[ikoneer]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

USA is the land of plenty. So no matter where you go you should be able to find some specialized camera shops. If you find yourself in New York I would highly recommend visiting B&H
Good luck and enjoy your stay in the US. We sure did!

Jeroen

You did set the mood very well Jeroen New York is definitely on the list and I will sure visit the store. Internet can never replace the joy of window shopping

Thanks dude for the good info and my excitement has just been turbo charged.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by ikoneer

Thanks Amit, what are the models to consider in canon at the same price range

600D and if you can push a bit up then 650D and 60D is really good.
There are several deals going on for 60D right now a mid tier body will be good for you in long run.

No point in buying T5i or 700D as it is exactly same as 650D.

Lenses to look for Canon 50 F1.8 , Tamron 17-50 F2.8 ( buy only body in this case) , Sigma 30 F1.4 ( best for crop body and there are fantastic deals on the outgoing model as new Sigma30 F1.4 with USB dock is introduced)
there is slight difference as old model had 8 aperture blades and new one has 9 but Sigma 30 F1.4 was always a fantastic lens.

If you are looking for small stealthy kit for street Canon 40 F2.8 STM.

If you are interested in UWA then Canon 10-22 , Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 11-16 as per your choice.


For purchasing look for deals on Canon direct store apart from Amazon, Adorama and B&H.

For bare basic starter kit my recommendation is Canon 60D + Tamron 17-50 F2.8 + Canon 50 F1.8

[ikoneer]

Originally Posted by amitk26

600D and if you can push a bit up then 650D and 60D is really good.
There are several deals going on for 60D right now a mid tier body will be good for you in long run.

For purchasing look for deals on Canon direct store apart from Amazon, Adorama and B&H.

For bare basic starter kit my recommendation is Canon 60D + Tamron 17-50 F2.8 + Canon 50 F1.8

Amit, thanks for all the options. Honestly, I am lost in all the specs that you have provided and will go with your bare basic starter kit recommendation.
Will it be too naive to ask the difference between tamron and canon 50, can you explain in non tech terms please?
I have a Nikkor 28-80mm lens available with me, this was from my old Nikon f70, will it work on these dslr cameras?
Visiting B&H is definitely on the list, point noted, will also look at the canon stores.

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by ampere

Definitely 24-105 F4 IS L is a amazing walk through lens. But I would still recommend a 70-200 because you can get amazing candids too.

I have a Canon EF 24-105 L f/4 and yes it is quite good but of course not the same in portraits as my sole prime lens (85 f/1.8). As a zoom EF lens, perhaps 24-105 mm is more versatile and cheaper than the 24-70. With the 24-105 mm and 85 mm in my kit, I think I can more or less cover most of my shooting ranges with future purchase of 70-200 f/4 IS USM. However that costs close to 80-90K and is out for the moment. Regarding 24-105 vs 70-200 mm, it will come down to what lenses you have and what you plan to shoot mostly. 70-200 mm is not wide but covers the longer lengths. 24-105 mm is a very good lens for general purpose though.

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

In all honesty I have no experience buying my photographic equipment in India. I've been in Delhi for 8 months and nothing, not a single store comes close to what you will find in the USA. Maybe price wise there's not much difference these days. But if you just would like to indulge and spend literally a few hours just mooching around photographic equipment, talking to knowledgable and friendly staff in a shop that basicly more or less stocks everything, the US is difficult to beat. On photography and most other hobbies too, if I'm honest.

Apart from the shopping experience, price wise there is a substantial difference between US and Indian prices. Of course if you pay custom duty, the price advantage of US goes down to 5-10%. I recently bought a 85 mm f/1.8 from B&H online, and it was selling for US$369 (around Rs. 20,000) for free delivery in US. In India, it sells for around Rs. 30-32,000. So a US resident pays 30-35% less than a person residing in India. For other photo equipment (and in general for most electronics, computer, etc), prices in US are much lower than in India.

[jacs]

Originally Posted by ampere

Definitely 24-105 F4 IS L is a amazing walk through lens. But I would still recommend a 70-200 because you can get amazing candids too.

Originally Posted by vasudeva

I have a Canon EF 24-105 L f/4 and yes it is quite good but of course not the same in portraits as my sole prime lens (85 f/1.8). As a zoom EF lens, perhaps 24-105 mm is more versatile and cheaper than the 24-70. With the 24-105 mm and 85 mm in my kit, I think I can more or less cover most of my shooting ranges with future purchase of 70-200 f/4 IS USM. However that costs close to 80-90K and is out for the moment. Regarding 24-105 vs 70-200 mm, it will come down to what lenses you have and what you plan to shoot mostly. 70-200 mm is not wide but covers the longer lengths. 24-105 mm is a very good lens for general purpose though.

