Yes the lens had to have the hood mounted backwards to fit. I have more kit now so don't use this bag. Always buy a bag slightly bigger because you will out grow it lol
shaylou said:I was talking to the guys at the local pro shop about bags and they told me always remember "there is no perfect bag and you will end up with a bunch of them before your done". One guy said he had 8 of them and the other guy 7. I have 3 but I don't like the last one I bought. The one that I really like is the lowpro flip side 300 backpack. Light, small but has plenty of room and most of all it is comfortable.
I had 3 bags as well. A Lowepro Flipside 400, Lowepro Nova 170 and a Lowepro Nova 200.
I sold the Flipside and bought the Nova's as I have a bad back and although it was comfortable I couldn't carry it with all my gear in.
The Nova 170 is a great bag for travelling light.
It fit my 600D with 17-55 attached and had room for the 70-200 f4 next to it and some filters and stuff in the pockets. I hope the 5D2 fits as well but I have a feeling I won't be able to fit the 70-200 in.
I use the Nova 200 to store all my other lenses and stuff and when I need to take that stuff then I'll take it out.
Shorty2012 said:New to this thread, hope to pick up some tips as I Just got my 600D with 18-55 lens, also tried a Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 which should arrive in the next couple of days, will be interesting to see how good it is in real life.
I have read lots of reviews on the Tamron and it seems to come out as "ok". I have also been looking at the sigma and canon equivalents although they don't have the same range.
Any help, support or thoughts would be appreciated.
30cms said:I have had the 600d now for a few months and have the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250mm lens. I am quite happy with the 2 lenses I have but I am looking at the Tamron 18-270mm pzd lens for an everyday walkabout lens as I find I am having to change lenses to frequently at some events I am choosing to photograph.
I have read lots of reviews on the Tamron and it seems to come out as "ok". I have also been looking at the sigma and canon equivalents although they don't have the same range.
Any help, support or thoughts would be appreciated.
. My question, how many Lens upgrades do you go through before you tell yourself, the power of your lens are being surpressed by the camera body and its finally time for an upgrade?
Hello Everyone,
I'm glad to be a part of this thread and be counted as one of the proud owners and users of Canon 600D or T3i as we call it here. I've had the 600D for a few months now since upgrading from the 1000D. I've gone through some lens upgrades and am now using a 28-135mm USM IS, a 20-35mm USM Wide-Angle, and the standard 50mm F1.8 prime. My question, how many Lens upgrades do you go through before you tell yourself, the power of your lens are being surpressed by the camera body and its finally time for an upgrade?
Sorry Neil, Tony has pm'd me his addy and I'll be posting it tomorrow.
It's worth a read if you are a beginner though as it explains and expands on the manual.
Cool.
Maybe pass it forward when you've outgrown it too?
I had my 600D for 7 months before I upgraded to a 5D Mark II. My reasons for the upgrade were that I had reached the limitations of what the 600D could provide me in terms of image quality and ISO performance. I like to shoot a lot of low light and night stuff and the noise was too much, even at low ISO.
The quality of images from any body is governed by the lenses you stick in front of them, use cheap lenses and you will get okay results, use quality (read: expensive) lenses and the results will be much better.
shaylou said:Hi Rico, I have a 600d and like you I do a lot of night shoots, slow shutter on low iso. I was wondering what you think about the iso performance difference.
Hi Shayne,
The difference is (pardon the pun) night and day!
There is much less noise and what noise there is seems to clear up much easier and the images are just so much nicer to look at and work with.
At the risk of sounding like a gushing teenager the 5D2 is such an amazing piece of kit, it's made a huge difference to my way of thinking about photography and how I look at things!
shaylou said:Thanks for the reply Rico. I bought my first dslr at the beginning of this year not knowing what direction I would go. I had no Idea I would be shooting either. Ends up I really like night shots and landscapes. I'm very particular about image quality and rarely go over iso 200 on my 600d. I was hoping to go full frame so that I would have a much higher iso range with good image quality, not to mention all of the other benefits.
The stm version has a different motor for focusing, it is designed to focus better when using it for video on the new 650d body, I am not sure if it has been improved optically.
The stm version has a different motor for focusing, it is designed to focus better when using it for video on the new 650d body, I am not sure if it has been improved optically.
jillybean said:Hi all, new to photography & forum, so great to see thread specific 4 the 600d! Just starting to look at additional lenses, (currently have the standard kit) and my local shop guys ( who have been v helpful to date on all things camera) have suggested looking at the Tamron lenses?? I See from thread that some reviews not good- looking at reviews myself but grateful for any tips. Currently looking at Tamron 28-200 f/ 3 .8/5.6, Canon 28-135 f3.5/5.6 IS USM and Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM.
Thanks
jillybean said:Hi again - Shaylou what does the 17-55mm lens offer above the kit lens 18-55mm, other than the single max aperture?
the canon 28-135mm USM IS as I currently own one myself. It's a great all-around lens with sufficient zoom range, fast and quiet focusing, and the IS is quite the catch.
Rico said:Image quality.
You will wonder how you managed with the kit lens if you try the 17-55, it's just so much sharper with better colours and it focuses faster and quieter too.
There's a reason why it's considered the best non-L lens for crop bodies.
Dave1 said:i would disagree with it being a "great all round lens" on a crop. How could it be considered an all rounder without any wide angle? On a crop its equivalent to 45-215. Not much use for landscape or even indoor general use (unless you have BIG rooms).
shaylou said:Agreed. The wide side is non existent . That's another reason the 17-55 stands above this lens. Not to mention the superior image quality and the constant 2.8 aperture.
Well this really gives me lots to think about. Thanks guys.