Camera & Lense Recommendation

[TheReefGeek]

I want to save up for a good digital SLR camera.

I want to take macro shots of my tank, and have good zoom for outdoors.

I am looking at the nikon 50 or 70, anybody have experience with these taking macro shots, what lense(s) do you like?

[Matt]

I just bought the Nikon d50 for my wife's birthday. We're still learning how to use it, but we'll be posting some aquatic shots soon. It came with the 18-55 dx lens. We don't have any other Nikon lenses yet.

So far, an impressive camera.

Matt

[TheReefGeek]

I have been reading up on that camera and lense.

Where did you get it from? How much?

I have been considering ordering from this website:

http://www.adorama.com/INKD50K.html

[Matt]

I was a bit more impulsive, and had a delivery deadline. I got it from McBain (http://mcbaincamera.com/digital/digitalnik.htm), where they're on sale right now. Still a bit more than you'll pay with careful online shopping, but they'll honour the warranty locally and they're a good outfit to deal with.

HTH,
Matt

[TheReefGeek]

I just found this:

http://cgi.ebay.ca/Nikon-D70S-D70-S-Digital-SLR-Camera-18-55-DX-4GB-NEW_W0QQitemZ7629464085QQcategoryZ107912QQcmdZView Item

Amazing deal! Now I know how much I have to save up. That package comes with the two lenses I want too.

[Ruth]

Just remember you are going to get dinged with duty, GST and brokerage fees. I know when I bought my Canon last year I looked on e-bay quit a bit and by the time I figured their shipping fees, exchange, brokerage etc. it was cheaper to buy it in Canada. I have that same zoom lens and actually prefer the quality of my pictures with the 70-200mm lens but that's just me.

[TheReefGeek]

I will calculate it out, I need a shipping quote, and if they ship USPS brokerage is $5, and GST is always charged. There shouldn't be any duty on a camera made in the US coming into Canada.

I have researched the lenses all day today, and the 18-55 gives the closest focal distance for macro shots, and the 55-200 vs. 70-300 lenses for nikon are very similar, but the extra zoom of the 300 would be nice, and it is cheaper too.

Any places to recommend looking in Canada? The prices I have seen are so much higher.

[muck]

Isn't Nikon a japanese company?

[Ruth]

I am still learning how to use my camera. I bought it from a place in Vancouver and I'll try to find the name. For a macro lens I use the 100mm 1:2 - you can get super close and still have great shots. What I like about the 70-200 is the quality of the pictures over my 70-300 - there is really no comparison but like you say it is quite a bit more expensive. I use that lens for taking action shots at ropings and such. I really have to get one of those camera boats built so I can take some pictures of my tanks because I just have no luck taking them through the glass - they turn out aweful.

[Ruth]

Isn't Nikon a japanese company?
I think they are - I know when I researched the Canon there was duty because it was a Japanese camera and I'm pretty sure Nikon is as well.

[muck]

I have heard good things about these guys in Ontario.

http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/PageDisplay?dest=frames.jsp&currency=CAD&storeId=10001

[Matt]

There shouldn't be any duty on a camera made in the US coming into Canada.The camera is made in Thailand.
Matt

[Matt]

I have heard good things about these guys in Ontario.

http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/PageDisplay?dest=frames.jsp&currency=CAD&storeId=10001McBain's is cheaper right now, and they're local... I don't want to shill for them, but even if you save a hundred bucks, these are delicate and expensive. I like having a local dealer.
Matt

[TheReefGeek]

lol, ok I know that Nikon is made in Japan. What I meant to type was that when it lands in the US first, and then comes to Canada it shouldn't have any duty. I will check the duty lists though.

For about $1300 all in, the e-bay package comes with a crapload of extras:
D70s camera
4 gig card
USB card reader
2 Nikon lenses
1 wide angle lense
3 different filters
Tripod
Aluminum carrying case
Soft carrying case


For $1900 at McBain I get everything the same, but no wide angle lense, no filter, tripod, or carrying cases.
I definately like buying Canadian, but not for $600 more for less equipment.

McBain does have the best Canadian pricing I have seen though, good link. I will probably buy their 35mm slide adaptor!

[TheReefGeek]

Ruth which Canon did you get? I assume you are using Canon lenses then?

[TheReefGeek]

I'll write to McBain and see how close they can come prise-wise to the e-bay store, if they can come closer then i'll consider them.

[Ruth]

I have a Canon 20D. Most of my lenses are Canon but I have a couple of Tameron as well.
When I inquired about duty on cameras I was told that if the camera was made in another country without a free trade agreement with Canada then duty was payable regardless of where it is shipped or bought from.

[TheReefGeek]

I just checked the tarriff schedule, from what I can see digital cameras are duty free.

[Ruth]

I phoned them and that is what I was told by the agent I spoke to.

[Matt]

I just checked the tarriff schedule, from what I can see digital cameras are duty free.That appears to be the case. I was bored (and interested) and went to a US site that has a shopping calculator (ecost.com) (http://www.ecost.com/ecost/eccamera/shop/detail~dpno~563250.asp) in a partnership with Canada Post's Borderfree.com (http://www.borderfree.com) service. No duty on a d50.

Matt

[i have crabs]

the new sony slr is coming out in july,i was gonna upgrade but i like my sony dscr1 too much

[TheReefGeek]

Hmmm, will have to research it then!

[DanG]

Ugg, don't get a camera with a 4gb microdrive. It's a small hard drive with tiny moving parts. They have horrible reliability. I've seen so many dead ones. You can get flash cards upto 4gb now, but the 1 and 2gb models are the best priced.

[TheReefGeek]

Here is some info on the upcoming Sony Alpha Digital SLR
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_8382.html

I will have to read up on the microdrives, I definately want somethine reliable, maybe a 4gig microdrive and a 1gig backup would be best.

[TheReefGeek]

Even better info on the Sony Alpha

http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/reviews/sony/sony_alpha_dslra100.php

[shadowboy]

I was looking at SLR's but decided that the delicacy of the camera wasn't for me. So i started looking at cameras that are noe preformign just as good or better than SLR's, you dont get the flexibilty of changing lenses, but lenses can run up to 300$ Im buying the fujifilm s9000 28mm-300mm zoom 9.2 megapixels and alot mor rugged than an SLR. Also all those cheap prices from the states are decieving. Alot of them dont ship into canada or use any type of P.O box system and alot won't accept credit cards from here and then you have no warrenty either. It's a big hassle for mabye 200$ off at the most. Look at www.camera-warehouse.ca they have some awesome prices and from alberta too.

tb

[TheReefGeek]

If it was only $200, but it is more like $600 difference.

