Choice Canon 40D + Tamron 17-50 vs Canon 400D + Canon EF 24-105 f / 4, 0L or even Nikon D80 kit 18-135? ! ? !

Pages: 1 2

13.12.2007 13:33:00
Actually the question!
buy first digital SLR.
clearly imagine the difference between the 40D and 400D. The forum
many agree that the difference between the image is small - makes all the difference in the management and ergonomics and the viewfinder. However, carcass 40D worth 2 times more expensive 400D and give almost half pieces bucks for kropnutyh carcass little sorry - if I shall be going to pass on FF a year or two, the funds will be spent inefficiently.

That had an idea that can be a good buy 400D + glass on FF, and if the itch, then a couple of years to buy a nickle or its successor, and 400D or leave as a second chamber or sell. . . For buying a relatively inexpensive (but not a bad Tamron) I did not then at FF vtulit - and he strongly wide for FF IMHO. . . Do not want to grow into optics, which will then be unclaimed - in our village would be difficult to sell. . . . . .
On the other hand - on the FF can be and will not move, so as not to take if the Nikon D80 kit 18-135? ! ? ! And like the camera down on the handling and ergonomics will be better than the 400D, and the kit lens at 100 mm focal length and ISO 100-200-400 relatively well, and the viewfinder is good. . . .
options with Canan will cost about the same cost - about 2000 euro to Nikon with the whale - about 1,300 ye. . . .

What am I to do, have?

owners 400D, peresevshie to 40D, tell me, is there a desire to move to FF?
And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass?

PS Of course I understand that the best option - a penny + 24-70 / 2. 8L, but it's a little expensive for me so far. . . .
 

13.12.2007 13:42:00
I did not like the result 18-135, on small details picture porridge.

clarify - I did not use them, simply seen enough photos paired with D80 + 18-135 + 28-135 and 30d. With the second set of photos look nicer.

sit on elechnom color you realize that there is no turning back. . :)

13.12.2007 13:45:00

if I shall be going to pass on FF a year or two, the funds will be spent inefficiently.
e. To take you to it all the time will not be so chtol?

What do I have?
Smoking is the subject of a difficult choice between the 400D and D80. . . .

owners 400D, peresevshie to 40D, tell me, is there a desire to move to FF?
not rash they insult to injury. . . .

And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass? Usually
and advise. . . . and rightly so, IMHO.

13.12.2007 13:51:00
quote:
:
And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass? Usually
and advise. . . . and rightly so, IMHO.
Despite the fact that I have no camera, the week - already subscribe to Tips to buy a good lens, and the surrender of the carcass.

13.12.2007 14:21:00

right advice, the main objective, their carcasses come. . and go. . . and good lenses remain. . .

13.12.2007 15:24:00
quote:
:

if I shall be going to pass on FF a year or two, the funds will be spent inefficiently.
e. To take you to it all the time will not be so chtol?

I will of course, but if the 750 dollar carcass 400D can and leave as a second camera down (light and compact), the carcass 40D and a half things like that sorry is not quite reasonable IMHO. . . .
and sell for the normal value we would get hard-to. . .

quote:
:

What do I have?
Smoking is the subject of a difficult choice between the 400D and D80. . . .

That I have more questions 400D with a good glass or 40D with the average. . . . .
The idea came about during the D80. . .
And the subject is handled poltyschi pages - do not read it for a reasonable time, and there are many Flame - as always, choose a carcass, and all slides to discuss who is better optics. . . .
not the first time it is - a forum I read years 7 - all repeated regularly. . E. Izmenyaetmsya nothing in this plan really. . . .

quote:
:

owners 400D, peresevshie to 40D, tell me, is there a desire to move to FF?
not rash they insult to injury. . . .



quote:
:

And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass? Usually
and advise. . . . and rightly so, IMHO.

Thank you!
I slowly too inclined to the idea. . . . .

quote:
:
quote:
:
And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass? Usually
and advise. . . . and rightly so, IMHO.
Despite the fact that I have no camera, the week - already subscribe to Tips to buy a good lens, and the surrender of the carcass.

you something good - you already have a 40D, and I still bathe with choice!

13.12.2007 15:38:00
quote:
:
quote:
:
quote:
:
And how much do I lose by buying cheaper carcass and more expensive glass? Usually
and advise. . . . and rightly so, IMHO.
Despite the fact that I have no camera, the week - already subscribe to Tips to buy a good lens, and the surrender of the carcass.
you something good - you already have a 40D, and I still bathe with choice! : Eyes:
Yes. But if you choose a good glass + cheap carcass, or cheap glass + more expensive carcass, I probably would have chosen the former. Because it is understood that gives the glass, and that - the carcass.

