Canon EOS 20D

[Jeff Snyder]

Just a quick comment...

Many people will spend much more on lenses than on the camera. Why, you may ask? Because, given the pace of digital photography advancement, chances are you will want another, better, faster camera in 3-4 years. Lenses, on the other hand, can last a long time and can provide just as much difference as actual cameras. For example, a 10D with a nice L lens may take sharper, nicer shots than a 20D (or 1Ds) with a bad lens. If you invest in lenses now, it'll probably last you longer than the same investment (in terms of $) in a camera.

EDITED to clear up some possible confusion as addressed in Mike H's post below...

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Many people will spend much more on lenses than on the camera. Why?

If you invest in lenses now, it'll probably last you longer than the same investment (in terms of $) in a camera.

Are you sure you asked this right? Anyway...yeah there will always be more and more megapixels for your lense to take advantage of down the road. If you have a decent cam and no nice glass for it I'd surely be more concerned about the glass before worrying about the cam.

 

[Patrick Kerrin]

For one this lense is VERY soft wide open. That is sort of important as chasing doesn't always allow that much time to tripod and stop it down. Wide open has two meanings....focal length and your aperature. F8 is an all around good one to get the most out of the lense(or so I've read)...and yeah it will depend on the lense. That and simply having you lense at full wide angle doesn't help matters, but with the mentioned 1.6 magnification you pretty much have to if you want the whole storm. Mine is at 18mm 99% of the time.

As I can't even afford the Dreble right now, I am a bit distressed to hear of your difficulties with the kit lens. I am aware of the limitations of the kit lens, and would be interested to know if, for low light shots, you have tried raising the ISO (even up to 1600 if needed), shooting near F8 in RAW, and removing the (already low) noise/tweaking the white balance later? That should maximize your sharpness at 18mm.

To me, the notion of leveraging the ISO seems appealing (in theory).

 

[Greg Campbell]

FYI, here's a short EF-S article I stumbled upon.
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs/e...efs_lenses.html

-Greg

 

[David Wolfson]

I'm still learning to use the 10D to its full potential. It's a heck of a camera! I shoot Canon EOS and have enough invested in glass to not want rush to stock up on a new lens design that is specific to 1.6x factor digital. I'm glad they've changed the lens design because I can put aside any desire I might have for the latest-and-greatest 20D.

The 100mm 1:1 macro for example is a fantastic lens. Maybe Canon will come out with a similar S macro someday, but then again maybe not.

 

[Steve Burre]

Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy


Strapped for cash!
----------------------------
17-40mm f/4 $700
50mm f/1.8 $60 (EXCELLENT BARGAIN!)
70-200mm f/4 $550


Aaron

That's the exact setup I have for my 10D (except I have the 50mm 1.4). The L glass is great...won't be considering the 20D anytime soon given the investment I put in this past year.

 

[Andrew Pastore]

I will always be a film fan. You cannot beat the saturation of slide films!!
Still, The 20 promises to be a great camera. One thing that I don't like about digital is the 1.6 magnifacation factor. Maybe someday I can afford the 1D with a 1.3 factor!!!

 

[Greg Campbell]

Canon is offering some serious rebates on the Drebel, and many lenses.

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/rebates/

-Greg

 

[Chris Gullikson]

Still, The 20 promises to be a great camera. One thing that I don't like about digital is the 1.6 magnifacation factor. Maybe someday I can afford the 1D with a 1.3 factor!!!

My big hangup before I bought a Digital Rebel was the 1.6 zoom factor. The 18-55 kit lens was not wide enough for my liking so I picked up a 15mm 2.8 Sigma fisheye after seeing promising reviews about it. This is now on of my favorite lenes for storm stucture. It is very easy to defish, but not absolutley required since the 1.6 zoom takes away much of the fisheye look. Price is not too bad either.

Defished:
http://www.f5hunter.com/6-10-04/redcloud.jpg

Not defished:
http://www.f5hunter.com/5-24-04/slides/IMG_3536.html
(good example of horizon curvature that can easily be fixed by defishing)

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

What defishing software do you use?

Aaron

 

[Chris Gullikson]

What defishing software do you use?

I use The Panorama Tools plug-in with Adobe PS.
Learn all about it hear:
http://www.razziphoto.com/archives/000023.php

 

[fplowman]

got a settlement buying the 20d.. ok so I tool back through these old posts. I find the info here .. I wanted to re clarify.. 17 - 40 or 16 - 35 lense for the 20d??

Aaron?? Mike?? Greg?? Anyone?

Also I guess i need the 70 - 200mm

and the 50mm??? For what?

Please help.. Im trying to figure out wht the hell i need..

More money than experience or sense.. lol

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

What do you want to shoot? Only you can answer the what lenses do I need question.

Aaron

 

[fplowman]

Im just looking for a nice lense package..

Just chatted with Mark grant.. he gave me some insight..

Im wanting to shoot some storm bases etc.. I know there was soem speculation rather the 17-40 and 16-35 which one was best for the 20d.

Im pretty sure the 70 - 200 is one i need for tighter work..

What would I use the 50mm for in your other post for lenses Aaron?

 

[Greg Campbell]

Hi, Fred How much $$$ do you have to blow?

Apart from the one on my P/S digicam, I don't own a single AF lens; I'd feel silly making a specific reccomendation.

Just for grins, let me offer an alternative to B&H.

Head down to the local mom-n-pop camera store. Forget Ritz, Best Buy, and the other chains - the help is clueless and interested only in shovelling merchandise and extended 'service' contracts. Try a number of their lenses. Look at (IMO) the Canon, Tokina AT-X line, and maybe some of the high end Tamron glass. Put the camea on a tripod and take pictures, then go back home and compare the results. Return and buy at least one lens from these peeps. Negotiate a bit, but don't grind them into the dirt. Yea, you'll spend a few $ more, but isn't several hours of their time worth it?

As I understand it, the Canon 16~35L is somewhat sharper (and a stop faster, if that's going to matter) than the 17~40L. It also costs twice as much. "How much $$ do ya got?"

Another thought - you might not need that spendy superwide zoom, at least not immediately. You've probably seen the sweet stitched pano shots posted recently. If you have a few extra seconds, locking the exposure and firing off a string of overlapping shots isn't difficult. A more modest zoom, or even a fixed 17/20mm should work well.

Probably a repeat, but here's a fairly reliable lens performance survey page. http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Good luck!