Camera_Gear: DSLRs

[rocketman]

This is a thread where I'd to hear about your DSLR camera. Treat this as if you were doing a one or two paragraph review of your DSLR, what you like and what you don't. Don't worry about it being professional, I want to hear what YOU the photographer think. Would you buy another one, if not what would you buy, and why.

RM

[K75Swim]

Very timely. I am considering a low-end DSLR to carry with me on the bike for some of the more valuable photo-ops I may come upon. I will still carry my Canon A85 to have handy in my jacket. I am bouncing back and forth between the Canon EOS xti (400D) and the Olympus Evolt 410. Anyone already have experience with either or both of these?

[Burnszilla]

I'd get one of these.. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/

[SNC1923]

I DID get one of those, a Canon 40D. Great camera.

I was a Nikon user, tried and true, for many years in the days of 35mm film. When I returned to school, and poverty, I was cameraless for a number of years. When my wife and I decided to tour Australia one year, I decided it was time for a DSLR. Rather capriciously, I decided to go with Canon, a Rebel XT (350D). Recently, I sold that camera and purchase a Canon 40D. I have collected the following lenses to use with it:


EF-S 10-22
EF-S 17-85 IS
EF 70-200 2.8 IS
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.8
100mm 2.8 Macro


The 40D is a beautifully designed camera. Larger than the Rebel, it fits will in my large-ish hands. The camera is a 10 megapixel CMOS APS-C sensor using Canon's Digic III processor, the same used in Canon's pro SLR's. The camera also has interchangeable focusing screens and shoots at 6.5 fps It has lightning fast focus and performs well at higher ISOs, though it is not the market leader in this category. It has a wealth of custom functions and an excellent, intuitive user interface. One of its noteworthy features is the self-cleaning sensor which helps to keep dust at a minimum. It has a larger, brighter viewfinder than previous models and FULL information in the viewfinder (like ISO). Another new feature of this camera is its live-view function, the ability to see through the lens with the LCD monitor. This is unusual as DSLRs go. It even has a 5X and 10X magnifier to aid in precise manual focusing.

There's tons more to say about this camera, but link Burnzilla posted above says it all far better than I could. If you're in the market for a DSLR, at the prosumer level, this is a good choice.

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS40D/Images/specsview01-001.jpg

[MLS2GO]

I used Nikon 35mm and could not get used to the "feel" of a Canon. I had a D70 and recently went with a D80. 10Megapixel and a lot of good consumer features. I believe you should look at the lenses first and then decide the camera. Once you start non a Nikon or whatever, you are going to collect those lenses and not want to change. For some reason I have always felt more comfortable with Nikon, and honestly I don't know why?
On the other hand I am a dedicated Canon Point and shoot user.
Go figure.

[SNC1923]

I believe you should look at the lenses first and then decide the camera. Once you start non a Nikon or whatever, you are going to collect those lenses and not want to change.

This is sage advice.

For some reason I have always felt more comfortable with Nikon, and honestly I don't know why?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you feel that way because Nikon has, for so many years, consistently made such superior quality equipment, up to and including their current offerings. It's really hard to argue with their level of intelligent design and consistent success.

Every major brand has their fans. You'll hear Pentax and Olympus users wax eloquent about their stuff, too. Most everything coming out of Japan in terms of photographic equipment is so good now, it's uncommon to find a real dog.

[AZ-J]

I have a Rebel XTi, aka a 400D. I have it about 1.5 years, after the XT. It is smaller than the 40D, and the major shooting difference is how fast the 40D and the 400D shoots in succesion, as both do, but the 40D recovers and shoots additional photos faster.

I have lenses as follows:

A Canon 28mm-135mm IS lens for everyday shooting.
A Canon 10mm-22mm wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide angle lens for those group and landscape shots
A Canon 100mm-400mm IS L lens for deep stable telephoto images
A Sigma 105mm macro for shooting small things BIG

It is a blast, easy and as hard to use as you want to delve in, and takes beautiful jpg and RAW images. It comes with RAW software, DPP and ZB, but I also use Lightroom and PS CS3. Vista has the codecs for it.

But the lenses are the best part of the experience, so make sure you know what you want. If I upgrade the camera to a 40D, I can use all of my lenses, too. I am no rush to replace this camera, though.

[crgrbrts]

I concur in the endorsements of the Canon EOS 40D. I recently replaced my trusty 30D with one, primarily to take advantage of the 40D's larger LCD screen with Live View Mode (handly for studio shots).

