New camera soon

[BlackRider]

I am really happy with my dad's Rebel XT... but I'm starting to feel guilty for basically stealing it. Thanks to all of your help, I've found out that my bad pictures were not the camera's fault... and so you've really helped me get great pictures.

I don't have much money, so another 350D or maybe 400D would work... but I'm always thinking bigger. Most of my funding will come from the sale of my secondary vehicle... a '91 MR2 worth ~$2-3000.
Now the new 1Ds is really appealing... but $9000 for 21MP is way beyond me. The 1D is tempting... quite tempting... but $4500 seems to be the normal price for that. I could wait until November when the 1Ds comes out and see how much the price drops, or settle for a 40D.

I still have to go to the camera shop and play with the cameras... but pending a lottery win, price will be the deciding factor and the 40D has a 99% chance of beating out the 1D. Plus, since the 40D is only $1200... I'll get some extra $$$ for a decent lense or two!

Now, since the lenses are going back to dad with the camera, I am open to suggestions of other cameras. So you guys are more than welcome to throw in your Nikon experiences. My only experience w/ Nikons is that I played with a D80 for a whole 30 seconds once........

[XMEN Gambit]

On switching to another brand, you got the first one right - lenses go with. If you got another Canon, you and your dad could borrow each other's lenses, or you'd have a backup available in an emergency (like if you gotta ship it off for service).

You may or may not recall that I made my 20d purchase decision based on a recommendation here (from TxCowboy) that they were much better series overall then the Rebels, and I've been happy with it.

The new 40D is really impressive. A lot of people are upgrading from their 20d or 30d models, so you could find some good deals on these older cameras. There are enough new features in the 40d vs the 30d though that the cost difference would have to be pretty steep for me to consider. The 40d addresses a lot of the things that some of the Nikon proponents liked on the Nikon over the Canon, such as focusing speed, etc. The big reason I find a lot of people choose Nikon seems to be ergonomics. Actually go use a Nikon for a while if you want (maybe rent it) and see, but I don't see a big reason to switch from what you're used to at this point.

Conversely, there's not a huge reason to stay, either. You might also consider something like the Olympus series of DSLRs. They have very fine optics, and the 4/3 system they use makes their equivalent lenses smaller, but the tradeoff is an increased sensitivity to noise due to the smaller sensor.

[BlackRider]

OK, I managed to get hold of a 40D for today and tomorrow... and I must say I am in love! The new 3" display is great for reviewing images, but otherwise it's a 'meh'. 6.5 fps is awsome! The viewfinder is wolds apart from the Rebel..... larger, brighter, AND more informative. With the 350D I'd always forget what ISO I was on and now that's visible inside the viewfinder. Really, my only complaint about the viewfinder is that it is so large that I cannot take in the image and the shot settings at the same time... I actually have to look around in the viewfinder!

It's in the car right now, but it came with (I think) Canon's 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lense... which is the first lense I've ever used w/ an image stabilizer... I haven't played with it much, so I have to do some testing as I really want Canon's 70-200mm f/2.8 lense, but the IS version is $600 more. ATM, I have my doubts as to whether or not IS is worth the extra $600... but the AF on that lense is SO VERY FAST!!!! (Compared to my dad's 75-300 which takes more than a second from near to infinity... this thing was ~0.2s, though I'm not very good at estimating short periods of time.)

Also, I bought... I forget what he called it... the plastic magic or something... but it's an $80 50mm f/1.8 lense. It's great for portraits and when I head off to the Columbus Zoo tomorrow we'll see how good it is for low-light and also for making cages disappear. I think I have a comparison between the 28-135 and this 50....... crap, still on the flash card in the camera. I'll post some comparisons between this $80 lense and the $600 28-135 sometime this weekend.

Hrmmm... well that's about all I can think of, but I think I'll also get some comparison shots between the 350D and the 40D using identical lenses.

Oh yeah... I also got to play w/ a 1D mkIII at the local camera shop. It was lighter than I expected, but not something I'd want to haul around on my typical 8 hour shoot.

Oh, in final news, I am looking into free-lance photography for a local paper: The Lantern.