13.12.2007 16:46:00
Already starting to think quietly, not whether to buy Canon 400D + Tamron 17-50. . . .
order not to fall into dependence on glasses FF purchased in the future, because it is foggy. . . . .
understand that contradicts himself, but. . .

13.12.2007 19:31:00
You determine for themselves first as you can (want) to spend on a photo-as well as you can (you want to spend in the future). From this and we dance. And so there's a lot of people the right things, you are advised.

PS. About your village. Even in our village carcass manage SLR sell

14.12.2007 13:49:00

Do not buy shoes for growth. It will be just right - has become unfashionable.
With lenses too - need to buy for current tasks. Because tasks tend to change over time, and what was originally planned "to use later on FF" can be generally on the FF is not relevant. The most typical example - 17-40 that good shtatnik sprinkled on, but after buying FF out of business. So what's the difference, FF or not, if you still sell?

14.12.2007 14:15:00

I apologize for tediousness. You bunch of technical details and not a single word on perhaps the most important when choosing any technology theme.

What do you with all of these farms are going to do? Why is it you?
What tasks do you intend to solve with the help of selected technology? What are the putative
conditions and modes of operation? What is your image and the rhythm of life?
How much money you are going to spend on maintenance and modernization of equipment per year? And as you can?

Maybe you do not fit into any one of the options under consideration. We're now nasovetuem on the basis of their understanding of "what is needed and what the technique of photography," and then you suffer, to spoil his mood and completely throw the photo.

upd. Agreed case. Ashamed

14.12.2007 14:27:00
quote:
:
already starting to think quietly, not whether to buy Canon 400D + Tamron 17-50. . . .

Well, here. We started with a cheap and good carcass glass, and came to the carcass of cheap and cheap glass.



better buy than the D80 400D, 40D better buy than the D80, it is better to buy a good light native glass than any of the Tamron.


14.12.2007 14:31:00


stingy photographer - at no photographer

14.12.2007 14:35:00

I dare even suggest that it is better to be rich and healthy .

14.12.2007 14:38:00
system, it is capricious any girl - requires a lot of money and all the best. . .

14.12.2007 15:23:00
quote:
:
you define for yourself first, as you can (want) to spend on a photo-as well as you can (you want to spend in the future). From this and we dance. And so there's a lot of people the right things, you are advised.

Currently safely detach from the budget in more than a thousand. e. on the carcass + lens can not. In the future, I think I can fork over a nickel (or its successor) and something like 24-105 / 4L, if it is I need. . .

quote:
:
PS. About your village. Even in our village carcass manage SLR sell

Ta sell what we can. The whole question - at what price? ! ? !

quote:
:

I'm sorry for the tediousness. You bunch of technical details and not a single word on perhaps the most important when choosing any technology theme.

What do you with all of these farms are going to do? Why is it you?
What tasks do you intend to solve with the help of selected technology? What are the putative
conditions and modes of operation? What is your image and the rhythm of life?
How much money you are going to spend on maintenance and modernization of equipment per year? And as you can?

Hmm. . .
Scale questions put!
Fotik wanted for purely personal use, for capturing moments of life, nature, situations and people. . . . Will be operated on the seas, resorts, travel (non-extreme - winter resorts do not like).
Fotomylnits were many and different - not satisfied with the speed autofocus noise, the quality of the lens, viewfinder, the inability to do the normal portrait and so on. D.
Lifestyle - measured and calm - I work from 10 to 18, five days a week. Two or three times a year I go to rest. Basically the sea. Mountains and skiing do not like.
e. Shooting time will be. . . .
How much money on maintenance and upgrades will spend a year - I do not know yet. But can a couple of thousand dollars, I think. . . .

quote:
:

Maybe you do not fit into any one of the options under consideration. We're now nasovetuem on the basis of their understanding of "what is needed and what the technique of photography," and then you suffer, to spoil his mood and completely throw the photo.

