Canon 300D...... LENSES?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Creeper, Sep 30, 2004.

  1. Creeper

    Creeper Guest

    I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.

    I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.

    I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    stars, etc.
    I also would like to have some degree of telephoto, for my more
    standard work.

    I'm torn between:

    canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    Sigma 18-125mm

    All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d. I
    don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.

    Any thoughts about what would be best for a keen amateur would be
    appreciated.
    Creeper, Sep 30, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Creeper" <> wrote:

    > I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >
    > I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >
    > I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    > stars, etc.


    You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8 and
    only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.

    > I'm torn between:
    >
    > canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > Sigma 18-125mm
    >
    > All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d. I
    > don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    > happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.


    Get at least one serious lens. The 50/1.4 is a joy to shoot with at night at
    ISO 1600 with the 300D.

    FWIW, I'd avoid Sigma. For example, the 18-125 is quite sharp, but I've
    heard about people having focusing problems: one guy has to zoom out, focus,
    and then zoom back to get it correctly focussed at 50mm.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 30, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Creeper

    Drifter Guest

    On 30 Sep 2004 05:15:23 -0700, (Creeper) wrote:

    >I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >
    >I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >
    >I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    >stars, etc.
    >I also would like to have some degree of telephoto, for my more
    >standard work.
    >
    >I'm torn between:
    >
    >canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    >Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    >Sigma 18-125mm
    >
    >All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d. I
    >don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    >happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.
    >
    >Any thoughts about what would be best for a keen amateur would be
    >appreciated.


    My Stock Answer (Lenses on a budget)

    STRONGLY RECOMMENDED….

    Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
    -Small, Light, Sharp, inexpensive. Just get one!
    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Primes/Canon/PRD_83382_3111crx.aspx

    Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5 IS USM
    -Good "all purpose" lens. Some people love it, some hate it. It's
    always worked great for me. IS (Image Stabilization) is a wonderful
    thing!
    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Zoom/Canon/PRD_83415_3128crx.aspx


    "SORT OF" RECOMMENDED…

    Quantaray (Tamron 572D) 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD
    -Purchased in an emergency situation. Wound up being a very pleasant
    surprise. This lens has it's quirks, but once you learn what they are
    and how to handle them you can get some nice images out of this lens.
    Still I'd trade it for "L" series glass in a heartbeat.
    (this review isn't this exact lens, but nearly identical and all the
    comments apply)
    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Zoom/Sigma/PRD_83601_3128crx.aspx


    DON'T REALLY RECOMMEND…

    Quantaray (Tokina AF193) 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5
    -Given to me by a friend. Not a spectacular lens and it has some
    fairly severe sharpness issues to work around when you open up the
    aperture. Although it is certainly not the worst lens out there I
    find this lens irritating to work with and am often disappointed with
    the results.
    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Zoom/Tokina/PRD_84960_3128crx.aspx

    Quantaray 500mm f8 mirror lens w/macro
    -Also given to me by a friend. The lens itself is okay (though not
    great) but I do mostly handheld/on the spot shooting so unless I go
    bird watching with a tripod I almost never find a use for it.
    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Primes/Quantaray/PRD_84660_3111crx.aspx


    Drifter
    "I've been here, I've been there..."
    Drifter, Sep 30, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <>, Creeper
    <> wrote:

    > canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > Sigma 18-125mm


    Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.
    Randall Ainsworth, Sep 30, 2004
    #4
  5. Creeper

    David Hearn Guest

    Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    > In article <>, Creeper
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    >> Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    >> Sigma 18-125mm

    >
    > Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.


    Personally I've been very pleased with my Sigma 70-300mm APO Super Macro II.
    :) No problems with it on either film bodies or digital ones. Not bad for
    £160.

    David
    David Hearn, Sep 30, 2004
    #5
  6. David J. Littleboy wrote:
    > "Creeper" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >>
    >>I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >>
    >>I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    >>stars, etc.

