[Mad Monkey]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

A good all round lens is the Sigma 18-200. If you can afford more than the OS version has image stabilization.
The 70-300 is only for telephoto.
There is a tamron 18-250 also which has longer reach.

If you want a nice expensive all around lens then the nikon 18-200VR is there

the Sigma 18-200 with VR is around 1500 Dhirams in Dubai
the nikon 18-200 VR 3400 dhirams in dubai

I am currently using the Nikon ......

[rjstyles69]

tanveer let me add , the Sigma 70-300mm is a tab bit slower when it comes to focusing in comparo to the Nikon 70-300mm.
Also makes a lousie grinding noise while focussing which I hate most.

I currently have the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro lens and I rarely use it, more-so only for macro's.

Avi ' depends on what your budget is, why don't you try the Nikkor AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G-type lens. I have used this earlier is a truly VFM considering the fact that we don't really do pro-photography and isn't too heavy on the vallet.

Else if you can stretch your budget you always have the Nikkor AF 70-300mm f/4.5 -5.6 ED-type with VR.

The best lens like Tanveer said, nothing to beat the 18-200VR lens .

[kvish]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

There is a tamron 18-250 also which has longer reach.

I second this too. Check out the flickr and pbase photo samples of this lens. It is very sharp. I was looking at this lens until the dreaded f2.8 word hit me.

[kchatt]

Originally Posted by kvish

I second this too. Check out the flickr and pbase photo samples of this lens. It is very sharp. I was looking at this lens until the dreaded f2.8 word hit me.

I have come to the DSLR world just a couple of days back. but from my experience in the SLR world where I really dug up stuff, I find the f4.5 - 5.6 a tad slow when doing low light photos in a film SLR. If I try to do some close photos without flash, its tough without a tripod.

With my Rebel XT I have the 18 - 55 lens, but I want a faster lens, the 18 - 200 sounds good, but what is the VFM? I just love to do night photos. I have been contemplating for a while on asking Rudra's opinion on this. After all he is the expert. Compared to normal SLRs the Digi SLRs with a slow lens what do we lose? Rudra want your inputs

[Samurai]

After a long wait, E3 is finally came out in November. I have the funds earmarked for it and a way to get it from abroad. Well, they don't seem to be releasing it anytime in India.

But, I am having that last minute pang. I know haven't grown past my current dSLR (E-500). I mean, the current weakness in my photography is not really due to my equipment or even technique, but it is due to my lack of skill in composition and post-processing. That's not going to dramatically improve with a new dSLR.

So why E3? Well, it will make up for certain deficiency in my current dSLR. Much better lowlight AF, much better performance at high ISO, much better lowlight shooting thanks to IS, articulating Live-view for shooting high-held/low-held compositions and bright/big viewfinder. But the first 3 points are all about low light performance. All my lenses remain same, so nothing changes there.

Since I can't really sell my current dSLR body (no resale marker in India), I won't even get any decent exchange value. So, does it make sense splurging 70K just for better lowlight performance and some extra stuff like better VF and articulating LV?

[mobike008]

Originally Posted by rjstyles69

Avi ' depends on what your budget is, why don't you try the Nikkor AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G-type lens. I have used this earlier is a truly VFM considering the fact that we don't really do pro-photography and isn't too heavy on the vallet.

Else if you can stretch your budget you always have the Nikkor AF 70-300mm f/4.5 -5.6 ED-type with VR.

The best lens like Tanveer said, nothing to beat the 18-200VR lens .

Riju, thanks for the advice, can you let me know the approximate pricing of these three lens?

Also what is the difference between the two 70-300mm nikkor lens?

[tsk1979]

Buy the E-3, you want it. Currently you are looking for excuses not to spend so much.
Its a bit like buying a new car when your old car is still running. You keep on putting off the purchase telling yourself that the old one still goes on and on!

Once you have the E-3 you will push yourself to higher limits, trust me.
I would not have taken a few shots last night which I did, just because I bought a new remote bulb release

[surajs]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

I would not have taken a few shots last night which I did, just because I bought a new remote bulb release

tsk, how much did they charge you for remote bulb release?

[ravikn]

Folks, am in need of buying a decent digital camera, the one I liked very much are Sony DSC-H7/s and Canon S3-IS. is it worth buying it in Bangalore as the price tag is close to 23K?

[alli.gator]

Simple thumbrule: choose canon for optics, sony for electronics. Canon pics will have more depth while in the Sony the picture will save faster etc. OK OK, huge generalizations, but I hope you get the picture.

Might make sense to check if anyone can carry a camera back for you from the US. For the price they're quoting for S3IS here, you can get an S5IS over there, if you're not worried too much about the warranty.

[rjstyles69]

ravi Canon S3IS is no longer in production AFAIK, instead Canon has released the S5IS. I hope you were quoted 23k for the Canon S5IS and not the S3IS.

I think crazy_driver has a S3IS , PM him and find out the exact price he paid for it in grey.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by surajs

tsk, how much did they charge you for remote bulb release?

4.82$, I ordered it online from dealextreme.com

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Buy the E-3, you want it. Currently you are looking for excuses not to spend so much.
Its a bit like buying a new car when your old car is still running. You keep on putting off the purchase telling yourself that the old one still goes on and on!

It is not the same. I know I am yet to make the best use of the current E-500, that's what makes me feel bad. The major benefit of E3 is that I don't have give up in lowlight conditions. Currently, shooting lowlight is a major effort, my Kambala shots were a major headache to shoot.

Originally Posted by alli.gator

Simple thumbrule: choose canon for optics, sony for electronics. Canon pics will have more depth while in the Sony the picture will save faster etc. OK OK, huge generalizations, but I hope you get the picture.

What about other manufacturers? Carl Zeiss lens that comes with Sony is no slouch either.

[HotChillyPepper]

Originally Posted by ravikn

Folks, am in need of buying a decent digital camera, the one I liked very much are Sony DSC-H7/s and Canon S3-IS. is it worth buying it in Bangalore as the price tag is close to 23K?

S5 IS is released in market and i purchased one from China 3 months ago for my friend. Its having 8mpixel sensor and have improved speed. I own Lumix DMC F50. Its an amazing Camera true value for money. Check it out if the budget matches(i dono price in india) I got it from Singapore.

[alli.gator]

Originally Posted by Samurai

What about other manufacturers? Carl Zeiss lens that comes with Sony is no slouch either.

Very true about the Carl Zeiss. The only thing is that Canon/Nikon have imaging origins. That experience they could translate to better pictures through the use of in-house lens. Sony on the other hand always excelled at the other parts (circuitry, storage, image boosting). Of course, for a typical user, the "better picture" is a very subjective thing, and they are happy as long as the family outing or the occasional sunset is captured well, and the camera that gives those results is small and looks good.

The above thoughts apply to digicams only, not to camcorders. Canon has very poor low light record over there.