[XMEN Gambit]

ATM, I have my doubts as to whether or not IS is worth the extra $600... but the AF on that lense is SO VERY FAST!!!!

Ah, I see you have encountered the USM (ultrasonic motor) focusing system. Most people love it. I've not had a chance to try one myself. I haven't tried an IS yet either. However, I do have the 50mm f/1.8 prime you refer to. Gotta be the best deal on an EF lens out there. My own experience doesn't show stellar image quality, but far far ahead of the 18-55 kit lens. And the problems could just be my own technique. I got it because I wanted a fast lens for low light situations, for which it's very good. I've considered upgrading to the f/1.4 version, but can't justify it.

My best lens is a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Cost me about $300 used and sure worth every penny. Worst thing I can say about it is it's not an L. Oh, and focus speed isn't as fast as a USM. I absolutely love it!

[BlackRider]

ok, I guessed wrong... it came with the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. (but it does say 28-135 equivilant...)

and I am finding that I really love that 50mm f/1.8! It can make quite a busy background practically disappear. Though I've found that even shooting 2-3 stops faster, I still can't really get away with handholding the camera in low light situations. Though the nocturnal house as the Columbus Zoo is so dark that you can hardly see the animals with the naked eye. I mean, the fastest shot I got was 1/30 f/1.8! Most were nearly 1s!

But I'm looking into the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM plus maybe the 2.0x tele-conv. (Unless I can scrounge enough for the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6), because even with a 1.6x crop factor 300mm still isn't enough... now 400mm + 2.0x tele-conv = YAY!

Maybe I should just get a job at the camera shop. :-S

...also, expect a review tomorrow of the 350D vs 40D

[XMEN Gambit]

Good fast lens does NOT equal night vision. You'll have trouble handholding in really dark areas no matter what. Having said that, don't be afraid to bump the ISO up on a Canon if you need the extra stops. Usually even at max the noise is tolerable, as long as it's exposed properly.

[BlackRider]

hehe, true... but I didn't have the space to setup the tripod... so, handheld it was.

anyway, some comparison images between the two cameras:

first notes, both images taken w/ same lense, same ISO, auto WB, and color, saturation, sharpness, etc are all set to the neutral position and all crops frop the 40D are ~12.5% larger linearly than the 350D so I could cut the same frame.

first set... DK's mustang, same exposure for both cameras:
350D

40D


This shot was in the shade, same settings except meters came up with different exposures. both cameras at 1600 ISO speed and fast shutter speed for lots of noise
350D

40D

40D w/ high ISO noise reduction ON


any other tests I should try or anything I should change in these tests?
*edit*
ohhh... my noise test is very much flawed! I'll redo that test with fixed lighting and identical exposure.


hrmm... identical exposures this time 5" f/36:
350D

40D

[XMENPorsche]

I've got to chime in on this, but it will have to wait....

In the meantime, read up on the Nikon D300. I'll probably be moving up to the D3 next year, but the D300 looks like a very sweet body. Also, the most recent issue of Popular Photography magazine does a comparison of the 40D, D300, and A700 (Sony). Understand that the production models of the D300 will not be out until next month but all of the press on the pre-production models looks very impressive.

As for the glass, arguably the Nikkor glass is better than the Canon L glass.

[BlackRider]

I've been falling in love with the 40D. I've been getting to use one when shooting for the paper, and when combined w/ that 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM... it's like a dream! AF feels near instant, and the burst brings a smile to my face everytime I press the shutter. It's supposed to be heavy, and so is the lense... but it doesn't bother me one bit to handhold for 90mins of a soccer game. (combined, it's nearly a 5lb package)

[XMENPorsche]

Take a look at this article: http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4625/th ... -2008.html. It's a comparison of the Canon 40D and the Nikon D300. Good info in there. Of course, the point is moot if you've made up your mind to stay with Canon. Nothing wrong with that, but I was under the impression that you were open to other systems.

I think you'll be satisfied with whatever you choose. Remember - the camera body is only a tool. YOU, as the artist, are responsible for bringing your vision to life.