Well, now I have answered your questions in order to clarify!
now consult on the basis of them!

quote:
:
quote:
:
already starting to think quietly, not whether to buy Canon 400D + Tamron 17-50. . . .
Well, here. We started with a cheap and good carcass glass, and came to the carcass of cheap and cheap glass.

following considerations here - if I feel an urge to move to a higher class technique - I'll leave 400D as a second camera for situations where compact size and weight are important and will be the risk of damage to the camera (the value of the carcass can not be compared with the value of penny, for example). And leave it with this notorious kropnutyh Tamron and afford something better - like penny + 24-105L
And on top - cheap Tamron - it's does not mean "bad"? Tamron good copy, as I understand it, it will be very good, especially for the money. . . .

quote:
:


better buy than the D80 400D, 40D better buy than the D80, it is better to buy a good light native glass than any of the Tamron.

understand. . . . However, native
good light glass type 17-55 / 2. 8 worth sour. . . And given the fact that it is only on the crop - is futile, IMHO. . .
But prospects for transition to Nikon FF can not see (but is it necessary?!?!?), But in the D80 viewfinder like much more than the 400D. . . .

Xs shorter. . . . .

14.12.2007 16:44:00
quote:


better buy than the D80 400D, 40D better buy than the D80, it is better to buy a good light native glass than any of the Tamron.

The main problem with the Nikon that good light native glass stands well, very expensive, and not bright native, has not that bright.
have wider range of Canon, and is both very expensive and very good, and more or less available and not bad, not to mention the cost of the lens.
have Nikon lenses do not find class Canon EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM, Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f / 4. 0L IS USM. And with the diaphragm 2, 8, similar to the Nikon slightly cheaper at Canon. Maybe Nikon's top lenses and the Canon is better, but what's the use if such a lens lover not bite.

I myself bought a Nikon D80 year ago, but today would have preferred the Canon D40. Lens to it is certainly better home and with a red stripe, but Tamron is not a bad choice. Certainly better than Nikon 18-135.

On account of FF. And whether you want it to suit your needs? Well of course not not critical.

14.12.2007 17:12:00

Scale questions put!

Life has taught first task to formulate, and then decide

Fotik wanted for purely personal use. . .

Based on the set of tasks from your list of prospective purchases, I would choose the Canon EOS 400D + Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.

Pros:
(a) a good lens with gentle treatment will make you happy for a long time;
(b) cover the entire range of the portrait. On the diaphragm 4. 0 portraits quite possible to do so. And based on the fact that you can spend quite notable amount for an upgrade for the same 85/1. 8 or 50/1. 4, or 100/2. 0 (and even 85/1. 2L or 135/2. 0L) business for a long time will not. For half a year - the year just become clear on what your focal people to photograph interesting;
(c) stabilized (IS) lens into something even better (now I cocked hat) light. And what is worse. For with the same level of blurring GRIP more. In the "home" shooting is still a plus. In the room to remove this lens is quite possible, and (almost) without a flash;
(g) 24-105 lens is protected. On the coast (especially the beach) is a definite plus;
(d) In short, a great lens. The carcass is quite so personal, AF system from 30D --- zer GOUTTES. What plastic, and do not worry. A couple of years it will be enough to you, then a cheap lens on it fasten, and give the child / family / etc, let attached.

Cons:
(a) lens is quite big and heavy. But with a measured way of life is not so bad. That I can not understand, I want mountains drag this bandura, or bothered to swing;
(b) the carcass, of course, 40D. Likely to have a year or two - another update. Well, no big deal. After the P & amp; S 350D camera and cause wild delight;
(c) batteries, like, 400D loves to eat. But you from the wall outlet into the wilderness far away from you, you can leave at least every day to feed the camera. Do not be scared.

Advantages 40D + Tamron 17-50 / 2. 8:
(a) lens. Excellent lens in excellent form factor. Almost a lifetime lens;
(b) portrait entire range (rather than just short of its end);
(c) also has a television. In holiday at the sea while riding on a boat along the coast as television did not take it, is still not enough.

Disadvantages before 40D + Tamron 17-50 / 2. 8:
(a) there is a wide angle. Virtually none at all. Architecture does not shoot. And "John in an embrace with Any muzzle in salad" too, not looking up from the table;
(b) worse ergonomics in the carcass (you, I understand, is not a miniature palm?);
(c) worse constructive carcass.

Overall: carcasses come and go (time and a half - two years line is updated), for the same money in a year - you buy two so at least no worse carcass (almost certainly the best), and * good * lens with gentle treatment --- a very long time (lenses over the past years and if en fell, it * much * less than a carcass, and there is no indication that this will change soon).

14.12.2007 17:15:00
quote:
:
system, she's cranky any girl - requires a lot of money and all the best. . .

understand that - Down and Out the trouble started!
addictive. . . .

