[chethan.ram]

Originally Posted by ampere

Some basic questions:

How does one compare a Tamron (70-300) Lens versus Canon (55-250).
JJ Mehta lists Tamron to be cheaper than Canon. Is it just for the brand or there is some thing else that I am missing here?

Also how does one compare 450D, 500D and 550D?

JJ Mehta Lists 550D as a 15MP while Canon says 18MP.
For the moment I will believe Canon site.

You have been doing some research. Looks like you have made up your mind, thats good to know. For all I know 550D is 18MP, I had been to Canon store recently and 500D looks pretty decent and I feel it is more than enough for travelling photography.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by chethan.ram

You have been doing some research. Looks like you have made up your mind, thats good to know. For all I know 550D is 18MP, I had been to Canon store recently and 500D looks pretty decent and I feel it is more than enough for travelling photography.

I am not done with FZ100 yet. Checking out all the options (and finances) before I decide.

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by rjstyles69

If I were to decide between a D7000 and a full frame, I would definitely put my money on a full frame considering the pricing of the D7000.

Couldnt agree more, if there is any potential to make some bucks through selling some of my crappy pictures, I would put my money on a full frame anyday . Hoping for the day some foreigners or filthy-rich indians would find my pictures 'out of the world' 'exclusive' and 'unique' ! Never know when that lucky star comes out of the clouds !!

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by shajufx

Couldnt agree more, if there is any potential to make some bucks through selling some of my crappy pictures, I would put my money on a full frame anyday . Hoping for the day some foreigners or filthy-rich indians would find my pictures 'out of the world' 'exclusive' and 'unique' ! Never know when that lucky star comes out of the clouds !!

Try some "disaster tourism" or scout for big human tragedies like a vulture, heard that news agencies and organizations like Getty images pay big money for it, Or hunt celebrities to unearth scandals so Indian Tabloid media find it worth buying

PS : Just a joke , No offense meant to serious photo-journos

[shajufx]

Thanks for the tips buddy, there is a valid point in your post. I am sitting on a damn chair for an average of 10 hours a day, 5 days a week since last 10 years, seriously. Its time to give up that monotonous routine and find satisfaction in my artistic side of brain and heart, atleast say good bye to that 'chair'. I have been telling people that 'I am retiring at 40' and I have just 1.5 yrs left, better I involve myself fully into what my heart wants which also meets my basic survival needs .

BUT when I look at the kind of shots people post on flickr and many such places as pure hobby stuff, I feel like 'run and hide', you know what I mean ! Sometimes I feel, I haven't even started learning this art.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Ajay Narayan

For this Gypsy shot, we waited 4 years !! Before starting from Delhi this time, we had already talked about it.

A good general purpose is 24-105mm. Great product and very popular. I am happy that you call him Rudra-da. You can get to learn a lot from him and besides, he is a very nice person.

4 years? How did you even expect the landscape to remain the same over a period of 4 years?

The 24-105 on my 40D would mean 45-170 or there abouts. I took the 17-55 as it was f/2.8, had IS, and gave me a resonably wide frame (27mm) on the 40D. The 24-105 is a much clearer and sharper lens than the 17-55 (@ f/4) even though the 17-55 is one stop down.

When I was first buying a digital SLR camera I considered 2 options.

40D+17-55+70-300 vs 5D+24-105+100-400. Both would give me the about the same focal range. The later would be FF and L glass but at twice the price! Since my requirements was kids and family and I'd rarely shoot RAW and process the photos I figured the 40D would do although Rudra-da had recomended the 5D combo but I was not ready to commit $4000 or so.

I find I like ambient light a lot (even bounced flashes feel odd) so I have added the 50/1.4, 28/1.8, and 100/2. Lenses on my wish list are the 10-22 and 60/2.8 macro. I do borrow some L glass from my niece if I feel the need. Today since I often feel the need for video I am thinking of replacing the 40D with a 60D.

You telling me. Rudra-da is a gem of a person. Someone I will always look up to and not just because he can take such beautiful photos.

[Ajay Narayan]

[quote=navin;2072636]4 years? How did you even expect the landscape to remain the same over a period of 4 years?

The 24-105 on my 40D would mean 45-170 or there abouts. I took the 17-55 as it was f/2.8, had IS, and gave me a resonably wide frame (27mm) on the 40D. The 24-105 is a much clearer and sharper lens than the 17-55 (@ f/4) even though the 17-55 is one stop down.
quote]

Navin,

In 2006, we captured 3 frames of Gypsy, one by me with Rudra standing with Gypsy, and two by Rudra: one with me and one just Gypsy near Zing Zing Bar. Due to bad weather last time, we had other issues on mind. That's why we looked forward to shooting it this time. As Rudra mentioned, this time we found a spot for it.

