A decision made...

Sanfam

I've acquired a new digital camera. Woo!

The Sony F717, after countless years of loyal service, has begun to reach the end of its life, so I picked up a Canon 450D/XSi with the kit lens. It's a shame, as the Sony has been an otherwise fantastic camera with few genuine flaws, but age has gotten to it and a service is needed to bring it up to spec, which is more costly than I feel is warranted at the moment. (perhaps someday...)

Of course, I summoned evil spirits and ended up with a model with defective JPEG engine causing the red channel to blow out into magenta tones and had to be replaced, but I'll finally have it again in the next few days...

In the mean time, I've begun to research lens options and plan out an upgrade path. Given the 18-55 kit lens (which is of shockingly decent quality), I'm now looking at a reasonable telephoto to cover a reasonable range. Unfortunately, my budget seems limited to a 50mm f/1.8 II and either a 430EX Speedlite or a used 550EX (possibly even a crappy sunpak :p) at this moment, so I'll be sticking with the kit lens for a while longer. ;).

Long Term: It seems like my collection should consist of some/most/all of the following Canon models:
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.0 IS USM
EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
EF 35mm f/2.0
EF 50mm f/1.8

Once I finally figure out where in the spectrum I find myself enjoying things, I'll probably refine the collection further, but I suspect the SLR will open up a new world for me. I've been trapped in 38-190mm (f/2.0-2.8 to f/8) for ages, so having genuine wide angle of some sort will be a real joy. Most likely, the 17-55mm will come last with telephoto and a portrait prime first/second and wide angle third. Or I could just buy a couple cars. ;)

Suggestions, thoughts, insults? Post away. :vorlon:

ShadowDancer

Well as I know virtually nothing about cameras, I think I'll just stick to the insults! :D

Freejack

Here's a question, since I am by no means a photographer. What advantage does a fixed length lens offer over a zoom lens (example 50mm vs 17-55mm)?

Jake

Entil'Zha

i'm looking for a good 600+mm IS USM but i dont have 7 grand to spare.

Vorlons in my Head

[QUOTE=Freejack;172514]Here's a question, since I am by no means a photographer. What advantage does a fixed length lens offer over a zoom lens (example 50mm vs 17-55mm)?

Jake[/QUOTE]
The biggest advantage to a fixed lens is a much wider aperture. They are great for low light shooting without flash or very fast shutter speeds. Most zoom lenses have an f-stop starting at 3.5 to 4.5. A 50mm fixed lens starts at F 1.2 to 1.8 depending on how much you want to spend. They also tend to be sharper than most zoom lenses unless you start moving to the higher end L series.

Sanfam

What Vorlons said, but emphasis on the overall optical quality aspect. The lens needs to be designed to function well at a single focal length, rather than a range meaning many of the artifacts from the high/low end of the range on a zoom lens can be avoided.

That and they're generally rather portable.

Entil'Zha, you got the 30D, correct?

Vorlons in my Head

Sanfam, I think you more or less have the lens range I would look for personally. I would possibly drop the 50mm since it will effectively be about 76mm on the XSi. I don't find that to be a particularly handy fixed lens to carry around.

On my FD camera bag my standard equipment is a single 28-100mm F2.8 zoom with an F2 35mm and F1.4 50mm that never leave the bag. Depending on what I intend to shoot I will throw in the 19mm or F2.8 200mm. I also have an F4 300mm but that only gets used on special ocassions like the 24hours of Le Mans :D. I have an assortment of well over a dozen more lenses both fixed and zoom but they rarely get used.

I finally got around to buying a digital SLR last year so I picked up an XTi with the same kits lens you got given I can at this point not a afford the 5D which is what I really want. The lens is quite good but the somewhat small aperture I'm finding to be quite detrimental. I really like the camera but the 1.6X compact sensor really makes it hard to cut back on the lens count. It's dificult to find a good zoom lens that will function from acceptable wide angle to small telephoto without having to carry t least two lenses. It doesn't help that just as I suspected, two of my 10+ year old EF lenses from my film EOS Elan, which I haven't used in years were no longer working when I took them out to try them on the XTi.