Thanks Ampere and Vasu. I'll purchase Zoom only after I feel it and convince myself that it fits my need. UWA is anyways in my radar, just looking around for an irresistible deal!

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

Apart from the shopping experience, price wise there is a substantial difference between US and Indian prices. Of course if you pay custom duty, the price advantage of US goes down to 5-10%. I recently bought a 85 mm f/1.8 from B&H online, and it was selling for US$369 (around Rs. 20,000) for free delivery in US. In India, it sells for around Rs. 30-32,000. So a US resident pays 30-35% less than a person residing in India. For other photo equipment (and in general for most electronics, computer, etc), prices in US are much lower than in India.

Street prices for Nikon's products are more or less within 5-10% of US retail prices at B&H/Adorama/Amazon. Believe it or not sometimes you get it at US prices here or, very rarely, even slightly cheaper.

While both companies raised prices last year due to the depreciating INR, Canon's price increase was much more which is why you see a substantial difference between India and US pricing.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by jacs

Thanks Ampere and Vasu. I'll purchase Zoom only after I feel it and convince myself that it fits my need. UWA is anyways in my radar, just looking around for an irresistible deal!

Originally Posted by vasudeva

I have a Canon EF 24-105 L f/4 and yes it is quite good but of course not the same in portraits as my sole prime lens (85 f/1.8). As a zoom EF lens, perhaps 24-105 mm is more versatile and cheaper than the 24-70. With the 24-105 mm and 85 mm in my kit, I think I can more or less cover most of my shooting ranges with future purchase of 70-200 f/4 IS USM. However that costs close to 80-90K and is out for the moment. Regarding 24-105 vs 70-200 mm, it will come down to what lenses you have and what you plan to shoot mostly. 70-200 mm is not wide but covers the longer lengths. 24-105 mm is a very good lens for general purpose though.

Very true. Depends on what one wants to shoot. Between 70-200 and 24-105, one really needs to decide. I wanted a bit more of range. And since I was not looking for birding kind of requirements, 70-200 was clear choice. (Since I would never be buying 70-300 and the likes)

Then I shifted to a 10-22 for UWA from 18-55. Between these two lenses, I almost never felt the need for 18-55. In fact now I never take it with me for shoots. I also had a thought of getting 24-70 to cover the full spectrum, but then I never felt it as a necessity for me. Meanwhile the prices went through the roof (>2000$) and there ended my quest! To make matters more confusing Canon now put in the old 24-70 2.8 price point (1200-1500$) the new 24-70 F 4 L IS USM. I was thinking why would one want this when the 24-105 F4 IS USM is available?


The only addition that I am considering is a 100mm F 2.8 Macro (Non L).

Regarding portraits with 50mm prime, I find them too soft many a times if I shoot with very shallow depths (F 1.8/2/2.2/2.8). Never found them to be sharp (Not sure what I am doing wrong). So I try to shoot with 70-200 itself and the difference is amazing!

Originally Posted by R2D2

While both companies raised prices last year due to the depreciating INR, Canon's price increase was much more which is why you see a substantial difference between India and US pricing.

+1. When I got by 70-200 it was the same price as Amazon. Now it has gone through the roof. But still its worth saving for; instead of buying the cheaper 55-250.

[vasudeva]

If you read my post 11658, I had mentioned that with effective customs duty (not mentioned was the freight cost of shipping from US to India), the price advantage of US whittles down to 5-10%. For people in India ordering from US, that would be mostly not worth it.

However, if someone is visiting the US, then in the specific case camera and equipment (this is a DSLR thread), it should be worthwhile. Not just cameras, a lot of Indians go to US, Dubai, etc and come home with a lot of electronics stuff that was significantly cheaper there (since they do not pay custom duties and freight is zero if you ignore the travel cost for presumably a leisure trip).

On a comparison between 24-70 and 24-105 mm, from various reviews, shopping sites, and forum talk (canonrumors), if we talk about comparable price range 24-70 (f/4) and 24-105 (f/4), the image quality and bokeh on 24-70 is supposed to be somewhat better than 24-105 mm but (a) focal length is max at 70 mm which is barely there for portraits (b) 24-105 is supposed to have better IS (c) 24-70 f/4 is around US$400 dearer than 24-105 f/4. There is also a 24-70 f/2.8 that sells in excess of $2000. There is a whole lot of web content on the 24-70 vs 24-105.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by ampere

Regarding portraits with 50mm prime, I find them too soft many a times if I shoot with very shallow depths (F 1.8/2/2.2/2.8). Never found them to be sharp (Not sure what I am doing wrong). So I try to shoot with 70-200 itself and the difference is amazing!.