And the e-bay link I posted

http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/reviews/sony/sony_alpha_dslra100.php

Ships to Canada, and takes Canadian credit cards.

Also camera-warehouse doesn't seem to have microdrives, large soft cases, or hard cases or tripods.

But their prices on cameras are not too bad.

I really want the ability to change lenses. I want to eventually have a nice 105mm macro lense for aquarium and other close up shots, and a nice telephoto zoom lense, at least 10x optical zoom. Can't really get that without SLR.

[TheReefGeek]

I will check out the fujifilm s9000 though, looks interesting, if it has decent macro capability.

[TheReefGeek]

Shadowboy, thanks for the fujifilm S9000 tip, it definately warrants a closer look at, I didn't know this class of camer existed.

This might be a good option for me, and if I desire SLR down the road I could upgrade, but this would be a good way to get more into photography for now.

[shadowboy]

reef geek if you like the look of the s9000 look at the sony dscr1, this would be my first choice buts its more than i can afford, only thing about it it doesnt have 10x optical zoom, the canon s3 is also nice

tb

[i have crabs]

i sold my sony dsc-r1 to stinky and pre ordered my sony alpha with the telephoto lense and caring bag for $1750.00 so i shoud get it between the 6th and the 10th of july

[TheReefGeek]

It will be interesting to see how their first DSLR performs.

Pretty cool specs with 10 megapixel, built-in anti-shake, anti-dust vibration.

Only thing is it was developed so quickly, just one year after acquiring konika minolta.

Comparison review of Sony A100, Nikon D70s, and Canon RebelXT here:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/A100vsD70svsXT.shtml

[kwirky]

don't go with the fuji s9000, or the sony. Get a real DSLR. The fuji's "super ccd" is not really that super, and the "SLR" sony has a HORRIBLY small CCD.

And if you want to do macro photography, you can look into getting an extension tube. Much cheaper than a macro lense, and great to start off with. Maybe $100 canadian, compared to a good $1000 macro capable lense. Remember when buying your camera, too. It's only as good as the lense. For every $500 you spend on your camera, spend $250 on your lense. May sound expensive, but remember. That lense will still be worth $500 five years from now, while your camera won't ;)

And yeah, I agree: go solid state rather than a microdrive. Microdrives are slow and have huge fail ratios.

here's a good site. http://www.dpreview.com

[TheReefGeek]

Thanks Kwirky, I have decided to get an actual DSLR, I am now torn between the D70s, and waiting for the Sony Alpha, because the Sony has anti-shake build into the camera body, and although it isn't a huge deal, the bump from 6 to 10 megapixel would be nice. And the anti-dusty technology in it will be cool.

[shadowboy]

After going to the store and testing out the s9000 and the sony, i found them to be uncomfortable to handle and the EVFS a pain to look through. I have decided in the end to gt and SLR probaly going to pick the olympus e-500 tommorow, still torn between it and the nikon d50. SLRs are probaly better in the long run because you can grown into your camera instead of growing out of it (in the case of the s9000) Always more lenses to buy, flashes etc.
Also does anyone have a D50 of E-500? IF you do,give me soem dirt on it. I've read every review to be written on them, and am still undecided, which camera is better?

hope ypu find a camera for yourself
tb

[TheReefGeek]

You really have to choose which lenses you are going to buy along with the camera body in order to compare them.


Some interesting reading here:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=74257&forum_id=36

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EfX1&tag=

[Old Guy]

I own the Olympus E-300 which is the predecessor of the 500. While it is a great camera and takes super pics with very little if any post stuff, I would recommend you think of lens's first. You will find that fast quality len's are expensive regardless of maker. Camera body's will change but the glass will be transferable. Olympus glass is as good as it gets but the cheaper kit len's is slow and will hunt to focus alot in lower light. Not able to macro either. The 50mm Macro len's is $630+tax.

Nikon has a greater assortment of glass but I suspect you will need to buy additional lens asap with the D50. Kit len's usually won't cut it. Also expensive but you can get other makers such as sigma for cheaper fast lens's.

Figure out your photo needs. Find out what lens works best for you to achieve your needs and go from there.

[shadowboy]

Great thanks for those sites, they have gave me a pretty clear answer, so Im gonna get the olympus and Will get back to you on it.
tb

[TheReefGeek]

My concern for the e-500 is the lack of high-end ISO capability. High iso with low noise is one of the major defining characteristics of digital vs film SLRs.

That and the lack of anti-shake in either the body, or the lenses.

But you do get a better anti-dust seal with the e-500.

Like the reviews said, buy the lenses carefully and you will be happy with any of them.

[kwirky]

yeah, I bought a DSLR before a film SLR, then learned the basics of aperature, shutter speed, iso, etc. Then I moved on to a film SLR. went with canon because I had already bought a couple basic lenses for my digital rebel. Now, the guys at the camera store gave me an AWESOME deal on my film camera. I got the camera below cost, and a kick ass lense at cost. They were clearing out the last of their 35mm's. I slapped that new lense on my DSLR and wow. Big difference :)

the funny thing is, my film camera, which I only paid $300 for, has features $10,000 DSLR's don't have. It tracks my eyeball to figure out where to focus. I look where I want to focus. Actually, it's more like I just think where I want to focus, it works so well. Canon Elan 7NE. Nice film camera.

yeah, dust inside a DSLR sucks. I've had to clean my rebel's CCD twice now. It's not hard, but it makes me nervous every time I have to do it. And high-iso grain sucks in digital, too. film grain looks good. digital grain looks like crap.

I've used 4x5 view cameras, where grain = non-existant :D.oO(call me spoiled)

One thing I'm leary about still with sony is lense availability. You can get some VERY good lenses used if you shop around, but only with major brands like Canon, Minolta, or Nikon. I'd choose a brand where the lense market is already flooded so you can reap the pre-owned savings.

Or get a REAL camera http://www.thecamerastore.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=25457 lol
this is my next camera I'm buying, along with a whackload of pre-owned darkroom equipment so I can do stuff at home instead of at school.

[TheReefGeek]

Good info thank!

For high-iso grain though, a good digital will be able to go to higher ISO than film without grain though, won't it? I thought this was a big advantage of digital over film.

The other reason I like (or at least I THINK I will like digital, I have no experience with any SLR yet) is the lcd screen for previewing pictures, and the ability to take 1500 pictures on a single card and only develop the pictures I like. Plus the easy photo editing.

I think I would miss some good pictures with film, because I am too cheap to buy that many rolls of film and use them!

[kwirky]

digital doesn't get grain on high iso? yes and no.