Sanfam

My goal was to decide on a specific pair of primes once I got a little further along with the camera. It's doubtful I'll go with three, but it seems almost certain that I'll be getting the 28mm, but the toss-up is between the 35mm and the 50. The latter has the benefit of being dirt cheap. :p

Also, the kit lens in the XSi is actually a newer revision. No USM, but stabilization and somewhat improved optics. the decent kit lens was part of the motivation to go forth and get the camera.

As I mentioned, wide angle isn't a huge concern to me yet as I'm still in the "What I don't know can't hurt me" phase. Once I discover true wide angle, I'll probably regret never having it before...but until then, I'll likely be satisfied with the minor improvement I'll be receiving right now.

I'm more or less trying to assemble a collection of lenses that offers either optical quality, low weight, or the careful acquisition of both. I'd like to take the SLR hiking, so the reduce weight of crap glass isn't necessarily a bad tradeoff for me in the long term. Regarding the aperture, I'm actually taking quite a big step back with the kit lens. My old Sony was f/2.0-2.8, and I'm fairly certain that spoiled me to no end. As much as I'd like to get better lenses or L glass, it seems improbable right now. Also, I don't necessarily mind carrying gear around. I've had to lug around a five-pack of L's and a 1Ds in the past for some classwork, so a couple of smaller lenses isn't something that'll stress me much. I'm almost certain my regular kit will consist of two lenses and a flash.

Vorlons in my Head

Ah, I think once you start getting spoiled by the SLR you shall understand why wide angles are one of the most usefull lenses around. Consumers buying still and video cameras usually get suckered in to looking for extreme telephoto even though they have extremely limited practical use yet they don't wonder why they need to keep backing into walls because they can't fit what they want in the frame. I just hope that as sensors become cheaper, all digital SLR's will transition to full frame sensors so lens ranges can work as normal. Compact sensors are one of those evils of technology right up there with glossy LCD screens :D

My ultimate goal is to invest in something like [url=
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=11924]this[/url] or [url=http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=8503]this[/url]. Once I can finally get a 5D one of these lenses would cover at least 80% of my needs with a fixed 50mm and at least one large wide angle.

Oh and I never really cared about weight. I traveled through europe carrying a camera bag with five lenses and an F-1 and A-1. One body with Tri-X B&W film and another with Fuji Velvia positive film. All of the lenses and camera's old shool kind made of bronze and aluminum. Non of that lightweight plastic stuff. Real men carry heavy camera's :P.

Freejack

[QUOTE=Vorlons in my Head;172517]The biggest advantage to a fixed lens is a much wider aperture. They are great for low light shooting without flash or very fast shutter speeds. Most zoom lenses have an f-stop starting at 3.5 to 4.5. A 50mm fixed lens starts at F 1.2 to 1.8 depending on how much you want to spend. They also tend to be sharper than most zoom lenses unless you start moving to the higher end L series.[/QUOTE]

That was kinda my guess, that zoom lenses have to make certain compromises to cover the wide focal range.

Nice to know about the lower f-stops though. At some point we will want to get some additional lens for our [URL="http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/product_details/digital_camera--K10D/reqID--8793673/subsection--digital_slr"]Pentax K10D[/URL], which has been an outstanding first DSLR for us. Since I find that a vaste majority of our shots seem to be of our 3 yr old in lower light interior situations, a fixed-length lens with a lower f-stop would likely work well.

Jake

Sanfam

People like big numbers. :p My biggest complaint about the XSi is that canon felt the urge to bump the sensor density to 12.2mp. If it weren't for the fact that noise performance is roughly the same on as with the old sensor, I'd have gone for a 40D.

Funny thing about numbers...The current war in the consumer digicam area seems to be ISO [B]and[/B] Megapixels. So now there's 10-14mp P&S cameras offering 1/8in sensors packed with pixels and absurdly high sensitivity ratings (3200 is fairly common these days). The result is a camera that is completely useless for almost everything. It's a terrible shame. Of course, if anyone hangs around IRC, you'll know the general take on sensor density :P

Mundane

My sony f828 must be replaced soon...

Sanfam

I've been so tempted to buy one of those as a secondary toy. :p They seem to go for almost nothing second-hand. I just can't beat the utilityof the F717 on so many occasions.

