Canon 40D

[RdRdrFan]

I've decided to take the leap and buy an SLR. I quickly decided to go with Canon since my brother and my brother-in-law both shoot Canon and have some good glass. After much online research I think I have decided to go with the 40D.

Can those of you who have much more knowledge on the various Canon SLR's tell me if there is a better option out there for a first time SLR guy? I think I would rather buy a slightly better body that I won't "outgrow" in a year or two than undergun and have to upgrade soon.

Tell me what you think guys.

Also, If you had to choose 2 (or more if needed) lenses that would cover the majority of situations, what would you go with? Total budget (camera body, lenses....everything) is approximately $2,500 (give or take). I would obviously love to save some cash but I can justify coming up with a little bit more if there is something that I really "need"

[AtTheWall]

I can't offer any insite to the 40D but it will be my next upgrade. From a features front, it's a serious camera and I know you will be extremely happy with it.

I know Canon will release a 12.x MP 50D here soon but I will be delightfully happy with a 10 mp 40D. Just the cycle speed alone justifies the upgrade for me and I have too much invested in CF cards to lean else where for memory.

[Casey]

I don't know what your experience level is or what you consider outgrowing, but I believe you'd be fine with the Rebel line (XSi $800) for at least a couple of years...and save cash while you learn. This is if you're new to the whole SLR approach to photography. Better yet, the 30D would be a good choice and it will cost you the same as the Rebel XSi, right now.

If I were doing your shopping, given your budget, I'd get the body only and tack on the following:

I would suggest you get the 70-200 F4L ($560) and possibly the 17-55 f2.8 IS ($960). That leaves you a grand which will buy you the 40D or the Rebel XSi.

You'll need memory cards and at least another battery. Get the battery at www.sterlingtek.com and you'll save a bundle. I use these batteries and they're every bit as good as the Canons. I would suggest multiple smaller (2 gig) compact flash cards over a single gigantic card...all your eggs in one basket theory.

If you are new, start researching. Read. Get books on exposure and anything else you can to help you understand what photography is all about.

If you buy a DSLR camera, and never take it off the "Auto" setting, I am of the opinion you bought too much camera.

[Russell Graves]

I don't know what your experience level is or what you consider outgrowing, but I believe you'd be fine with the Rebel line (XSi $800) for at least a couple of years...and save cash while you learn. This is if you're new to the whole SLR approach to photography. Better yet, the 30D would be a good choice and it will cost you the same as the Rebel XSi, right now.

If I were doing your shopping, given your budget, I'd get the body only and tack on the following:

I would suggest you get the 70-200 F4L ($560) and possibly the 17-55 f2.8 IS ($960). That leaves you a grand which will buy you the 40D or the Rebel XSi.

You'll need memory cards and at least another battery. Get the battery at www.sterlingtek.com and you'll save a bundle. I use these batteries and they're every bit as good as the Canons. I would suggest multiple smaller (2 gig) compact flash cards over a single gigantic card...all your eggs in one basket theory.

If you are new, start researching. Read. Get books on exposure and anything else you can to help you understand what photography is all about.

If you buy a DSLR camera, and never take it off the "Auto" setting, I am of the opinion you bought too much camera.

Well said.

[AtTheWall]

I would also recommend, following Casey's excellent recommendation, a good tripod and a remote control unit.

Remote camera shutter operation. You will find there will be times you want to remotely fire your shutter without touching a thing. The Canon 40D doesn't support infrared wireless remote (like the Rebel line) but there is a wireless remote solution for the higher end Canon DSLRs bodies (a pain of sorts but that is how it is). This device is the Canon Timer Remote Controller TC-80N3. I mention this simply because in time you will want to remotely fire your shutter to capture night shots, birds at a feeder, family pics (shot where you don't have to run back and forth using the timer) as well as shooting macro shots (up close to bugs and things) where holding the camera may blow the resolution. Low light or very close photography requires a solid and still camera so you don't have any motion distortion.

Tripods: You will probably have a couple of them. One ultra-light cheapo model for hiking and kicking around (weight savings) and then a beefier model for more steady and serious shots. I break the cheapo's but they serve a purpose for low light shots in a very small form factor (easy to pack) when I'm cruising lightweight and need a solid quick setup for inside shooting. I use a beefier tripod (always in my truck) for shots that require more setup time and a heavy solid foundation.

[Atfulldraw]

I will spend a little more of your money and recommend the 70-200 f2.8 instead of the 4.0

Casey's other recommendations are spot on, in my opinion.