14.12.2007 17:20:00
quote:
:
I myself bought a Nikon D80 year ago, but today would have preferred the Canon D40. Lens to it is certainly better home and with a red stripe, but Tamron is not a bad choice. Certainly better than Nikon 18-135.

And next year will better D90 Canan 40D and 50D in a year, which is better than D90. This is called progress.

quote:
:
have Nikon lenses do not find class Canon EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM, Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.

And who these dark chudy want? There are cheap 28-70 / 2. 8 and 24-85 / 2. 8 of which will be a lot more sense than the dark glasses with Stabia. A 24-105 also terribly soap at the long end (if you believe the photo zone).

quote:
:
Tamron is not a bad choice. Certainly better than Nikon 18-135.

particularly focus on the 50 to 135 mm.

14.12.2007 17:37:00


There are cheap 28-70 / 2. 8 you call this a cheap lens? B. y. do not take into account, and the new is not cheap.

And what kind of lens 24-85 / 2. 8, which is 2, 8-4, 0? Not a permanent hole, or even AF-S. And there is no stabilizer.

14.12.2007 17:45:00
quote:
:
quote:
:
have Nikon lenses do not find class Canon EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM, Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.
And who these dark chudy want? There are cheap 28-70 / 2. 8 and 24-85 / 2. 8 of which will be a lot more sense than the dark glasses with Stabia. A 24-105 also terribly soap at the long end (if you believe the photo zone).

from the next:
: It is necessary to pay extra for this extra in 1000. e. or better learn normally shoot at ISO 800, and the money saved to buy a good lens? I would choose the latter.
: In nature there is no zoom, which is sprinkled would provide a comparable picture with 24-105 on full frame.
. . . Well, good for the lens of the crop is what?
: that the 40D (x with him, let him be Canan) + 2 good zoom for his purposes (sport + reportazhka + travel) is much better and more practical than the 5D + 24-105.
: I have already asked Lenses example, which is sprinkled taxied 24-105 / 4L at FF. I do not know such zooms.
: I'm not kenonist. You sort it out with their lenses.

Expert

14.12.2007 18:07:00
quote:
:

The main problem with the Nikon that good light native glass stands well, very expensive, and not bright native, has not that bright.
have wider range of Canon, and is both very expensive and very good, and more or less available and not bad, not to mention the cost of the lens.
poetmu Here I tend to Canon system. . . .

quote:
:
have Nikon lenses do not find class Canon EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM, Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.

I was a bit embarrassed that they have minimal hole 4. . .
It is clear that there is a large aperture fixes, but that's another story. . .

quote:
:
On account of FF. And whether you want it to suit your needs? Well of course not not critical.

So I do not know whether to grow. . . .

14.12.2007 18:10:00
There are cheap
28-70 / 2. 8 and 24-85 / 2. 8 of which will be a lot more sense than the dark glasses with Stabia.
said Victor and bought a cheap glass




I would choose the Canon EOS 400D + Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.
IMHO, the best choice in this situation

14.12.2007 18:10:00
quote:
:


There are cheap 28-70 / 2. 8 you call this a cheap lens? B. y. do not take into account, and the new is not cheap.

And what kind of lens 24-85 / 2. 8, which is 2, 8-4, 0? Not a permanent hole, or even AF-S. And there is no stabilizer.

But removes fine, but what picture you have given Canan have yet to see. And to Stabu I do special treatment.

quote:
:
I'm not kenonist. You sort it out with their lenses.

Expert

Quotations You are our walking. Again, pull out quotes out of context. I'm not going to study all glass canon. I do not need to understand that F2. 8 is much better than F4. If they are working. A stub motor and useful, but not of the first importance thingies.

quote:
:

There are cheap 28-70 / 2. 8 and 24-85 / 2. 8 of which will be a lot more sense than the dark glasses with Stabia.
said Victor and bought a cheap glass



1. I am aware of all of its shortcomings.
2. Know exactly why I bought it.
3. For quality in the same range I have also fixes there.
4. As a first lens would never take Tamron.

14.12.2007 18:26:00
quote:
:

Based on the set of tasks from your list of prospective purchases, I would choose the Canon EOS 400D + Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4. 0L IS USM.

