|
|
 Posted 10/28/2007 7:25:35 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:22:53 AM
Posts: 924,
Visits: 2,923
|
|
| Hi All: I have been thinking about purchasing a Canon EOS 40D DSLR camera. Have been reading reviews of this camera on various online camera sites. I was curious to know if anyone has any experience with this model camera & how they like the practical operation of this camera? Any Pros & Cons would be appreciated. I am planning on using the camera for general photography as well as perhaps purchasing a housing for under water use as well. What are your thoughts?? Thanks. Steve
|
|
|
|
| Posted 10/28/2007 7:28:36 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:22:53 AM
Posts: 924,
Visits: 2,923
|
|
| OOPS! Sorry but I see I have posted this in the wrong forum. Anthony, feel free to move it..... Steve
|
|
|
|
| Posted 10/29/2007 10:06:14 PM |
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 5/17/2008 6:59:58 AM
Posts: 4,094,
Visits: 2,647
|
|
no worries my friend  I dont have much here to add other than I am a big fan of Canon bodies for aquarium photography specifically (I feel their software is truly superior to even Nikon for our purposes) I shoot with a 20D that I am so delighted with that I have passed(!) on an offer to upgrade to a 30D. I also bought my fiance the 400D/XTi and do believe shes a fan now too (the XTi is a great camera for folks that cannot afford the aluminum body pro series models) These are the cameras we do my book and magazine photography with. I have even submerged my 20D in the SOuth Pacific (ahem... without an underwater housing!) and nearly did the same in the Indian Ocean (I get a little too comfy exploring intertidal zones  ). My camera was unphased after a drying out and pro cleaning. Its a workhorse.
. Anthony Calfo
|
|
|
|
| Posted 10/30/2007 3:41:16 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:22:53 AM
Posts: 924,
Visits: 2,923
|
|
Thanks for your input Anthony & I suspected that's what you were going to say. I am very surprised that your camera made it through a dip in the ocean. Canon quality for sure.  I am interested in hearing other comments as well........ Steve
|
|
|
|
| Posted 10/30/2007 10:02:07 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 7:52:19 AM
Posts: 834,
Visits: 2,502
|
|
I love my 20D, but I am seriously tempted by the current upgrade. I have a seriously unfortunate issue with my microscope setup in that my trinocular camera mount doesn't focus exactly where the binocular lenses do. I would kill for the live mode feature and the larger LCD.
As far as the 20D goes, I've just been delighted with it and I really believe that Canon has this stuff down. Especially once I started using the 100mm/f2.8 macro lens.
——————————————————
Andy
|
|
|
|
| Posted 10/31/2007 8:41:43 AM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:22:53 AM
Posts: 924,
Visits: 2,923
|
|
Hi Andy: Thanks for that info! Labman has the 40D & posted in Anthony's forum below. I have asked him for additional info as well. The 40D appears to be quite a photog machine for sure. My only concern is that I spend the big bucks on it & in 3 months they come out with someting even more astounding that I would have to have! Can't win I'm afraid... Steve
|
|
|
|
| Posted 11/2/2007 7:45:26 AM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:22:53 AM
Posts: 924,
Visits: 2,923
|
|
| Anthony or anyone: What type of lenses would you suggest purchasing for the Canon 40D? I was thinking of the 100mm 2.8 lens & a basic telephoto for general type photography. I don't really need to be able to zoom in on far away object however. I would also consider a basic type portrait lens. What other "accessories" would be necessary or worth having? Any thoughts will be appreciated. Steve
|
|
|
|
| Posted 11/2/2007 3:33:20 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 7:52:19 AM
Posts: 834,
Visits: 2,502
|
|
Steve--The 100mm/2.8 is a macro lens but it can be used for basic portraiture work. You have to be a little farther away from your subject with that lens than you would with most portrait lenses, but it's not that big a deal. It doesn't give you any zoom at all, though, as that isn't what it's for.
I would upgrade the flash right off the bat.
——————————————————
Andy
|
|
|
|
| Posted 11/2/2007 4:11:51 PM |
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 6/7/2008 12:59:02 PM
Posts: 243,
Visits: 2,311
|
|
| I have a new Canon 50mm 1.4 lens which is good for portraiture. I am still getting used to not having any zoom (which I used a lot to adjust the composition of shots) but it takes beautiful pics. FWIW though, I am purely a newbie when it comes to photography Steve, so take my comments with a grain of salt
|
|
|
|
| Posted 11/8/2007 2:01:33 AM |
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 5/17/2008 6:59:58 AM
Posts: 4,094,
Visits: 2,647
|
|
many photogs end up with three lenses... 1) a wide angle, 2) a telephoto and 3) a macro
Your strongest interests will determine the order you buy lenses in :p
Unless you are hardcore focussed on one type of subject, you will not likely need the macro or telephoto at first. You more likely need a walk-about "all purpose" lens.
For Canon... I suggest the 50mm prime lense for 1:1 ration (great for portraiture and within room distance images)... or maybe you can afford the 17-40mm Wide angle ( a popular walk about lens... though heavier)
See recent chats about macro lenses in this forum to compare diffs.
For telephoto... save and buy the best that you can afford. It will be so worth it! Get L glass in Canon if you can.
.Anthony Calfo
|
|