Back to square-one

[ret]

I gifted my Olympus to my bro so I am looking for a new DSLR .... having tried the Oly, the temptation is to try something else this time .... any recommendations!!!

the D90 looks good and at the moment looks within my budget but with the launch of the D90 and the 50D, the prices on models like the 40D would probably go down making them an attractive option .... other theory is to get a basic body with a good lens

I would also appreciate information on some of the good lenses from various brands because the kit lenses may not be that good

[tegan]

I gifted my Olympus to my bro so I am looking for a new DSLR .... having tried the Oly, the temptation is to try something else this time .... any recommendations!!!

the D90 looks good and at the moment looks within my budget but with the launch of the D90 and the 50D, the prices on models like the 40D would probably go down making them an attractive option .... other theory is to get a basic body with a good lens

I would also appreciate information on some of the good lenses from various brands because the kit lenses may not be that good

I would be attracted to the D90.

Tegan

[ret]

I would be attracted to the D90.

Tegan

yeah the D90 appears to be one of the best options :D .... but i will check it out in detail before putting $1450 + tax for the kit

[ret]

What would be a good lens for the D90, the kit 18-105 or 18-200?

[Marko]

I used the 18-200 last week on my friend's Nikon camera. I did not inspect the shots on the computer, but I can say that this is a VERY VERY versatile lens. It's not a fixed aperture lens but I think it starts at F3.5 which is not bad.

[tegan]

Surprising considering the great range but the 18 to 200 has an excellent reputation even among the reviewers, so I would agree with Marko and tend toward that one.

Tegan

[kiley9806]

i use the 18-200mm on my d80 and its great... no complaints, unless you want to do super duper macro.

[ret]

in terms of quality, how do the 18-105 and 18-200 compare?

if i m not wrong then is the 18-105 developed for the D90?

[tirediron]

Ehhh... I'm going to be the voice of dissent here. First off, stay away from the 18-105, unless you never plan to change lenses. It has a plastic lens mount. Let's see; metal on the body, plastic on the lens... this isn't too hard to figure out. I've not used the 18-105 personally, so I have no knowledge of it aside from the lens mount issue, but all of the reviews I've seen indicate it be yet another slow, marginal, consumer zoom lens. You're correct; the 18-105 was developed as the kit lens for the D90.

The 18-200 has acceptable optical quality, and IMO, barely adequate build quality. As with anything that tries to do so many things, the 18-200 doesn't really do any of it really well. If you want a consumer-grade zoom, go for the 18-70 kit lens that first came out with the D70. It is a kit lens, it is slow, but it's a much better performer than either of the two mentioned above.

[ret]

tirediron, appears as if dpreview seems to agree with you on 18-200 .... they have recommended it but with reservations

Nikon 18-200 review (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-200_3p5-5p6_vr_afs_n15/page4.asp)

btw, what Canon lens would be good with the 40D/50D, i guess it would be the 17-85

[ret]

Also would appreciate info on Nikon's 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR lenses

@tirediron .... I just checked the 18-70 on the net but it seems as if it's not VR like the 18-200

[ret]

how does the Sigma 18-200 OS (http://blackphotostore.com/english/proddetail.asp?sku=6032) compare?

[scorpio_e]

What can I say, I am a Canon lover. So I would go with the 40D. You are correct. I expect the prices to go down even LOWER on the 40D since the 50D is coming out soon. I would go with the Canon as I think you can get a wide variety of third party lenses and Canon lenses. From what I understand, the Canon glass is cheaper than Nikon glass.
I would go with the 40d body and get a third party lens.

The Tamaron 28 to 75 is an excellent all around lens with a fixed 2.8. Some people complain that the 28 is not wide enough.

You could also go with the 17 to 50 and the 55-250mm f/4-5.6 EF-S IS.
A lot of people like the 17 to 50 and I have heard good things about the 55 to 250 too

If you want to know more about Canon go to:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

[tirediron]

Also would appreciate info on Nikon's 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR lenses

@tirediron .... I just checked the 18-70 on the net but it seems as if it's not VR like the 18-200

True, but do you really need a VR lens? I've been using the original image-stabilization system since the early 80s... it's called a tripod. Yes I know that sounds a little sarcastic, but the simple fact is, for the average user, in most conditions, VR/IS/Whatever is unnecessary, especially given the high-ISO performance of modern DSLRs.

