The final hurdle before buying my SLR

[yeppie99]

Better body + Moderate lens = Wait longer to buy better lens
(EOS 30)
or

Entry-level body + Better lens = Might think of changing bodies in
(EOS 300) the near future?

 

[Kei]

Erm no option for better body better lens? hee

Btw do u have any lens in mind ?

 

[yeppie99]

Originally posted by Keito
Erm no option for better body better lens? hee

Btw do u have any lens in mind ?

better body better lens = donations from members

preferably i want a 70-200mm to start with but if i get a more expensive body i'll have to settle for a 50mm for the time being.

 

[Kei]

Erm then i suggest getting the eos30 and a 50mm first

 

[yeppie99]

Originally posted by Keito
Erm then i suggest getting the eos30 and a 50mm first

yeah i think so too. coz i love the looks of the EOS 30. ok ok, not everything abt looks. it shld b a safe buy. i know myself, if i get the eos300 i'm 70% sure i'll wanna upgrade soon....

 

[yeppie99]

by the way, can someone give some pointers when choosing a 2nd hand camera? such as wat to look out for, wat signs do a very used camera show, etc. i know there something in the mount and the shutter?

 

[Kho King]

Originally posted by yeppie99


preferably i want a 70-200mm to start with but if i get a more expensive body i'll have to settle for a 50mm for the time being.

If your better lens definition is the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 lens, then I suppose your first option of better camera (EOS 30) + moderate lens, the moderate lens can be a quite good 28-135mm IS USM, since the price of Canon 70-200mm alone is more than the EOS 30 + 28-135mm IS USM already.

 

[007]

Originally posted by yeppie99


better body better lens = donations from members

preferably i want a 70-200mm to start with but if i get a more expensive body i'll have to settle for a 50mm for the time being.

yeppie, i do not have any idea also.
But if I am not wrong, why don't you get a

28~105 mm lens?

Try to get this lens. Good lens. The only problem for this lens is the f-stops. Due to the f-stops, difficult to AF under dim light condition.

(28~80mm (most of the time is given as default lens is not recommended, just a so-so lens ).

What do you think?

 

[yeppie99]

thanks khoking and 007! i was thinking more of Sigma 70-200mm F4 (is there such a thing? F2.8 is too exp.) anyway how much is the 28-135mm IS?

 

[docile]

I'll go for the 50mm and Eos30 if I were u. No regrets
;p

Having said that, there are some hard facts.
50mm and some places like JBP don't really mix.

Maybe u can get a cheap 70-300 4-5.6 sort of zoom first...

 

[Kho King]

pricelist...see below...

 

[Kho King]

Originally posted by yeppie99
thanks khoking and 007! i was thinking more of Sigma 70-200mm F4 (is there such a thing? F2.8 is too exp.) anyway how much is the 28-135mm IS?

No, there is no Sigma 70-200mm f/4. However, there is one Canon 70-200mm f4...price...not sure...check my pricelist...but I am not sure if there is any changes. You might want to get lots of equote from CP, and update my pricelist in Canon range.

 

[yeppie99]

Originally posted by docile
I'll go for the 50mm and Eos30 if I were u. No regrets
;p

Having said that, there are some hard facts.
50mm and some places like JBP don't really mix.

Maybe u can get a cheap 70-300 4-5.6 sort of zoom first...

how much would the 70-300 f/4-5.6 cost? is it possible below $1000? the other day i was looking at this Sigma 50-500mm. but i think its $1000+. that shld come in handy for wildlife.

 

[Bluestrike]

Originally posted by yeppie99


how much would the 70-300 f/4-5.6 cost? is it possible below $1000? the other day i was looking at this Sigma 50-500mm. but i think its $1000+. that shld come in handy for wildlife.

The 50-500 cost abt 1600.

Oso, take note which 70-300 you getting...
There are many versions to it and I do strongly suggest that you don't get this len 1st!

 

[yeppie99]

Originally posted by Bluestrike

The 50-500 cost abt 1600.

Oso, take note which 70-300 you getting...
There are many versions to it and I do strongly suggest that you don't get this len 1st!

i most probably won't with the crap budget i have. so for now just eos30 + 50mm.

btw wat do u mean by many versions?

 

[007]

Originally posted by yeppie99


how much would the 70-300 f/4-5.6 cost? is it possible below $1000? the other day i was looking at this Sigma 50-500mm. but i think its $1000+. that shld come in handy for wildlife.

Yeppie, you're welcome.

But please listen to my advice, please. If not, you might end up choosing a wrong lens!
Well, it is okay that you desire a large zoom lens (with high ratio) but bear that in mind, the bigger the ratio, the more it tends to have some image loss. Really. I read somewhere that for normal shooting, the range is around 28mm to 300mm (or 200mm?) But just get a 28mm-300mm is not the way!

It is better that you break into few lenses.
Do you know the difference between a fixed focus lens and a zoom lens?
The same theory apply to different zoom lens. Well, I admit that with high cost (>>1k) you definitely can get a good lens (ie 28-200mm )
But it is better ($$ wise and image quality wise) that you can choose something like this?

a) 28-105mm + 75-300mm?

I read somewhere also, that the 28mm-80mm is not so ideal.

btw,
50mm is similar to what our eyes look at things
28mm is better for scenery
24mm is for building

(in case you don't know about these. Me also a beginner, I really don't want to see another wrong choice in building your system.)

 

[yeppie99]

thanks 007, i'm listening to all advice now.

so the bigger the ratio the supposedly worser the image quality? din know abt that. ultimately i want to get a >300mm lens for wildlife shooting but i'll put that on low priority 1st and get my system startedd...

 

[Kit]

Originally posted by 007

Try to get this lens. Good lens. The only problem for this lens is the f-stops. Due to the f-stops, difficult to AF under dim light condition.

Again, who told you that???

I used to own the 28-135 and at the wider end, its almost the same as the 28-105. No problem with AF in dim light at all, maybe slower but certainly not a problem. How often do you need fast AF?

yeppie99, you said you would prefer the 70-200 so I assume that you'll need that 70-200 more than the 50? So why compromise and get a lens which you don't need just to get a better body??? Think of it this way, with the 70-200, you can shoot in the 50 range with both 30 or 300. With the 50, you can't reach the range of the 70-200. So ask yourself, which do you REALLY need? The lens is more important in any case in my opinion.

I'm not against of upgrade but to think you need to upgrade even before you buy anything is just plain ridiculous.

 

[Kit]

Sorry, but when I read some of the advices given on this thread, I shake my head in disbelieve..............

 

[yeppie99]

yes i know that upgrades shouldn't be on my mind even before i buy a camera. but now seeing that the price of a 70-200mm or anything that goes beyond 200mm is beyond my budget, i must as well use my budget to get a body that i fancy rather than getting something that is 2nd choice. i look at it this way, better the get the good body now and save for the lens i want rather than get the lens i want now and CHANGE bodies. to me, i rather add on instead of change. is this point of view considered ridiculous? it seems quite logical to me now.....