With film, there's a thing called reciprocity failure. Where once your exposure is past a second and a half, each additional second of exposure you have to double your exposure time. Think of it as an exponential curve, and remember that increased exposure time means more grain. And you'll notice that second, red curve, density. That's basically how much information is recorded. The longer the exposure, the less information recorded. You'll get a washed out image that requires you to "push" your film, and develop it longer, further decreasing image quality.

here's a chart showing what happens.
http://www.esopenko.com/images/filmgrain.gif
(c) Kodak

Digital has no reciprocity effect, so long exposures have the possibility of less grain, but unfortunately, digital's grain pattern is much more noticable, and very anti-aesthetic compared to film's grain pattern. And digital normally can't do exposures longer than 15 seconds, because areas of the CCD will overheat, and you'll get "hot spots" on your photograph. Usually around the corners, and little white spots will show up in the photograph.

But you'll almost never need to go past 15 seconds for longer exposures, so either will look pretty good. Digital will never look as good as film though in the darker regions of your photograph.

A good, and quick stress test you can do with a digital camera in store is to switch the camera to fully manual mode, and set the exposure to "bulb." That's where the exposure is as long as you hold the button for. (If you don't know how to do that, ask the sales associate to show you how. If they won't show you, or if they don't know how and won't ask somone how to do it, walk away and go to another store; they've just failed their customer service test lol.) Then take like a 6 second exposure with the lense cap on, and review the black picture. Zoom in real close with the camera's preview function, and look at the nasty grain, because black is the hardest part of an image for a digital camera to photograph. Look for a camera where you find a good grain pattern, if grain is an important issue for you.

And yeah, you're exactly right about the benefit of being able to shoot thousands of photographs. I went the route of digital before film, because the time involved with developing every single roll of film before you see whether you messed up or not is kinda crappy. And camera's screen is a nice review of whether your focus was good or not, and whether you got the correct exposure. Oh and if you're shooting in RAW format, which I'm sure you eventually will, you'll be lucky if your card holds 150 :). A photo looks horrible when JPG compression has to deal with grain.

.oO(I wish they'd hurry up and bring JPEG2000 out...)

[TheReefGeek]

Wow, so much to learn, thanks for the insights.

I am taking a full 3 credit class on digital photography in January, so hopefully this will make more sense after that!

I'm getting a 6 gig card, how big are RAW files about?

[Old Guy]

With my camera each raw file is 13.88 meg. I get 151 pics to a gig.

[reeferaddict]

Wow, so much to learn, thanks for the insights.

I am taking a full 3 credit class on digital photography in January, so hopefully this will make more sense after that!

I'm getting a 6 gig card, how big are RAW files about?

RAW files are "unprocessed" images at the native resolution of the camera, and image size depends on ISO and how each picture is exposed. You can then open a RAW file with the camera's software or Photoshop, (if the RAW format for your camera is supported in Photoshop), and tweak exposure, whit balance, saturation, colour balance settings and more. What used to be an art in the darkroom is now able to be previewed on a screen before "post processing" a RAW file to a final image file such as a TIF or JPEG.

Why do I know this? Because photography is another passion of mine besides reefkeeping. I carefully researched and purchased a Canon 20D system this spring. While all the other company's are offering some innovative "prosumer" products at some fantastic prices, I chose Canon because of their proven technology and commitment to their higher end stuff... I had a Digital Rebel before I bought this system and had to sell it a couple of years ago, so I had a practice run at buying this stuff which made this time around much easier AND more expensive. Avoid kit lenses and consumer grade zoom lenses. While a 28 - 300 zoom might sound like a wonderful all-in-one lens, good luck getting consistently clear, sharp images, especially if you have less than sunlight to shoot in. I paid around $7500 for my system and primarily bought it off eBay. I compared local, and national companies, but in the end saved more than $5000, (that's right five THOUSAND), by doing it over a 3 month period looking for the deals on eBay. After getting my first high end lens I was hooked on the expensive glass and that's all I have.

Just for the availability and variety of accessories I really recommend Canon or Nikon. Their products are relaible, the technology proven, and ask any pro and they'll tell you nothing compares when it comes to their glass. Even the Zeiss glass used in Sony's camera's is a "consumer" grade. Canon by all accounts has the best noise/ISO ratio and I prefer their CMOS as opposed to CCD sensor technology as their pixel density is the best in the business. The Fuji S3 could also be an option, they have probably the best dynamic range of all DSLR's and take Nikon glass... just a little clunky to use IMO.

All I can say is that if you intend to be into photography in any serious way at all, be it pro or amateur, don't look for the bottom buck solution... your results will suffer and you will only end up frustrated... I hope this gives a little insight.

[Ruth]

Reeferaddict which lenses would you recommend? I also have a Canon 20D system. I have a few lenses for it but I think the 2 that I am happiest with (and yes they were definately the most expensive) are my 75-200 and a 100mm macro lense. I am looking for a wide angle lense and after a while go cross eyed trying to read and understand all of the info out there. Care to make a recommendation on a good zoom and wide angle lense for this camera.

[muck]

oh oh ... and a fisheye lense. :mrgreen:

[Ruth]

oh oh ... and a fisheye lense. :mrgreen:

Yuck Yuck Yuck - everyone is a comedian:biggrin:

[TheReefGeek]

Reeferaddict, I will do some research on the 20D, looks like a nice camera, very similar to the Nikon D70s I am about to order.

What lenses do you have, and recommend for the 20D? I will have to start with some cheap kit lenses, but eventually want a 100mm macro, a 12-24ish zoom, 18-70ish, and a 70-300ish.

[Ruth]

This is the zoom lens that I have for my Canon - I also have a 70-300 lens but the far superiour pictures come from this lens
http://http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-EF-70-200-f-4L-USM-Lens-70-200mm-f-4-0-L-f4-0-f4L_W0QQitemZ110004137619QQihZ001QQcategoryZ4687QQ rdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[TheReefGeek]

The 20D carries a bit heftier price tag than the D70s, just out of my price range, I get $1500 to buy everything for now, including shipping, exchange, brokerage, etc.

I can get away with that for the D70s, but not the 20D :sad:

[muck]

Yuck Yuck Yuck - everyone is a comedian:biggrin:

sounds like a joke but really its not. :wink:

http://www.bugeyedigital.com/moreinfo/ray-dcrfe180pro.html
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fish15mm.htm

[reeferaddict]

Rory - You'll be very happy with the D70s... IMO not quite a 20 or 30D but a very good camera for the price none the less... and Nikon's kit lenses actually fare a little bit better than Canon.

