Old 22nd March 2006, 01:12   #121
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
the 30d will be pretty huge once you get that battery grip on. A far cry from the oly e330...
Yes. And it's also very tough. I actually find it difficult to use my Fuji P+S because it's so small, so having a large camera will be really nice... I have very large hands, btw.

Quote:
Personally I wouldn't get a 20 or 30D straight off. It's a shed load of money and you'll probably be more than happy with the 350D or the Nikon D50. If you find after a year or so that it doesn't do everything you want then sell it and get the 20/30D.

edit:
If you're going to spend that much money on a 30D you really should know why you're getting that camera, what results you are going to get compared with anything else. The D50 I got was pretty much the cheapest D-SLR I could find and is leaps and bounds better than any P&S I could name.
In all honesty, I knew that the E-330 was kinda expensive for what it is from the beginning, but I would've been willing to deal with it had it had the quality that I'd hoped it did. But alas, after reading the reviews and seeing the images it produced, I wasn't very impressed. I'd already read the reviews and seen the images from the 20D and 30D, so I already knew that they were both excellent cameras. Despite them not having a couple of the features that I would've gotten from the E-330, the superior image quality well more than makes up for it. Despite what everyone here may think, image quality is most important to me. There's no way in hell I would've ordered that E-330 without seeing some sample images and reading a good review of it. Now that I've seen what it's all about, it's not a prime consideration of mine any more. And, like I said, since I'd already read the reviews and seen the sample images from the Canons, I knew what they were all about. I've had a few chances to play with a couple different Canon dSLRs in the stores, so I know what kind of quality they have.

Also, why would I bother buying a 350D and using it for a while first before deciding that what I really wanted was a 30D? "Oh great, there's a thousand pictures I could've taken with a better camera." It's not like I'm going to be buying a dSLR just "for a while" or until something better comes out. If I get this camera, I'm going to have it for a long time. It's not a replacement for my P+S. In fact, I plan on keeping my Fuji for a very long time to come, too.

And while I do like the Nikons, I like the Canons a bit more. I know this sounds superficial, but I was turned off to the fact that the Nikon I was looking at has a sensor made by Sony. I know it's almost impossible to stay away from Sony these days, but I'm not going to willingly support them if I can help it. But still, the Canons are just more appealing to me. When I compared them in the store, the Rebel XT caught my eye more than the D50.

Quote:
One thing if you get a Canon: forget about kits.
Their kit lenses are traditionally only useful as paperweights.
Really, getting a kit or not is still up in the air for me at the moment. I wasn't all too worried about having a kit lens for the most part because I'd be using the telephoto zoom lens most of the time. If I find a macro zoom lens that's more fitting to my needs than the kit lens, then I'll just get the body and buy the lenses separately. It all just depends on what lenses I find that suit my needs. Also, is there something wrong with the one I picked out?

Quote:
Get the 30D. Its a better camera, I'd regret getting anything less, or anything non-canon and I wouldn't want to go through the trouble of selling it to buy a new one.

If you don't like the kit lenses, get the body only and a lens separate. Maybe you could even get a lens that you'd like better then the one that comes with the camera (regardless of quality).
Pretty much what I was thinking.

Quote:
edit: remember if you go on vacation you'll need a larger mem card. I hope you have a laptop or some type of hard drive storage if that ever happens. My friend has a Rebel and he brings his laptop and uploads his card every night
Yeah, if I do get this, I'll most likely end up getting a second memory card later. But for now, I do have a laptop that I can transfer the files to if need be.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd March 2006, 07:07   #122
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
macro zoom lenses arent great. A prime macro gives far better results.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd March 2006, 00:43   #123
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Prime macro lenses are good for people that do lots of macro photography and have lots of money to spend on dozens of lenses for every purpose imaginable. I don't do much macro photography. In fact, I hardly do any at all. So an inexpensive macro zoom lens with even a moderate focal length range would be fine for me. I wouldn't use it often enough to justify having an expensive one, and especially not enough to justify having several expensive prime macro lenses. 95% of the time, the shots I'm trying to shoot require long focal lengths, which is why I want to get a lens with a large maximum focal length and a good range.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 02:19   #124
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Oh, and another quick question...