Also...
The camera returns! And this time, it's taking perfect photos. On a side-note, the lens is notably sharper and the AF mode is notably quieter. Seems like I got a Taiwanese model :)

E.T

Here's good lens review site:
[url]http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview[/url]

[QUOTE=Sanfam;172538]So now there's 10-14mp P&S cameras offering 1/8in sensors...[/QUOTE]I think you have typo here... isn't it "O" instead of "&"?

[quote]I just can't beat the utilityof the F717 on so many occasions.[/quote]If you like landscapes and such you'll be soon cursing its lack of wide angle.


[QUOTE=Vorlons in my Head;172521]I just hope that as sensors become cheaper, all digital SLR's will transition to full frame sensors so lens ranges can work as normal.[/QUOTE]"Surface area of silicon" will cost always.
I think APS-size sensor would be pretty much optimal. It can give low noise if BS departments aren't allowed to cram always more megapixels and allows slightly smaller optics than full frame sensor. (big aperture lenses would be smaller because of smaller real focal length)
Problem is just that many wide angle to reasonable tele zoom lenses have been designed for full frame cameras and especially Canon seems to be reluctant to make similar lenses for APS-sensor size.

Entil'Zha

Sanfam, No, i've got the 40d

Vorlons in my Head

I really wouldn't mind if you couldn't find full frame sensors in some of the lower range SLR's but I really wish at the very least I could get a full frame body in the price range of a 40D. As it is now the price jump from the 40D to the 5D is quite staggering. For me the main reason is I still like to shoot film and will probably want the option to do so until either I die or it just becomes impossible to get film developed by any means. I'd like to keep the lens range the same among both bodies. Of course I also wonder for how much longer I can even get Eos film bodies which might make the point of lens sharing moot.

Sanfam

[QUOTE=E.T;172668]Here's good lens review site:
[url]http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview[/url]

If you like landscapes and such you'll be soon cursing its lack of wide angle.[/quote]

Well, that I have owned said F717 since the line's release...I can't say that I've found myself *too* unhappy. The lack of wide (of any sort) is a bitch, but the overall quality makes up for it.

I've also grown attached to [url]http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/[/url] my research, as well as a selection of others.

[quote]"Surface area of silicon" will cost always.
I think APS-size sensor would be pretty much optimal. It can give low noise if BS departments aren't allowed to cram always more megapixels and allows slightly smaller optics than full frame sensor. (big aperture lenses would be smaller because of smaller real focal length)
Problem is just that many wide angle to reasonable tele zoom lenses have been designed for full frame cameras and especially Canon seems to be reluctant to make similar lenses for APS-sensor size.[/QUOTE]

If I remember correctly, canon recently released an EF-S wide-angle lens. Now it still falls victim to the crop factor, but the optics are apparently tuned pretty well.

Sanfam

I've gone out and acquired a couple goodies for the camera in the past few days.

First, a 50mm f/1.8 II, primarily as a low-light portrait lens. For the price, it's not bad, and I've found myself enjoying that range on the kit lens. I almost got a used metal mount variant for $40 a few days back, but the seller backed out for unstated reasons.

Today, I picked up a fairly well kept [URL="http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-210mm.htm"]70-210mm f/4[/URL] circa 1988. It lacks IS (which is going to rule out handheld use under most anything short straight daylight) and AF is a bit weird by comparison to any modern lens but it was a very affordable purchase and will tide me over until I can get something better suited to my needs. The glass itself seems to be fantastic.

In the mean time, I only have a 15mm gap in my kit that will most likely be dealt with by a 28-135 IS USM (if my friend is willing to part with it for a reasonable enough price).

I've also gone off and purchased a battery grip, as my hand is cramping up too much without one and portrait aspect shots have been a pain in the ass to compose.

Picked up a bag, as well. LowePro CompuDayPack and a LowePro Voyager C neck strap. With the bag, I'll have enough space for the camera with lens, two more lenses, and a two more strobes or lenses.

Overall, I'm loving the XSi, but I keep wishing for faster glass. I haven't had enough time to fool around with it, but I'm discovering that my habits with the old camera are making me take longer than I need to.

Future: As price is indeed a limitation, I'll probably settle into a couple of cheap, fast, and very used primes for my lower light work until I can afford a better variable range lens.