Ruth - I bought my 20D with the 17-85 IS kit lens, a decent all-round lens, and I have also acquired a 28-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 300 4.0L IS, 135 2.8 Soft Focus, and for wide I went with the 10-22 3.5-4.5. The 10-22 is an absolutely amazing lens for wide stuff. I couldn't recommend anything else after having owned this lens. I have compared it to the 17-85 and there simply is no comparison... I'll go through some of my images to post so you can have a look later this week. (Maybe some tank shots? haha)

I went all Canon this time as I had bought a Tamron 90 2.8 for my previous camera, (Digital Rebel), and it gave me an error on my 20D. I had it rechipped, but since sold it as I want all my lenses to be compatible with any future bodies I may get. (D1s Mark II) Right now my macro solution is a set of extension tubes I use primarily with the 135 prime lens. As far as I'm concerned you have the best macro lens Canon makes, (not counting the 180 3.5L) as long as you have the USM version. I really DO recommend going with manufacturers lenses for compatibility reasons along with the fact that they really hold their value as well. I'm so happy I went this route. With my previous system I was buying $300 - $500 consumer lenses and always wanted "one more lens"... Now that I have these, I have no desire to go out & get another lens as I know I can't get any better. Well... I DO desire a 600 f4... but that'll cost almost as much as my reef tank!

There ARE some awesome 3rd party lenses out there, but a little hit & miss with quality and compatibility issues, so another reason to stay with manufacturers lenses be it Canon OR Nikon... One thing about Nikon though, they have clearly shifted their focus to the consumer line as evidenced by the D50 commercials that are continuously on TV, while Canon has held the course with it's commitment to the "Prosumer" line they started with the Digital Rebel and 10D.

[seashells]

More important than the number of pixels is the size of the CCD sensor. You can have 11Meg pixels on a 1/2 inch sensor and have poorer quality than a 6Meg pixel on a 2/3 inch sensor. For the 11Meg pixel camera just means they could stuff more or smaller pixels into a smaller size sensor. Better quality is achieved with large number of pixels on a large sensor.

We used to have a coolpix 990 and have a D70s.

Here is a good link http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dq.shtml

Doug

[TheReefGeek]

Sensor size on the bunch of cameras we are looking at are identical I believe, or all very close. That is why I am not worried about the D70s haveing only 6 megapixel compared to the others with 8 or 10.

[Old Guy]

Notice the lenses that reeferaddict likes are 2.8L . A faster len's is what you will always want and need. 3.5 to 5.6 will only cut it for outdoor shots and especially on the long zoom at 5.6. The slower f4 L are nice but you will need high iso capabilities for indoor shots w/o flash. F2.0 and faster will kill the old pocket book in a hurry but I can garantee faster is better and anybody considering a DSLR should take this into consideration. Price what len's you need first. Body's will come and go.

[reeferaddict]

Notice the lenses that reeferaddict likes are 2.8L . A faster len's is what you will always want and need. 3.5 to 5.6 will only cut it for outdoor shots and especially on the long zoom at 5.6. The slower f4 L are nice but you will need high iso capabilities for indoor shots w/o flash. F2.0 and faster will kill the old pocket book in a hurry but I can garantee faster is better and anybody considering a DSLR should take this into consideration. Price what len's you need first. Body's will come and go.

Exactly - and when you compare Canon's stable of lenses to Nikon's these days, it just doesn't come close. I can trade my 20D up and forward anytime now that I have the high quality fast glass. The other thing that 2.8 offers is lightning quick auto focus, even in low light... the difference between my Rebel with consumer glass and my 20D with Pro glass is hard to describe, you almost have to feel and see it for yourself to understand, which is really pronounced with the Image Stabilizing lenses. You frame your object and watch it in a shaky screen, push the shutter release button down halfway and the image miraculously "goes still" so to speak. It will be interesting to see how Sony's built in IS is going to work and what type of new lenses they will design. When I shot film I shot a Maxxum 9000 - Minolta used to make some pretty good gear, so it will be worth watching to see if Sony can extend that into the digital market.

[Ruth]

I agree that the faster lenses are definately superiour from my limited experience.
For a point and shoot camera I have ordered a Fuji Finepix S9000 9.0MP as there are times when I don't want to mess around with a larger camera.

[TheReefGeek]

The "pro" glass from Canon does seem to be a bit faster than the Nikon equivilents.

But the Canon "kit" lenses are weaker than Nikon's, so I am torn, because for quite a while I will only have kit lenses, but eventually want to invest in pro lenses, so what to do!

I could get the rebel XT, but it feels a bit small in my hands.

[TheReefGeek]

Hmmmm, researching a bit more, with a vertical/batter grip on the Rebel XT, that might be a nice camera.

If I was to buy two lenses of decent quality, would these be good choices:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens

I know these are not as fast as 2.8 or 3.5, but price is a problem.

These are very similar to the Nikon lenses I was going to get, but both of these have image stabilization in them, wheras the Nikon ones I was thinking of, do not.

[Ruth]

I have the 70-300 lens that you are referring to and would not recommend it. The picture quality is just not there.
I think you would be better off to go for one good all around lens with an F of 2.8 or lower. JMO

[TheReefGeek]

Ruth, which telephoto lense would recommend then?

[Ruth]

I think I posted a link to the one I prefer on a previous page on this thread. 70-200. Of course the one I would really like is a 600mm IS lens but right now that is a bit out of my price range.
http://http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Telephoto-EF-600mm-f-4-0L-IS-Image-Stabilizer_W0QQitemZ150007829248QQihZ005QQcategory Z106844QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[reeferaddict]

Hmmmm, researching a bit more, with a vertical/batter grip on the Rebel XT, that might be a nice camera.

If I was to buy two lenses of decent quality, would these be good choices:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens

I know these are not as fast as 2.8 or 3.5, but price is a problem.

These are very similar to the Nikon lenses I was going to get, but both of these have image stabilization in them, wheras the Nikon ones I was thinking of, do not.

I got my 20D with the 17-85 lens for $1500 landed off eBay - the deals are out there - just watch for positive feedback. IS gives you up to 3 stops more of hand held ability, and I notice a larger percentage of keepers. There's nothing wrong with the Rebel XT either... I had the original 300D and was quite satisfied with it - what I did wrong in that system was to buy cheap glass. I had the battery grip with the 300D, (as I do with my 20D), and coupled with that, the Rebel felt like a pro camera in my hands. I think they key is the glass, which is why I went this way, now when I want to upgrade to a full frame camera I have the lenses that will deliver image quality I demand.