The Canon DSLRs have successfully converted me from a dyed-in-the-wool film fan to digital (though I still hang on to my Rollei SL66 medium format and Gowland 4x5 view cameras). I'd been using Olympus and Canon point-and-shoot digitals for a few years, but wasn't impressed by the results. The DSLRs, however, are light years better, so to speak

The digital camera I really lust after is the Leica M8 (I'm an old Leicaphile), but its purchase price of over $5,000 can buy a whole mess of AC Schnitzer goodies for my K1200R Sport or a very nice Edelweiss tour. I suspect, however, that the images from the dreamed-of Leica wouldn't be noticeably better than the ones I'm enjoying from my Canon.

[bmwdean]

I have been using Nikons since my first, in the early 1970s, when I could finally afford one, an FTN:

<img border=1 width=400 src=http://www.switkin.com/photography/equipment/nikonftn/nikonftn.jpg>

But my first one was black.

Then I went through several Nikon SLRs, from the F2 Photomic on up to the F5.

So, with a bunch of Nikkor lenses in tow, when it came time to go digital I stayed in the Nikon family. Started with a D1X, then a D70, then a D200, and lastly the D300:

<img border=1 src=http://photo.net/equipment/nikon/D300/nikon_d300_front.jpg>

This camera has a 400+ page owner's manual. It can do far more than I could possibly ever achieve. It is a fabulous camera. Would I get another one if this one was, say, stolen? In a heartbeat.

I have a Canon S70 P&S, which is fine for carrying in my tank bag and does a pretty good job, but not up to the caliber of a DSLR.

There are Nikon people and there are Canon people. Perhaps it's a little like pickup trucks -- either your Ford or Chevrolet, and never the twain shall meet. (I have a Ford F250 diesel to carry my Nikons :))

[dancogan]

I have been using Nikons since my first, in the early 1970s, when I could finally afford one, an FTN:...There are Nikon people and there are Canon people. Perhaps it's a little like pickup trucks -- either your Ford or Chevrolet, and never the twain shall meet. (I have a Ford F250 diesel to carry my Nikons :))
Jeff, thanks for the shot of the FTN. That was my first Nikon, too. But then I switched to the Canon F1, which I felt was a much better body. After years of Canon, they switched to autofocus and I was left with a bunch of FD lenses that would not work on the new bodies. After a brief stay with Minolta (they used to have the best AF of anybody) I went back to Nikon. I'd hate to name all the Nikon glass I have, but I don't even think about changing! I've also come to love the wireless flash capabilities with the D200 and a couple of SB800 flash units! :bow So much nicer than all those cords and connectors I used to have to use. :clap

[37071]

In 77 when I got back into motorcycling, I sold off a big bag of Pentax bodies and lenses. They took up too much space. I bought a nice little P&S. It took the pictures I needed. In 2006 I bought a Nikon D50 plus accessories. It does a wonderful job of taking pictures of my grandchildren and birds. On bike trips - I take my old Nikon Coolpix 995. I bought it used and cheap on eBay. It seems rugged and packs small. After using the D50 the 995 seems like a POS - but I'm rugged too.:D

[SNC1923]

On bike trips - I take my old Nikon Coolpix 995.

The Nikon Coolpix 995 is something of a phenom in the compact camera market. Its still prized by ebayers as a great all-in-one camera that takes especially good close-up images. It's swiveling screen is something designers have moved away from and I, for one, miss. I had one and a 950 before it. GREAT camera.

Nikon makes a wide angle lens for this camera. IMHO, the camera is incomplete without it. You might look into one.

http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/digitalcamera/coolpix/995/img/pic_001.jpg http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/lens/wide-angle-E63.jpg

It's a WC-E63. Some mamby-pambies claim it's too big, but they just intimidated. This camera/lens was SUCH a nice combination; I really miss mine. . . .