Disadvantages before 40D + Tamron 17-50 / 2. 8:
(a) there is a wide angle. Virtually none at all. Architecture does not shoot. And "John in an embrace with Any muzzle in salad" too, not looking up from the table;

Here's what I do not like - spring trip to Europe planned - and there is something to take pictures of the architecture. . . Therefore
and wondered about the Tamron 17-50, though he kropnutyh. . .

quote:
:
(b) worse ergonomics in the carcass (you, I understand, is not a miniature palm?);

There is, but when in the hands hold 400D - say that quite uncomfortable I can not. . . . But
40D and D80 - are significantly better. . . .

quote:
:
Overall: carcasses come and go (time and a half - two years line is updated), for the same money in a year - you buy two so at least no worse carcass (almost certainly better). . .

The question is, what kind of carcass buy - krupnutuyu or not. . . . And if buy. . . . . Though - most likely buy. . .

Thanks for the detailed conclusions / advice!

quote:
:

Do not buy shoes for growth. It will be just right - has become unfashionable.

agree. . .
But we want to somehow propetlyat to longer use what has and has not changed, but it does not suffer from limitations. . . .
Although, as they say, "compromise is always more expensive than any of the alternatives"

quote:
:
With lenses too - need to buy for current tasks. Because tasks tend to change over time, and what was originally planned "to use later on FF" can be generally on the FF is not relevant. The most typical example - 17-40 that good shtatnik sprinkled on, but after buying FF out of business. So what's the difference, FF or not, if you still sell?

Thank you!
I would think. . .

quote:
:

4. As a first lens would never take Tamron.

And why? It seems like a good glass. . . . .
 

14.12.2007 18:56:00

If you do not have experience shooting SLR, then for the first time in box fit Canon EOS 400D, and there is no sense in the Canon 40D. You just do not understand the privileges of ergonomics. When mastered, then the time comes to update the carcass.
for shooting in tight urban settings of Europe and focus on the 17 CROP not always be enough, want a little wider. But once you're on future plinirueete expand over time to buy a 10 (12) -20 (22-24).

14.12.2007 19:07:00
quote:
:

If you do not have experience shooting SLR, then for the first time in box fit Canon EOS 400D, and there is no sense in the Canon 40D. You just do not understand the privileges of ergonomics. When mastered, then the time comes to update the carcass.

Yes, I have therefore decided to think about the 400D, with the expectation to change the carcass in a year or two. . .

quote:
:
for shooting in tight urban settings of Europe and focus on the 17 CROP not always be enough, want a little wider. But once you're on future plinirueete expand over time to buy a 10 (12) -20 (22-24).

And this, too, I think - just do not want to grow into kropnutyh glass - suddenly pull FF. . . .

PS Sorry all you fuck my doubts brain type "and if, what if....."
still does not poyuzat long time is something you do not understand something, you need it or not. . .
necessary, in short, to buy and shoot!

14.12.2007 19:18:00

You just do not understand the privileges of ergonomics.

Ahem, how can "not understand" numb from the inability comfortable grip after half an hour photographing violent hand? How bought a pen, so he understood everything was so easy to wield the camera.


why and wondered about the Tamron 17-50, though he kropnutyh

And why not take, sorry, a whale? Wide angle for very cheap. It is so personal option. Here is an example, how you can shoot on the 300D + kit and more (architectural:)) (the author except 300D kit no art there, and removes).

And then something like 16-35mm f / 2. 8L II USM you can buy, if mega-quality SHU soul will desire.

Also, incidentally, a good option.

14.12.2007 19:21:00
quote:
:
quote:
:

4. As a first lens would never take Tamron.
And why? It seems like a good glass. . . . .

Not bad, but:

1. go to the branch to find and Tamron abusive reviews about Tamron is to Canan.
2. I've bought my, bought only the third call, almost by accident, having tried before 6 copies until found normal. If this was the first glass, I could not check it properly in unfamiliar bird.

At the same time of 5 Nikkorov I came across only one defective. And even then, it most likely dropped. He is not focused. A whale and 55-200VR I generally took the blind.

quote:
:

If you do not have experience shooting SLR, then for the first time in box fit Canon EOS 400D, and there is no sense in the Canon 40D. You just do not understand the privileges of ergonomics. When mastered, then the time comes to update the carcass.

And it makes sense to take the plastic misunderstanding (400D), if you can take a normal neporezannuyu camera (40D)?

the point? So it can be put in two words - Spot. On the other benefits of ergonomics and functionality 40D can not mention.

16.12.2007 0:04:00

And do not forget that absolutely any object in the hands of a novice enough and wide enough TV at the same time! Almost everyone has a period when the bulk of the shots are taken at the edges of the range, then in an attempt to "grasp the immensity" then "get unattainable." To deal with this in the first place need, and secondly - very easily. Put the fix. Or give yourself installation - Today I shoot only 35fr, no matter what happens.