That said, don't forget a good flash unit and a mono/tripod unit.

I'm thinking that a little patience and good shopping will find you with the 40d for a good price in the near future.

[Casey]

That said, don't forget a good flash unit

I meant to say something about an external flash. If you do family stuff or anything indoors with your camera (or outdoors) get an external flash. I use mine a LOT!

[RdRdrFan]

Is it worth the extra money to go with the Image Stabilization model on the 70-200?

If I were to go with the 4.0 then the price would go from $560 to $1,025.
If I were to go with the 2.8 then the price would go from $1,190 to $1,574.

It isn't that big of a difference on the F/2.8L ($384) but it is a little bit more on the F/4.0L ($465).

Is it worth the cash?

[Atfulldraw]

Is it worth the extra money to go with the Image Stabilization model on the 70-200?

If I were to go with the 4.0 then the price would go from $560 to $1,025.
If I were to go with the 2.8 then the price would go from $1,190 to $1,574.

It isn't that big of a difference on the F/2.8L ($384) but it is a little bit more on the F/4.0L ($465).

Is it worth the cash?

I've read lots of reviews that claim the one without the IS is actually sharper.

Course, my hero (CM) bought the big daddy, so peer pressure will likely drag me into the IS model.

You can get a great tripod for $400 - the trick is to use it.

[Gerald S]

I agree with all here.

I bought the 2.8 NON IS version and love it. After using some lenses with IS, I just felt they lacked the sharpness as Rod mentioned. It hasn't handicapped me yet not having the IS. Also, I had the 70-200 F4 previously, and I feel the image quality was better out of that lens than the 2.8

[Bluesman]

I've read lots of reviews that claim the one without the IS is actually sharper.

I don't get (all) sharp images with the camera tripod mounted and the IS on. Turned it off and all seems fine.
Most poor images with the IS on are moving targets like birds. I think I know why the lens does this but the instructions say to turn it off when on the tripod anyway. So be it.

[Shane]

So, in other words.....you're dreaming if you think you are only going to spend $2,500 before you're done.

[Casey]

Is it worth the extra money to go with the Image Stabilization model on the 70-200?

If I were to go with the 4.0 then the price would go from $560 to $1,025.
If I were to go with the 2.8 then the price would go from $1,190 to $1,574.

It isn't that big of a difference on the F/2.8L ($384) but it is a little bit more on the F/4.0L ($465).

Is it worth the cash?

Honestly, you have a HUGE budget for a beginner. I believe without a doubt that if you get what I listed, you will be very happy...if you'll learn to use it. If you want to step up your game in a couple of years because you've gotten over the learning curve, moved from the green auto setting to Av or Tv or heaven forbid, M and you think you need the higher end stuff..get after it. I sold my 70-200 F4L for 80% of what I paid for it after using it for 3 years. The glass I suggested will hold it's value and your next step won't be so painful. Unless you move away from the XXD or Rebel line, you'll never part with the 17-55 f2.8 IS.

If you spend a ton and don't learn your gear inside and out, you're going to be disappointed in your images. If you don't know how to use the F4 non-IS the f2.8 IS is not going to help you.

B a b y S t e p s !!


I want to add....I'm not sure where you are, but you might entertain figuring out a way to try other gear. Maybe someone you know nearby, one of us, whatever. Get a base setup, learn to use it and then test out other things. Lens rentals are a great way to try before you buy. You can go to www.rentglass.com www.lensprotogo.com or www.lensrentals.com and take down a lens or other piece of equipment for a week. You'll get a great idea this way for what you might think would suit you. I'm watching out my window right now for the Fedex dude to bring me the 85mm f1.2L I rented for a week. I'm going to try it out at a wedding I'm shooting this weekend and set up to grab some portraits of my kids while I have it. I won't ever buy that lens, I don't think, but I can enjoy it a week at a time if I want.

The best thing you can do is ask questions. This is a great place to start with folks that should be able to help you out. I'll help you any time or any way I can.

[Casey]

I don't get (all) sharp images with the camera tripod mounted and the IS on. Turned it off and all seems fine.
Most poor images with the IS on are moving targets like birds. I think I know why the lens does this but the instructions say to turn it off when on the tripod anyway. So be it.

IS is supposed to be off for tripod use. I think some of the newer stuff is capable of shutting itself off after detecting no camera shake, but I'm not certain. IS does nothing for a moving subject.

[AtTheWall]

IS does nothing for a moving subject.

But a good loud buck grunt might make em stop!