What did Santa (or for my fellow Jewish brothers, Hanukah Harry) bring you?

[Blacks Law]

Over the course of this month which also includes my birthday, I have received my new altima coupe, Freaks and Geeks on DVD, some replica Florida Gator basketball shorts and soon I'll be buying myself the Griffin iPod Tuneflex for my coupe.

[generic808]

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

I already have a 70-200 f/4L non-IS so I guess I'll be selling it soon. Any other photobugs on here?

[SHIFT_2.5S]

I'm a huge photo guru...love photography like nothing else. I'm planning on getting a Rebel XT sometime next year with some nice glass to last me for a while.

[generic808]

I'm thinkin'bout upgrading my XTi for the 5D body, but $2500 is a bit too much for me right now. I shot all film for many, many years, but recently made the switch to digi SLR. I came from using 2 EOS3 bodies (one back-up) and I switched to the XTi. Now I'm stuck with my crazy expensive film bodies. I really don't want to sell them because they serverd me well for many years and they're still running solid.

As far as glass goes, get only "L" lenses. A good place to start building would be the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS and 17-40mm f/4. They can be had for about $550 and $650 respectively. I used mine for about 3 years and they're still just as good as the day I bought them.

Now I got my badboy 70-200 f/4L IS

[bembol]

Got a Leather Coat from Danier from my parents and Cineplex Entertainment Movie passes from my sister.

I got myself something too.

Yamaha HTR-6190B (aka RX-V1800) Receiver (dts Master Audio, DOLBY TrueHD) 7.1Panasonic DMP-BD30K BD Player.

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Why not USM? I see you got the Image Stabilizing lens, so that's a plus. But those are a bit slower.

I was thinking between the XT and XTi, but could not justify spending an additional $140 for 2 extra focal points and 2 extra megapixels. I would love to have the 30D but that is too expensive for the time being. The 5D is much too much $.

[johnny_d]

I'll trade you my Tamron 28-75 F2.8 & for that 70-200 F4

[generic808]

Why not USM? I see you got the Image Stabilizing lens, so that's a plus. But those are a bit slower.

It is USM. All L lenses are USM; I was just too lazy to type it out

And Johnny, you smokin' crack or what? Tamron for my Canon?

[SHIFT_2.5S]

I'll trade you my Tamron 28-75 F2.8 & for that 70-200 F4

[johnny_d]

okay, i'll throw in the Sigma EF 500 DG Super flash too

[generic808]

I was thinking between the XT and XTi, but could not justify spending an additional $140 for 2 extra focal points and 2 extra megapixels. I would love to have the 30D but that is too expensive for the time being. The 5D is much too much $.

Trust me, the price difference is worth it. Not only the 2 megapixals, but you also get sensor dust cleaning which is very handy. The camera automatically shakes the dust off before it shuts off. And there's also a dust particle removal feature for when you have a dust particle on your images. A larger 2.5" LCD which comes in very handy. 9-point auto focus vs. 7 for the XT. And in burst shot mode you can get off 27 vs 14 for the XT.

IF you look on amazon right now, it's going for $519 body and $587 with 18-55mm lens. I'd personally skip the kit and just go with the body. Use the saved money toward L glass.

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Trust me, the price difference is worth it. Not only the 2 megapixals, but you also get sensor dust cleaning which is very handy. The camera automatically shakes the dust off before it shuts off. And there's also a dust particle removal feature for when you have a dust particle on your images. A larger 2.5" LCD which comes in very handy. 9-point auto focus vs. 7 for the XT. And in burst shot mode you can get off 27 vs 14 for the XT.

IF you look on amazon right now, it's going for $519 body and $587 with 18-55mm lens. I'd personally skip the kit and just go with the body. Use the saved money toward L glass.

You're making a lot of sense there. I'm starting to reconsider...this will be my first dSLR.

[generic808]

What were you shooting film on? Are you coming from the Canon family? If so, your EF lenses are interchangable on the DSLR's. Just remember the 1.6x crop factor if you switch your EF lenses onto consumer level DSLR bodies. I have 2 EOS3 bodies and a 7NE body to boot. If you're ever interested in a 35mm film body (still the better medium in my opinion), let me know. I have to get rid of one EOS3 body and the 7NE body. I'm hoping to sell them, maybe a couple of lenses and a flash gun to fund my 5D body

[generic808]

And if you don't have it already, I'd highly, highly recommend getting the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II. It is THE best bang for the buck lens that Canon has ever made. It is very cheaply built, many would compare it to a Cracker Jack toy, but trust me, that thing takes absolutely stunning photos. The bokeh is very nice, not as good as the 50mm 1.4, but for 1/3 the price, it take beautiful shots. You just have to be extra cautious when handling it, but the thing is, if it breaks, you can just buy a new one for $75 +/- a few.

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Eric, thanks so much for all of your advice. I used a Minolta Maxxum 7xi for film, and used a Canon PowerShot S3 as my primary digital camera. Now, I'm ready to switch to dSLR. Will probably go with the XTi per your recommendation.

Besides the 50mm, which len(s) would you recommend to begin with. I'm looking for a macro lens and a lens for normal shooting (portraits/scenery).

Thanks again.