Think forward when you build expensive camera line-up. Lenses last you years, Camera bodies are changed much more often. I am sure your next body will be full frame, That's my two bit for a suggestion.

Many regards. Ajay

[navin]

Originally Posted by Ajay Narayan

Think forward when you build expensive camera line-up. Lenses last you years, Camera bodies are changed much more often. I am sure your next body will be full frame, That's my two bit for a suggestion.

I do agree that the biggest sensor you can find is usually the best option. I understand exactly where you (and Rudra-da) are coming from.

A canon 5DII+24-105+100-400 would run about $5k
A canon 7D+17-55+70-300 would run about $3K
A canon 60D would be about $500 less than the 7D combo

actually that is not much of a difference in $ (over a life time of ownership) except that the 7D has better metering and more focus points than the 5DII and the 60D offers nice video angles with that tilt and swivel screen.

You guys are really going to confuse me.

[Ajay Narayan]

Originally Posted by navin

I do agree that the biggest sensor you can find is usually the best option. I understand exactly where you (and Rudra-da) are coming from.

A canon 5DII+24-105+100-400 would run about $5k
A canon 7D+17-55+70-300 would run about $3K
A canon 60D would be about $500 less than the 7D combo

actually that is not much of a difference in $ (over a life time of ownership) except that the 7D has better metering and more focus points than the 5DII and the 60D offers nice video angles with that tilt and swivel screen.

You guys are really going to confuse me.

Navin
Probably my answer was not self-explanatory enough.

What I meant was that you need to work on priorities.
1. What kind of photography you are interested in, nature, potraits, landscape, mixed etc.
2. depending upon point 1. what are the best suited 1) lenses and then 2) bodies.
3. what's your budget.
4. above three will give you a priority-list.
5. Ask Rudra, he will then suggest you the right equipment according to your budget on a 'timeline' basis.
6. Over a period, you will accumulate them one by one.
7. In the meantime, go thru the learning curve and build upon it.

If you go and buy complete equipment at once, you are bound to find later that one of them is misfit and waste of money. The idea is to see the big picture and build upon it.

Hope I make myself a bit more clear. Rudra or anybody can help you only if you give your vision of what you want to do when you say 'I want to photograph'.

Many regards. Ajay

[navin]

Originally Posted by Ajay Narayan

1. What kind of photography you are interested in, nature, potraits, landscape, mixed etc.
2. depending upon point 1. what are the best suited 1) lenses and then 2) bodies.
3. what's your budget.
4. above three will give you a priority-list.
5. Ask Rudra, he will then suggest you the right equipment according to your budget on a 'timeline' basis.
6. Over a period, you will accumulate them one by one.
7. In the meantime, go thru the learning curve and build upon it.

1. Kids (my son, his school activities and friends and family)

2. low (read as indoor) light OR outdoor daylight tele-zoom which is why I looked at 24-100 + 100-400 lenses (in FF).

3. $2000 is what I budgeted when I got the 40D I figured that the 5D would cost twice as much and I'd gain some ISO sensitivity but I did not intend to print beyond 5x7 anyway so a few fewer dots would not be that noticeable hence I chose EF-S over EF and got the 40D. In my view the biggest drawback of CCD sensors is the "uncool" way they use light. The 40D CMOS was the first generation of sensors that were decent enough to be compared to Kodachrome. Then it also had sensor cleaning, a 3" LCD and best of all the same Menu UI as the 1D!

4. I converted the 24-100 and 100-400 to EF-S and got 16-70 (the closest canon was the 17-55) and 70-300. Canon's 17-55 has IS which was a bonus.

5 Rudra was consulted but I did not do what he asked yes I am mad. His recomendation was 5D+24-105 (and to add the 100-400 later).

6. Over the past 3 years or so I have only added the 3 primes. I had the 420EX from my past (I used the 420EX with a G2).

7. As far as the learning curve is concerned I am afraid I am already in deep decline due to premature senility

8. Today I realise I want HD video (after playing with a friend's 550D) which really makes sense with a tilt and swivel screen (Canon should have offered this in the 7D but who am I to say so) so the 60D is looking pretty interesting unless ofcourse the 5DIII or 7DII is going to have one.

Something tells me Rudra-da is reading this and laughing thinking "Poor Ajay, why did he go get mixed up with a nut like Navin".

[Ajay Narayan]

Originally Posted by navin

1. Kids (my son, his school activities and friends and family)

2. low (read as indoor) light OR outdoor daylight tele-zoom which is why I looked at 24-100 + 100-400 lenses (in FF).

