12-11-2009, 01:23 PM
|
#21
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary AB
|
If it helps with your decision, in the FS flyer today the T1i is $799. I'm now considering the purchase but at the same time I like that Nikon D90 at $999.
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pro...gon=&langid=EN
|
|
|
|
12-23-2009, 11:20 PM
|
#23
|
|
Such a pretty girl!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Calgary
|
There will probably be a boxing day sale. I bought my Xsi bundle last January for even cheaper than that.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
01-13-2010, 09:17 AM
|
#24
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Calgary
|
BUMP.
Since it's pretty much the same topic. OK, so we have the T1i with the base 18-55mm lens. After our first trip with it, we realize we need more zoom  , so the question for the photogs is, which of these is/are the best choice:
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/sub...EN&catid=25814
As you will see, the price ranges from ~$300 to ~$2,000. Given that we are not pros, and just want to take nice pictures of architecture/animals/people on our trips, what would you recommend? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
01-13-2010, 02:36 PM
|
#25
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler
BUMP.
Since it's pretty much the same topic. OK, so we have the T1i with the base 18-55mm lens. After our first trip with it, we realize we need more zoom , so the question for the photogs is, which of these is/are the best choice:
http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/sub...EN&catid=25814
As you will see, the price ranges from ~$300 to ~$2,000. Given that we are not pros, and just want to take nice pictures of architecture/animals/people on our trips, what would you recommend? Thanks. |
Don't know if you need to get it from futureshop, but I got myself the canon 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS. I didn't want to carry around too many lenses, so I felt for convenience, price, and performance, it was a good choice. I just take this and my 50mm prime around most of the time. Sigma makes a similar lens as well, i think it's a little cheaper but the aperture isn't as good at the long end of the zoom.
http://www.thecamerastore.com/produc...8-200mm-f35-56
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Flaming Choy For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
01-14-2010, 11:38 AM
|
#26
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary
|
If price is no issue, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is an amazing choice. But it is expensive, heavy, and a pain in the rear if travelling.
If you're not needing to shoot handheld in low-light, the f/4 version is considerably cheaper, lighter, and smaller and is still optically very good. Still bright white though.
I have heard that the 18-200 is a nice lens, although you sacrifice a little aperture. If you're going to be using it in daylight mostly, this is a non-issue. The range gives you fairly wide to fairly telephoto, so for a "walkaround lens" for normal lighting, this one seems ultra-convenient.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jimmy Stang For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
01-14-2010, 12:15 PM
|
#27
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
|
The Sigma 18-200 OS is nice, it's my everyday lens. I'm sure for a pro, the aperture would be an issue, and the Canon lenses are reviewed slightly higher in terms of optical quality, but for your average person I think the difference isn't worth the dollars. Walking around with one lens for most shots I would ever take, including macro, portrait, landscape and zoom shots is pretty decent. It's easy to start spending money, but I'm perfectly happy with the quality of the shots that I get from my lens for just about any purpose I would have.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:24 PM.
|
|