I really think your decision is subjective. Analyze what you want to shoot - then buy accordingly. If you'll never shoot sports or in low light, then you won't need 2.8 lenses. The caveat of big aperature glass is the learning curve required to use them as the depth of field is paper thin, especially when the subject is close, making the lenses seem "soft" when the aperature is wide open. Once you use them and discover the "sweet spot" of the lens though, you won't be able to go back to consumer lenses. Primes are almost always faster and give much better image quality than zooms, even the 135 soft focus at $300 gives as sharp if not sharper images than my $1800 70-200 2.8L IS... all I can say is research research research... dpreview and Fred Miranda are probably the best two sites to do this.

*** A note about buying on eBay ***

I bought my whole system and never had a single problem. Don't use UPS for shipping across the border. Their brokerage fees are outrageous, $58.00 minimum... USPS charges $8.00... Hong Kong or Far East eBay retailers will mark your shipments as "gift" or "commercial sample" so you don't have to pay GST or PST, and there is no duty on digital cameras or accessories. I found that buying accessories like filters, remote shutters, and flash accessories was cheapest this way - close to 50% savings over even Adorama. Again I stress to watch for positive feedback, and don't buy anything without using Paypal.

[reeferaddict]

Ruth, which telephoto lense would recommend then?

The 70-200 f4 is widely regarded as the "best bang for your buck" and has "L" glass to boot... can be had for around $5 - 600 used - $7 - 800 new.

[TheReefGeek]

I guess that is an option, going with the 20D and just the 17-85 lense instead of the Rebel XT with 17-85 IS plus 70-300 IS.

But I think I would miss the telephoto too much, and the difference between the rebel xt and 20d is going to take me a long time to notice. By the time I could say that I should have bought the 20D, then I will just buy the latest and greatest body, which will be better than the 20D.

Did you go with Canon battery grip, or 3rd party?

[reeferaddict]

I guess that is an option, going with the 20D and just the 17-85 lense instead of the Rebel XT with 17-85 IS plus 70-300 IS.

But I think I would miss the telephoto too much, and the difference between the rebel xt and 20d is going to take me a long time to notice. By the time I could say that I should have bought the 20D, then I will just buy the latest and greatest body, which will be better than the 20D.

Did you go with Canon battery grip, or 3rd party?

That would the the 30D... lol

I went Canon all the way. Their grip also has vertical controls on it so you don't have to fumble for buttons if you're shooting in portrait orientation. It was actually one of the deciding factors as I really like having the dual controls and grip. Nikon doesn't make a grip, and the 3rd party grips for Nikon are cheaply constructed and don't have the vertical shutter release.

If you really want to go that route and will miss the zoom I can fix you up with a decent Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 for $100. It has a crack on the barrel, (purchased retail at a discount that way), but is optically clean and works perfectly. It was one of the cheap zooms I bought with my previous system and wasn't a bad lens, especially for $100.

[TheReefGeek]

I am definately leaning more towards Canon now, especially with the vertical grip information.

Good info on the sigma, i'll let you know once I figure out what the heck I am ordering. (will be within the next week or two so I get it in time for my honeymoon)

What about flashes for canon? Do you have one you recommend? There is a knock off brand Sakor

They Canon EF 70-200mm F4 L USM, does this have image stabilization though? I will be doing mostly handheld photography, more than tripod.

My use of the camera is for aquarium pictures, and nature pictures primarily.

[reeferaddict]

I am definately leaning more towards Canon now, especially with the vertical grip information.

Good info on the sigma, i'll let you know once I figure out what the heck I am ordering. (will be within the next week or two so I get it in time for my honeymoon)

What about flashes for canon? Do you have one you recommend? There is a knock off brand Sakor

They Canon EF 70-200mm F4 L USM, does this have image stabilization though? I will be doing mostly handheld photography, more than tripod.

My use of the camera is for aquarium pictures, and nature pictures primarily.

Rory - the 70-200 f4 L doesn't have IS... that being said IS will do nothing for your aquarium shots as it compensates for camera shake not subject movement. Same goes for nature shots. IS is AWESOME when you are shooting a static subject at 200 mm and want to hand hold using a shutter speed of less than 1/200. No matter what, get a tripod, I recommend a Monfrotto 055 with a ball or grip head. Don't waste your money on a cheaper one, these ones fold and splay into any configuration you can imagine and pack nicely.

I went with the 580EX and 430EX flashes. Again on the expensive side, but ETTL II works superbly and the through the lens communication totally takes the guesswork out of flash photography. If you get a 3rd party flash, Sigma is the only one worth it's salt, the rest are junk... ask away, anything I can do to help & I will.... I read up for a month before I bought and had the added experience of buying a sub par system before that to know what I really wanted. :mrgreen:

[TheReefGeek]

I appreciate the help, thank you so much.

This may be a dum question, but why do you need two flashes?

The IS on the 17-85 will help with hand-held aquarium pictures won't it?
For nature shots, I mean walking/hiking, and I see landscapes and animals I want to shoot, won't the IS be a help there?

The price difference between the 70-300 IS and the 70-200 F4 L is very little, which would you recommend then, the 70-200 even though there is no IS? My other lense would likely be the 17-85 IS.

Maybe I am missunderstanding what IS really does, can you explain?

Do you have any experience using extension tubes for macro photography without an actualy macro lense?

[Ruth]

Yup I would be willing to sell my lens as well for a good price if reeferaddicts deal falls through. I think you would be way better off to just save up and buy better quality lenses though.

[TheReefGeek]

Ruth, how much would you want for your lense?

[reeferaddict]

The only dumb question is the one you never ask....

I got two flashes because they work as a master/slave combination so that you can have one off camera to provide lighting from a different angle to cut down on glare and provide fill flash etc. Straight on flash photography throws harsh shadows and highlights that scream "FLASH SHOT". I also got an ST-E2 flash transmitter so I can use both units off camera as slaves wirelessly. Both are about the same except the 430 will only act as a slave and the 580 is more powerful and will act as a master or a slave.

OK... on to IS...

When you are shooting, to eliminate blurry photos due to camera shake the recommended shutter speed is 1/focal length. So if you are shooting a 300 mm lens your shutter speed should be less than 1/300. This has absolutely no bearing on "stopping motion" in your photographs, this is just to eliminate blur due to shaky hands including the most steady of hands. If you have IS you can take the same shot at 1/30 or 1/60 allowing you to use a smaller aperature so you can get a larger depth of field or to be able to get the shot using available light instead of using a flash.

