Believe It Or Not...

G

Graelwyn

Suspended / Banned
Messages
848
Edit My Images
Yes
I still cannot decide on my camera!!
The money is now all available. £1500 of it.

And I am still going round trying the D300 and the 40D, somehow convinced that because the D300 has so much more technology to it, that it will,in the long run, produce better images...yet, I have seen some fantastic work on here done with 30d, 40d, 20d etc etc.

My ex says d300, but he has always been a nikon guy.
Shop people say d300.
My head says d300 but my heart says 40D and I have no clue why because the screen is not very good, you cannot adjust as many settings and it doesn't have the 52 point autofocussing.

But with the 40d, I could get a few decent lenses rather than just one, plus the flash, grip and bag that I lack.

I am sure some here cannot understand why I agonise so much over a decision, but that is me. And given someone has just asked if I can help out with portrait photography at their new studio, I need to be sure I have something I can do reasonable portraits on.

If I do go for canon, these are the kits ive been looking at...Any good or better to just go second hand on some lenses locally?

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1022914

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1025952

Sorry :shrug: just important to me I make the best decision.
 
You should be researching extensively when buying a new body, no need to apologise :)

In the end you should go with whatever feels right in your hands and what you feel most comfortable with becuase if you end up buying the wrong one personally, you will regret it and your photos will reflect this.

I'm a loyal Canon user and have a 40D myself and love it to bits, but it's what you personally feel is right for you. If your heart says a 40D, then go for it, don't let features push you away from your gut instincts.

As for those kits you posted, the 1st one looks pretty good. Heard good things about those lenses.

Whichever camera you choose, you won't be dissapointed.
 
I think you are right to keep researching, but one thing I will say, is don't skimp on the body now for the sake of an extra lens. The D300 is the dogs danglies of am/pro bodies at the moment, but that doesnt mean the 40D is a bad camera, it isn't.

By the same token, new lenses are lovely and good glass is important, but that doesnt mean more lenses or better lenses will make you take better pictures, and the flip side is that some very nice lenses can be bought s/h as long as you do your research. Having just a single lens to begin with is one way of finding out what sort of lens you feel you need next, by using the frequency of limitation of that lens - for instance, do you find yourself wanting more reach a lot, or wider angle more often, and so on.


Now then, form a purely biased point of view, get that D300, follow your head not your heart :D ...but thats just the Nikonian in me ;)
 
I'm pretty certain that both bodies will do exactly what you need so I wouldn't fret too much over the current do's and can't do's.

It's more important in today's rapidly moving techno-world to look at the two manufacturers as offering a "system".....bodies, lenses, attachments et al. Do the research based on what you might be wanting to add within the next year or so and see what's on offer...even if you're not going to be buying the extras for a while. A good deal this week can lead you spending more next time when you're adding bits to your kit.

Bob
 
have to say, i doubt you will be upset over either, they are both brilliant cameras (i got a 40d). i personally, considering the ex has nikon, would probably go for them, purely for the fact you can scrounge a lens or two off him(if he has any).

as for the 52 point AF, i only use the centre one on my 40d, so the others would be a bit wasted on me.

im unsure what extra settings the d300 offers over the 40d, perhaps you could clarify?
 
I really can't advise on Canon but go with which you feel is best.
It is a subjective thing that is completely individual, but it must feel comfortable when you hold it for possibly several hours.

Both will take good shots it's the brain and eye behind the camera that will make them great.

The D300 body is available from Dixons of all places at £950.00 at the moment (uses a discount code) which still allows you to get some lenses with your budget of £1500.00

Also has a 2 year warranty.
 
My mate just spent under £1500 at Warehouse Express. He got a Nikon D200, a Sigma 10-20, Nikon 18-200 VR, memory cards, filters and a bag. Good setup, I thought.
 
If your current mission is portrait then you need only focus on a single lens...

The multi point focus of the D300 is better than the 40D and so is its high ISO performance.

Get the Nikkon and a suitable portrait lens - you don't need a big bag of gear.

Mind you, don't ask me about portrait lenses - I know nothing!
 
if you were after the 40d, i would get it body only, witht he sigma 24-70 f2.8 and then the sigma 50-150 or 70-200 f2.8. based on warehouse express prices 1355-£1450 ish i think. then go to play.com for a couple of 4gb CF cards(extreme 111) and find a bag you like. should come to bout £100.

the 24-70 can be had cheaper from jessops(£252), when used with discount code LENS10
 
:whispers:

You considered Olympus?


The E-3 body can be had for £850. Has in body IS, Dustproof, Weatherproof, a dust reduction system that actually works (!), articulating screen, Liveview, and some of THE best lens out there.
 