Fast 50mm primes are a bit soft towards max aperture. Normally, stopping down to F/2.8 or F4 should give you best results. It also increases the DOF.

You could be seeing softness in your images due to very slight back or front focus. Depending on your camera you may be able to perform micro adjustments. Though IMO these adjustments are best left alone. If you do suspect focus issues and the camera doesn't have MAF adjustments take the lens to the Canon ASC for a check-up.

Originally Posted by ampere

When I got by 70-200 it was the same price as Amazon. Now it has gone through the roof. But still its worth saving for; instead of buying the cheaper 55-250.

Agreed The 70-200 F/2.8 is a gem and a far better choice than the 55-250. No comparison actually.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Fast 50mm primes are a bit soft towards max aperture. Normally, stopping down to F/2.8 or F4 should give you best results. It also increases the DOF.

I think this is the reason. There are no focus issues. Since DOF is so shallow, it turns softer. But then if I am not using the the max aperture for which the lens was bought, how do I gain. For F4 and above I might try and make the 70-200 work. Some how not able to get a good solution. Even F1.4 or 1.2 might not solve the problem. Then my question is, how to best use the prime lenses at those max apertures. My use for the prime was always indoors at max apertures. The only approach looks like is keep it at F4, but use flash. I was trying to get the snaps without snaps. But looks like that is not possible.

Agreed The 70-200 F/2.8 is a gem and a far better choice than the 55-250. No comparison actually.

2.8 is way above my limit now and was even then ! I have the F4 IS. It literally stays on my camera almost all the time. Its my walk through lens.
Only when I need UWA, I change it to 10-22. Else its 70-200 all the time !

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by ampere

2.8 is way above my limit now and was even then ! I have the F4 IS. It literally stays on my camera almost all the time. Its my walk through lens.
Only when I need UWA, I change it to 10-22. Else its 70-200 all the time !

Of course 70-200 mm 2.8 IS II is simply great. But it costs >$2000 and weighs 1.6 kg. For present relevant choices, there would be three 70-200 mm: f/2.8 IS II ($2100-2300), f/2.8 IS ($2000), and F/4 IS ($1200-1400).I have on my mind though the 70-200 mm f/4 IS which costs around $1200-1400 (Rs. 80-90K in India) and weighs 756 g. Compared with 4 IS, I cannot simply pay 60-70K more for the 2.8 (IS/IS II or carry an additional 800 g). Even if I had the money, the additional weight itself would be killing.

See this comparison of specs:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/len...s-ii.htm#table

[ampere]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

I have on my mind though the 70-200 mm f/4 IS which costs around $1200-1400 (Rs. 80-90K in India) and weighs 756 g. Compared with 4 IS, I cannot simply pay 60-70K more for the 2.8 (IS/IS II or carry an additional 800 g). Even if I had the money, the additional weight itself would be killing.

The weight was the other reason apart from money I went with F4 IS.
Ken Rockwell is the first site I look for lens reviews, specs and feedbacks!

[VKS]

Very true . I have been to us last month and didn't find much price difference on camera body . They are more or less same in India and usa . Extra needs to be paid for international warranty.

The same is not true for lens though .
Ex.canon 50-250 zoom lens is 230$ at best buy and even cheaper at amazon .

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by ampere

But then if I am not using the the max aperture for which the lens was bought, how do I gain. For F4 and above I might try and make the 70-200 work. Some how not able to get a good solution. Even F1.4 or 1.2 might not solve the problem. Then my question is, how to best use the prime lenses at those max apertures. My use for the prime was always indoors at max apertures. The only approach looks like is keep it at F4, but use flash. I was trying to get the snaps without snaps. But looks like that is not possible.

I use my 50mm 1.4G lens at max aperture otherwise I believe one is not doing it justice. Fortunately my copy is good..I won't say perfect because no lens truly is.

So stopping down in case you notice softness is just a way to go from good to better. Unless you are really pixel peeping or there's a noticeable back/front focus issue it should do.

The 50mm 1.2 or the 85mm 1.2 would just make things far more challenging with their micron thin DOF. Beautiful lenses though.

Originally Posted by ampere

2.8 is way above my limit now and was even then ! I have the F4 IS

The F4 is no slouch when it comes to IQ and you do have the lower weight advantage which goes a long way to ensure it is used more frequently. Heavier the lens, higher the chances you keep it at home.

Unfortunately Nikon only recently introduced a 70-200 F/4 much after I had already purchased the 2.8 version. The F4 is supposedly as good as the expensive and faster sibling. There's no budget left for any more lenses.