    >
    >
    > You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8 and
    > only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    > sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.
    >


    You can also take the route of getting the kit lens, and deciding later
    what glass you need/want/desire/lust for. The kit lens is quite decent.

    --
    John McWilliams
    John McWilliams, Sep 30, 2004
    #6
  7. "John McWilliams" <> wrote:
    > David J. Littleboy wrote:
    > > "Creeper" <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    > >>stars, etc.

    > >
    > > You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8

    and
    > > only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    > > sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.

    >
    > You can also take the route of getting the kit lens, and deciding later
    > what glass you need/want/desire/lust for. The kit lens is quite decent.


    I didn't say "don't get the kit lens".

    He said he's interested in "low-light work - fireworks, aurora, stars,
    etc.". If he only gets the slow glass he's talking about, he's going to be a
    lot less happy than he would be if he also got the 50/1.4.

    The 50/1.4 is 3 stops faster than any of the lenses he's looking at. That's
    an enormous difference for the sort of photography he mentioned.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 30, 2004
    #7
  8. Creeper

    Tony Guest

    Don't buy Sigma - or Quantary which is usually Sigma with an even worse
    guarantee.
    For a quick refresher:
    Sigma build quality is less than ideal, the lenses do tend to fall apart
    Sigma compatibility is bad. They reverse engineer the mounts in order to
    save a few buck on license fees - consequently a Sigma that will work on a
    current model might not work on future models. Sigma claims they will
    re-chip lenses but they will fudge this too.
    A friend sent them a lens that took six months to re-chip and it came
    back ready to go on his Elan II but then would not work on my EOS 3 - a
    model that was on the market when the lens was sent in for re-chipping.
    Sigma would not re-chip it a second time.
    My own Sigma lens that was "Too old" to rechip - it was six years old. I
    was still using my 13 year old first Canon zoom on our fifth Canon body at
    the time so I have a different view of "old" than the slime buckets at
    Sigma.
    You are trading price for performance AND for permanence. Sigma is always
    a bad deal.




    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

    "Creeper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >
    > I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >
    > I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    > stars, etc.
    > I also would like to have some degree of telephoto, for my more
    > standard work.
    >
    > I'm torn between:
    >
    > canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > Sigma 18-125mm
    >
    > All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d. I
    > don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    > happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.
    >
    > Any thoughts about what would be best for a keen amateur would be
    > appreciated.
    Tony, Sep 30, 2004
    #8
  9. David J. Littleboy wrote:

    > "John McWilliams" <> wrote:
    >
    >>David J. Littleboy wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Creeper" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    >>>>stars, etc.
    >>>
    >>>You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8

    >
    > and
    >
    >>>only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    >>>sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.

    >>
    >>You can also take the route of getting the kit lens, and deciding later
    >>what glass you need/want/desire/lust for. The kit lens is quite decent.

    >
    >
    > I didn't say "don't get the kit lens".


    Nor did I infer you did.
    >
    > He said he's interested in "low-light work - fireworks, aurora, stars,
    > etc.". If he only gets the slow glass he's talking about, he's going to be a
    > lot less happy than he would be if he also got the 50/1.4.
    >
    > The 50/1.4 is 3 stops faster than any of the lenses he's looking at. That's
    > an enormous difference for the sort of photography he mentioned.


    And that lens is probably just the ticket for his type of shooting.

    Perhaps an unfortunate consequence of my posting off yours, but no
    opposition was intended. Just that all the posts to date seemed to point
    to various lens other than the kit lens, which, for a new digital
    shooter, seems to be the place to start.

    --
    John McWilliams
    John McWilliams, Sep 30, 2004
    #9
  10. "Creeper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >
    > I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >
    > I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    > stars, etc.
    > I also would like to have some degree of telephoto, for my more
    > standard work.
    >
    > I'm torn between:
    >
    > canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > Sigma 18-125mm


    Consider fixed focus lenses, they are less of an optical compromise
    and usually have larger useful (2 stops down from wide open)
    apertures. They may even be reasonably useful wide open, but always
    provide for easier focussing.