If you'll allow me a walk down memory lane, here are a few of my favorite 995/wide angle shots:

http://snc1923.smugmug.com/photos/12816562-M.jpg http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/12816564-M.jpg http://snc1923.smugmug.com/photos/12837421-M.jpg http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/101935596-M.jpg

[Visian]

There are Nikon people and there are Canon people. Perhaps it's a little like pickup trucks -- either your Ford or Chevrolet, and never the twain shall meet. (I have a Ford F250 diesel to carry my Nikons :))

i had a ford truck and it was the world's biggest POS ever. my camper is based on an F450... ditto. that said, i see plenty of old fords on the road, so no doubt it is just my dumb luck.

and... i have had nikon since the days of F2AS, and bought the first automatic (shutter speed) FE. i sold the F2AS (big mistake) and kept the FE).

i have some nice nikkor lenses, and i have been holding out, waiting for the day when nikon came out with a full-size image sensor that i could afford.

still waiting...........

so now, i have a dilemma, and i wonder if the assembled experts can help me.

i am looking at two options:

1) Canon EOS XSi (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos450d.asp) (aka 450D)... just announced and available soon.... where i would have to buy new lenses.

2) Nikon D300 (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300/)... where i could use my lenses, even though they don't have autofocus. Cost is higher than the Canon, but I would not have to buy lenses (I think)

both have smaller-than-full-size chips. other than the cutoff (i like wide angle photos) how important of a shortcoming is this? i remember reading/hearing somewhere that the lenses for digital cameras are different than the film cameras... is this true?

both have 3" displays and live view function (important feature to me)

The Canon uses CD cards, the Nikon CF... and i lean toward the SD.

and when did lenses get so *freakin expensive???* (my old nikkor AI lenses are going for, like, $35 on eBay... :( )

which way should i go?

ian

(ps=> sorry to be a little OT here, but i didn't think this merited its own thread, and this thread looked to be the best place to ask.)

[bmwdean]

i had a ford truck and it was the world's biggest POS ever. my camper is based on an F450... ditto.

ian

Very sorry to read that.

So ... are you going to move over to a Chevy, Dodge, or Tundra (no diesel available in the latter)?

P. S. My F250 has been a reliable workhorse. Just change the oil. I would get another.

[rocketman]

I was a little disappointed in that some of my lens for the FTN did not fit the D70 or D80, the interface ring just would not quite mate up and latch. The one that did only had a mechanical linkage for the F-stop so the digital could not get a reading from the lens. With the lens for the newer film cameras that probably that may not be a problem. I know that had I known that before getting the D70 I might have gone with something else in a DSLR but when they came out with a $300 dollar off deal for a while even though I wasn't quite ready to buy well....how could I resist!

RM

[rinty]

I've had Nikons for decades: FE, 601 M, 601, Koolpix something, and currently a D 40.

I've always really liked them, and really like the new D 40. It's nice and light, and has more features than I'll ever use. Like Kbasa, I keep it in a saddle bag (in a Lowe case) and the point and shoot goes in the tank bag.


Rinty

[bmwrebel]

I got a Pentax K10D last year. I have used Pentax 35mm SLRs for years and they are tough. I love this camera, I have the Pentax 16-45 for my main lens and a 50-200 for a zoom. I got the Pentax AF 550 flash for christmas. It takes great photos, it is large and takes up a bit of bike space, but what you can do with it. I will send a few other photos.

[bmwrebel]

Pentax K10D. A night shot with no flash;

[bmwrebel]

Pentax K10D Close up;

[Visian]

P. S. My F250 has been a reliable workhorse. Just change the oil. I would get another.

i'd rather hear about your camera!

(and pardon my n00bishness if i have started a religious war...)

ian

[SNC1923]

i had a ford truck and it was the world's biggest POS ever. my camper is based on an F450... ditto. that said, i see plenty of old fords on the road, so no doubt it is just my dumb luck.

and... i have had nikon since the days of F2AS, and bought the first automatic (shutter speed) FE. i sold the F2AS (big mistake) and kept the FE).

i have some nice nikkor lenses, and i have been holding out, waiting for the day when nikon came out with a full-size image sensor that i could afford.

still waiting...........

so now, i have a dilemma, and i wonder if the assembled experts can help me.

i am looking at two options:

1) Canon EOS XSi (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos450d.asp) (aka 450D)... just announced and available soon.... where i would have to buy new lenses.

2) Nikon D300 (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300/)... where i could use my lenses, even though they don't have autofocus. Cost is higher than the Canon, but I would not have to buy lenses (I think)

both have smaller-than-full-size chips. other than the cutoff (i like wide angle photos) how important of a shortcoming is this? i remember reading/hearing somewhere that the lenses for digital cameras are different than the film cameras... is this true?

both have 3" displays and live view function (important feature to me)

The Canon uses CD cards, the Nikon CF... and i lean toward the SD.

and when did lenses get so *freakin expensive???* (my old nikkor AI lenses are going for, like, $35 on eBay... :( )

which way should i go?

ian

(ps=> sorry to be a little OT here, but i didn't think this merited its own thread, and this thread looked to be the best place to ask.)