What's the difference between Canon's EF lenses and EF-S lenses. I noticed that some of their cameras (5D, for example) are compatible with only the EF lenses, while other cameras (30D, etc) are compatible with both. Does the latter have image stabalization or something?
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 02:35   #125
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
EF-S lenses are designed for smaller (15x22.5) sensors, the 5D has a full frame (24x36) one.

Stabilisation = IS (in case of Canon)

And (while at it) USM stands for Canon's fast and silent AF (beware non-USM lenses).
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 03:14   #126
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Ah. ty.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 16:18   #127
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
EF is a better investment, in case you decide to upgrade to full frame somewhere down the line.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 19:12   #128
Quentin22
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7
I'm happy with my canon
Quentin22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th March 2006, 23:49   #129
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
The 70-300mm lens that I'm looking at is EF, so that's good. With the 30D, that lens has the equivalent focal range of 112-480mm.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 00:00   #130
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
nice. Just make sure to keep something for the wide angle, be it a kit lens, or something a bit more.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 00:04   #131
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
I'll look through the lineup and compare some of their lenses with the standard kit lenses and see what I come up with.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 13:15   #132
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
The best choice in terms of quality would probably be the 24-70 2.8 L USM, it would only give you about 38mm equivalent wideangle though and no macro capabilities to speak of.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 21:41   #133
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Yes, but it does have a large aperture, and it picks up where the low end of the other lens leaves off (112mm equiv). That looks like a really nice lens. I'll look through the macro lenses as well, though.


[edit]
Yow! I just looked up that lens on Froogle, and it ranges anywhere between $969 and $2,700! I was expecting a few hundred bucks or so, but not a couple thousand.
[/edit]
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 22:35   #134
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
While it isn't nearly as impressive as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens, the EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens is a fraction of the cost. It'll give the 30D a focal length range of 38.4mm to 136mm, which is pretty respectable for the price and lens type. It lacks IS, but it does have Ultrasonic Motor AF and is full-frame. The aperture is smaller than the 24-70, but it's still a decent size. Froogle lists this lens for as low as $234. Not bad, I think. We'll see, I guess.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2006, 23:38   #135
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
[edit]
Yow! I just looked up that lens on Froogle, and it ranges anywhere between $969 and $2,700! I was expecting a few hundred bucks or so, but not a couple thousand.
[/edit]
$2700 is a rip-off.
Over here it costs about as much as a 30D body, which, well I'm still used to good lenses costing significantly more than the body (the way it used to be in the old film days) so I found it adequate . But of course it depends on how much you actually use that range (or full aperture, though it also helps with focusing).

The 24-85 actually seems to work a lot better with a smaller sensor than in full frame, at least judging from Canon's MTF graphs (the 30D's sensor only has a diagonal size of 27mm so you can forget everything right of 13.5).
These graphs say nothing about vignetting, distortion or chromatic aberration though.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2006, 04:46   #136
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Well, film SLR camera bodies naturally cost a lot less than good digital SLR camera bodies, so in that case, the price ratio of lens/body will be quite a bit different.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2006, 07:22   #137
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
I said...
an inexpensive macro zoom lens with even a moderate focal length range would be fine for me.
I guess that'd be pretty hard to come by, considering that Canon doesn't make any of those. I guess what I was referring to are standard zoom and wide zoom lenses with lower focal length ranges. I've found a couple prime lenses that look nice, but I'm not sure if I'd use them enough to justify the expense. I'm keeping options open, though.