    > All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d.

    I
    > don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    > happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.


    50mm f/1.4 has almost as high a resolution as the better telelenses,
    and it has very nice bokeh and low flare. It also focuses fast. If
    budget is a bit tight, you can go very wrong with the f/1.8, but it is
    not as good as the bigger brother. And remember, you're unlikely to
    need an upgrade for a better 50mm (effectively providing the Field of
    View of a nice portrait lens on the 300D). It is also ready for your
    next (full frame) DSLR.

    > Any thoughts about what would be best for a keen amateur would be
    > appreciated.


    Judge the differences and see if they are important enough for you:
    http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/
    The zooms are likely 'worse' than the f/1.8 a least at some of the
    zoom range, and they block a lot more light (no links to back that up
    though, just experience).

    Bart
    Bart van der Wolf, Sep 30, 2004
    #10
  11. Drifter <> wrote in message news:<>...

    > My Stock Answer (Lenses on a budget)
    >
    > STRONGLY RECOMMENDED?.
    >
    > Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
    > -Small, Light, Sharp, inexpensive. Just get one!
    > http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Primes/Canon/PRD_83382_3111crx.aspx


    Canon's faster 50mm primes are extrememly blurry wide open. The Sigma
    50mm EX Macro is fantastic...

    http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#F50

    > Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5 IS USM
    > -Good "all purpose" lens. Some people love it, some hate it. It's
    > always worked great for me. IS (Image Stabilization) is a wonderful
    > thing!
    > http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Zoom/Canon/PRD_83415_3128crx.aspx


    If you can deal with the slow f3.5 class, Sigma' 24-70 HF is clearly
    the best buy around, as well as the top performer in its class, at
    only $80...
    http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Zstd

    The Canon 28-135 IS has always given me blurry results on the 10D.

    > "SORT OF" RECOMMENDED?
    >
    > Quantaray (Tamron 572D) 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD


    There are only 3 lenses in this class worth considering:

    Sigma EX, Sigma EX, and Sigma APO.
    http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel

    The APO rated 3rd above (to Sigma and Sigma) is definitely the runaway
    best deal going. It's probably the best value across all lens lines
    for in the 35mm foramt built today, with the possible exception of
    Sigma's superb $80 24-70 HF.
    Georgette Preddy, Sep 30, 2004
    #11
  12. Creeper

    Ryadia Guest

    Randall Ainsworth wrote:

    > In article <>, Creeper
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    >>Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    >>Sigma 18-125mm

    >
    >
    > Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.


    So it's not just Sigma cameras you have a bent on, Randall?
    How about you post some reasons here?
    Broad condemnation of a brand is the worst kind of arrogance.

    Ryadia
    Ryadia, Sep 30, 2004
    #12
  13. Creeper

    Todd H. Guest

    Ryadia <> writes:

    > Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>, Creeper
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > >>Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > >>Sigma 18-125mm

    > > Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.

    >
    > So it's not just Sigma cameras you have a bent on, Randall?
    > How about you post some reasons here?
    > Broad condemnation of a brand is the worst kind of arrogance.


    Well said. Not to mention being a Hallmark of the biased and
    uniformed.

    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/
    Todd H., Sep 30, 2004
    #13
  14. Creeper

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    I agree with the poster who says you should consider the Canon 50mm f/1.4.
    It's a fantastic lens.

    Jimmy
    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:cjgvg8$688$...
    >
    > "Creeper" <> wrote:
    >
    > > I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    > >
    > > I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    > >
    > > I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    > > stars, etc.

    >
    > You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8 and
    > only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    > sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.
    >
    > > I'm torn between:
    > >
    > > canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    > > Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    > > Sigma 18-125mm
    > >
    > > All prices are roughly the same, bought in a package with the 300d. I
    > > don't have a big budget - want to get something that will keep me
    > > happy for a while, before I decide wether I want high-quality glass.