I must have missed this post earlier. . . .

The F2AS kicked ass--what a camera. Always wanted one, never got one.

Nikon has a full-sized image sensor now. OH, one that you can afford. . . .

The 450D is an excellent camera to consider. You'll have an opportunity to get some really cool lenses, particularly ones with IS.

You can't go wrong with a Nikon D300. Great camera.

I think the two cameras that you are comparing are somewhat dissimilar, though. I think the D300 compares more fairly with the Canon 40D. Now there's a camera. Not better than a 300D, but a decided step above the yet-to-be-released 450D.

Don't fret about lens compatibility. You're going to buy new lenses anyway. I promise. IS (or VR), ultra-sonic motors, autofocusing, coupling with the camera's advanced metering system. . . . With an AI-S lens, you'll be missing a lot more than autofocus. Think about having the flash zoom automatically with your lens, for example. Old lens compatibility is really a non-issue. Sure, it's nice, but you won't use most of them most of the time. Possible exception would be a micro lens.

The APS-C sensor is not a handicap in anyway. Until recently, Nikon said they would never produce a full-size sensor camera. Those who know point to advantages in both APS-C and full-size sensors. The full-size sensor probably has the edge on image quality (definitely at high ISOs) but the APS-C sensors take GREAT pictures. You have to do a bit of math to figure your focal lengths (X1.6 for Canon, X 1.5 for Nikon, I think). Just buy a new wide angle zoom like the 17-55 f/2.8 for canon (28-80mm equivalent).

I can't tell you about digital lenses being different than film lenses. I don't think so. . . . Lenses made specifically for APS-C cameras (Canon EF-S lenses, for example) cannot be used on full-frame or film cameras. All lenses can be used on APS-C cameras. I have six lenses; two are APS-C the other are standard. All are great.

CF cards are thought to be better than SD, not sure why. I use both all the time and can see/tell know difference. Another non-consideration IMHO.

I shot Nikon for years. Still have an FE-2, 24mm 2.8, 35-105, 55 micro, and 80-200 4.0, all AI-S. Never touch them, look at them, or use them. I caprisously switched to Canon on a whim and have never looked back. Both are great systems. If you look at the stats on Dgrin, about 60% own Canon, about 30% own Nikon, and 10% everything else. Pentax and Olympus owners, though fewer in number, seem very happy with their brands, too. Also, if you watch the Flea Market, you regularly see Nikon guys dump their whole system to go to Canon and Canon guys do the same to go to Nikon. A lot of back and forth if you ask me.

I don't think lenses have gotten expensive. I think that the value of the dollar has changed since last you went shopping. I felt very similarly when I started down this road. A lens that cost $300 in 1995 is $450 now. Stuff is more expensive. My grocery store wants $9.00 for a sixer of Samuel Adams. . . .

Go to a nearby retailer (an independent shop if you have one) and handle both cameras. Buy the one the feels best and has, for you, the most comfortable user interface. You'll never look back. Neither of the cameras you're looking at could ever be considered a Ford.

[bmwrebel]

For bike use the Pentax K10D is water & dust resistent and has a metal frame. All Pentax K type lens will work. About lens, forget the ones that come with the kits, spend a few $ more and get good glass, it makes a real differance. Any photo web sites will steer you in the right direction. This is not a point & shoot, but a camera you can go from full auto to full manual. Pentax enginered it to be as close to a 35 as possable. It also has built in image stabazation. It beats the Canon D30 by a mile and a few hundred $.

[bmwrebel]

The Pentax K10D can take great photos of ladys;

[oldpaul]

I settled on a D40 Nikon simply because it would take all my old glass. I had seven Nikkor non-AI lenses collecting dust. The D40 will take them, though of course everything is done manually, but then that's what it was on the old F2 Photomic as well. Very pleased with the camera to the point that I mostly just use the two kit lenses that came with the D40.

[bmwdean]

i'd rather hear about your camera!

(and pardon my n00bishness if i have started a religious war...)

ian

I am not sure I understand your point about war. Nevertheless ...