[generic808]

It depends on how advanced you are with SLR cameras. I shot quite a few weddings and portraits in my day, but after the events of 9/11, I got out of the industry.

If you're a beginner-intermediate, depending on budget, I'd recommend the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. It usually runs around $425 or so, but that is a bit steep for a beginner. I just feel it's one of the better "affordable" all-around lenses. You can shoot landscape at 28mm, portrait at 85mm (the ideal focal length for this purpose), and zoom at 135mm. As you advance more in your photography though, you'll realize spending that much up front is worth it rather than buying a cheaper lens and upgrading down the line. Perfect example is my 70-200 f/4L. Now I have the bigger, badder version 70-200 f/4L IS so I have to figure out whether or not to sell my older white lens

For macro shots, the Canon 50mm f/2.5 Macro is a best buy at around $250. It's pretty fast for the price point, and the bokeh is awesome! Again, the build quality isn't the greatest, but you can't expect much for a macro lens this fast and this cheap.

So if I was a beginner/intermediate photographer, my bag would look like this:

Canon XTi body50mm f/1.8 II or 50mm macro f/2.528-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM BG-E3 Battery grip

Of course my bag is loaded with heavy glass at this point. It's now just one of my hobbies which I never seem to have enough time to pursue. Funny how I hated shooting when I did it for work, but now that it's a hobby, I seem to want to shoot more but don't have the time. GO figure

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Once again, I can't thank you enough for your help. I am somewhat experienced with photography, but not so much with the dSLR world. This will be my first transition to true dSLR and I want to make the most out it. Thanks so much for all of your help.

[SHIFT_COUPE]

Uh oh Eric, I'm a Nikon guy

Got this for Christmas for my D40x

AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Nikon is good and all, but just not up to par with Canon. No offense, it's a matter of brand preference. Both are very good...but the consensus (among photo pros) is in favor of Canon.

Nevertheless, that's still quite a good lens you got there.

[SHIFT_COUPE]

Thanks

Both brands have their pros and cons, like most other competitive markets. I personally don't like the feel of the Rebel in my hands, it felt difficult to hold. The Nikon feels more solid to me. Once again, all about preference. Hell I wouldn't mind a 5D myself

[generic808]

Yeah, Nikon's feel more solid than the Canon's, but I prefer Canon innovation over the not-so-innovative Nikon. They seem to put out the same boring stuff over and over, with very few changes. I've been a Canon guy for over 15+ years, dating back to my AE-1. The thing in favor of the Nikon is the glass. That's why I have to buy L glass to keep up to par with the Nikon.

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Didn't know this forum had so many photo gurus...it's wonderful to know you guys.

[generic808]

I have a bunch of portrait, wedding, and landscape photos sitting around. I'll try to get them uploaded into my photobucket so you guys can check out some of my work. Boy, all this talk is getting me excited to go shooting again.

[SHIFT_2.5S]

I have a bunch of portrait, wedding, and landscape photos sitting around. I'll try to get them uploaded into my photobucket so you guys can check out some of my work. Boy, all this talk is getting me excited to go shooting again.

You've got no idea what I'm feeling...I'm "jumping for joy"

[squik]

I got a Warwick Corvette 5 string bass guitar of Doom. Not to break up this camera chat....Cannon rules!

[edonissan13]

i got clothesmy altimamy rimscash monaaaaaaaaaaaay

[johnny_d]

got some clothes, socks, razor, ties blah blah .... the best present I got myself earlier for Xmas ............. was my Injen Intake

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Eric, I have a camera question for you.

So I'm about to buy the XTi body with the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 lens that you recommended. I am looking to get a second lens as well, and have narrowed it down to 2 choices:

1. Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens - $4102. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens - $540

I want your honest opinion as to which I should get. I mostly travel and like to take pictures of nice scenery and architecture and such. I understand that the 70-200mm has better zoom but the first lens also has a lower F-stop, meaning that more light is let in (unless I am mistaken). However, it is larger than the 28-135mm which would make it more difficult to travel with.

I need this to be a good reliable lens that I can use for several lens. Because I will be spending a substantial amount of money, I don't want to make the wrong choice. Also, the 70-200mm is the "L" glass, which is very nice from what I've heard.

Being the photography master that you are, which would you recommend for me, in addition to the 50mm f/1.8? Thanks so much.

[johnny_d]

if you want it to be a walk-around lense then I would say the 28-135mm would work better for you because most of the time you'll need a bit of wide angle. 70-200 is out of the question for scenery or architectures cuz you won't be able to get the whole thing in there..... unless you're traveling on the African Safari chasing lions then 70-200 or longer would definitely be a must That being said, the 17-40 and the 70-200 are Canon's most popular lenses. Being on a cropped body, you may even want to consider the 24-105 F4 as a walk-around lense to get a tiny bit more wide angle and it's L-series quality, but that's depends on how often you shoot wide & budget. The difference between F3.5 and F4 is only half an F stop, not very significant if you're traveling during the day

[SHIFT_2.5S]

Thanks Johnny, but the 24-105mm f/4 L is about $1,000 and beyond my budget. I think the 28-135mm would be optimal, but it's not "L" glass, and that factor is rather appealing.