Camera Re-Buying Advice

jsstevo

jsstevo

Messages
139
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,
I'm after a bit advice as I'm in need of rebuying all of my camera equipment!
Previous setup of main components was as followed....
Canon Rebel T1i (think it was 500D in UK but purchased whilst in America)
18-55 IS Kit lens
55-250 IS Kit lens
430ex ii Flash
Basic sturdy but heavy tripod

Unfortunately all of this has been stolen! So, I now need to buy all of my camera equipment again from scratch. I loved using the T1i and had great fun learning how to use a DSLR in places such as the Grand Canyon, Vegas, Dallas ball-park (baseball became an obsession with the camera!). I also enjoy shooting (as in the UK, not US meaning) rally cars.

I like to have a wide range of usage and the 2 previous lenses mainly covered this. Only once in 4 years I need something wider than 18 and that was at Big Bend. I managed a shot but my friend with a 12 managed a much better one, so I used his! I do however think that I need something with a bit more zoom.

So, my thought is to go for the following setup. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Canon 650D
Canon 18-135 IS STM
Canon 100-400L IS USM
No separate flash at the minute
And oped to suggestions for a suitable tripod

Or push the boat out....
Canon 650D
Canon 28-300L IS USM
Canon 10-22 USM
Again no separate flash at the minute

Also, where's good and trustworthy to buy camera in the UK, at a good price? Going into a shop, is my preference. I'm based in the Midlands, near Derby but willing to travel. Also I see that places like http://www.digitalrev.com are selling cheap. Are they trustworthy?

Please let me know your thoughts.
 
I would forget about the canon 28-300mm IS not a great lens for the amount of money you pay for it, you would be better of getting the canon 70-300mm L or sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS.
 
Thanks, update on my current thoughts after looking at your suggestion.
I could go for the 70-200L 2.8 IS ii and have an extender (1.4?) handy. Would this be any good with 2.0 extender?
70-300 4-5.6 IS USM (also with extender?)

Then Canon 18-135 STM is lens.
Future buy a Canon 10-22?

How does this coverage sound?
 
jsstevo said:
Thanks, update on my current thoughts after looking at your suggestion.
I could go for the 70-200L 2.8 IS ii and have an extender (1.4?) handy. Would this be any good with 2.0 extender?
70-300 4-5.6 IS USM (also with extender?)

Then Canon 18-135 STM is lens.
Future buy a Canon 10-22?

How does this coverage sound?
Click to expand...

Forget TC on a 70-300mm assuming you mean the L version TC won't fit and not worth while on the non L version either.

By all accounts the 70-200mm f2.8 MKII a great lens, combined with the MKIII TCs work much better than the MKI lens and MKII TCs which performance wise from using this setup wasn't great. Remember you lose 1 f-stop for a 1.4xTC or 2 f-stops for a 2xTC.

Personally if your looking at the 70-200mm, I would seriously consider the sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS as an alternative, about the same money but extra reach and still f2.8, also takes TCs.
 
I've been looking around for the sigma 120-300 2.8 but it says discontinued?
 
Ok, I'll start to look at the Sigma spec's. I've just priced up my options and found the below.....
Canon 650D with 18-135 IS STM
Canon 70-200L IS mark II USM
Canon EF 1.4X III Telephoto Extender
Canon PhotoShot SX260 (need a point and shoot camera too)

Park Camera's (UK retailer) £3212
Panamoz £2393
Amazon US £2360 ($3729)
 
You may have issues with try to buy electronics from amazon us.

Have a look at www.flashcameras.co.uk as well. Ian (Kerso) is a TP member

Panamoz grey market, but many on TP have bought from them.
 
Now that would be a good combination. How does the 24-105 compare to the 18-135?

I have a US address so getting product delivered there from Amazon isn't an issue. Would just prefer to buy it in the UK though. With flights to the US currently as low as £400 I could still fly there, pick up the equipment, fly back and save £600.
 
The difference is like chalk and cheese. The 24-105 is a L series lens (i.e Canon's professional range). The 18-135 is a glorified kit lens. You can get decent pictures from the 18-135 but you will get excellent pictures from the 24-105.

Build quality and weather proofing are also much much higher with the 24-105.
 
Check the reviews:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-STM-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

You could also consider the 15-85 which is (price wise at least) in the middle of these two.
The softness on the edges/corners of the 18-135 would put me off, but then its less than half the cost of the 18-135.

Worth noting that if you ever wanted to move up to full frame the 18-135 would have to be sold on and a new lens bought, as its an EF-S (as is the 15-85). The 24-105 is EF and therefore fits full frame.
 