My main camera now is a Nikon D300 with the AF-S Nikkor 18-200mmm DX VR lens. It is the finest DSLR I have ever owned, the latter including the D200 and D70, which I keep around for backup and special uses. It is capable of far more than I am capable of asking of it. Its rear screen is enormous, and its photos are razor sharp. Delve into its 420 page(!) User's Manual to answer any question and learn about any of its hundreds of functions. Or, just set it on "P" and fire away.

If I were wealthy, I would pop for the Nikon D3, with its full-size sensor. But it is bigger and heavier and doesn't have built-in, pop-up flash, which I use a lot. So you need always to carry around a flash unit with the D3. And, frankly, the only reason to have a D3 rather than a D300 is if you are a pro or just want to be the first on the block to have one. The D300's resolution is as much as I need. But I suppose with the D400 with a gazillion megapixels comes out in a couple of years I will be in the market for that!

My "tank bag camera," a Canon "PowerShot" S70 is pretty nice for a P&S. One photo I shot with it became a BMW Owners News cover. But it isn't in the same league with a good DSLR.

[Visian]

I am not sure I understand your point about war. Nevertheless ...

My main camera now is a Nikon D300...

...snip

My "tank bag camera," a Canon "PowerShot" S70

religious war: canon vs. nikon. looks like you've found peace with yourself.

thanks for the info.

tom - up above you comment that i am considering two dissimilar cameras... yes, i know. the canon 450D/XSi i am interested in costs less, but i will have to buy more lenses for that than a nikon D300.

I am hearing that y'all are happy with the performance of cameras that have less than full-size chips. the only hassle with that for me is that i love wide angle shots, and the smaller sensor means a loss of angle.

last, tom... i see you have a 55 micro nikkor... so do i... that lens is fantastic!

ian

[SNC1923]

tom - up above you comment that i am considering two dissimilar cameras... yes, i know. the canon 450D/XSi i am interested in costs less, but i will have to buy more lenses for that than a nikon D300.

I am hearing that y'all are happy with the performance of cameras that have less than full-size chips. the only hassle with that for me is that i love wide angle shots, and the smaller sensor means a loss of angle.

last, tom... i see you have a 55 micro nikkor... so do i... that lens is fantastic!

ian

That thought (buying a less expensive camera to help fund lenses) actually crossed my mind, but I dismissed it as I'm convinced that you'll buy the same number of lenses for either camera. I may be wrong, but I don't think so. . . .

The only "loss of wide-angle" you'll experience is in the hope that you'll use existing lenses. Both N and C make very high quality wide-angle zooms. Canon makes a superb 10-22 which is an equivalent to 16-35mm, not too far over $500.

Yes, that Micro Nikkor is a wonderful lens. I just treated myself to a 100mm macro, an F/2.8. It's also a really nice one and I'm enjoying the greater shooting distance. One of the advantages of newer macro lenses is that they focus down to 1:1 without extension tubes.

Keep us apprised of your decision. The only thing I like better than buying a camera is watching someone else do it. Actually, there's quite a few things I like better, but you get my point.

[rocketman]

Speaking of lenses....


I'm looking at getting one of these three

Tokina 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 AT-X DX AF Fisheye Super Wide-Angle Lens for Nikon Digital SLR

Sigma 15mm F2.8 EX Diagonal Fisheye Lens for Nikon SLR Camera

Tokina AT-X 12-24mm AF PRO 4.0 Ultra-Wide Zoom Digital Camera Lens for Nikon AF-D

all about the same price and they seem to have been given good reviews from what I've read and run at least a good $150 less than the least expensive Nikkor that i have seen. I'm kinda stuck ...

The first one has a nice range, would compliment my current 18-50, 90mm, 70-300 set giving me that extra at the bottom edge. It also can focus down to 1" at 10mm which could make for some interesting shots..

The second I like because its the fastest of the three, though it doesn't go down to 10-12, but its faster than my 18-50 which is 3.5-4.5

The last one, though a bit slower stays at 4 thruough out the range of 12-24 which I like though at 24 my 18-50 is at 3.8, but the over lap would give me a bit of latitude in not having to switch quite as often.. Decisions decisions.....


any thoughts??

RM

(oh, and forgot to add.......I've never owned a Ford! :laugh)

[bmwdean]

I am hearing that y'all are happy with the performance of cameras that have less than full-size chips. the only hassle with that for me is that i love wide angle shots, and the smaller sensor means a loss of angle.

ian

I have a 60mm AF Micro-Nikkor that resides mostly on my D70 for use with macro photos. It is, indeed, a great lens.