Also, are there any other lens manufacturers out there that make EF-mount lenses that have good quality and fast AF?
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2006, 09:29   #138
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
you can do ok(ish) macro with close up 'filters' (theyre technically lenses, but often sold as filters) and a normal kit lens
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2006, 12:20   #139
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
The good ones aren't that cheap either though (around $100), the cheap ones are just a single lens in a filter mount that'll give you tons of chromatic aberration.
(I'm using the front group of an old broken tele zoom glued into the mount of a rubber lens hood (with the rubber part cut off), works great.)

As for 3rd party, Sigma's HSM is similar to Canon's USM but I think they only use it for tele lenses. At least the standard zooms that sometimes get offered in bundles are all DC (=slow).
Sigma's reputation in terms of build quality isn't the best anyway.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2006, 17:26   #140
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Quote:
Sigma's reputation in terms of build quality isn't the best anyway.
Yeah, I remember you saying that earlier. Their lenses look really nice in spec sheets, but if the quality isn't there, then that kinda defeats the purpose of having a nice camera in the first place.


Quote:
you can do ok(ish) macro with close up 'filters' (theyre technically lenses, but often sold as filters) and a normal kit lens
I'm not altogether sure that I'll be doing much macro work to begin with. If I do find that I want to do more macro work later, I'll probably invest in a true macro lens, but I'll wait and see first.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 22:53   #141
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
I went to a couple local camera shops and looked at a few different dSLRs and lenses earlier today. After spending a couple months debating and taking into consideration everything that everyone's said in this thread, I'm thinking that the 30D is a bit of a big expense for someone like myself. There's no doubt that it's an awesome camera, but I think it's a bit much for me. While it's got a lot of advantages over the Rebel XT, picture quality really isn't one of them. The XT has a slightly smaller sensor in it, so it puts out 8.0 megapixel images compared to the 30D's 8.2 megapixels. While the images are slightly different in total dimensions, the quality between the two are extremely close. The 30D is quite a bit larger, heavier, and has an alloy chassis which makes it feel very professional and sturdy. The XT is a bit smaller, lighter, and has a resin body with an alloy underchassis which makes it more portable, but it still feels very strong. The XT lacks a couple features that the 30D has, but it still puts out pictures that are essentially equal in quality. I can't see spending twice as much for a camera (even with the extra features and size) that puts out the same quality pictures. So...

Canon EOS 350D "Digital Rebel XT" Kit
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip
SanDisk Ultra II 2GB CF Media
SLIK U-212DX Tripod

That's what I've picked out as of right now. The 30D is awesome, but I'm not a professional photographer. The XT is a bit small, but still relatively comfortable to use, and the battery grip should add a nice bit of mass and stability to the camera. A few people have mentioned this camera earlier in the thread, and I think you're all right. Any new thoughts or suggestions? My ears are always open, and I always appreciate any help.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 23:01   #142
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
i bought a pentax DL2 a few weeks ago. If i could afford it, i'd have gotten the DS2 for the following reasons:
bigger viewfinder (bigger than the nikon d50 or d70, CERTAINLY the canon 350d and afaik, the 30d too)
TTL flash (the dl only does PTTL or manual)
support for older manual lenses (even metering on fully manual lenses at the touch of a button!)
It also has a grip halfway between the d50's and the 350d's. Very comfortable in my hands, and the camera is a fraction smaller than the 350d!

Pentax's new offerings look promising too; in body anti shake, a 10MP camera on the horizon, they even have a meduim format digital in the works.

They just need to spend more (as in, more than nothing) on advertising. I went into black and lazar's when i was reseaching the camera, and they didnt even know that pentax were still in the DSLR business!

I ended up getting the camera with 18-55 lens for £310. <3 working in a camera shop.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 23:05   #143
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
* sgtfuzzbubble99 goes to look that one up...


[edit]
Man, I must be sad or something. The first thing I noticed about that camera when I looked it up was that the sensor was made by Sony. That's the original reason why I scratched Nikon off my list of considerations. I know, that's a bit superficial, but I really dislike Sony, even though it's nearly impossible to stay away from them these days. Nice looking camera, though.
[/edit]
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 23:23   #144
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
Its a good sensor though.

same one as in the d50. Pentax are also supposed to be switching to a different supplier for their sensors in their next DSLRs, probably kodak or panasonic/samsung (one of those two, i forget which.)

