[Torqueguru]

I know what equipment he uses dude. You dont get the point anyways, and I am also resting my case. Peaceout.

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Do you still find those ISO performance acceptable? If you do so...well then I'm sorry it simply doesn't work out for me and most serious photographers.

I clearly stated IT doesn't work for me. My 50D goes upto ISO 12800. That doesn't mean that those photographs are usable either!!

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Please dont bring in esoteric comparisons with Jets in here. Every camera basically does the same thing, some do it better thats all.

Some jets fly better some just fly better. No wonder we now got Sukhio's instead of the flying bisons.

Anyway like TG also stated. You just are not getting the point and feel like hitting my head against a wall. And I'm tired of trying to explain.

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I wish to buy a black-and-white digital camera. Please guide me. Most cameras are black-and-black and the one black-and-white camera I saw was very expensive.

I also want that black and white camera!! Lol.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Fortunately advanced dSLR is not like a Nunchaku. The dSLR will still let a novice take decent shots, while with the Nunchaku he will beat himself black and blue.

So, even if you start with a D90, you should be good. Go for 18-200mm VR which is a good walkaround lens for beginners.

I totally agree with Samurai. Go VR it always pays for better shots in low light conditions.

Regards,

Anirban.

[extreme_torque]

This is hilarious stuff.... came across this on a photography forum...

YouTube - Hitler rants about D3x

[given2fly]

Anyone wants a B&W camera, dump your fav brand and go Canon.

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

This is hilarious stuff.... came across this on a photography forum...

Lol that really was hilarious. Ken Rockwell again lol. BTW which movie is it?? I've seen it but can't remember the name.

@ E_T: We've both got something in common...Do you know what? It's the insane Delhite Attitude

[RufRoc]

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Hahahahahaha! That was just too too too awesome man! I am laughing since morning and yet not stopped1 Hahaha!

Ridiculously funny video ... had me laughing my head off especially the part where the actual video line and the text ends with 'Stalin'

Anyways, I have a question for the forum. I'd planned to upgrade from my P&S Nikon S10 to a Canon EOS 450D (though my first choice was the 40D). But I've now decided to hold till the crazy prices drop a bit, atleast back to the old price. The 450D with kit lens which earlier retailed at 640$, was 699$ as of yesterday on Amazon. The 40D body has gone from the approx 810$ to around 890$.

Well, back to my question which is about my first lens. I might get the 50mm f/1.8 too but I would like to know from you if choosing the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (approx 420$) over the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS makes sense. The Tamron lacks IS but would it make up with it being a fast lens?

And to put things in perspective, I'm a dSLR beginner and this would just be a walkaround lens to shoot people, street experiences, cars, pretty girls (not necessarily in that order)

[s0uljah]

Ruf, I was in a similar spot last month. I went through this debate of walk around lens VS 2 lens for a while as well as 1000D or 40D (I know there isnt a comparison).

In the end Iv landed up with :

Canon 40D (Malayasia warranty, as good as grey)
18-55is (used)
55-250is (1 year Malayasia warranty, 1 year international)
Hoya 58mm UV filter
Hood Cap
4GB Kingston 266x CF Card
All Weather Bag

It amounted to 58500 INR. Not exactly a steal considering the 18-55 is a used unit.

Having to change a lens would be very deterring for most people jumping into this for fun, I wasnt able to find a good enough lens at the right price and hence went for the tried and tested twin combo.

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by RufRoc

I might get the 50mm f/1.8 too but I would like to know from you if choosing the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (approx 420$) over the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS makes sense. The Tamron lacks IS but would it make up with it being a fast lens?

And to put things in perspective, I'm a dSLR beginner and this would just be a walkaround lens to shoot people, street experiences, cars, pretty girls (not necessarily in that order)

Well the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is an excellent lens. It's very crisp and though it lacks IS but it overcomes that problem with the overall f/2.8 easily. A friend of mine has been using it for some time with a D80 and she's managed very crisp images. It's also a very good portrait lens in low light and indoor conditions. I'd say go for it.

The order of the photographic subjects is very well understood brother

Regards,

Anirban.

