Lenses

[mikecweb]

Ok you super dooper lense knowing lil F8cks. Which ones should I consider.
For both Nikon and Canon.
around 300mm.
at or below $500.
Letters like L,EF,II,USM they mean nothing to me. And I'm fine to research it but I can't find a solid site that breaks them all down...

thankya.

[Greg]

Planning on getting an SLR Mike?

[Airbus_A320]

The only lens thats 300mm under $500 is the 75-300 III USM or the 75-300 IS USM also the sigma 70-300 APO Super II or something like that. Then there is a 75-300mm from Tamron too and proally some other 3rd party companies. All in about the same price range.

If you are willing to go about $69 over $500 for a lens i would get a 70-200 F/4L USM.

http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=588199/search=70-200/ut=45b1630a999e116c

USM- Ultrasonic Motor
IS- Image Stabalizer (called VR (vibration reduction) with Nikons)
Not sure what EF stands for
L- (not sure if it means anything) but it deontes Canon's "pro" lenses
II, III- i think that just stands for newer versions of the lens but i'm bot totally sure.

[Greg]

EF is the Canon type mount. FD was the old mount.

[mikecweb]

I'm looking at the D70 and 10D.
I'm leaning D70 so I can get a better lense.

I can't really go over 1400.

[Greg]

Get a Canon Mike.

It's the lens system your going for. If you didn't want to spend too much just get the 300D. It's a great camera and much better than your HP. If your on a budget I don't see why you should go for the 10D. A 300D purchase would leave you with enough money for a good lens with some nice reach. You can check out my images, Adam's images, Paul's images, etc. For an example.

[mikecweb]

I hear ya greg. But that fact that adam is wanting a 10D already is showing me that the 300d lacks.


What are the advantages of cannon lenses over nikons. The D70 looks awful good for its price.

[b777]

I hear ya greg. But that fact that adam is wanting a 10D already is showing me that the 300d lacks.


What are the advantages of cannon lenses over nikons. The D70 looks awful good for its price.

There isn't really any clear cut advantage of Canon lenses over Nikon lenses or vice versa.

The D70 would be a better choice if you fear that 300D's features are not enough to "grow" into. Nikon has the Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6D ED lens for about $300 (B&H Photo) that should get your started. Or you can get a 10D body for $1155 at buydig.com and get the 75-300mm III USM for about $200.

A 300D is not a bad choice if you want more money to spend on lenses. Also consider getting a used D30 or D60.

[GrantT]

Or you can get a 10D body for $1155 at buydig.com and get the 75-300mm III USM for about $200.

There is no point in buying a 10D and then getting a cheap lens. Mike is better off buying a D30 (or D60 but they are still quite expensive) and getting a 100-400L or 70-200L, that would give better results than a 10D and 75-300.

[DeltaASA16]

Grant-

the 10D and 75-300IS put out incredible shots! Shots that are just as good as any L Lense product. Take a look at Johnathan Derden's photos. All of his telescopic shots were taken with his 75-300 IS USM.

[photoid=324284]

-Adam

[kcmh]

I went through this same problem about a month ago when i upgraded from a Konica/Minolta Dimage 7i to a Canon product. I searched and searched for a reason to go to the 10D and spend the 250 to 500 more than on the 300D.

The Nikon was a choice also but for really the same amount of $ you can get a 10D with a ok start 28-80mm lens. The store here in CMH where I bought mine had D60 used for $800 but since I did not know very much about them I did not even look into them.

While I did go back 2 days later and get the 10D I did not have the $$$ right at that time for a really awesome lens, so I bought the sort of cheap EF lens no USM or IS and not an L lens, 1 lens is a 75-300mm and the other is an everyday 28mm-800mm that is also a basic lens. Does it do the job, yes. Do I want better lens, oh hell yes (matter of fact I'm looking into the new Sigma 18-125mm lens right now.)

I concluded in my own goofy mind that Canon's 300D was not as good because it did not have as many features as the 10D or the D70 Nikon. I know I'm wrong but I still say that. The 10D has to many features for me and I have no idea how to use everything on that camera and I've had it a month.

If you have $500 to spend on the lens side of it get a good lens like one of the IS lens from Canon. But don't forget the short side of photography too.

[b777]

Or you can get a 10D body for $1155 at buydig.com and get the 75-300mm III USM for about $200.

There is no point in buying a 10D and then getting a cheap lens. Mike is better off buying a D30 (or D60 but they are still quite expensive) and getting a 100-400L or 70-200L, that would give better results than a 10D and 75-300.

The price difference between the L lenses and the 75-300 is $1000 or more ...that's way over Mike's budget. Don't knock the 75-300, it is a good starter lens and will produce quality photos if you use it right (lots of photos in the db to prove that).

[GrantT]

The price difference between the L lenses and the 75-300 is $1000 or more

The price difference between a D30 and 10D is almost $1000. All I’m trying to say is, it is the lens that matters more than the body, instead of spending your money on an expensive body like the 10D and then compromising your pictures with a cheap lens why not get a professional lens like the L series and a cheap D30? And I’m not "knocking" the 75-300 it is a perfectly good lens, which I’ll probably use when I get a dSLR.

Adam, ask anybody who has had a cheap lens such as the 75-300 and moved onto a professional lens such as the 100-400L and tell me which one they prefer.

[mikecweb]

Hmmmmmm decisions decisions. Thanks guys for your input.
Here is my thinking. I definetly think Grant's point is valid with the more expensive lenses. But I'm not gonna go backwards as far as a D30 or D60. I know they still produce amazing pictures its just I will want something more in short order and that means more money with lil resale. I can get the 300D for about $800 and the 10D for about $1200. Right now I'm looking at the 75 -300 IS USM and the 100-400L. Don't worry bout me and the short side. I was never in to that stuff.

The thing that is frustrating is...I'm a full time flight student at riddle. I spent over 3500 in 6 days one time this summer. And that wasn't even half of what I spent. But thats "school and your career" as the rents say so justifying over 2000 on a camera will take alot to convince me.

[mikecweb]

Whats the huge difference between the:
75-300 EF IS USM
and
75-300 EF USM III

EDIT: What are your guys recommendations on this. How useful is that IS.