Canon EOS400D advice and opinion

Oh yeah…mea culpa. If efiste2 has a EF 80-200mm f/2.8L then its a great lens to start with and a 1.4x TC will help out.

As noted before, both Nikon and Canon used in-lens stabilization (VR and IS), which is touted as being more precise than in-body/sensor thats used by Pentax/Sony/Samsung. Canon has argued that stabilization needed is a function of the focal length and you just cant wiggle the sensor around to make up for stability.

Now the “expense” of such lens and its utility can only be gauged by actually using these lenses. For me they are worth their weight in gold.
________
buy cheap vaporizer
________
ASATRU (NORSE PAGANISM) ADVICE

donno what you mean by the “80-200mm” in your OP.

I think you mean efiste2’s opening post.

However, most of us who post on this forum are interested in ground to air (or even air to air) photograph of relatively small aircraft (as compared with an airliner) in flight. For that, a much greater zoom is required, if the aircraft isn’t going to look like a spec in the distance.

The std/de-facto air show lens is the EF 100-400mm for an EOS body. This would get you ground to air and distant on ground shots. I donno what you mean by the “80-200mm” in your OP. If you are referring to the EF 80-200mm f/2.8L (a.k.a “The Magic Drain Pipe”) then its a fantastic mid-focal length lens.

I have never shot air to air but given that you are strapped in with little or no movement it all depends on how far your quarry is, if you have good forearms you can certainly wield a 100-400mm (if your quarry is closer than its min focussing distance you have OTHER things to worry about). If not something like a magic drain pipe would work just fine.
________
vapormatic vaporizer
________
F399

I do like the look of the Sony Alpha, though. It is just whether or not I can get one, and a suitable lens. within a £650 budget. Someone posted their Sony results on here a while ago, and I was very impressed with the pictures.
Robbo.)

I have one of those and it works well with a 70-300mm Minolta D series lens, these lenses can be found for as little as £100. I have also used with some success a 70-300mm Sigma EX Macro, the macro on this is useful when I am not carrying my Minolta 100m Macro D. This Sigma I purchased for under £100 so either of these will fit within the budget.

I tend to go for regular 35mm lenses rather than the more restrictive lenses aimed at the APS C format because I still use film.

There is a forum for Alpha and Minolta users at:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/

George, it is obviously true that the lens you advocate is a very good one.

However, most of us who post on this forum are interested in ground to air (or even air to air) photograph of relatively small aircraft (as compared with an airliner) in flight. For that, a much greater zoom is required, if the aircraft isn’t going to look like a spec in the distance.

Of course advice on general photography is always welcome, and a kit lens is obviously going to be great for everyday, landscape or macro use.

Many people profess that the EF-S 18-55mm is not adequate, I have yet to find it falling flat. And I have done head to head comparisons with the 17-40mm f/4L which is a great lens, but for my use in this focal length it really does not justify $500.

I would suggest getting the kit lens (if you are going with Canon, I know Nikon makes really good products but really cant tell the difference in the real world) and learning to use it properly. When you “outgrow” this lens you would have a real good idea about photography in general and also you specific requirements.

Here is the PBase database on what people have done with this lens. Its not the camera or the lens as much as the person behind it that really matters.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_s_1855_35
________
silver surfer vaporizer
________
Easy Vape Review

Nikon do not offer in-body image stabilisation on any current DSLR model.

Perhaps RobAnt is thinking of the Pentax K10D and K100D? These DSLRs do feature in-body image stabilisation.

It’s possible, I might go and get a written quote – just in case. 🙂

thanks for the advice ROBBO, my next move is to go to WILDINGS, and give a few cameras a test drive, Thanks again 🙂

Nikon do not offer in-body image stabilisation on any current DSLR model.

Perhaps RobAnt is thinking of the Pentax K10D and K100D? These DSLRs do feature in-body image stabilisation.

Despite your edit none of the specs I’ve seen mention in-body IS on the D40x.

The Olympus E-510 and Sony Alpha 100 both have in-camera IS.

Maybe I got it wrong, and it was another model and I got confused. Anyway! I MIGHT get a tax credit payment unexpectedly. For now, I’m sticking with my S6500fd.

I do like the look of the Sony Alpha, though. It is just whether or not I can get one, and a suitable lens. within a £650 budget. Someone posted their Sony results on here a while ago, and I was very impressed with the pictures.

I am just looking at the moment, I was in town looking for a barber & dishwasher, actually. (No, I wasn’t thinking of sticking my head in a dishwasher in the hope it would cut my hair! Even though, I’m sure you’d consider it an improvement, Robbo.)

Really? Which Nikon models are you talking about?

I was wondering if a Nikon D40x dSLR

Per chance I was in the London Camera Exchange, Plymouth branch today, and that is roughly what the salesperson said to me. Like I said, I could be wrong.

I appreciate you may not have seen my edit before taking your quote though.

Completely agree with everything you say.

I was wondering if a Nikon D40x dSLR might not be better value, because image stabilisation is built into Nikon bodies and therefore you can use simple, and therefore cheaper lenses. Is it correct to say that with Canons if IS is important to you, then you have to pay more for the more complicated IS equipped lenses?

I don’t know for sure though, and I’m sure the more experienced dSLR users will have their views on this matter. But I am sure that there are other differences that might swing a decision, even if it is just the way they feel in the hand.