    >
    > Get at least one serious lens. The 50/1.4 is a joy to shoot with at night

    at
    > ISO 1600 with the 300D.
    >
    > FWIW, I'd avoid Sigma. For example, the 18-125 is quite sharp, but I've
    > heard about people having focusing problems: one guy has to zoom out,

    focus,
    > and then zoom back to get it correctly focussed at 50mm.
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >
    >
    >
    Jimmy Smith, Oct 1, 2004
    #14
  15. Creeper

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    This Preddy guy is a Troll so watch out when he says something. Canon 50mm
    lens are extremely sharp. They handle light like Bach handled music. The
    50mm f/1.4 is super fantastic. The 50mm f/1.8 is very very good. I had the
    dough so I opted for the f/1.4 since I also wanted to play with low and
    available light photography. I've never been sorry.

    Jimmy

    "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Drifter <> wrote in message

    news:<>...
    >
    > > My Stock Answer (Lenses on a budget)
    > >
    > > STRONGLY RECOMMENDED?.
    > >
    > > Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
    > > -Small, Light, Sharp, inexpensive. Just get one!
    > >

    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Primes/Canon/PRD_83382_3111crx.aspx
    >
    > Canon's faster 50mm primes are extrememly blurry wide open. The Sigma
    > 50mm EX Macro is fantastic...
    >
    > http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#F50
    >
    > > Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5 IS USM
    > > -Good "all purpose" lens. Some people love it, some hate it. It's
    > > always worked great for me. IS (Image Stabilization) is a wonderful
    > > thing!
    > >

    http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm Zoom/Canon/PRD_83415_3128crx.aspx
    >
    > If you can deal with the slow f3.5 class, Sigma' 24-70 HF is clearly
    > the best buy around, as well as the top performer in its class, at
    > only $80...
    > http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Zstd
    >
    > The Canon 28-135 IS has always given me blurry results on the 10D.
    >
    > > "SORT OF" RECOMMENDED?
    > >
    > > Quantaray (Tamron 572D) 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD

    >
    > There are only 3 lenses in this class worth considering:
    >
    > Sigma EX, Sigma EX, and Sigma APO.
    > http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel
    >
    > The APO rated 3rd above (to Sigma and Sigma) is definitely the runaway
    > best deal going. It's probably the best value across all lens lines
    > for in the 35mm foramt built today, with the possible exception of
    > Sigma's superb $80 24-70 HF.
    Jimmy Smith, Oct 1, 2004
    #15
  16. Creeper

    Drifter Guest

    On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 19:05:18 -0400, "Jimmy Smith"
    <> wrote:

    >This Preddy guy is a Troll so watch out when he says something.


    It's funny 'cause preddy and many others have been in my killfile for
    so long that I completely forget about them until somebody quotes them
    in a reply.


    Drifter
    "I've been here, I've been there..."
    Drifter, Oct 1, 2004
    #16
  17. Jimmy Smith wrote:

    > I agree with the poster who says you should consider the Canon 50mm f/1.4.
    > It's a fantastic lens.
    >
    > Jimmy
    > "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    > news:cjgvg8$688$...
    >
    >>"Creeper" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I've decided on the 300D for my first DSLR.
    >>>
    >>>I'm a bit stuck on what lens/lenses to buy.
    >>>
    >>>I'm going to be doing alot of low-light work - fireworks, aurora,
    >>>stars, etc.

    >>
    >>You need the 50/1.4. Sure, it's 4 times more expensive than the 50/1.8 and
    >>only slightly better. But it's better in just about every way: speed,
    >>sharpness, bokeh. A real gem, one of Canon's best lenses.


    But from what I've read by astrophotographers, it has a lot of
    aberrations wide open and you need to stop it down to 1.8 if
    you want better star images. So perhaps the 50/1.8 is fine.

    For fireworks, they are not low light. I've typically
    used iso 50 film and f/11 with great results.