Any other oldish parts I could get away with picking up?

Edit: [URL="www.omgod.com/photo/testlighting/"]High-res samples of new optics! [/URL]

shadow boxer

[url]http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/[/url]

buy, or forever be a user instead of a photographer

E.T

[QUOTE=Sanfam;173174]I've also gone off and purchased a battery grip, as my hand is cramping up too much without one[/QUOTE]That should be bolted on at factory to these tiny winy child sized DSLRs, they're ergonomic nightmares and I don't even have big hand.

[QUOTE=Sanfam;172676]If I remember correctly, canon recently released an EF-S wide-angle lens. Now it still falls victim to the crop factor, but the optics are apparently tuned pretty well.[/QUOTE]Sure but all of those fall very short in tele end leaving Canon without "all around" lens.
For example where are counterparts for EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS or [url=http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/191-canon-ef-28-300mm-f35-56-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=2]highly rated[/url] EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 USM L IS or something between them?
Nikon has lenses for ~28-200 and ~28-300mm range in APS sensor size cameras. Also Pentax and Sony(/Minolta) have lenses for similar range.

So looks like Canon wants to kick users toward more expensive full frame cameras by limitations in APS sensor cameras. I'm sure EF-S lens similar to that L lens would sell quite well, and make their DSLRs much more appealing for me.
Then again requirement for stabilization in lenses seems badly old fashioned compared to stabilization built into camera body by Olympus, Pentax, Samsung and Sony


BTW, Too bad Sony probably isn't interested about making fixed lens prosumers. Larger than normal 2/3" sensor of [url=http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms100fs/page14.asp]Fuji S100FS[/url] shows quite nice promise. That sensor put into KM A2 would make really nice camera.

Sanfam

I'd like to mention that the big reason I got the 450D is because it was the first smaller SLR that was able to comfortably fit into my hands without a battery grip. Portrait aspect aside, I've found it generally comfortable. It's not a 40D, but the 40D is substantially heavier. (if anything, I'll be looking into a steeply discounted 40D or 50D down the long-term road as a future upgrade and secondary-use camera)

Canon's big problem has always been forced upward mobility. They handicap their bottom-end products with the hope of pushing the users into higher price brackets. The exclusion of ISO3200 on the rebel line has always bugged me, and their choice of AF sensor configuration was less than optimal, but overall it was satisfactory enough for me to consider it as a purchase. However, they do appear to be slowly introducing lenses to fit the needs of cropped sensor cameras. From what I've read, Canon's development rates seem to be slower than those of Nikon and Olympus, but the product they eventually release is generally well-regarded (save a couple bottom-dollar crap lenses). Sigma and Tamron both appear to be trying to offer solutions within the range you mention, but their quality control is just too low to make them a reasonable consideration. I'd love something equal to the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 DX VR for my Canon, and I suspect that such a lens [B]will[/B] come out in the relatively close future. the EF-S pool is slowly growing.

Lens selection is still pretty much what would have sold me on the Nikon line. It is superior, but I just preferred the image characteristics of the Canon lineup.

The [URL="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/"]Sony DSC-R1[/URL] was a fantastic example of a fixed-lens prosumer nearly-SLR that sold about as well as a decaying paper bag of shit. On paper, it was far superior to most SLRs for average use, giving the user almost everything they could ever want (assuming they were of the dangerously large majority who don't buy additional glass and stick with the kit optics), but it just didn't sell at all. Once Sony bought the Konica Minolta line, I think they just didn't see the R1 as a reasonable product to continue (given that it could, in theory, eat away at higher-profit SLR sales).


SB: One of those is on my list. Screen + Optibrite + AF points (Maybe + grid).

Tyvar

Whats wrong with trading field of view for zoom? some of us don't really need that kind of FOV, since we typically would be taking pictures point targets on high zoom... I mean if were only needing to photograph one person sized thing at long ranges... <_< ... >_> not that its stalking people or anything.


seriously though can somebody recommend me a good simple p/s camera with something approaching an okay zoom? like 5x maybe?

