Finally took the DSLR plunge

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bob, Dec 26, 2005.

  1. Bob

    Bob Guest

    I've owned several film SLRs and have a few point-and-shoot digitals. The
    current prices/rebates were too-tempting-to-resist. So, with a little
    pressure from Santa, I just bought:

    Canon 20D
    Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L
    Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS

    I, now, can't afford to eat for the next two years, but I'm too fat, anyway.
    All is good.

    After I get a PBASE account setup I'll post some pictures.

    To my eye, at least, the results are amazing. I only regret that I waited so
    long to get some quality digital equipment.

    Bob
     
    Bob, Dec 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. You misspelled 'Satan'.
    Welcome to the dark side! (I recommend eating even less for the next 4
    months and getting the 10-22 for some real fun.)

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Dec 26, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bob

    Bob Guest

    You're correct. I should have written "Satan". It would have been more
    appropriate.

    Yeah, I've looked at some of the super-wide zooms. The two I've seen are
    Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.6 and the Sigma 10-22mm f/4-5.6.

    Two things worry me about the Canon, though -- it's an EF-S, and Canon
    doesn't post the MTF charts, for it. The MTF's for the Sigma look good --
    but the 'wide-open' data plots are for f/4 -- and even I could build a
    low-distortion lens at f/4, right?

    Any opinions?

    Thanks.
    Bob
     
    Bob, Dec 26, 2005
    #3
  4. It's fine. Everyone raves about it. The only superwide for the APS-C format
    that you can use on a FF would be the Sigma 12-24, and it's kind of a
    clunker. I have the 10-22 on the 300D, and it's a real pleasure. Between the
    weight and the bulbous front element, I really doubt I'd use the 12-24
    anywhere near as much as I used the 10-22.
    I think you have that backwards, or something. f/4 is the fastest superwides
    get for APS-C.

    Anyway, the off brand APS-C superwides are, according to what I've read, not
    bad at all. I'd be a bit leery of them, since the EF-S mount lets the lens
    get closer to the sensor, and for lenses that wide, the extreme amount of
    retrofocus involved _should_ result in optical performance compromises. But
    in real life, the reports I've seen have them being fine.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Dec 26, 2005
    #4
  5. Bob wrote:
    []
    What point-and-shoot cameras are you comparing the 20D against?
     
    David J Taylor, Dec 26, 2005
    #5
  6. Bob

    Bob Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    Nikon Coolpix 990, Canon A70 and S400.

    Bob
     
    Bob, Dec 26, 2005
    #6
  7. Bob

    Jasen Guest

    At least you didn't get the opposite pressure from the wife! Many of us
    have no such luck....at least I don't :-(
     
    Jasen, Dec 26, 2005
    #7
  8. Thanks, Bob. Hardly surprising that the (year 2004) 8.2MP 20D beats a
    (year 2000) 3MP Nikon 990 (although it lacks the versatility of the swivel
    body). More disappointing about Canon's point-and-shoot cameras though.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Dec 26, 2005
    #8
  9. Bob

    Eatmorepies Guest

    I have had my L lenses since May of this year - I can never go back.

    ..
    Look at the EF 17-40mm f4L or the 16-35 f2.8L. Both will fit onto your next
    camera body, unlike an S lens. I predict that, like me, having bought the
    finest lenses you will upgrade your body in a couple of years - probably to
    a full frame sensor. I have the 16-35 which is excellent. I am prepared to
    accept that 16mm is not exceptionally wide on a 1.6x sensor - so I sometimes
    stitch.

    Stay with L.

    John
     
    Eatmorepies, Dec 26, 2005
    #9
  10. Bob

    Scott W Guest

    You can see the MTF curves for the Canon 10-22 here
    http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/ef/catalog/category/ef_s10_22_f35_45.html

    I don't know why they don't have this on the US site.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Dec 26, 2005
    #10
  11. Bob

    Skip M Guest

    See, you just have to get your wife involved in the madness, too! I did,
    and the only downside is that I keep having to buy two of everything. Which
    is how we ended up with two 20Ds and two 5Ds... I can feel my AmEx card
    cringe in my back pocket every time we pass by Calumet...
     
    Skip M, Dec 26, 2005
    #11
  12. Have fun! That's a high-quality set of gear you've got there.

    Start saving for some wider glass, though!
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Dec 26, 2005
    #12
  13. My Tokina 12-24mm is f4. That's a drawback, of course. I'd prefer a
    faster lens. But I can use much slower shutter speeds with such a
    wide lens than I could with a longer lens. And I use it more for
    things than for people, and things mostly hold still (compared to
    people), again letting me use slower shutter speeds. And there wasn't
    a faster lens in that range available. And I could afford it.

    Life is full of these little tradeoffs.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Dec 26, 2005
    #13
  14. Bob

    Matt Ion Guest

    Yeah, well, that's what happens when you're using lenses that are worth
    more than the cheap cameras you're comparing to, combined - there's
    BOUND to be a slight difference in the quality of the optics.


    ---
    avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
    Virus Database (VPS): 0551-6, 12/24/2005
    Tested on: 12/26/2005 3:12:12 PM
    avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
    http://www.avast.com
     
    Matt Ion, Dec 26, 2005
    #14
  15. Bob

    Jasen Guest

    tried. no luck, but she loves what I take myself. Did her up a couple of
    gorgeous prints of some of her favourites for Xmas.......maybe I can woo her
    to let me buy some wide glass?? ;-)
     
    Jasen, Dec 27, 2005
    #15
  16. Bob

    Skip M Guest

    That could work. "Honey, I know you like this, but think how much better it
    would look if I could get the whole room in the shot!"
    At least you won't have to buy two of them, like I do... ;-/
     
    Skip M, Dec 27, 2005
    #16
  17. Bob

    Jasen Guest

    So true Skip, so true.
     
    Jasen, Dec 28, 2005
    #17
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.