The DS viewfinder is beautiful though!
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 23:27   #145
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Supposedly its in-camera jpg conversion sucks, shouldn't be too hard to acquire ACR though.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2006, 23:43   #146
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
That's something I really like about the 350D. It's got the same image processor as the EOS 1Ds mII, which is a very expensive, professional dSLR.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 00:58   #147
EfaustuS9
Major Dude
 
EfaustuS9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 1,895
Send a message via ICQ to EfaustuS9 Send a message via AIM to EfaustuS9 Send a message via Yahoo to EfaustuS9
From what I read The Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 is impressing many digital camera officianados.
EfaustuS9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 01:22   #148
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
It seems to be pretty noisy at high ISO though (for a DSLR).
Phil Askey has posted some samples (made with a camera he had to send back due to metering problems, hopefully not an indication of overall quality control), the last 3 are ISO 400-1600.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 01:47   #149
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Looks pretty sleek, but I'm sure that's because it has lots of ****** Minolta influence. That eyepiece proximity sensor would annoy me, though. For me, I think it'd just use more battery power than actually provide any advantage.

Also, how do KM's A-mount lenses compare to Canon's EF and EF-S USM lenses? The USM lenses that I looked at earlier today were extremely impressive.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 03:15   #150
dlichterman
Forum King
 
dlichterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Where Hell Froze Over
Posts: 2,466
My mom had a Cannon EOS Elan film camera before she got the rebel XT, and its sweet cause her lenses all work on the new rebel. She really likes it and the pictures it takes are awesome.

Software is like sex: It's better when it's free.-*-If at first you don't succeed; call it version 1.0-*-Guess the band from pics game
dlichterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 09:42   #151
ElChevelle
Moderator Alumni
 
ElChevelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: the MANCANNON!
Posts: 22,436
Quote:
Originally posted by EfaustuS9
From what I read The Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 is impressing many digital camera officianados.
When in doubt, always avoid Sony like it has herpes.
ElChevelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 13:19   #152
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Well, I'm about $1700 poorer now.


Quote:
When in doubt, always avoid Sony like it has herpes.
Words to live by.


Quote:
My mom had a Cannon EOS Elan film camera before she got the rebel XT, and its sweet cause her lenses all work on the new rebel. She really likes it and the pictures it takes are awesome.
That's exactly why I chose an EF-mount lens. If I ever decide to upgrade to a new full-frame Canon dSLR in the future, I can still use this lens. USM and IS are sexy, anyways.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 14:25   #153
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
Quote:
Originally posted by gaekwad2
Supposedly its in-camera jpg conversion sucks, shouldn't be too hard to acquire ACR though.
only when set to vivid. On natural, its yummy.
I use raw anyway, due to, as you say, aquiring photoshop.

edit:

Quote:
Originally posted by gaekwad2
It seems to be pretty noisy at high ISO though (for a DSLR).
Phil Askey has posted some samples (made with a camera he had to send back due to metering problems, hopefully not an indication of overall quality control), the last 3 are ISO 400-1600.
that iso 800 looks at least as bad as 1600 on my pentax, and the 1600 shot is roughly as bad as 3200 on my camera. That said, a bit of chroma noise reduction (when properly applied, it wont blur the image at all) and it'll just be a bit grainy.
d50/DL/DS ISO 3200 converted to B&W can look as atmospheric and grainy as a roll of ilford delta 1600 from what i've seen of them both.
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 16:15   #154
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Yeah, so shortly after I put my order in with bhphotovideo.com, I get an email stating that my order can't be processed. It says that I have to call an 800 number for "verification purposes" or some shit. What the hell do you need verified, damnit? I gave you all the information you needed when I placed my order! So, I called the number three times, sat on the phone on hold for half an hour, and gave up. So I sent them an email asking why I got the verification email and what the hell they need verified. If they don't reply by tonight, or if they give me any shit, then I'm going to tell them to refund my damn money.