Look for lenses that have the best optiecal quality. If they happen to be VR, that's a bonus, if not, who cares? Personally, I go out of my way to look for lenses that don't have VR built in, as I see it as one more thing to break.

[mindforge]

The stabilizing is actually pretty good. If I am shooting at 200mm, I can see a definite difference... but only at about 1/5 to 1/60 shutterspeed, and even then... I only notice a profound difference at about 1/5 to 1/25 shutterspeed. It doesn't really help after 1/60... well maybe it does but I haven't really noticed but I am one of those guys that stands right, holds the camera right, breathes right, etc... I think the balancing really helps shooting a little faster on the fly though. You don't have to breathe right, etc.

Besides, I can only hand shoot at about 1/5 anyway with or without balance and without the balance I have to shoot a few in succession and one of them come out good. With the balance, it usually comes out great.

[tegan]

tirediron, appears as if dpreview seems to agree with you on 18-200 .... they have recommended it but with reservations

Nikon 18-200 review (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-200_3p5-5p6_vr_afs_n15/page4.asp)

btw, what Canon lens would be good with the 40D/50D, i guess it would be the 17-85

According to Popular Photography, the Sony 350A has a faster autofocus system and metering than the Canon 40D. The 50D I don't think has been reviewed yet.

Tegan

[ret]

Today, I visited a store, inquired about the D90 and the store said that if I placed an order the D90 will be delivered in a few days [but don't know if I should order it without feeling it in my hands] .... then I checked out the 40D with the 17-85 lens and boy this thing is a beauty and feels solid. the view through the viewfinder is amazing. i guess 40D uses the pentaprism [D90 has pentaprism too]

below are the approximate price calculations:
D90 body = 1100
D40 body = 1000 to 1100

Now add similar lenses for price comparison,
D90 w/ 16-85 VR = 1800
40D w/ 17-85 IS = 1400 to 1500
50D w/ 17-85 IS = 1800
D90 w/ 18-200 VR = 1800
50D w/ the new 18-200 = 2000

My budget is around 1500 so that gets me
D90 w/ 18-105 lens [kit] = 1350-1450
40D w/ the 17-85 lens [kit] = 1400-1500

Advantages [from the top of my head]:
D90: More features, More pixels, 11 point AF, better LCD, HD Video, higher ISO range, HDMI output, 2 years Canada warranty .... and Chase Jarvis and friend's recommendation :p (http://www.chasejarvisandfriends.com/)
40D: comparatively better lens wrt budget, faster FPS, Better body construction with Magnesium alloy casing

And as I learned from this forum, this is also about buying into a system so am evaluating .... Other option is to get something like the XSi w/ 17-85 IS for around 1100 or a good Nikon lens with a basic body

[ret]

You could also go with the 17 to 50 and the 55-250mm f/4-5.6 EF-S IS.
A lot of people like the 17 to 50 and I have heard good things about the 55 to 250 too

If you want to know more about Canon go to:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

The 17-50 with fixed F2.8 sounds good and they even have the 18-200! do they have image stabilization? .... And how would you rate lenses from Tokina and Sigma?

[scorpio_e]

The 17-50 with fixed F2.8 sounds good and they even have the 18-200! do they have image stabilization? .... And how would you rate lenses from Tokina and Sigma?

WOW !!!! Sounds like an easy question but it's not. Putting all lenses in one category from a particular manufacturer does not work. (good/bad).
I can only share you my experience.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Had it did not like it. You can pick a used one up for $50

Canon 28 to 105.. It not a bad lens at all. Used goes for about 160

Sigma 70 to 300 ..Again not a bad lens buit I found it not to focus fast


Canon 28 to 135 IS..Personally I did not like it but they are quite a few people who do. You can get a used one for about 260 and new for 315.


I have the 70 to 200 F4 L... SWEET !!!!!!! lens..fast focus..great color. About 550 new

I have very happy with the tamron 28 to 75.. great lens ..highly regarded and priced right


I have the Sigma 10-22 This fill in my wide angle.. Another nice lens

I also have the Canon 85 1.8.. Another nice Canon lens.. Sharp and fast

I can get by without IS but thats just me.

On a budget, you can get a new 40D using microsift live and get 6% cash back. $816 for a new 40D free shipping.. Leaves you some extra cash for a nice lens.
I would go for a used Tammy 17 to 50 on the Canon forum and the back it up with a new 55 to 200 IS later on :)

[scorpio_e]

The 17-50 with fixed F2.8 sounds good and they even have the 18-200! do they have image stabilization? .... And how would you rate lenses from Tokina and Sigma?