    Roger
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Oct 1, 2004
    #17
  18. Creeper

    Big Bill Guest

    On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 06:34:04 +1000, Ryadia
    <> wrote:

    >Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>, Creeper
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    >>>Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    >>>Sigma 18-125mm

    >>
    >>
    >> Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.

    >
    >So it's not just Sigma cameras you have a bent on, Randall?
    >How about you post some reasons here?
    >Broad condemnation of a brand is the worst kind of arrogance.
    >
    >Ryadia


    Do a Google search for problems with the DR.
    You'll find that ther number 1 problem is Sigma lenses not working
    right.
    That's not a bias, it's what others who have used the lenses say.

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
    Big Bill, Oct 1, 2004
    #18
  19. Creeper

    David Hearn Guest

    Big Bill wrote:
    > On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 06:34:04 +1000, Ryadia
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article <>,
    >>> Creeper <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> canon twin lens kit 18-55mm & 55-300mm
    >>>> Canon 18-55mm and sigma 55-200mm
    >>>> Sigma 18-125mm
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Don't throw your money away on Sigma products.

    >>
    >> So it's not just Sigma cameras you have a bent on, Randall?
    >> How about you post some reasons here?
    >> Broad condemnation of a brand is the worst kind of arrogance.
    >>
    >> Ryadia

    >
    > Do a Google search for problems with the DR.
    > You'll find that ther number 1 problem is Sigma lenses not working
    > right.
    > That's not a bias, it's what others who have used the lenses say.


    Its also older Sigma lenses (ie before 2001). As far as I know, all modern
    lenses (after 2001) work with all Canon bodies and Sigma will rechip (for
    free if you're the original purchaser and can prove it) most other lenses
    such that it'll work with the lastest and greatest Canon body.

    David
    David Hearn, Oct 1, 2004
    #19
  20. Creeper

    David Hearn Guest

    Tony wrote:
    > Don't buy Sigma - or Quantary which is usually Sigma with an even
    > worse guarantee.
    > For a quick refresher:
    > Sigma build quality is less than ideal, the lenses do tend to fall
    > apart


    I've never heard anything like that about Sigma products before - in fact,
    many people rate the Sigma's 18-125mm lens over the Kit 18-55mm. As for the
    70-300mm APO Super Macro II - many people think that there's little to
    compare with it in its class.

    Now, the number of times I've heard of Canon front lens elements falling out
    after a "light knock" (eg. 50mm f/1.8 MkII). Even Canon build poorly built
    (but optically good) lenses.

    > Sigma compatibility is bad. They reverse engineer the mounts
    > in order to save a few buck on license fees - consequently a Sigma
    > that will work on a current model might not work on future models.


    Canon don't (officially, at least) license their EOS mount interface specs
    to anyone. Therefore Sigma's only option is to reverse engineer the specs.

    As for compatability, I don't know of any lens brought out since 2001 which
    has compatability problems with the current set of Canon cameras.

    And don't forget, Canon seems to have ignored the wide angle brigade when it
    comes to lenses for 1.6x crop cameras. If you want anything sub £500-£1k
    then you're looking at non-Canon lenses.

    David
    David Hearn, Oct 1, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bryce

    Canon 300D and lenses from Rebel 1993-4ish

    Bryce, Aug 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    341
    Thor Henning Wegener
    Aug 25, 2003
  2. Witters©

    Lenses for use with the canon 300D

    Witters©, Oct 24, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    570
    Mark B.
    Oct 26, 2003
  3. Hans Joergensen

    Hong Kong prices on 300D, Canon S40+S45 + equipment for the 300D

    Hans Joergensen, Jan 25, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,498
    =?Big5-HKSCS?B?uXG4o6RwpGw=?=
    Jan 26, 2004
  4. Linda_N

    Re: Canon 300D...... LENSES?

    Linda_N, Oct 10, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    38
    Views:
    700
  5. Linda_N

    Re: Canon 300D...... LENSES?

    Linda_N, Oct 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    928
    Linda_N
    Oct 24, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page