Here's where IS conflicts with moving subjects - To "stop motion" in a photograph you have to use a shutter speed of at least 1/60 or 1/125, even higher if you have a fast moving subject. As you can see, IS will let you shoot at shutter speeds lower than that even with a long lens, but the lower shutter speeds will make anything moving in your frame turn out blurry. I would learn to shoot without IS ... experiment with it on the 17-85 lens and you will quickly learn when to use it and when not to. Having said that, I would definitely go with the 70-200 4L. The lens is PRO quality, excellent build and more dust and weather resistant, as well as having flourite elements and low dispersion glass as all "L" lenses have. All these factors add up to superior contrast, sharp and fast autofocus, and almost a total elimination of flare. I have to warn you though, "L" glass is almost as addictive as reefkeeping!

As for macro, I don't yet have a true Macro lens. I am leaning towards either the EF-S 60 2.8 macro or the one Ruth has the EF 100 2.8, but now I see Sigma has come out with a 70mm 2.8, and I used to have a Tamron 90mm 2.8, a very sharp macro lens indeed! I think I will stick with Canon though as both those lenses are compatible with Canon's ring lights and serious macro work will require a flash so you can shoot at smaller aperatures to have greater depth of field. The shots I put up of the Powder Blue tang were using a 135 2.8 prime with an extension tube. The extension tubes work great with a prime lens to get macro shots. All they do is lengthen the distance between the lens and the film plane to allow for a closer focusing distance. For example the lens I used for those shots normally has a minimum focusing distance of 4 feet or so, slap on an extension tube and I can focus down to 4 inches or so but lose the ability to focus to infinity. As you can imagine, lighting an object only 4 inches from the front of the lens can provide some lighting challenges, especially with a flash head that sits up on a camera's hot shoe so far away from the lens... this is why I have flashes that can be mounted off camera and why I'll eventually get a Macro Ring Light flash unit.

BTW - the built in flash on the 20D will be adequate for probably close to 75% of your flash shots, and you can get cheap slave units to augment that until you can afford a bigger flash...

[reeferaddict]

Yup I would be willing to sell my lens as well for a good price if reeferaddicts deal falls through. I think you would be way better off to just save up and buy better quality lenses though.

No need to commit here - I was just offering up a cheap way to 300mm... :idea:

[TheReefGeek]

Great info, well explained, I actually followed it all!

Ok, so a flash is not necessarily a "must have" accessory to start. That might help offset the thousands you are going to cost me in L glass now. :mrgreen:

Of course I do have some further questions now!

1. Can you describe how you take macro shots of your tank? Is your lens right up the glass? Are you handheld or tripod? Do you use flash's or is the aquarium light enough? Can a macro extension tubes be used on a zoom lense, or just a prime?

2. If you were just starting, and wanted to take some nice macro shots of your tank, have a decent travel/walk-around lense, and also have a decent telephoto for outdoors, which 2-3 lenses would you recommend?

I think I am leaning towards a Rebel XT, the savings compared to a 20D or 30D I will put towards better glass. I figure in a year or two, if I am able to max out the Rebel XT and it is holding me back, I can upgrade to the latest and greatest body, and use my existing glass. Whereas paying more for a body will mean worse glass, so down the road upgrading will be even more $$. Sound like a decent plan?

And this all started off with "honey, our digital camera doesn't have enough zoom"!!! Just like reefkeeping, "honey, those clownfish sure look cute".

[reeferaddict]

Rory you won't regret the XT, in fact you may never feel the need to upgrade...

There are many ways to do Macros depending on what you're shooting. I really try to shoot with available light as you get much more natural looking shots. That being said, even with the amount of light we shower our tanks with, it pales in comparison to shooting outside, even on an overcast day. Your camera's metering system will quickly make that apparent. Using a flash pointed directly into the tank will give you reflections as well when using a flash so what I do when using flash is to set my flashes up at 45 or so degree angles to the tank glass to eliminate glare. You will need to compensate for the awful colour of a flash with your white balance settings, or shoot in RAW mode so you can post process this later on. If I am shooting a coral, I tend to set up on a tripod, frame the shot and use a remote shutter release, using as small an aperature as I can along with the fastest shutter speed possible. Up to 800 ISO gives me great results, even when blowing images up to huge sizes. (I have a printing business so I can make prints up to 4 feet wide - original image quality is important and has been of no concern using either my present 20D or my previous 6.3MP Rebel). When shooting fish or any other moving target, I ixnay the tripod, hunt and chase them along the front of the glass and shoot lots of shots hoping to get "the one".... this is the biggest advantage digital has over film IMO. As for distance, it really depends on your lens and composition you are looking for. You CAN lean right up against the glass as you are focusing beyond it anyways. Extension tubes work better with primes and are pretty much useless at focal lengths less than 50mm. You CAN use them on some zooms, but usually only at it's maximum focal length.

There is no ONE way to do Macro work... it all depends on lighting & subject along with the desired depth of field and working distance. The closer you are to your subject the more light you will need and less depth of field you will have. For example let's say you are shooting a coral with a 135mm lens and a working distance of 2 feet using an extension tube. Your normal tank lighting will allow you to shoot at 1/160 at ISO 800 and f4... Your depth of field might only be 1/4 of an inch, so if your coral is 2 inches from front to back and you focus near the front, only 1/8 of the coral will be in focus... if you want more depth of field you will have to add more light, stop down the lens, and/or increase the working distance between the film plane and the subject. You may need to use a lens with a longer focal length and increase the working distance if adding more light and/or stopping down isn't an option... sorry if I'm going in circles here... just trying to point out that there is more than one way to skin a cat when it comes to taking pics... the beauty of digital is being able to see right away if you got the shot or not... :biggrin:

If I could only have 3 lenses on a budget... hmmm....

1). The 17-85 is a great economical beginning... gives you a decent wide angle, and probably the best "kit" lens Canon makes. IS is a bonus as well...

2). The 70-200 4.0L unless you can afford the 70-200L or the 70-200L IS. These 3 lenses are the most popular and highly regarded in Canon's line.

3). Any prime 2.8 or faster between 50 and 150mm. Once you see the sharpness and contrast of a prime - not even an expensive prime, you won't use your zooms as much. "L" quality primes are even better yet.

Once you have those, don't bother buying another lens unless it's a 2.8 or faster... the exception being the 300 4.0 IS... another GRAND... lol.

[TheReefGeek]

Thanks so much!

Are there any particular retailers you would recommend? US or Canada or Ebay etc?