Something told me I should've just ordered the lens from the store down the road, and I should've gotten the camera from Newegg. Why didn't I just follow my first instinct?


[edit]
Why, on this big chunk of spinning rock, do they need verification over the phone? After calling five different numbers, spending an hour on hold, and getting transferred to different departments, I finally talk to a human being...

Him: "Hello, can I have your order number please?"
Me: *gives order number*
Him: "And your name?"
Me: *gives name*
Him: "And your telephone number?"
Me: *gives phone number*
Him: "This is your home number?"
Me: "Yes."
Him: "Are you at home right now?"
Me: "No, I'm on my cell phone right now."
Him: "But ###-#### is your home number?"
Me: "Yes."
Him: "Ok, your order is ready to be shipped. Thank you, have a nice day."
Me: "Ok, thanks."
*click*

Took all of 45 seconds to do, if that. Good grief! I guess they needed some sort of Caller ID verification or something before they'd process my order. Why, though? Why can't they have some sort of online verification like every other site I've bought things from?

Next time I'll just stick with the sites I know and trust.
[/edit]
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 17:07   #155
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Apparently you have to call so they can try to sell you lots of overpriced accessories or other crap (according to threads at dpreview, dealers over here fortunately don't do that (yet)).

edit: ah, not this time
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 17:09   #156
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
Well, they never tried to sell me anything over the phone. I just spent 99.3% of the time listening to their scratchy elevator music. But from now on, if I need a lens, or if I decide to upgrade to a new camera, I'm going to order it from Newegg. If newegg doesn't have it, then I'm going to go to the camera store down the road and just pay the extra cost for them to order it.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 18:37   #157
fwgx
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King)
 
fwgx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,314
Nice kit. I hope you're not going to miss the 15mm between the two lens'. Also, I wouldn't have bothered with the battery grip. You will get a lot of pics out of a battery, might have been more ecconomical to just get another battery.

You're not going to be disapointed with any of it.

.: fwgx.co.uk.:.My art:.

"We think science is interesting and if you disagree, you can fuck off."
fwgx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 19:50   #158
sgtfuzzbubble011
 
sgtfuzzbubble011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 60,837
I have no doubt that the battery pack that comes with the kit is more than sufficient for taking lots of shots, but I hate proprietary battery packs with a passion. Yeah, it probably would've been cheaper to just buy an extra battery pack, but after a few years, those things will eventually kick the bucket. And when they do, will Canon still be manufacturing that same model? It's really easy for me to go to the store just down the street and buy a brand new set of rechargable AA batteries (2500mAh each, too) that are far less expensive than a single battery pack. Plus, I can charge the AAs in a variety of off-the-wall chargers that can be bought almost anywhere.

Almost as important as that is the fact that it'll add extra mass and gripping surface to the camera body. That'll make it a bit more stable and easy to use. And since it's got an extra shutter button, taking portrait shots isn't a huge hassle. I figured, for a camera that I'm planning on keeping for at least quite a few years, ~$135 for the battery grip wasn't a bad deal.

I'm not sure if I'll miss the gap between the lenses much, but if I do, I can always get another lens later to cover that range. Actually, I have no doubt that I'll get another lens later. Since the kit lens is EF-S and the other lens is EF, there's an effective gap of about 57mm between the two. :P

After I get it, we'll have to compare some shots between our cameras, too.
sgtfuzzbubble011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 20:26   #159
mark
Forum King
 
mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norn Ir'nd, leek...
Posts: 6,287
wouldnt even see it :P
mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2006, 21:38   #160
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtfuzzbubble99
Since the kit lens is EF-S and the other lens is EF, there's an effective gap of about 57mm between the two. :P


The 35mm equivalent difference is 15*1.6=24mm.
The tele at 70mm actually has a wider field of view than the kit lens at 55, but only if you'd put the tele on a full frame body.
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > General Discussions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump