[TSEA]

@Mayank,

1. When I bought Xsi it came with the 18-55 kit lens. I tried to manage with the Kit lens, but within 1-2 weeks, I strongly felt the need to have more range. And eventually I ended up buying an additional zoom lens. I would have definately saved some money buying everything together.

2. Recently my friend bought a 5d + 17-40L + 28-135 + 70-300 (second hand) from a seller through craigslist at a very good price. Agreed it was used, but still in good condition. My reccommendation is you should research the used market, atleast for the lenses.

[DerAlte]

I had followed Sam's lead and bought a D40 a while back, and I am as happy as any other D40 user (I am not an expert). I don't take any special precautions, and the camera does what it is designed to do. In all my trips one charge has lasted throughout (mixed daylight and flash situations), and the pics I get are pretty decent.

VR is useful at long focal lengths and slow shutter speeds (even mounted on a tripod, with self-timer, there is always a bit of shake), but I have not felt the absence. Primarily because I rarely if ever shoot in low light, and I check the computed shutter speed both in auto and manual modes (aperture priority).

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by MC Mayank

What is the general difference in price for lenses between India and the US?

Official prices are 50% - 100% more. Grey market is comparable to the US.

Would one seriously advice getting the prime lens because it's much cheaper here?

Yes - If you really want to learn photography you need a prime.

Or should I buy just the D40 kit with 18-55mm for now and then as I get well versed with the basics of photography and really know what tools I need, I could go for the upgrades at that point.

$200 more ain't that much - get the 55-200VR.

I was thinking of the 55-200 mm VR to have more zoom than the 18-55mm but I am not sure now what to do.

uhh it not an either/or situation. The 55-200 is a telephoto zoom. the 18-55 is a normal zoom that goes from moderate wide to moderate tele. The kit helps cover the most used focal lenghts, albeit with slow zooms (meaning they don't let in too much light). You can compensate for the slow zooms by getting a fast, cheap, normal prime like the 35/1.8, which will teach you about depth of field and throwing the background out of focus.

[RufRoc]

Originally Posted by Torqy

In Bangalore, Jayesh Mehta of Fotocircle can get you Tamron stuff.
Yesterday my friend picked up a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 from him. -- Torqy

Torqy, if it's not too much trouble, could you find how much was paid for it. I've SMS'ed Jayesh but yet to get a reply.

I've got another question ... not really photography related but would appreciate a response

Canon currently has a 200$ instant rebate on the Canon XSi (450D) if bought with the kit lens plus 55-250 IS and that amounts to 849$ (approx. 42K), add 79$ (UPS) to that and it totals at 920$ (approx 45.5K). Now, if I ship it, approximately how much would I end up paying at customs (does it depend on the whim of the customs officer on duty or is it transparent, like the 25,000 Rs limit per person when travelling by air). I understand that when you include shipping it makes sense to buy it grey, out here but curious about the customs duty and I'm sure so many would have had some experience shipping to India.

Btw, there are Canon rebates on the L series lens too. It's from May 3rd to sometime in July (Spring rebates?)

[finneyp]

Rufroc, customs duty for Camera shipped-in from abroad is approx 21.65%

[janitha]

Originally Posted by finneyp

Rufroc, customs duty for Camera shipped-in from abroad is approx 21.65%

Then, presuming that they will not have warranty in India, will not gray be cheaper?

[sukiwa]

Has anyone used buying via bhindia.com?
B&H has liaison office in India, they import & directly deliver to buyer within 7 working days.

customs duty for Camera shipped-in from abroad is approx 21.65%

bhindia.com states that customs duty for digital camera is 31.7%.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by sukiwa

Has anyone used buying via bhindia.com?
B&H has liaison office in India, they import & directly deliver to buyer within 7 working days.

bhindia.com states that customs duty for digital camera is 31.7%.

Is that real??
I had no clue...

[Torqy]

Originally Posted by RufRoc

Torqy, if it's not too much trouble, could you find how much was paid for it. I've SMS'ed Jayesh but yet to get a reply.

18.5K for the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (i guess it had a built-in motor).

[RufRoc]

@Torqy: Thanks for that.

@finneyp & sukiwa: Thanks for the info.

@janitha: I agree. With these custom rates ... buying in grey out here is a much better option

[Sam Kapasi]

Friends, Bourbons and infantrymen,
I do not come to praise Caeser but to gently caress his inner thighs with my mustache...

I have a D40. I want a telephoto. I have a 70-300, 4/5.6 Nikkor, but that damn thing only autofocuses on the D70.

So now I want a telephoto zoom that will autofocus on my D40. Why do I want a Telephoto? For my various travels of course. Why do I need autofocus - it's a right royal PITA to manually focus at anything above 200mm.

Now keep in mind that my camera costs 25K with the kit lens before you advise me some $1500 lens.

I originally thought of this

Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. I can get this for about $530. Costs more than my darn camera.

Then I got very very tempted by this.



Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon. It works with D40 and costs about $160.

Please tell me it's a good lens so I can have a telephoto for $160. YAY!

[redrage]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I originally thought of this
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. I can get this for about $530. Costs more than my darn camera.

Then I got very very tempted by this.

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon. It works with D40 and costs about $160.

Please tell me it's a good lens so I can have a telephoto for $160. YAY!

@Sam: Please blindly go in for the Nikkor 70-300 VR, Its a sharp piece of glass and works wonders on the D40 with lovely Bokeh too, I have used the Sigma 70-300 and somehow i feel the quality is never there, purple fringing,Chromatic Aberration's, slow focusing at low light. The 70-300 VR from NIKON is the clear winner here and the cost is clearly justified with nice & sharp pictures . If you plan on doing macro photography it makes sense to add the Nikkor 105 mm lens later on. But for now it makes more sense to buy the Nikkor 70-300 VR since you are posting pictures on travelogues and the Sigma just wont do justice to low light/other shots. Its just my opinion on using both the lens , others may differ.

[gd1418]

Sammy Boy,

This indeed is a good lens with good IQ. A bit noisy though and the AF is a tad slow. Go for it..

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Then I got very very tempted by this.

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO for Nikon. It works with D40 and costs about $160.

Please tell me it's a good lens so I can have a telephoto for $160. YAY!

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by redrage

@Sam: Please blindly go in for the Nikkor 70-300 VR, Its a sharp piece of glass and works wonders on the D40 with lovely Bokeh too,

I agree that the Nikkor will be better than the Sigma. If there was a small price difference, I would not even have posted this question.

But the Nikkor costs over 3 times as much!! I think my question is

Is the Nikon lens worth it at three times the cost of the Sigma?

Plus, my use is limited, but yes I agree, the light conditions may not be good.

[amitoj]

Isnt the Sigma lens without VR? Comparing a VR lens with a non VR lens is like comparing a FI with NA
Plus, non VR lens under lowlight == must use tripod