3. $2000 is what I budgeted when I got the 40D I figured that the 5D would cost twice as much and I'd gain some ISO sensitivity but I did not intend to print beyond 5x7 anyway so a few fewer dots would not be that noticeable hence I chose EF-S over EF and got the 40D. In my view the biggest drawback of CCD sensors is the "uncool" way they use light. The 40D CMOS was the first generation of sensors that were decent enough to be compared to Kodachrome. Then it also had sensor cleaning, a 3" LCD and best of all the same Menu UI as the 1D!

4. I converted the 24-100 and 100-400 to EF-S and got 16-70 (the closest canon was the 17-55) and 70-300. Canon's 17-55 has IS which was a bonus.

5 Rudra was consulted but I did not do what he asked yes I am mad. His recomendation was 5D+24-105 (and to add the 100-400 later).

6. Over the past 3 years or so I have only added the 3 primes. I had the 420EX from my past (I used the 420EX with a G2).

7. As far as the learning curve is concerned I am afraid I am already in deep decline due to premature senility

8. Today I realise I want HD video (after playing with a friend's 550D) which really makes sense with a tilt and swivel screen (Canon should have offered this in the 7D but who am I to say so) so the 60D is looking pretty interesting unless ofcourse the 5DIII or 7DII is going to have one.

Something tells me Rudra-da is reading this and laughing thinking "Poor Ajay, why did he go get mixed up with a nut like Navin".

Navin

Actually your point 1 is still not fully answered. I see from pt.8 that now you also want HD. Repeat your growing needs for next 5-10yrs and that will be point1. You still need to work on point 1.

No doubt Rudra had that as well in mind when he suggested 5D. Your needs are not higher than 5DII for few years to come. I can say that. Also his suggestion as well as mine was to go for 24-105mm. With one single lens you would have been the happiest guy. And later u cud hv bought 100-400 or even 70-200 with 1.4 extender. You would have a full 21MP frame with full-HD and a lens range from 24mm to 105 and later 400mm (or 70-200 x1.4 = 280mm).

Tilts and swivel screens are in ameteur models or max Prosumer. I want to see thru glass and my retina what I am shooting.

Don't get into jargon of cameras and allied equipment and CMOS process. Your needs today are still 5DII and 24-105mm. Most of Pro in Photo as well as in short movies use 5DII today.

Everything else is just 'nice to have' or pure discussion.

Many regards. Ajay

[tsk1979]

A 5D will fall woefully short of Navins expectations. Infact due to point 1, no canon camera currently matches what navin wants in a video standpoint.
Its one thing shooting HD on a tripod, and another shooting HD in real world. None of canons cams do continuous AF during video. Nikon has it, and canon may have it in future versions.
But right now, the HD video feature on Canon cameras is useful for pre planned shooting. For shooting moving kids, or street shooting moving objects its pretty useless.

[Joy]

@Ajay: Any pointer on which sensor is better, CCD or CMOS?

[Ajay Narayan]

Originally Posted by Joy

@Ajay: Any pointer on which sensor is better, CCD or CMOS?

Joe, You asked me a tech. question and it's a huge topic, so let me try to answer you very briefly. I may overstate somewhere but more or less this is how it is.

CCDs as such are better in image quality, less distortion and higher resolution. CCD uses special manufacturing process transporting charge across the chip. High quality sensors and better light sensitivity is obtained but more expensive and consumes more power with heat generation.

CMOSs uses traditional process with many transistors to a pixel transporting charge in a more popular semi-conductor process.

CMOS is widely manufactured and comparetively less expensive. Furthermore, it uses way less power, maybe upto even factor 80-100 compared to CCD. For commercial viability, CMOS is more used currently in Cameras by leading manufacturers.

But that's still not the end equation if you talk about cameras. Besides, chip, its also camera design, handling, body, quality, durability, reliability, functionality, commercial aspect, manufacturing and above all, offered lens quality, just to name a few. The list is very long.

Both Canon and Nikon can fulfill more than what you require. They have a full range of equipment and are among the best in market today.

For current Cameras, look at my comments above for selection criteria.

Hope this answers your query.
Many regards. Ajay

[Joy]

Originally Posted by Ajay Narayan

....
CCDs as such are better in image quality, less distortion and higher resolution. CCD uses special manufacturing process transporting charge across the chip. High quality sensors and better light sensitivity is obtained but more expensive and consumes more power with heat generation.

CMOSs uses traditional process with many transistors to a pixel transporting charge in a more popular semi-conductor process.

CMOS is widely manufactured and comparetively less expensive. Furthermore, it uses way less power, maybe upto even factor 80-100 compared to CCD. For commercial viability, CMOS is more used currently in Cameras by leading manufacturers.

....

Hope this answers your query.
Many regards. Ajay

Sorry to bug you more but if CCD is better why most full frame dslr's using CMOS (called APS or something, can't recall exactly)? Most of the sites gives confusing answers.

Let's make it more clearer, as a pro what would you prefer?