If you use Nikon DSLRs other than the D3, they have smaller chips. When I bought my first, the D70, Nikon had only one "DX" lens, an 18-70 zoom, which came in the kit I bought then. Now there are lots of DX lenses designed for the smaller chip, and some are quite inexpensive. I have a 12-24mm DX (not inexpensive) which is very wide angle, and a 10.5mm DX fisheye that is very very wide angle and a lot of fun:

<center><img border=1 width=400 src=http://home.att.net/~jeff.dean/tucson-fisheye.jpg></center>

Check with B&H or any other online photo house to see the assortment of DX lenses and their prices.

I get great photos with the less-than-full-size Nikon chips. Unless you are doing wall-size murals -- for that I would haul out my old, dusty 4x5 view camera -- they are just fine.

Fisheye fun:

[SNC1923]

Speaking of lenses....


I'm looking at getting one of these three

Tokina 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 AT-X DX AF Fisheye Super Wide-Angle Lens for Nikon Digital SLR

Sigma 15mm F2.8 EX Diagonal Fisheye Lens for Nikon SLR Camera

Tokina AT-X 12-24mm AF PRO 4.0 Ultra-Wide Zoom Digital Camera Lens for Nikon AF-D

any thoughts??


I know nothing about these three lenses.

Solely going by numbers, I'd look at the 10-17, especially as it fits your kit lens so nicely. The 15mm buys you almost nothing but f/ 2.8, the primary benefit of which is the ability to focus in low light, and since you have an AF camera. . . .

I like the fixed aperture of the 12-24, but again, with TTL everything, so what?

If the reviews are all more-or-less equal, I like the 10-17.

This is a uniquely uninformed opinion.

[rocketman]

I know nothing about these three lenses.

Solely going by numbers, I'd look at the 10-17, especially as it fits your kit lens so nicely. The 15mm buys you almost nothing but f/ 2.8, the primary benefit of which is the ability to focus in low light, and since you have an AF camera. . . .

I like the fixed aperture of the 12-24, but again, with TTL everything, so what?

If the reviews are all more-or-less equal, I like the 10-17.

This is a uniquely uninformed opinion.

Yeah, that's pretty much my view too....

then again I could get one of those $65 screw-on fisheye things and go for complete distortion! :nono Those things just can't be that great, just the fact it screws on... each time slightly different focal distance... naw....:D

RM

[OfficerImpersonator]

This is a thread where I'd to hear about your DSLR camera. Treat this as if you were doing a one or two paragraph review of your DSLR, what you like and what you don't. Don't worry about it being professional, I want to hear what YOU the photographer think. Would you buy another one, if not what would you buy, and why.

RM

Didn't we have this thread already? :)
http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23135

I use an older Canon D-60.

I have three lenses. I use the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM 99% of the time, since it's perfect for both portraits close to the subject:
http://dvandkq.net/images/20080128-059.jpg

and landscapes:
http://dvandkq.net/images/05022004-322.jpg

I also have a EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and a EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens. The IS can't be praised enough. It simply allows long zoom shots in marginal light or of moving subjects without the use of a tripod - a huge advantage, in my opinion.

I do have a Hakuba carbon fiber tripod w/ Really Right Stuff quick release clamp and mounting plates. I use a Sigma EF 530 DG Super Flash EO-ETTL as my speedlight, and a nifty Pelican case to keep everything but the flash and the tripod safe from water, sand, dirt, etc.

[rocketman]

Didn't we have this thread already? :)
http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23135

I use an older Canon D-60.

I have three lenses. I use the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM 99% of the time, since it's perfect for both portraits close to the subject:

and landscapes:


I also have a EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and a EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens. The IS can't be praised enough. It simply allows long zoom shots in marginal light or of moving subjects without the use of a tripod - a huge advantage, in my opinion.

I do have a Hakuba carbon fiber tripod w/ Really Right Stuff quick release clamp and mounting plates. I use a Sigma EF 530 DG Super Flash EO-ETTL as my speedlight, and a nifty Pelican case to keep everything but the flash and the tripod safe from water, sand, dirt, etc.


that was more of a poll, I was looking for more information/review of what you had and why so that others looking to buy could get some ideas of what features the average Joe or Joan, end user likes/dislikes.

RM