I'm liking the 24-105 and 100-400 combo.

I've dropped Kerso an e-mail to see if he can do a deal. DR comes out about £150 more expensive than both Panamoz and Amazon US.

Thanks guys.
 
Hi all, just a quick update. I ended up buying the 650d with 18-55 kit (short term) with the 50 1.8 and 100-400L.

I now need to decide upon the remaining lenses. 24-105 looks favourite for now. Gives me a good spread. Craft, thanks for the advice about the EF verses EF-S, not thought about that. Whilst I might not upgrade to FF for a 'few' years, I like the idea of being able to swap lenses with people, etc.

The other lens I was looking at to complete the range was the 10-24, but noticed that this was an EF-S lens and I can't find a EF equivalent. Does one exist?

Also just want to finish this off with saying that I bought my kit from Kerso and would consider him for all future kit, if I have no US trips planned myself. His speed of commas was excellent, prices are keen, and he pulled out all stops to get me delivery before my hols (next day) even though the payment was delayed my end due to me loosing my bank card reader. Thanks Kerso!
 
Good news :thumbs:

No, there isn't a Canon 10-22 in EF, the reason is that 10mm on a full frame camera would give a massively wide field of view and probably show up lots of distortion from the lens.
On full frame you'd probably use a 17-40 or similar.
 
Been looking into this a little this afternoon. The 24 of the 24-105 would give me 15mm equivalent on a FF right? That would prob be wide enough in the future. If I went somewhere like the Grand Canyon again, I could rent a 10-22. Only time I've found 18 too narrow was at Big Bend where my mate with his Nikon and 12mm could get the shot that I couldn't. Maybe I could have gotten some better shots at the Canyon and Vegas too?

So, I think I'm going to get the 24-105 and have that sat on the camera most of the time. Play with the 50 1.8 to try and become a bit more creative, and 100-400L for Motorsport and wildlife. Right, off to speak to Mr Kerso!
 
jsstevo said:
The 24 of the 24-105 would give me 15mm equivalent on a FF right?
Click to expand...

It could just be my addled brain reading this wrong but on a full frame body the 24mm would be 24mm. On a crop body you'd need something like a 15mm lens to get a 24mm equivalent field of view.
 
Last edited:
jsstevo:

24-105 gives a field of view of 38-168mm on a crop.

Don't get too hung up on the crop vs full frame thing.

I use a 24-105 + 100-400 on a crop, get on fine. I only bought the 10-22 because Iw as going to New York and you need as wide as you can get there!

The only thing I would say against the 100-400 is its a but of a lump, quite big and heavy - so taking it on the off chance of using it means a bigger bag and weight to carry all day. It is very good at what it does though!
I think the weight/size thing applies to all long lenses though, even the 70-200 2.8 IS.
 
Yes, you're right, but in flip reverse (as I'm used to a crop) does my sort of logic add up?

I.E. if I put the 24 on my crop I'm actually getting Actual 38. However, if I want Actual 24 I need to put a 15 lens on it. Problem with all this is that when using the crop I see 24 on the dial and not 38!
So, in the future when i buy a FF, if I want to get the same angle as I currently get from a cropped 15, I can just use the 24.
 
crop-sensor-vs-full-frame-mumbaipav.jpg


From : http://www.mumbaipav.com/2012/03/22/what-is-a-full-frame-camera/

Both 28mm, one on a crop the other full frame.
 
Maybe it's just my mind over thinking!

Still not plucked for the 24-105. I have a nagging that my standard lens starting at 24 might be too narrow? Past trips have been with the kit 18-55 which is ok, but I know the new glass I'm looking at should be a lot better. Am I going to miss the 18-24? Errrr, any other suitable options? Again I used the 18 in New York, and judging by your comments, if I just managed with the 18, then the 24 won't be wide enough?
 
I didn't miss the 18-24 range when I switched.

24 isn't really wide enough for places like NYC, but I would say it probably isn't wide enough on a full frame either!

We are all different and shoot different stuff. If you aren't sure, stick with the kit lens for a bit, review how and what you shoot and then upgrade your glass.
 
I went for the 18-135 STM over the 18-55mm kit lens as it wasn't much more and seemed more practical.

The 24-105 will give you sharper images but you'll have to keep your 10-22mm handy if you're regularly want to take wide shots.
 
You've got the 18-55 so why not chop that in and pick up a secondhand tamron 17-50 F2.8, they can be found quite cheap now for the non VC version (sharp as a tack) and still get the 24-105 as well.. that way you have the best of both worlds and all the bases covered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top