[RufRoc]

Originally Posted by s0uljah

In the end Iv landed up with :
Canon 40D (Malayasia warranty, as good as grey)
18-55is (used)
55-250is (1 year Malayasia warranty, 1 year international)
Hoya 58mm UV filter
Hood Cap
4GB Kingston 266x CF Card
All Weather Bag

souljah, I really really wish I could afford the 40D right now. The 450D is a small compromise on my part, handled both cams and the 40D did feel a lot more solid but then I'm still looking out for my rich long lost uncle ... and till that day this is all that I'm going to be able to afford.

I gave the EF-S 55-250 IS a thought too but then decided to save up for a while and get the EF 70-300 IS instead.

Regarding your 18-55 IS being a used lens, well ... I don't think lens depreciate much, do they? So that would still be quite a good price for the 40D with 2 lens combo.

[gd1418]

Lenses per se don't depriciate much if handled with care & love. Normally an avid photographer do not sell their lenses that they have acquired over a period of time.

Used lenses do raise a doubt at times. Can't make out if they are dropped or the inner alignment has gone bust. Sticky zooms are also a problem. If you are lucky, maybe you get a decent used glass.

Originally Posted by RufRoc

Regarding your 18-55 IS being a used lens, well ... I don't think lens depreciate much, do they? So that would still be quite a good price for the 40D with 2 lens combo.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I wish to buy a black-and-white digital camera.

Originally Posted by RufRoc

I gave the EF-S 55-250 IS a thought too but then decided to save up for a while and get the EF 70-300 IS instead.

if you need a long zoom right now get the 55-250. I would have if it was available when I got the 70-300. Not that it is better than the 70-300 but the differences are minor. My belief is that sooner or later FF DSLRs will come down in price. When they do the comapnies will introduce FF glass for these cheaper FF-DSLRs at that time one can shift and sell the entire kit.

When I was looking for a DSLR kit I set my self a budget and the kindof lenses I needed.

I started with the budget and application: what was I going to shoot, in what light etc..and eventually what did I want to spend on a DSLR kit.
then I chose the most economical lens system that had the lenses that fit my application (between Canon and Nikon becuase these 2 have more service centers in India). Then I chose a body that I could afford once the lens budget was fixed.

My dream kit at that time would have been the 5D (the 5D-II was not out) mated to the 24-70/2.8 IS and 80-400/4.5-5.6 IS this kit would have cost me in excess of 2.5L in India so I dropped the sensor size to APS-C.

I got the 40D with the 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-300/4.5-5.6 IS. If you notice that except for my wide angle starting from 27mm instead of 24mm I got very close to my goal for about Rs. 1L.

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Lol that really was hilarious. Ken Rockwell again lol. BTW which movie is it?? I've seen it but can't remember the name.

@ E_T: We've both got something in common...Do you know what? It's the insane Delhite Attitude

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Lol that really was hilarious. Ken Rockwell again lol. BTW which movie is it?? I've seen it but can't remember the name.

@ E_T: We've both got something in common...Do you know what? It's the insane Delhite Attitude

E.T must be getting hiccups! :-)

[s0uljah]

Originally Posted by RufRoc

souljah, I really really wish I could afford the 40D right now.

I gave the EF-S 55-250 IS a thought too but then decided to save up for a while and get the EF 70-300 IS instead.

Its not like I could afford it either... Im not missing that kidney anyway, it was worth it

I thought about the 70-300 too but ultimately came to understand that the 55-250is is a out and out performer for beginners glass.

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

BTW which movie is it?? I've seen it but can't remember the name.

It's called Der Untergang. The Downfall.

[Samurai]

This video was discussed before when it first came.

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...ml#post1086685 (The Digital Camera Thread: Questions, discussions, etc.)

[RufRoc]

@NomadVagabond: Thanks for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 feedback.

@souljah: Exactly ... the 55-250 IS lets you live another day, the 70-300 IS costs somewhere close to a kidney (not the healthy ones) while the L glass sucks your insides out and then puts you through those machines they make minced meat from

Originally Posted by navin

if you need a long zoom right now get the 55-250. I would have if it was available when I got the 70-300. Not that it is better than the 70-300 but the differences are minor.

Well, I somehow never thought of it that way ... my idea being that the 70-300 IS was way better (opinion not formed out of experience but reading too much into forums) . And when I think of it that way, I could actually go for the 55-250 IS instead of waiting to be able to get the 70-300 IS. Working backwards from my budget is what left me with the 450D, it's just that I keep changing my lens choices, my latest leaning being towards the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 instead of the canon kit 18-55 IS.

Thanks Navin.