OHH Tokina and Sigma both make nice lenses. You have to do you research. Yes they do have IS..It is just called something else.

Sigma calls it OS
Tamron calls it VC


Good luck This stuff can make you head spin !!

[ret]

On a budget, you can get a new 40D using microsift live and get 6% cash back. $816 for a new 40D free shipping.. Leaves you some extra cash for a nice lens.



those seems like US stores, won't they charge duties on it?

[Travis]

Also would appreciate info on Nikon's 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR lenses

@tirediron .... I just checked the 18-70 on the net but it seems as if it's not VR like the 18-200

I have owned both the 18-55vr the 55-200vr (and even the 18-200vr)

IMO the kit 18-55vr,55-200vr rock. The 18-55 has pretty good close focusing and is sharp. The 55-200 is very sharp for a $300 lens. All in all it's a great combo, the only caveat is they are f5 lenses and ofcourse are a little slower than 2.8 glass. Unlike Tirediron, I greatly value the VR, but it depends on what your shooting. Tripods are good for staged/planned shooting but are a little cumbersome on walk abouts. VR gets you I think 2 extra stops on ver1 and 4 extra stops on ver2. This is handy when shooting with F5 glass. The VR is only effective for your shake (unlike 2.8 glass) so your subjects have to be somewhat static. If I am taking advantage of VR in a lowlight scenario I will usually burst shoot and there is always a keeper or two in the batch. Pertaining to craftsmanship, VR has been out for quite a few years now and I don't see any buzz on forums pertaining to failure. Tirediron has a point that VR is another thing that can go wrong, but there is nothing so far that identifies it as something prone to failure. If you purchase new, Nikon warranties are 5 years. That should be enough time to figure out if you got a lemon.

The 18-200 does have some forum buzz about sample variations. If you are considering buying this lens, buy it new from a local dealer who has a few copies. Mine was sharp and had no issue's. Kiley has one as well and from her postings looks like she's got a good one too. The 18-200 might be easier to sell later on than a 18-55 kit lens (not many people want these). The 18-200 has VR2 equating to four stops. The 18-200 is a tad less sharp than the kit combo, this is the price you pay for not having to miss shot changing lenses. This is what unsharp mask is for.

[scorpio_e]

those seems like US stores, won't they charge duties on it?

They will not charge duties BUT you customs might.

[ret]

Got the 40D with 17-85 lens :D

As you guys know this was a race b/w the D90 and the 40D and in the end I got a good deal on the 40D so the decision became a no brainer

Thanks to everyone for the suggestions :)

[ret]

Canon 40D: Ist Impression

Pros: Image quality .... fast operations, quick camera .... ability to shoot at 6 frames per second .... Magnesium alloy construction, superior built quality .... comes with useful softwares like remote camera .... the top info LCD helps and gives one more reason to move up from the entry-level DSLRs. most needed buttons at the fingertips

Cons: Auto white balance not up to the mark in indoor low light conditions [but that may be the case with other cameras too] .... no dedicated LV button. thats not a criticism but an observation. I don't use LV much so this is not an issue with me and on the plus side a lack of dedicated LV button does make the back look less clustered .... a little heavy

Overall Ist impression: fantastic piece of photo equipment


17-85 IS EFS USM lens: Ist impression .... so far it's been good

picture (http://img265.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture5rx9.jpg)

[scorpio_e]

Congrats on your new camera.
I think you will be happy with your 40D.
The 6.5 frames per sec is SOooooo fast. Personally I will never use it.
It is a quaility build.

Happy shooting !!!

[ret]

The 6.5 frames per sec is SOooooo fast. Personally I will never use it.


that translates into more than 360 shots in a minute!! I don't take than many shots in a month :p

[ret]

will an UDMA CF card work on the 40D? I am using the Scandisk Extreme III CF card for the 40D but also have the PNY 40MB/sec UDMA CF card and am wondering if I can use it on the 40D as well

[ret]

D90 review by DPreview (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page36.asp)

As expected they gave it the 'highly recommended' verdict .... looking at the JPEG outputs of D90 vs 450D's, I kind of liked the 450D's, so guess i did the right thing by going with the 40D as I like that kind of JPEJ output :)