Bay area photographers..I need advice
Wow.. An 18-200 would really be nice. I have a 17-40 f/4L, 24-85 f/4-5.6 and the 70-200 f/4L IS. Something like an 18-200 would allow me to carry one lens. I don't carry all of them because.. It's a bit much and my Pelican case only holds the camera w/ one smaller lens and the 70-200. I usually use the 17-40 but there are definitely times the tele would have been nice and I didn't have it.
I honestly didn't like the feel of the XT or XTi even though they are truly great cameras. A better photographer could take much better pics w/ an XTi/18-55 over my gear. Just get what you want, but a good rule of thumb is to get the cheapest body and spend on the lens. I would love a 5D, but cannot justify the cost...
It might sound silly, but my sister picked up the "digital SLR for Dummies" book and there are some great tips. I have been learning for a while, and I enjoyed flipping through the book and learning a bit more about my manual settings. Definitely worth a try if you are new at this...
I honestly didn't like the feel of the XT or XTi even though they are truly great cameras. A better photographer could take much better pics w/ an XTi/18-55 over my gear. Just get what you want, but a good rule of thumb is to get the cheapest body and spend on the lens. I would love a 5D, but cannot justify the cost...
It might sound silly, but my sister picked up the "digital SLR for Dummies" book and there are some great tips. I have been learning for a while, and I enjoyed flipping through the book and learning a bit more about my manual settings. Definitely worth a try if you are new at this...
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,892
From: Hangin in Placerville youtube.com/rallydude1515
Car Info: 1999 RS Coupé- 1995 Mazda Miata -KTM 300
^ haha you could even benefit from an 18-135...no VR so they are about $250 on CL...better than spending an extra $500 just for the 135-200mm range.
the second lens that would match the 18-135 would be a 70-300.
if you only had money for 1 VR lens...it'd be better on the 70-300, since 300mm will blur easier than 200.
i see a lot of people getting 18-70 then 70-300...but then theres no wiggle room (between overlapping 70 gap to each lens.)
I sold my d70 knowing i was gonna get a d80 within a year when the prices came down, but i might just get a d70 again...still deciding
the second lens that would match the 18-135 would be a 70-300.
if you only had money for 1 VR lens...it'd be better on the 70-300, since 300mm will blur easier than 200.
i see a lot of people getting 18-70 then 70-300...but then theres no wiggle room (between overlapping 70 gap to each lens.)
I sold my d70 knowing i was gonna get a d80 within a year when the prices came down, but i might just get a d70 again...still deciding
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,892
From: Hangin in Placerville youtube.com/rallydude1515
Car Info: 1999 RS Coupé- 1995 Mazda Miata -KTM 300
i bought a 20D for $450 with proof of full factory refurb receipt a few months ago!
now i need to find some lenses
now i need to find some lenses
Nice! That's about $1k less than mine cost. If you just need any lens I have a Canon EF 24-85 f/4-5.6 that would get you by. You would be better off with the cheapie 28-135 tho.. I would like to try out the 16-35 f/2.8L and might sell the 17-40 if I like it.
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,892
From: Hangin in Placerville youtube.com/rallydude1515
Car Info: 1999 RS Coupé- 1995 Mazda Miata -KTM 300

Right now i've been looking for:
28-105 $200
75-300 $150
Just to get me by
I was looking at the 28-135 IS but if im shelling out an extra $300 for IS, id rather have the IS on a 75-300 lens and not a small 135 lens.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