16.12.2007 11:37:00
the point? So it can be put in two words - Spot

Daaaaaa. . . . . . Spot. . . . . . how much of this sound for Nikon heart merged. . . . . . .

16.12.2007 13:12:00


. . . . . himself in a similar situation, by the way how-do-you vyboren resolved, or not?

. . . I also shoveled test reviews, examples, how to properly advise to go and try,
if possible, I do not and will not and here to what options I have come
"virtual path":

- Bird 40D (like those -progress and improvement)

but with glass really had to smash his head, while not limitless financial
possibilities in this direction and within a reasonable . . . .
landmark ~ 30 thousand. rub. and most importantly to quality picture ,
like to shoot nature, often try to make forays into the mountains for a few days as
foot and bicycles (weight!!!), a no-no in the cave complex not go (aperture!!!) Well, how do
mates not to shoot close-ups, and "home" . . . . . . the long end of the zoom aka binokl particularly impressed when did not was - like a standard field of view and to be at the center of events, and nimble feet while . . . . . just not how many times got into action in the competition because of all otsmotrennyh somewhere 5% zoom. . . . . because it can not have a good zoom ?

- Canon EF 17-40mm f-4L USM + Canon EF 50 mm f-1_4 USM

or

- Canon EF-S 17-55 mm f-2_8 IS USM

now judge for yourself, reasonable offers welcome, just do not flood! !

full format climbeth not think (like, still Dorogova something)
therefore set of lenses aka EF vs EF-S is not particularly care not only in terms of a lot further
values, EF sprinkled seem preferable to t . a. critical edges remain behind the scenes on
Tamron (for Canon) SP 17-50 mm f-2_8 XR Di II LD ASL [IF] also looked at Har Cams and
focal he ochen good, but spoils the impression constructive and sin for a large percentage of high-quality copies
not (judging by the reviews) so as to try 5, and even more
copies is not an option. . . . and how to relate to a set - Bird + Tamron (like a whale) I do not know,
Does this mean that in this case the Tamron tested for compatibility and
expose the "marriage" is minimized? . . . . . . .
version with Canon EF-S 17-55 mm f-2. 8 IS USM - like because of the f-2. 8 and the stub for a couple of stops on the idea
will handicap, though the battery will eat BUT boshe confused retractable end to sin and "cleaner"? ? Though here and about 17-40mm f. 4L USM responded that c / o front glass sucks ,
but the version with two lenses in quality like, but what about the 17 (27) at min. f. 4 (Flash not want zamarachivatsya)
voooot. . . . . .
and yet somehow stumbled on a review of Canon EF 28-70mm f-2. 8 USM L - cool glass! ! would be also interesting
Varian, yes but I did not find it on sale

16.12.2007 16:41:00

400D + Tamron 17-50 / 2. 8 - very good start

16.12.2007 17:29:00
Was in about the same situation. At Nikon, however, almost did not watch. The main directions of the shooting - architecture, portraits. From the analysis of a dozen gig photos with an old Minolta A1 brought about the desired range of 20-80 mm.
Next was a choice between carcasses:
400D (not lay in the hands of all, oschuschenie toys)
40D (normal size, constructive, but crop ekrancheg + + normal viewfinder)
5D (fulfreym, 70tyr at the time)

Next manning glass :
400ku and 40ku could take a swab or boots 17-50 17-55 IS. Since the. Last except stub does not differ from the swab (IMHO), t. To. Do not L, then I make much sense in it, as in shtatnika seen. Yes, it is elementary and Health
By 5ke as the glass was the choice of the 16-35 II and 24-70 (c thrust it to him), but this option 5D + 24-70 was rejected, since I felt this very structure. I decided that as long as necessary to be limited to small, and the budget was obtained in 100 thousand-plus (the money was, but did not have confidence in the correctness of choice). The result was
40D + Tamron 17-50 for 50tyr ~, t. To. Allowed to use the initial stage kropnutyh lenses.
Already dokuplena blaze 580EX II 10 sput (again not regret choosing, t. To. 400ke on (checked), it does not roll very well )
+ as get to Labasa - will be bought 50 1 4
Closer to fly - will be more difficult, t. To. likely will be a choice of 70-200 2. 8L / 4. 0 (IS)

17.12.2007 13:27:00


Thank kasetelno Tamron - will think (or to save.... )

quote:
:

And do not forget that absolutely any object in the hands of a novice enough and wide enough TV at the same time! Almost everyone has a period when the bulk of the shots are taken at the edges of the range, then in an attempt to "grasp the immensity" then "get unattainable." To deal with this in the first place need, and secondly - very easily. Put the fix. Or give yourself installation - Today I shoot only 35fr, no matter what happens.
Hmm. . . .
possible. . .
until you try - all one does not know. . . .
Although, on the other hand the experience of shooting the CM I have big enough. . . .
Xs shorter. . . . .



choice is not resolved yet - 400D in the hand is not the fountain (and still do not want to handle buy more, given the fact that the carcass in a year or two will change....), The viewfinder of the 400D is not the NRA - from Nikon D80 it better (I dyal)
D80 in the hand is better than the 400D, but that something is not right yet. . . . .
e. As a result - xs what to do. More than six (or two pieces with straining) spend now can not - and this means that either the 400D + Tamron or D80 kit or 40D + Tamron (with straining ). . . . On
desired 40D + 24-105 / 4 L lacks babulikov. . .
Although 400D + 24-105 is probably enough, especially if mesyatsok or two wait. . . .
Canon EF-S 17-55 mm f-2_8 IS USM - roads and non-Lka - a stab at this focal - I'm not sure that there is a great benefit. . .
Canon EF 17-40mm f-4L USM have a friend, he was pleased, but again these two Elqui too dark - need to be more puff. . . .

quote:
:

result was 40D + Tamron 17-50 for 50tyr ~, t. To. Allowed to use the initial stage kropnutyh lenses.
Already dokuplena blaze 580EX II 10 sput (again not regret choosing, t. To. 400ke on (checked), it does not roll very well )

Damn, we have 580 EX II ~ $ 530 and up! ! ! !
In general, yes - for the 400D it is too big, IMHO. . . . And will outweigh. . . .

Here I have already pointed out correctly that without the experience of shooting the CZ me it will be difficult to choose the best copy of the Tamron. . . .

Damn, I do not know what to choose. . . Have
likely to be postponed for a month or two opkupku until the required amount is accumulated. . . . . .

quote:
:

And why not take, sorry, a whale? Wide angle for very cheap. It is so personal option. Here is an example,

Yes much negativity about him write that do not want to throw away money, even this hundred uev. . . . .
However, almost decided - to receive, as soon as the required amount is drawn, 40D carcass, and the kit lens for a month or two will take poyuhat another - it is now not with his hands - he now has a 17-40 L. . . .
And then - buy a good lens!

quote:
:
And then something like 16-35mm f / 2. 8L II USM you can buy, if mega-quality SHU soul will desire.

Also, incidentally, a good option.

Not bad, but not much cheaper option. . . .
However - I am rather in the direction of 10 (12) -20 (22) will then look. . . . .

17.12.2007 17:56:00

Damn, we have 580 EX II ~ $ 530 and up! ! ! !
We generally by 600. BHPhoto after mgovennogo Rebate 350, with delivery to the RF 400

do so - for the 400D it is too big, IMHO. . . . And will outweigh
Yeah. . There will have to stay for the puff

Here I have already pointed out correctly that without the experience of shooting the CZ me it will be difficult to choose the best copy of the Tamron. . . . Well
specific soap immediately noticeable is how to test the front-Bey also focus on ixbt written. I also bought the first SLR - and, to be honest, I do not regret too much. Optimal / suboptimal Tamron - first you absolutely can not tell, for this great experience pixel peering "a need . As from Tamron 17-55 kenonovskogo. I sobstno, after watching a photo of both, I realized that I do not see the difference and decided to take the Tamron.

17.12.2007 18:03:00

Not bad, but not much cheaper option

This is clear enough, I put it, I apologize. By "good choice" I had in mind: 400D kit + 24-105 / 4L IS now. Plus 16-35 / 2. 8L then, inevitably in the distant bright future.

17.12.2007 23:48:00

Canon EF-S 17-55 mm f-2_8 IS USM - roads and non-Lka - a stab at this focal - I'm not sure that there is a great benefit. . .
a tourist, especially in Europe, the use of very is. Come into the church, the castle - will understand. Travel just a wonderful lens.

20.12.2007 11:05:00
quote:
:

Canon EF-S 17-55 mm f-2_8 IS USM - roads and non-Lka - a stab at this focal - I'm not sure that there is a great benefit. . .
a tourist, especially in Europe, the use of very is. Come into the church, the castle - will understand.

understand even now already know, has not yet ezdiv not shoot, but I can not accept the fact that for neeLku that swears that she sucks the dust under the crop, it is necessary to give uev 1200. . . . .

