Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 18, 2011, 7:54 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

How about the Sony a33 and the Tamron 18-250mm lens?

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2011, 8:23 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The 18-250 also has a lot of distortion at the wide end, which limits its usefulness when shooting architecture.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2011, 10:37 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mrpete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 282
Default

The 16-105 is from what I've heard pretty decent, more so than the Tamron. If only we could fit in the 16-80 CZ...
__________________
my photography

No photographer is as good as the simplest camera. ~Edward Steichen
mrpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2011, 11:52 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If low light is not as important the XSi body instead. It is just as good as the t1i and t2i form 100-1600iso. And that should bring it in right at 1000 with the ef-s 15-85mm

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The 18-105 has a lot of distortion at 18mm, so it wouldn't be great for architecture.



The Canon 15-85 is ~$739 (~$650 Refurbished.)
The Canon T1i is ~$559 (~$530 Refurbished.)

That's a total of ~$1298 (~$1180 Refurbished.)

Edit: That's an excellent kit, but 20-30% over budget.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2011, 6:31 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpete View Post
The 16-105 is from what I've heard pretty decent, more so than the Tamron. If only we could fit in the 16-80 CZ...
That's why I mentioned the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. It's almost as good as the Sony/Zeiss 16-80 but it's a lot cheaper. It's getting tougher to find, however, since Sigma released the 17-70/2.8-4.0 OS which isn't as good.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2011, 7:45 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
mrpete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 282
Default

The Tamron 17-50 is great too (even without that extra range, its constant f2.8 is sweet)
__________________
my photography

No photographer is as good as the simplest camera. ~Edward Steichen
mrpete is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:21 PM.