[reeferaddict]

I got my camera and lens kit at Robinson's Online Store on eBay... they're actually in Calgary. URGalaxy or Hong Kong Direct on eBay both gave tremendous service. Use Adorama to price compare, and look for private deals from sellers with positive feedback. Look for auctions that end at weird times, and not during peak periods like weekday evenings and weekend afternoons. eBayers can be wierd, and start bidding wars, so be patient, it took me over 2 months to round out my system. Identify what you are going to buy, buy one item at a time and bid once only specifying your maximum bid. Set your price and eventually you will win as long as your price is realistic. Americans are particularly hard to deal with, every private deal except one I did with an American cost me extra on this side as they are hesitant to send anything across the border and declare as a gift or sample, not that they are obligated to do this, but all the Hong Kong sellers are masters at minimizing customs costs. Whatever you do... use Paypal to pay and complete the transaction on eBay... you have buyer protection that way...

[shadowboy]

I bought the olympus e-500, for a novice like me with little experience ( except from my sister who is a photo journalist) it's awesome, its basically a point and shoot camera out of the box and takes awesome pics. Im playing around with all the manual controls now. Overall im am very satisfied with my purchase. I was oing to buy the rebel xt but it felt like a toy in my hands and i just couldn't get over that. the olympus worked out to $1050 with tax. The two kit lenses are awesome and even though there's no image stabilization it isnt a problem. Low light is a slight issue, but after messing with the white balance and flash settings i seemed to have solved it. Have taken 96 pictures so far, and battery life is amazing.

hope everyone finds a camera they love and don't overcomplicate the simple, go out, take some pics and have fun

tb

[i have crabs]

well lets see some of those pics already.

[TheReefGeek]

I have researched the e-500 as well, looks like a good camera, interesting fourththirds system.

Not that it should be a huge concern, but olympus did drop their film SLR line, so I am someone apprehensive to buy into their digital line because of that, compared to Nikon and Canon.

[TheReefGeek]

Reeferadict I will check out those places you mentioned, thanks.

Oh, and the E-500 is out for me because of the lack of image stabilization, and pooper high-ISO performance. Not that it is a bad camera, but I am looking to buy into a system for the long term, and low-light photography will eventually be important to me.

[Ruth]

Another place that I have found for used equipment that there appears to be some good buys is "photogon". I have never bought anything off of the site though so cannot recommend one way or another.

[TheReefGeek]

Thanks for the link Ruth.

[kwirky]

reeferaddict was stating a good point earlier about IS not helping with fast moving objects.

If you're on a budget, you can go for a good non-IS lense, and put that investment into a good tripod and a monopod. You MUST have those handy for lots of shots, and I'd choose a tripod/monopod over an IS lense. I love my monopod. Special ordered the Manfrotto 680B (monopod 16" when compacted), and the #234 rotating head. I take it out with my whenever I go out photographing. No need for an IS system :) I also use the wired remote, so I can just hold the monopod steady, and my pressing of the button doesn't cause any motion blur.

and I don't think ANY is lense would handle touchy macro shots well, especially if you get into adding extension tubes and other stuff. A tripod can't really screw up (unless you have a cheap head. then it sucks)

and the tripod/mono pod are investments you probably will NEVER bother upgrading, but will get LOTS of use from. Stay away from ball heads if you want something long lasting, and just remember to tighten till it's just snug. Overtightening shortens the life of your head.

Once you've been photographing for a while, you can then decide on what to spend your money on for specialty lenses. Just like how reefaddict first bought a rebel, then upgraded to a 20D based on his own experience he got from using the Rebel. (and how I bought a digitel rebel, then a film Elan, and now I'm thinking of going pro-medium format Hasselblad. Film vs. gear *grins*). I think he also said he never had a "real" macro lense. Me neither, as I use extension tubes, and I'm contemplating a bellows system, as I might be able to get one for a great deal.

I myself like straight, non-zoom lenses, but that's my tastes :) Oh, and for low light photography, go film ;) Supplement your digital with a film body. The body won't cost more than $250 new anyways, with today's film body prices. And a profesional film processing center can develop your film, and scan it for you on a great machine, giving you like a 20 megapixel or higher image in most cases. You can get some nice high speed film, and you can even pull it down a bit and get amazing photographs out of it for low light.

And buy a Holga! lmao. you'll love it hehe (can you tell i'm an art student? lmao)

oh and I've started building a 4x5 view camera for macro photography. I can give anyone plans for it once I'm finished if they're interested. It'll be a multi-lense system, not costing me more than $100 to build. Getting the glass from an optical surplus. 200 megapixels of film, baby, yeah!

[TheReefGeek]

Do you take your monopod hiking? I am buying this camera partly for my vacation on Vancouver island.

[reeferaddict]

Do you take your monopod hiking? I am buying this camera partly for my vacation on Vancouver island.

Well DO make sure you look me up so you can see some of this "L" glass in person! :mrgreen:

[TheReefGeek]

Where is Mill Bay?

[reeferaddict]

North of Victoria - 30 minutes...

[shadowboy]

sigma and leica have announced a whole new line of lenses, some with IS. With the 4/3rds system, any lenses designed for panasonic, samsung or kodak will all be compatable for olympus as well. With the 4/3rds your also going to be dealing with samller lighter lenses and a larger CCD. So even if olympus drops the line ( which hopefully won't happen) There will still be lenses out there for it.

tb

[TheReefGeek]

Shadowboy, good infor thank.

Reeferadict, the cracked sigma 70-300, is that the APO or not?

[reeferaddict]

Rory - not the APO version... if you're out this way you're welcome to take it for a test drive... FWIW it's actually not a bad lens at all if you have decent light, I found it quite sharp to tell you the truth - it just can't begin to compare to higher end lenses though...

Shadowboy - I looked at 4/3 when I was buying because I actually like the aspect. The problem with DSLR's outside of the big two are technology shifts, and people jumping in and out of the pool leaving camera owners flapping in the breeze. Minolta, (now Sony), Kodak, Sigma, Olympus and others are so clearly the "followers" they are at a disadvantage. I know you will say that Sony's in-camera IS is their own or Minolta's, which it IS... but it is also simply a new twist on Canon technology that has been around for years. I for one, have invested a lot of time and money into my system and sure wouldn't like to see my products just disappear from market because sales weren't high enough to warrant continued development and production. Also look at the lines of accessories and lenses available for each camera... NOBODY compares to Canon in that aspect... just my 2 cents.

