Topic: Mr. mccabe what camera did you use to get this shot of Warren Haynes from NYE?

[stirinthesauce]

It's an ef lens.  Will work on full frame or crop sensors.  I use mine on both my 20d and rebel xt (both a 1.6x crop).  Former owner used it on his 5d (full frame sensor).  ef-s lenses will only work on your crop sensor bodies, the ef will work on both.

I would like an L lens in this focal range to compliment my 70-200Lf2.8, but, IQ is there on the sigma so I can't justify shelling out more money.  That sigma lens pretty much stays on my body.  I sell alot of prints, mainly landscapes, and even on a crop sensor, at 24mm, it's wide enough for alot of situations.  If I need wider, I've got 12-24 atx.  But what's great, after a day of shooting outdoors, I can walk in the club and not change a lens.  I too shoot alot in the magic hour of the day, alot of it is of area landmarks where I need the low light capabilities without a flash and the f2.8 really comes in handy.  I also shoot kids, and fast glass is a plus there.  It's just easier if I have faster glass, I don't have to change lenses quite as often or haul around as much glass.  3 lenses in my bag is heavy enough.

Don't get me wrong, i still lust after more glass.  It's like mics, I want more, but what I have is suitable for all situations...

I do so want a 5d though 

[bhtoque]

If your buying a zoom walk around and want it to be multi purpose, concert and low light (early morning), get an f2.8 zoom.  You'll spend around a grand for a canon 24-70f2.8.  Another option, for less than half the price is a sigma 24-70 f2.8 ex dg.  Damn fine IQ.  Sharp.  The auto focus is a bit slow and noisy, but, for around 4 bills, definitly worth it.

so then does it matter too much which body the lens goes on, as far as the XTI or the pricey D40 Canon?

The 40D is much cleaner at high ISO.

With the same lens and lighting you will get a crisper, less speckled shot than with the xti.

I bought a rebel without knowing any better and now I wish I dropped the extra $$ for the D

JAson

[stirinthesauce]

If your buying a zoom walk around and want it to be multi purpose, concert and low light (early morning), get an f2.8 zoom.  You'll spend around a grand for a canon 24-70f2.8.  Another option, for less than half the price is a sigma 24-70 f2.8 ex dg.  Damn fine IQ.  Sharp.  The auto focus is a bit slow and noisy, but, for around 4 bills, definitly worth it.

so then does it matter too much which body the lens goes on, as far as the XTI or the pricey D40 Canon?

The 40D is much cleaner at high ISO.

With the same lens and lighting you will get a crisper, less speckled shot than with the xti.

I bought a rebel without knowing any better and now I wish I dropped the extra $$ for the D

JAson

Or get a used 30d.  Won't hit your wallet as hard.  Some say less noise than the new 40d.  I have no experience however other than reading reviews on fredmiranda and dgrin.  I could be off base.  The 40d does have some more features but both are very capable cameras.

Personally, the xt's and the xti's just don't feel as solid, plastic body.  I still use the xt from time to time.  I just like something a little more robust and solid.  Again, this is personal preference.

[phanophish]

Like I said a few hundred in budget swings things.  If the hypothetical budget is $1200.  Then I'd definetely go for the Sigma 2.8 as a walk around lens as it is also a good concert lens.  I have one and agree that it is my most used lens.  It's just with the slightly tighter budget it was probably too much to stick with a D Series Canon or on of the hundred series Nikons and I really think that is a better way to go for a body.  Others have mentioned the reasons why and I fully agree.  Low light performance and build quality are superior to the XT series. 

[bluntforcetrauma]

it appears that most would not go the way of the xti? but go with the 40d.  But again its some serious upgrade cash wise.

What about the xti body with The canon 70-200L IS f2.8 about 1800.00 new?

its like 600 bucks or so from a xti to a 40d.

If i go with a great lens and the xti body--am i doing bad?  Can i upgrade to the 40d or something else in the future?

[stirinthesauce]

it appears that most would not go the way of the xti? but go with the 40d.  But again its some serious upgrade cash wise.

What about the xti body with The canon 70-200L IS f2.8 about 1800.00 new?

its like 600 bucks or so from a xti to a 40d.

If i go with a great lens and the xti body--am i doing bad?  Can i upgrade to the 40d or something else in the future?

That canon lens is about 1500, so even with an xti, your pushing 2000+.  Used for lens and xti and you can possibly hit that budget of yours.  Upgrades are very feasible.  Your gonna do that anyways    Just like anything else, you'll want to change things up, move on up.

Quality backs and lenses are expensive.  Check your wallet at the door.

[bluntforcetrauma]

it appears that most would not go the way of the xti? but go with the 40d.  But again its some serious upgrade cash wise.

What about the xti body with The canon 70-200L IS f2.8 about 1800.00 new?

its like 600 bucks or so from a xti to a 40d.

If i go with a great lens and the xti body--am i doing bad?  Can i upgrade to the 40d or something else in the future?

That canon lens is about 1500, so even with an xti, your pushing 2000+.  Used for lens and xti and you can possibly hit that budget of yours.  Upgrades are very feasible.  Your gonna do that anyways    Just like anything else, you'll want to change things up, move on up.

