DSLR Hell

[squirl033]

milrodpxpx wrote:

$1,000.00 lenses? you must own a canon! :? i'm kidding!

and not to be offensive or anything squirll, but its posts like yours about not getting anything better out of your dSLR UNLESS you spend $1000s on lenses that scared me to the FZ30. it was a nice stepping stone kind of camera, but i dont miss it in the least. hey, i read about your Bubble pic in the panny forum, but i couldn't find it! congrats on the nat'l geographic publication - could you link the pic to here for me? thanks, and this has been a great discussion so far!

actually, the Canon lenses are even pricier! my "expensive" lens aSigma EX 80-400. yes, it cost me a grand. would i buy it again? absolutely. but i didn't mean to imply that you can't get good results with kit or "consumer" grade lenses... you absolutely can. the difference between kit lenses and, say, the Canon "L" or Sigma "EX" optics can bepretty esoteric and hard to detect outside an optical lab, an often aren't obvious in prints, especially smaller than 8x10, but they are there, and my only point was that to get the best possible results, you're better off to scrimp a bit on the body and spend the money you saveon quality glass. after all, the lens is the most important part of the camera system... the camera only records what the lens sees, and if the lens is poor, the images it transmits to the sensor won't be top-notch. but even an entry-level DSLR and kit lenseswill still give you very good results, and offer greater speed, flexibility and capability than a "prosumer" point-n-shootin the bargain, to say nothing of cleaner images. ultimately, it depends on what you want to do with your equipment, and how far you want to push the envelope... the farther you want to go, the more you probably should be prepared to spend.

thanks for your comments on my bubble... here it is:

[bobbyz]

Nice shot Squirl033!!!

[mtclimber]

Squirl-

Thanks for excellent posted example.

I think in your last post that you make an excellent point. Everyone has to choose the lens that is price right for them and yields the image that they desire. I have posted several examples of consumer grade lenses that seem to do a good job to address the point made by the OP that the DSLR body is cheap compared to the lenses needed.

My point has been that there are very useful consumer grade lenses, that will let a noobieperson get started with a DSLR and a reasonablely pricedlens. From there onward, they can build their own arsenal of lenses, choosen to meet their own personalspecifications.

This example is the Tokina 24-200mm lens mounted on a Pentax DS.

MT

[mtclimber]

Here is a photo for meanstreak-

It was taken with the KM 5D equipped with a Sigma 18-200mm lens in the 18mm position.

MT

[meanstreak]

mtclimber wrote:

Here is a photo for meanstreak-

It was taken with the KM 5D equipped with a Sigma 18-200mm lens in the 18mm position.

MT

Looks good in your exampleand certainly better than the results with 18-70 KM kit lens I've seen but there are not a lot of straight lines at the edges where it might be more apparent.

[mtclimber]

meanstreak-

The Sigma 18-200mm lens has performed very well for me on the KM 5D. Even when you have straight lines all the way out to the very edges they, remain the straight and very much follow the Photozone tests that ET referenced this morning.

MT

[milrodpxpx]

i can't view too many pictures on here at work - finally got to see the Bubble - that is an awesome photograph, no wonder its been doing so well and praised so much!

[mongrelchild]

For me it was a fairly easy choice.

I couldn't find the original digital rebel (300D) anywhere.

I didn't like the 350D, viewfinder was too small, camera was too small and felt cheap, and it was brutally expensive.

I used the Nikon D50 at a store, and DESPISED the menu system and exposure settings interface. That, a high price and an obligation to use a custom li-ion battery were 3 strikes.

I looked and found the pentax *istDL. Was cheap.... around $650cdn shipped. Looked at the reviews and they weren't very favorable, and the sample pics of the *istD/DS were awful and blurry. Found ou there was a 100 dollar rebate on it tho. Bought it for 650 + tax, found the proice dropped to 600 just days later and got some money back. So after taxes and the rebates, i paid $cdn 582 for a digital SLR, which is fantastic. I was afraid the autofocus would suck at only 3 points but it isn't an issue. I'm more angry at the ugly silver/black casing they sell in Canada rather than the sexy all-black one everywhere else.

I liked the minolta kit also. It has sensor cleaning, which is a HUGE plus and TWO lenses included (one normal, one zoom), but at $1090 before taxes, it was a nobrainer

[mongrelchild]

dont have access to my home PC from here. but heres a pic I put on facebook

[mtclimber]

Mongrelchild-

Thanks for posting! Yes, you raise an excellentissue concerning the price point on the current crop of consumer DSLR cameras.

Here is another photo sample from a consumer lens selling foraround $150. This is a KM 5D photo using the Tamron 28-300mm XR lens. The lens is zoomed all the way out to 300mm.

MT/Sarah