

but i really still need somemore advice on lens..

i have only this few in mind
1) Sigma 17-70mm
2) Sigma 70-200mm
3) Sigma 70-300mm
4) Sigma 18-200mm
5) Nikkor 18-200mm VR (if i get Nikon)
6) Canon 17-85mm IS (if i get Canon)
7) Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS (if i get Canon) :lovegrin: (too far $$$)

should i get a all in one lens.. or buy normal zoom lens & telephoto zoom lens.. i not looking at prime lens.. just go direct to zoom.. mean while i also dun need wide angle.. anyway i need u guys to recommend me more lens?

 

[FilterFunk]

how about the Sigma 50-150 F2.8 for tele?

and perhaps considering 1 of these to replace the kit? (all F2.8..)
Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-50 (both already available on both mounts) and Tokina 16-50 (coming soon early next year?)

if you want slightly longer reach, the Tamron 28-75 and Sigma 24-70 comes to mind.

if you care alot on IQ, i suggest you get seperate lens for different uses rather than all in one focal length lens... but honestly, being the school photographer, do you really need alot of tele reach or night/poor lighting shots? if no, the Sigma 70-300 will suit you fine. personally think you should be in the heart of the action to capture the 'moment' nicely.

just my 2cents

 

[Stratix]

Thanks for all help in decision..

ok.. this is what is heard.. the sigma 70-200mm has an unreasonable weight compare to other 70-200mm and its soft, not fast.. NO GOOD!! i had NEVER used any 70-200mm so i dunno.. its all hearing..

so now, i just got to pray hard to try get 30D.. heavy user here.. that be best.. lots of event to cover.. if not the next will be 350D.. i prefer 350D compared to 400D.. it doesn't matter to me even if 400D was 16 mpx & has 45 point AF.. i would prefer something i'm used to.. something i like.. also stated.. its the photographer.. not the camera... then last but not less if no choice then will use nikon.. d80..

but i really still need somemore advice on lens..

i have only this few in mind
1) Sigma 17-70mm
2) Sigma 70-200mm
3) Sigma 70-300mm
4) Sigma 18-200mm
5) Nikkor 18-200mm VR (if i get Nikon)
6) Canon 17-85mm IS (if i get Canon)
7) Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS (if i get Canon) :lovegrin: (too far $$$)

should i get a all in one lens.. or buy normal zoom lens & telephoto zoom lens.. i not looking at prime lens.. just go direct to zoom.. mean while i also dun need wide angle.. anyway i need u guys to recommend me more lens?

since you're covering events ("heavy" like you've described), a 350D / 400D vs a 30D wont be a great difference. unless you're that type that goes for super bursts, else, i dont see the diff really...

and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 soft? yea, it's all hearing. till you get one then maybe you might eat your own words :bsmilie:

i'm never a fan of a single lens that covers wide to tele. those 18-200 or 28-300 lenses are horribly slow. Since events are the type of photography you indulge in, then please, get lenses that focuses fast.

and last point, you're probably using parent's money for now (looking at your age...), hence, save if you can. not too nice to blow your parent's money on top end goods... my honest opinion.. =)

 

[jeromevo]

how about the Sigma 50-150 F2.8 for tele?

Reply: not long enough

and perhaps considering 1 of these to replace the kit? (all F2.8..)
Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-50 (both already available on both mounts) and Tokina 16-50 (coming soon early next year?)

Reply: Great.. might consider.. but end at 50mm might be too less..

if you want slightly longer reach, the Tamron 28-75 and Sigma 24-70 comes to mind.

Reply: with canon 1.6x its confirm too wide for me

if you care alot on IQ, i suggest you get seperate lens for different uses rather than all in one focal length lens... but honestly, being the school photographer, do you really need alot of tele reach or night/poor lighting shots?

Reply: less night.. need tele for sports.. MUST HAVE!!! em.. ya have lots to shoot..

since you're covering events ("heavy" like you've described), a 350D / 400D vs a 30D wont be a great difference. unless you're that type that goes for super bursts, else, i dont see the diff really...

Reply: i bursts

 

[westwest1]

Reply: not long enough

Reply: Great.. might consider.. but end at 50mm might be too less..
Reply: with canon 1.6x its confirm too wide for me
Reply: less night.. need tele for sports.. MUST HAVE!!! em.. ya have lots to shoot..
Reply: i bursts

1. Get 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8
2. What is not wide to you?
3. Get the 1D Mk2, If not fast enough I will recomend u something else.

 

[FilterFunk]

i 2nd westwest1's choice on the 300mm F2.8, that should definitely cover your 'diet' in action sports.

you want wide? get the ultrawide offerings from the various companies, picking Tokina 12-24mm though.

as for your 'burst' style, 1D Mark II is the way to go. 30D is probably not fast enough.

the question now is, is your wallet fat enough? or should i say is your parents' wallets are fat enough for this expensive hobby? :sweat:

 

[jeromevo]

guys, dun treat me like this la.. i dun nid so X lens.. (300 F2.8) I'm not asking for that.. just need telephoto zoom lens.. even cheap Sigma 70-300 also can.. but i need to take sports.. faster the better..

sorry la.. my meaning is at 28mm with canon 1.6x.. its not wide enough.. 17mm or 18mm with 1.6x is still ok..

i burst abit nia.. dun nid those.. those 8FPS too fast liao.. i had seen it..

jus nid your advice..