£1500 after cashback would have got you a Canon 5d and 24-105 f4 IS L Lens from Jacobs last weekend.

5d body can be had for £1200 or less, so you could get a nifty fifity and a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 within your budget too.
 
Do you think that option would be better than the 40d given I could get 3 lenses with the 40D?

I have read about the 5D and that was to be my next upgrade if I got the 40D.

Also, 5D has much lower shooting speed doesn't it, and it is more difficult to get good results...ie, you need higher quality glass to get decent images from it?

I am not rich enough to get a load of L lenses, much as I would love them.
 
Grrr, cannot even post in 'wanted' yet.
would be good place to ask if anyone has a 40d body or lenses they can sell.

Out of interest, if I do go for a 40D, what lenses should I buy given I would have a £800 budget?

I am especially interested in macro, portrait and landscape work, so a general, all round good zoom + something to cover those would be nice.
 
the sigma 24-70 is supposedly better than the kit 17-85 canon. i have the kit at the mo, and it struggled indoors with moving kids. that wil set you back £253. then it depends what you want to shoot, if landscapes the sigma 10-20 seems to be popular, or for longer lengths, youve got the 70-200 options (should be able to get a canon f4L non is or the sigma f2.8). longer than that i havent a clue

i take it the 40d is sounding most likely?
 
Sigma 24-70 f2.8 £220 (onestop digital)
Sigma 10-20 £290 (various UK sources, some issues possible with this lens, easier to return if any problems)
sigma 105mm Macro £220
canon 50mm f1.8 £60ish (Kerso on here)

Total £790. You don't have anything with a longer focal length though with that list, so you'd have to sort something out further down the line if you wanted a telephoto zoom :)
 
Yes, the 40D will allow me to get more lenses, and a bag etc, and I think, given the price it was originally, it is a pretty good deal, even if it isn't as high spec and high tech as the nikon.

In the end, if I dont get along with it, I can sell up and swap down the line, lol.

I have seen fantastic shots on here from the canon 30d and 40d etc, so I am sure I wont be too disappointed. Just hope I wont have to do loads of pp work to get decent results.
 
Hehe - we are getting as confused about what you need as you are lol!

Now this is a bit of a wild card, but assuming you went for a 40d body at £600, that would leave yo a decent budget for glass - you could maybe strike soem deal with StewartR at lensesforhire to send a selection to you for 3 day hire.

Another option is to buy a nifty fifty only - this will then give you an idea of what focal range you really need, and at £60 its hardly going to break the bank, and you could sell it easily for £45 months later if its no use.

There are lots of good options posted above - on a cropped sensor camera i'd have no issue using Sigma lenses at all (yes there are some reservations about consistency), but 24-70 f2.8 and 24-60 f2.8 are very good lenses, as is the 10-20mm for wide angle stuff.
 
The 40D is in no way a bad camera, its just not as good as the D300.

Re PP work, well, thats up to you really. If you have a handful of shots and want one to shine from it then PP away. Don't expect to get glossy magazine style pics from any of them without some photoshop time ***. Just a bit of a bummer when you have 3000 photos :D So just polish the best.
 
never used it, but it is supposedly a very good lens, at a good price, but the only problem you will have is indoors without flash, as you will need roughly a 1/200th shutter speed to stop hand shake affecting your images, which is a bit difficult at f4, unless your using a tripod or have very steady hands. there is an IS version but is considerably more, bout the same as the 2.8 non IS version.

some people say the f4l is the sharpest of the range, but views seem to vary quite a lot, have a search for 70-200 and see all the comments from previous posts.
 
Now, with Canon, you might start off with normal glass, but the lust for L will soon drive your budget out the window. You'll start salivating at white lenses, and your monthly food budget will be down to around 46p afterwards... I've seen it in so many Canon users...;)

I took my D300 and 100-300mm f/4 down to the beach yesterday evening, taking pics of lots of surfers falling off their boards. God I love that camera so much, I want to have its babies... The D300 really is that good!

Whatever camera you buy, get decent lenses - if you only buy 1 or 2 with whatever body you choose, so be it. You can always save up again!
 
If I were you and had your heart set on canon, with the view to upgrading to full frame in the future, I would get the 40D, the canon 17-40mm, the 70-200f4 IS. With cash back it should bring you in around £1500. Perhaps kerso can do this little lot a bit cheaper and in addition you can afford to stretch to the 85mm f1.8 for indoor portrait work or if not, the 50mm f1.8 at around £60 should do a pretty decent job.
 