Quality backs and lenses are expensive.  Check your wallet at the door.

yeah I will always want to upgrade, i just thought for know i could go with the xti and the 70-200L lens i still would get great pictures without going to the 40D or something more expensive right now.  Do you think I will have quality shots with the xti and the 70-200L lens?  I can swing that fee, but adding the 40d body to that lens is just a bit much for the wallet for right now.  I just dont want to get something i would regret.

[stirinthesauce]

it appears that most would not go the way of the xti? but go with the 40d.  But again its some serious upgrade cash wise.

What about the xti body with The canon 70-200L IS f2.8 about 1800.00 new?

its like 600 bucks or so from a xti to a 40d.

If i go with a great lens and the xti body--am i doing bad?  Can i upgrade to the 40d or something else in the future?

That canon lens is about 1500, so even with an xti, your pushing 2000+.  Used for lens and xti and you can possibly hit that budget of yours.  Upgrades are very feasible.  Your gonna do that anyways    Just like anything else, you'll want to change things up, move on up.

Quality backs and lenses are expensive.  Check your wallet at the door.

yeah I will always want to upgrade, i just thought for know i could go with the xti and the 70-200L lens i still would get great pictures without going to the 40D or something more expensive right now.  Do you think I will have quality shots with the xti and the 70-200L lens?  I can swing that fee, but adding the 40d body to that lens is just a bit much for the wallet for right now.  I just dont want to get something i would regret.

The 70-200L f2.8 is fucking sharp!  The xti will also be more than adequate.  The biggest obstacle is the photographer.  Practice practice and practice.  Great gear can yield sub par results, mediocore gear can yield great results in the hands of someone who know what they are doing.  Great gear and great photographers yield exceptional results. 

Your biggest advantage will always be your glass.  L lens glass is top notch and yields fantastic results when used properly. 

[bhtoque]

it appears that most would not go the way of the xti? but go with the 40d.  But again its some serious upgrade cash wise.

What about the xti body with The canon 70-200L IS f2.8 about 1800.00 new?

its like 600 bucks or so from a xti to a 40d.

If i go with a great lens and the xti body--am i doing bad?  Can i upgrade to the 40d or something else in the future?

That canon lens is about 1500, so even with an xti, your pushing 2000+.  Used for lens and xti and you can possibly hit that budget of yours.  Upgrades are very feasible.  Your gonna do that anyways    Just like anything else, you'll want to change things up, move on up.

Quality backs and lenses are expensive.  Check your wallet at the door.

yeah I will always want to upgrade, i just thought for know i could go with the xti and the 70-200L lens i still would get great pictures without going to the 40D or something more expensive right now.  Do you think I will have quality shots with the xti and the 70-200L lens?  I can swing that fee, but adding the 40d body to that lens is just a bit much for the wallet for right now.  I just dont want to get something i would regret.

Fairly sure there is a non-IS or non-L version of that lense that is a few hundred cheaper

Take a look at my flickr page. Those shots are all from a rebel xt and good lenses, but nothing close to the 2.8L
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bhtoque
JAson

If you plan to shoot in smaller rooms where you will be able to get close, skip the big zoom for a 40d and just get the 85 1.8

Tamron makes a 28-105 2.8 that you can find used for a couple hundred. It's less popular because it is heavy, but it works well.

I'd start with the best camera you can, and add lenses as you go. Think of it like running schoeps into a deck or having a preamp and a/d converter.

JAson

[phanophish]

Look for a refurbished/used 30D, it's a better camera than an XTi and I've seen them around $600 refurbished.  And as others have said the 70-200/2.8 is the ultimate concert glass, but you would blow your entire budget just on the lens, I'd suggest getting started with a basic setup and upgrade to the big glass later.

[stirinthesauce]

^^

I concur on the 30d used.  $600

Used 70-200L f2.8 (non IS) ~$1000
New 50mmf1.8 $70

Still have a hundred bucks leftover for a camera bag and UV filter.  Budget of $1800 met.

Check fredmiranda.com and dgrin.com.  The 30d and the 70-200 will pop up every few days.  Another option for the lens is buying a grey market lens.  Can be a chance, but not through BHPhoto since they warranty everthing for a year anyways.  Saves you about $100 off new price. 

[Brian Skalinder]

I love watching these types of threads, both for taping gear and photo gear.  The original stated budget was ~$1,000.  Now we're up to meeting a budget of $1,800.    I, too, love playing with other people's money. 

[phanophish]

I love watching these types of threads, both for taping gear and photo gear.  The original stated budget was ~$1,000.  Now we're up to meeting a budget of $1,800.    I, too, love playing with other people's money. 

Hi, my name is also Brian and I'm a gear slut.

And yes we are very good at spending money, both ours and other peoples.

[stirinthesauce]

 

[bhtoque]

After a bunch of research, I'm thinking of passing on the canon 70-200 2.8L and getting the Sigma 70-200 2.8 ex DG APO HSM (769.00 for the MKII version) or the Tamron SP AF 70-200 2.8 DI LD Macro (699.00 but not out yet)

with the huge savings I can pick up the 1.4x ring and another lens or a 2nd body.

JAson