And please, keep it amateur friendly okay? I have no interest in serious photography at the moment, or probably ever. To me all these high quality lenses you guys are yacking about is robbing quality glass resources from great places like Nightforce, Swarovski or the holy grail of all glass, Schmidt & Bender. High quality glass is to give you clarity when shooting something or somebody in the face :P

Biggles

The Panasonic long zoom range would probably suit you well. Good cameras, not overloaded with features, their main selling point is a long zoom (typically 10x). For example:

[url]http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmctz4.asp[/url]

Sanfam

Thought I'd post up some initial macro results...

So far, so good.

[URL="http://www.omgod.com/photo/softbox/IMG_2187_2.jpg"]50mm II Lens[/URL]
[URL="http://www.omgod.com/photo/softbox/IMG_2129.jpg"]Some dusty toys[/URL]
[URL="http://www.omgod.com/photo/softbox/IMG_2157.jpg"]Chevrolet Vega 1[/URL]
[URL="http://www.omgod.com/photo/softbox/IMG_2164.jpg"]AMC Gremlin[/URL]

I'm still refining the macro studio and most of those shots were done before I had purchased backdrops.

Messiah

You should make your root forbidden.

Sanfam

Since it use it largely as a filedump (and for nothing that isn't internet safe), I prefer it open. The risk to my content is low, as 100% of it is reproduced elsewhere in this exact same format. There are also quite a few folders not visible that require authentication if they are somehow found.

Mr_Bester

I'm kind of jumping in late, but I have the original DRebel. I got it used just about a year ago. Since then, I've picked up 3 540EZ flashes and wireless triggers(has to be used on manual), Sigma 10-20, Sigma 70-300, 50 1.8 and the kit lens. I started with my film rebel kit lens 28-90 which wasn't wide enough. I found that out my first real use of the camera in Rocky Mountain National forest.

I found that I use them roughly equally, except the 2 kit lenses. I like to try and take photos of birds, so I am aching for a longer lens, but I don't have $1000 to spend. The sigma 70-300 is OK, but when I compare sharpness with the 50 or 10-22, it is sadly lacking. I should have saved another $200 and gotten the Canon 70-200F4L, but the wife wouldn't allow it.

All together, I've spent about $1100 on everything, so I am aching to upgrade to a 30D or 40D.

As far as film goes, there is almost no one that optically enlarges from film anymore. Every minilab scans the neg and the digitally outputs to paper. Even the pro labs that I used to work at don't do optical enlargements anymore. That's what forced me to digital last year, and I am glad it did. Film and processing cost a lot. I can experiment with digital and get my results (almost) immediately.(my lcd isn't very reliable)

I'm sure you'll love your XSI, I picked one up and played and it is lightyears better than the original Digital Rebel, as it should be.

Dug

Freeze

Cameras for Dummies, Part XXIII:

I've read Internet FAQ's & camera manual of my spanking new but techically old [url=http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/29_C-770_UltraZoom.htm]Olympus C-770 UZ[/url], but I still can't make it happen: How can I take shots where objects around main object are blurred, out of focus?

I've tried [ P ] mode and used different settings for aperture [ F ], which in my model ranges from 2.8 - 8.0, but I'm still having normal, sharp images!

Also checked the A/S/M mode, with aperture priority, but it doesn't help. What am I doing wrong, guys? I need a hand here ... *stupid*

Eclecticonaut

I believe that's where Photoshop comes in... :p

Mr_Bester

[QUOTE=Freeze;173542]Cameras for Dummies, Part XXIII:

I've read Internet FAQ's & camera manual of my spanking new but techically old [url=http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/29_C-770_UltraZoom.htm]Olympus C-770 UZ[/url], but I still can't make it happen: How can I take shots where objects around main object are blurred, out of focus?

I've tried [ P ] mode and used different settings for aperture [ F ], which in my model ranges from 2.8 - 8.0, but I'm still having normal, sharp images!

Also checked the A/S/M mode, with aperture priority, but it doesn't help. What am I doing wrong, guys? I need a hand here ... *stupid*[/QUOTE]

Try to get closer to your subject and your subject further from the background. F2.8 should give you decent blurriness in the background.

Sanfam

[URL="http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm"]This may help.[/URL] Also, [URL="http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/depth-of-field-video-tutorial/"]this one.[/URL]