[shadowboy]

Canon is a very good camera make and is the leader in lenses and accessories. I would had loved to buy the rebel and actually went to get it, but it felt like a toy in my hands, cheap cheasy balck or silver plastic. Being 16 i can't afford a step up from the rebel xt, plus the kit lenses are sub-par for preformance...and it only came with one for the same price as the olympus( which came with 2!). For me The olympus will far exceed my capabilites, and should last me a long time. And as for "flapping in the breeze" lol, i don't think panasonic,kodak,sigma,leica and samsung are all going to jump off the bandwagon, and I'm not one the go buy the newest lense to come out< ill probaly end up with 3-5 lenses and that shoudl be more than enough.

tb

[seashells]

Looking back my personal preference was a Hasselblad 500CM with a 120 macro. I wish I still had it. Razor sharp images. Needed to use a diffuser filter to hide facial blemishes. Sold the camera and lens and got a car. Still had some change for Nikon F2. I would still like to get back into the Hasselblads H system.

doug

[TheReefGeek]

I have been reading about the "bridging" cameras now, such as the panasonic fz30, and the canon s3

They are good cameras, but the main tradeoff is the smaller sensor means high noise at pretty much 200+ ISO, but you get movie playback which would be really nice.

I was pretty close to buying the fz30, but now they released the fz50 for september-ish, but that means no nice camera for my honeymoon.

And I might really kick myself for not going DSLR and getting better low light performance, I dunno!

[shadowboy]

GO for an SLR you definetly won't regret it, which might happen if you buy just a megazoom. I was all for the s9000 and s3, but you guys and other places talked me into a SLR, Don't wimp out on me now reef geek! go slr. If you do go just a megazoom go the s9000 699.99 at future shop, or the s3, the e-500 is only 949.99, 250$ for An slr with two lenses, decisions, decisions

tb

[TheReefGeek]

Yeah I am a pendulum, keep swinging back and forth!

I will do some more research on the oly 500, might be a decent option for now, but I would rather invest in canon or nikon and get access to the used market maybe?

I am thinking maybe the d70s with the 18-200 vr lense though, and add on a canon 500d lense for macro shots?

Or the rebel xt with 17-80 is, and buy a cheap non-is zoom for now?

Read some more on the sony alpha, the high ISO performance isn't up to the rest of the DSLRs, but the image stabalization sure is tempting.

Ok enough ranting for now! On to oly 500 research...

[reeferaddict]

All that advice and you're still confused? :mrgreen:

Just look at it this way... what are your photographic requirements gonna be? If you plan on expanding, I just wouldn't entertain any other options than Canon or Nikon... other than that you are getting an inferior product, or shelling out your own cash to do R & D... Hell my GF bought an Olympus refurbed camera that is 4 MP takes 30 seconds of video and takes wonderful pics... $100 and it was basically new from Olympus direct... but will it macro and take me to 300mm...? Nope.

[shadowboy]

It seems most people say to buy the rebel just as a body and spend money on a better lens right away. HAve you been out and tried the rebel?
if so what did u think of it? I still think it feels like a toy.
and even though that with the e-500 doesnt have a status lcd on the top all others you need a flashlight at night tiem to see it, so its not that important in my eyes

tb

[TheReefGeek]

The oly is 4:3 and high ISO performance isn't there, and no image stabilization available, so its out.

The Rebel XT is definately more toy-like, but I would add on the battery grip which should make it better.

If Canon made a similar lense to Nikon 18-200 VR then I would definately go Canon, because then I could start with one lense.

I'm thinking D50 (maybe d70s depending on total cost) w/18-200 VR, and a canon 500d
The only drawback for me is that I like Canon's lense selection better for when I do want to add more lenses, but maybe with a goo 1.5x or 2x add on and the 500d, I won't need more lenses for a long time, except maybe the 12-24 DX

[TheReefGeek]

Oh and yes I have been to McBain to try out all the above cameras, except for the oly 500.

[shadowboy]

Try the oly, i shoot in pitch black, extreme low light, just for fun, but all the pic's turn out crisp and clear, IS is a novelty, I think its just a new digital technology that everyone say's they can't live without...what did they do before? they used tripods, something you'll be probaly buying anyways. Oly and the 4:3rds systems are'nt going anywhere. Go try the oly, see how you like it. Also what does everyone have for camera bags? This is gonna be my next purchase, needs to be able to stand some abuse (gonna be traveling for a couple of years) lowepro make some sweet models, what does everyone have?

tb

[reeferaddict]

Shadowboy, I have the Tamrac Trekker 6 ... got it used for $75 on eBay in brand new shape... holds EVERYTHING, including a small laptop. Easy to customize, lots of flaps & pockets for batteries, cables, memory cards, lens cleaning supplies, you name it... I have 5 lenses (2 large lenses), a flash, macro tubes and an extender, and a body, and could fit more, and it's a fairly hefty but packable 40 or so pound backpack. Oh it will carry your tripod too...

Now I don't pack that thing around everywhere, so when I bought my battery grip, I bought a kit that actually comes with a Lowepro shoulder bag for the 20D. It can hold the camera with a lens, an extra lens or two depending on how big they are, and a flash along with compartments for other small accessories. The bonus for this one is it's lightweight and has an ergonomic carrying strap along with a fairly quick holster style space to put your camera.

Rory - listen man... I kinda get an idea of what you want to do, and just based on the amount of time you have considered your purchase and the careful questions you have asked, we can all tell this isn't an "impulse" buy. For that reason, don't go anything less than either Canon or Nikon DSLR's, you won't regret either... again just because I have a Canon doesn't mean I want you to buy a Canon, I've already stated earlier in this thread why I made my own decision so I won't go into that again but I do have some advice on the 18-200 VR in particular...

Go to Fred Miranda or DPReview and read up on the general consensus about "10X" zooms... I would tend to go with a 5x or less zoom combination along with a couple of cheap primes for tack sharp images. Then you have some shooting versatility along with some ability to take high quality images. Remember IS/VR or whatever doesn't do anything for you for moving subjects in less than favourable light... actual shutter speed is the best solution for sharp images, and this lens is pretty slow. At 18mm f3.5 will be fine, but by the time you zoom out to 150 you are at a max aperature of 4.5 - 5, and up to 300 you are at 5.6. You lose image quality at widest and longest, your autofocus will hunt, and you will be challenged to get fast enough shutter speeds to get the image quality you want.

[TheReefGeek]

Good advice guys, thanks again for all the help.

I do want to go try out the oly at the camera store to see how it feels.

I am thinking about the 18-200 VR specifically for my ocean kayaking trip to photograph whales and other animals where the boat will be moving, and it would be nice to not have to change lenses at all in the boat, I'm going to be scared enough just bringing the camera in a dry bag let alone changing lenses.

I have read every review of the 18-200 and I know its not going to be fast in the telephoto end, but I think it would make a great walk-about lense.

The alternative is 2 canon IS lenses which cost a fair bit more but I still might go that route, especially because the 18-200 is so hard to find, I might not even find a vendor who can get me one before my trip!

[shadowboy]

Don't forget you have to shell out an extra 100$ bucks for raw proceesing software with the nikons, so work that into your budget

tb