Graelwyn said:
Is this lens any good?

Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM Lens
Click to expand...
I have one and I think its super, gives lovely colours and its not heavy. I do very little processing as I am no good at it so the images it gives are a bonus!
 
I've the 70-200 and yes it is sharp, and light. Although I would look at the IS option. This lens also allows you to use it on a full frame camera when/if you buy one.

I know how difficult it is to make a decision like this. You don't want to make a mistake and end up by regretting it.Be careful of tech specs. Yes they do tell you something about the camera, but many may not be relevant. Do you need 45 focus points, especially if they lock onto the wrong part of the subject. I use one, although I may change which of them I use.

The only thing I tend to use the camera screen for is a/to check the image is captured, b/ to view the histogram. Occasionally I may zoom in ensure an area has be captured correctly, but I never judge the picture quality from it.

Do you NEED high ISO capability, or would an IS lens be better. I rarely need 1600 ISO, but then I'm not doing sports photography in low light levels where it would be a bonus.

Decisions. Decisions. Decisions
 
Graelwyn said:
Is this lens any good?

Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM Lens
Click to expand...

Had one and sold it after about 6 months.

1. Wasn't really long enough for what i wanted at the time, and at f4 to start using a teleconverter wasn't really an option
2. Never thought it was THAT great in terms of IQ, but i was using it on a 300d at the time, along with Sigma f2.8 lenses of various ranges.
 
Of course with a D300 and its high ISO performance you can probably gain a few F-stops back... f2.8 and wider glass is horribly expensive and also money just spent in one focal length range. If poor light conditions are a consideration, get something that can reliably give you greater than ~ISO400, which the Nikkon definitely can.

Look at my sig, I am a long term Canon user and am telling you this... :D
 
the 40d will handle high iso well, not quite as good as the d300, but iso800 doesnt cause a problem
 
Get to your local shop - take your own memory cards - stand in the doorway and snap a few shots across the street with various bodies and lenses (40d with Sigma, Canon and Canon L glass, D300 with Sigma and Nikon glass). I suggest you either use a fixed aperture or shutter speed between like for like shots in both cameras 'P' mode.

Take similar shots - a shop doorway,church steeple etc.

Go home and look at the pics critically - which are better ?, need less PP ?? etc etc


I appreciate you can alter in camera settings to your hearts content, but you need a basis for comparison - its you that needs to see the results and differences or not.
 
Try this it may help.

Sit down somewhere quiet. OK now imagine you've bought the 40D. Are you happy with your decision. Just think about it. Are there any nagging doubts?

Now reverse. You've just bought the D300, same question.

May help....may not
 
Plenty of nagging doubts about the nikon... it doesn't excite me at all, to be honest. The feel of it in my hands was not comfortable, the same issue I had with the d200. I found it cumbersome to me because of the shape.

While the 40D and wow, the 5D feel right. I love the 5d and I have to ask, would that be better for me or nay as there is one on ebay standing at £400 with lens currently, with 16 hours to go...but I find the lcd really small and not sure if the image quality will be better or not?
 
to be fair, the 5d is a full format camera etc etc, but you seem to know what you like, and i think you need to go for the one that feels right in your hand. all be it the 40d or the 5d, both are excellent cameras and will do you very proud. the major difference is the 5 is a full frame(same as a 35mm film camera) and the 40d is a 1.6 crop i think. the 5d wont take the cheaper canon ef-s lenses or the sigma dc lenses as they are designed for the crop sensor. which did you like the best?
 
if it is the size, you can add a battery grip to the 40d to make it bigger/more substancial

congrats on the lens before you get a camera!!!!:woot:
 
What other lenses have you got on your list to get?

prob worth picking a body first though.
 
The screen on the rear of the 5d maybe only 2.5", but that was considered big 2 years ago - its what i had on the 30d and now on the 5d - its big enough for me, the bigger the screen the less space there is for the other controls and that then restricts where controls can be placed and can affect the intuitiveness of camera use.

The bigger screen of the 40d doesn't mean any better quality - its actually the same resolution on both cameras at 230k pixels. 5d doesn't get liveview, but thats just a gimmick from pocket digicams in my view.

I had a similar dilema 18 months ago - 5d or 30d. The guy in the shop told me only go with the 5d if its going to earn you money or you print above A3 size; otherwise 30d. So i went with the 30d and was quite happy with that - i only upgraded to the 5d now because the prices have fallen so much from 18 months ago, and i didn;t think the 40d was a big enough upgrade from the 30d for the money
 
Bear in mind the 5D is widely expected to be replaced in the next couple of months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top