Canon EOS megathread (Nikon fans keep out :D)

[mystery]

Thats a good price for a great camera. How long til you get it?

[THE GODFATHER]

At the currant rate it will be my Christmas pressy

[sherlock]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdF-jHkO4AE]YouTube - Mr Hitler is really not happy about the new Canon 550D/ Rebel T2i[/ame]

[mekon]

haha 'Rebel Stalin'

[linguini]

Canon 7D just arrived today! and 50mm 1.4.

Will hopefully be purchasing 70-200mm is f4 when I got upto Singapore if a few days.

[mekon]

The 50mm 1.4 is an interesting lens I'm having fun with it at the moment.
Just picked up a new Canon speedlight 430EXII for $330.

[spendy]

500d kit lense
bought it for under $1000 brand new
lowepro bag

[mekon]

Just added a Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens to the bag for $129 ebay last minute snipe, almost got it for $99 had I laid off the bid by 10 seconds. Can't afford the good glass at the moment for that range so good bargain me thinks even if it is a mediocre lens.

[IGS]

Dear Canon brain trusts,

Do you think it's worth the extra 1k to go the 7D over the 550D?

Thanks,
noob

[Captain Starfish]

yes.

[Jamathi]

NO

[IGS]

Even if not shooting professionally? I'd like to think that in time the limiting factor would be my skills and not the camera, and the 50D doesn't have video recording so I've dropped that from the list.

Although the added weight/size of the 7D might be an issue for travelling with it dangling from the neck.

[Aphex]

Here's a direct comparison of all three you've mentioned. The 7D IS worth the extra . What it doesn't mention in that little snippit is the dual Digic4 image processors which speed things up quite nicely.

[Professor Redfern]

I have the 450 and it takes absolutely fantastic photos.

Even with the standard glass that most pros label crap because its not L or whatever.


For a noob though it really does take amazing shots.

The only downsides I have are the flash can overheat or whatever and slow down shooting time after doing about 10-15 flash shots in a row.

As mentioned a while ago in a different thread, this is a photo I took from a moving bus through a dirty window of a tiger that was about 20+ meters away.

It just shows how a schmuck with a decent camera can get a good snap with no clue how I did it.

My point is eitehr of those cameras will take kick arse photos.

So why pay a grand more unless you are really serious.

[Kingy]

If you have to ask them my answer would be No you don't need it... my theory being if you know and understand the differences between the two (other than the price) and believe you can take advantage of them then in your expected use of the camera then you would not have asked the question in the first place.

As mentioned often, better lenses will make more of a difference in most photo ops, or alternatively save you money to buy more lenses which will cover more variety of photo ops so you use the camera more often..

[Jack0207]

If you are going to hang onto it for awhile and use it to its potential = big YES.

[Barfridge]

If you are starting out, by the time you are good enough to make use of the extra features/quality of the fancy body, something else better will be out.

I say get a middle of the range body, and invest the rest in good glass that you can keep for decades. And if you decide you want a better body, the one you are lusting after now will be available for a fraction of it's original cost.

[Cone Cat]

Well, got out and about in the weekend with my new toy, the Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 IS USM lens.

Decided to give the lens a bit of a test. Drum roll please.

400mm @ F5.6 + Sigma pro 2x Teleconvertor. Final apeture = F11. Taken from the fremantle war memorial hill. Subject should be obvious. Image is not cropped or edited in any way apart from down sizing for hosting.
800mm + 1.6x crop factor = 1280mm focal length. I sat on the lawn and balanced the lens on my knee using manual focus and used the image stabiliser to help frame the shot.
Not a great shot. In fact it's pretty darn ordinary. But given it's over a metre of focal length! Gotta try this lens on the moon one night!



So overall, how do I like the new lens? I like it! Not too many opportunities for good shots atm, but this one from the back yard on the day I got it is a pretty good indication for what's in store.
Again, 400mm, wide open, no editing except for resizing for web;



These three are about 5 metres off the ground. the detail on the Bee is fantastic given the distance!

[Professor Redfern]

Hard to tell how impressive it is without seen the shot taken from a more realistic view to compare it with.

I can only assume you were pretty darn far away.

[Cone Cat]

Good point.

Found a shot taken from the same location, but at 52mm focal length which is equivilant to 83mm on FF just to give you some scale.



This shot was taken with a lowly EF 24-85mm F3.5-4.5, which I don't own a 67mm PLR for...