Live - see. . . . .

Thanks for the tips! ! !

20.12.2007 23:03:00

neeLku
"you have cheap..."? 17-40 dark, narrow and 24-70 without stub, 24-105 dark and narrow. On crop Travel shtatnika better 17-55 no. And if you choose to leave, rather than selling compact 400D, it will not be thrown out, and very well invested money.
that it sucks dust
Maybe in the sands and sucks. I do not know, he was not. I year (~ 7000 frames) net.

21.12.2007 19:25:00
That

me and have cheap and go!
I want everything at once, though I understand that it does not happen. . . Here
thought slipped individual that beginning photographer lyubolo lens will be small. . . .
I'm thinking and buying a high-aperture fixation (that though and fifty dollars from 1. 4!), In order to stop the agony of choice. . . . At least for a while. . .

22.12.2007 8:54:00

I'm thinking of buying a high-aperture and the fix (that though and fifty dollars from 1. 4!), In order to stop the agony of choice. . . . At least for a while. . .
done! Sit down, five! ! close your topic quickly, while again chent not have advised. . 50mm sprinkled on, I think will give an understanding of where the "look". . in width or distance. . and good, fixed aperture - always handy in the economy, even (especially!) After purchase zoom
Buy, soon and Fota! ! ! ! do not forget to close the topic. . .

24.12.2007 13:00:00




Thank you all for your advice!

24.12.2007 20:00:00

Want to tell what your problem is?
The fact that you want to solve the problem, which they themselves can not articulate. You've already offered to buy the kit, it is the most reasonable proposal. If
Photo will not delay you slizhkom much you spend relatively little money, in general, will remain in a large loss. If
still drags on, then a year or two You will absolutely know exactly what you need: and what risk factors, and the presence / absence of stabilization and what aperture, autofocus and requirements (if he needs you at all), and the need for FF.
Take a whale, whether or Nikon Canan, and shoot more leisurely and analyze what you need and what is not.
Good luck!

28.12.2007 16:25:00
quote:
:

Want to tell you what your problem is?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Good luck!

Thank you!
Yes, that's right - you're right, right. . . .
But I have probably one of the diseases techies - a lot to think about performance and long to choose. . . . .
That girl in the topic "Choosing SLR for dummies" process much easier to pass. .
But I think that I, too, "Victory", because even the decision on what to buy has already been taken. . . . . Almost. . .

28.12.2007 18:35:00

But I have probably one of the diseases techies - a lot to think about performance and long to choose. . . . .
is rather an attempt to predict the future. Striving understandable, fortune-tellers and astrologers along well. And without them there is a chance to buy something expensive and unnecessary and sekonomit down.

29.12.2007 13:03:00
quote:
:

But I have probably one of the diseases techies - a lot to think about performance and long to choose. . . . .
is rather an attempt to predict the future. Striving understandable, fortune-tellers and astrologers along well. And without them there is a chance to buy something expensive and unnecessary and sekonomit down.

It's all out of poverty. .
It would be more money - bought at once 40D + 17-55 / 2. 8 IS to start and would not soared. . . .
And so - is likely to take 40D, the lens will take the whale "vilified" for a while at a friend and buy fifty dollars from 1. 4 to start. . .
the summer - 17-55. . . . . .
Next - we will see. . . . . .

29.12.2007 14:11:00
If
vybiraesh fotyk travel, have a look in the direction of D80 + Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-200 f / 3. 5-5. 6 G IF-ED. The truth is a little more expensive in 1500. e. is obtained. The very use of such a set of long and very happy with it. Image quality is excellent and a small weight. To him can still be affordable Nikkor AF 50 mm f / 1, 8 D to take all sorts of bokeh
 

30.12.2007 1:18:00

bought at once 40D + 17-55 / 2. 8 IS to start and would not soared.
it may be not so optimal. I'm here to zumam cooled completely. Play around with the whale, and then decide for yourself


If vybiraesh fotyk to travel, have a look in the direction of D80 + Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-200 f / 3. 5-5. 6 G IF-ED
at all "super-kit" for travel Though no "beautiful"
Pages: 1 2

Choice Canon 40D + Tamron 17-50 vs Canon 400D + Canon EF 24-105 f / 4, 0L or even Nikon D80 kit 18-135? ! ? !

info@www.about-digital-photo.com