What do you reckon - Page 2 - Saxperience

mattchewone · 17th March 2009, 21:31

Lenses to be recommended that are not ridiculous prices. I like a bit of motorsport ish stuff, also portrait's. Occassionally scenery/landscape.

Sorry Ryan i couldnt remember which one he had.

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:33

70-200 is the most universal lens for portrait/sports and alot of other stuff imo. (as you dont have money to buy a 400mm prime and an 85L)

landscape is wide angles n shit yo

jaybiss · 17th March 2009, 21:35

how much you got to spend matt?

i am looking at the canon 70-200mm f4 but there is also the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 for slightly more cash

mattchewone · 17th March 2009, 21:38

Cheers i really like that lens i loved using Sayers!

Im taking it all on board at the moment as im still deciding on what to do.

Would it not be a slightly better idea to, upgrade body, then in say a few months or so upgrade to new glass. That way ill have a bigger and slightly more capable body and new shiny glass?

The only reason is if i dont do the exchange soon ill have to sell my body and purchase the 40D at full price. Where as if it gets done soon ill only be paying a smaller amount.

*EDIT* - Jay not really got much if anything atm im just thinking the only reason im thinking now is this deal is fairly good oppurtunity to get it cheap(ish) rather than splash on £400-£500 (more than what i would of used to upgrade body) on new L glass and then in 6-12 months pay £600-£800 on 40D.

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaybiss

how much you got to spend matt?

i am looking at the canon 70-200mm f4 but there is also the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 for slightly more cash

ive compared the two, and id defo be going for the sigma as its a 2.8, 200mm @ 2.8 kicks ass

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:41

why do you need to upgrade the body? Yours has iso, multipoint focus points, ai servo etc etc....

The body will be outdated soon anyway as i said. You will buy the body, realise the photos are the same quality as with the 400D get pissed off and down and want to sell it imo.

Glass is the key as everyone keeps saying! its not like you are upgrading from a cropped sensor to a FF, then thats a different story as you would be going FF for a reason.

The sigma 2.8 70-200 is also a cracking lens for sure (no IS mind) dave G has one on ssc, and his photos I wouldnt exactly say are shit (even when he was on the outdated 20D).

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattchewone

Cheers i really like that lens i loved using Sayers!

Im taking it all on board at the moment as im still deciding on what to do.

Would it not be a slightly better idea to, upgrade body, then in say a few months or so upgrade to new glass. That way ill have a bigger and slightly more capable body and new shiny glass?

The only reason is if i dont do the exchange soon ill have to sell my body and purchase the 40D at full price. Where as if it gets done soon ill only be paying a smaller amount.

ok unless you are a total pixel prick, then as long as the image is in focus and not motion blurred your winning, a new lens will get you the shots you want, ok mabe a little noise but you can fix sooo much on photoshop these days.

getting a better body will in no way improve your pictures, its simple.

jaybiss · 17th March 2009, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by don55

ive compared the two, and id defo be going for the sigma as its a 2.8, 200mm @ 2.8 kicks ass

i have been speaking to sayer about this and hes saying go canon

anyone else have any input on the two options? would be good to get a variety of opinions.

mattchewone · 17th March 2009, 21:43

So i should never need to upgrade the body at all then?

Why is it people buy the xxD's and not the xxxD's then? If the older ones are just as good and cheaper why do people buy the newer ones?

Man its a confusing market!

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by don55

ive compared the two, and id defo be going for the sigma as its a 2.8, 200mm @ 2.8 kicks ass

Even without the IS its a cracking lens.

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaybiss

i have been speaking to sayer about this and hes saying go canon

anyone else have any input on the two options? would be good to get a variety of opinions.

check this site jay http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...mp=0&APIComp=2

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattchewone

So i should never need to upgrade the body at all then?

Why is it people buy the xxD's and not the xxxD's then? If the older ones are just as good and cheaper why do people buy the newer ones?

Man its a confusing market!

They buy the newer ones because they want to buy new (warranty etc... or are told by someone that the newest is 10000x better than anything else).

If the body works keep it, thats why I still have a 30D, I earn money from shooting, but the shots I get with the 30D my clients are really happy with, would they be happyer with shots on a 50D that id spent £800 on. I very much doubt it.

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

Even without the IS its a cracking lens.

yer and its still cheaper than the F4L, the IS F4Lis like £800 right ?

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:49

only reason i got a 30d was i found one cheap, on ebay with 10 mins left at 7am on a tuesday morning, put in a £1 over bid and won the damn thing lol, i had no plans to buy a new one really.

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by don55

yer and its still cheaper than the F4L, the IS F4Lis like £800 right ?

yes, although prob more expensive now due to the shit £ rate atm.

My 70-200 2.8 IS L has gone up about £200 iirc in the last few months. The sigma 120-300 has shot through the roof.

mattchewone · 17th March 2009, 21:51

So just wait months till i can afford new glass then.

Was just looking forward to having something nice and new. And a larger body.

Maybe one day.

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:53

is it worth the extra money though thats what you have to ask.

Yours works, and isnt going to cost you anything £££ and should really last a hell of alot longer. Its not that outdated, its not like its a 300D over a 50D imo, in a few years time when yours is well out of date then its a good time to upgrade imo (once you have decent glass to)

Ryan^p · 17th March 2009, 21:55

espec when look at the price of a new 40D without your trade in?

think about the money you ARE loosing!

If you wanted twin bodies then buy one, but dont trade yours in and then pay ontop what could nearly get a new one outright.

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod576.html

don55 · 17th March 2009, 21:56

a larger body is nice, alot. as i said get a 30d and sell the 400d, you will prob get an even exhange, i did and ive never looked back.

also waht do you want to shoot, as a £500 lens for motorsport is alot if you only shoot it once in a while.

i have a tamron 17-50mm 2.8, amazing lens, does 80% of my work, then i have a canon 55-250mm IS which is a great lens for the money, and of course the compulsory nifty 50mm 1.8

im totaly happy with what i have, i did alot of research and more importantly i listend to people when they told me stuf, like the 17-85mm IS.

until i find a limit to my gear, like mabe shooting motorsport, which i have never even attempted lol, then mabe ill think about a new glass, but nor now my wide anlge tamron is kick ass for all my needs.

mattchewone · 17th March 2009, 21:59

Thats body only Ryan.

It would be this one - http://www.pcworld.co.uk:80/martprd/...&category_oid=

Minus what i paid for mine which i think was roughly £460-£480 i think. Somethink like that.

Yer i know there isnt much wrong or anything wrong just was something that i thought about thats all.