DSLR First time buyer advice: Canon 400D

tom_nieto

tom_nieto

tom_nieto

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
13,274
Location
Birmingham
Hi all, first post in photography, so be nice :)

I'm going away on my medical elective in about 10 days time and I want to take a camera with which to take some great photos.

I'm pretty much settled on the Canon 400D, but I'm very confused about what I need to buy with it. For example, I've heard that the bundled lens is pretty poor.

I'm going on a bit of a safari first and so I figure I'd want a longer lens for this. I'm also thinking a flash gun would be handy for night time and indoor shots.

A well known high street photography store has this offer for £585.97, and I must say I'm tempted:

Canon EOS 400D (Black) + EFS 18-55mm Lens
Tamron 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD Macro (Canon AF)
Sandisk 1GB Extreme III Compactflash Card
Lowepro Rezo Tlz 20 Bag

I'm no expert by any means so I might be buying a load of rubbish, but as far as I can see this is bang on my budget and seems to have everything except a flash. I also know that the memory cards from there are a rip off, but the bundle is pretty good as far as I can see.

Is there any other combo that you'd all suggest for about £600? Thanks for your help!
 
if it was me I'd go for cheapest body only deal and get the best lens I could afford, a longish zoom
 
I've not done a Safari so I don't know how close you get but 200mm sounds a little short to me.

For 600ish quid, I'd go for.....

400D body only
50mm f/1.8
Sigma 70-300 APO Macro
 
As Cookie Monster pointed out to me the cheapest he found for just the body was £369.99. Don't think that comes with international warranty though.
 
How about:

Canon 70-200mm f/4 L - £350
Used Canon 10D, 20D, 300D or 350D Body (maybe with a kit lens)
If money allows, Canon 50mm f/1.8

That'd be my choice I think.
 
^^Gord^^ said:
I've not done a Safari so I don't know how close you get but 200mm sounds a little short to me.

For 600ish quid, I'd go for.....

400D body only
50mm f/1.8
Sigma 70-300 APO Macro
Click to expand...

What does the APO in the spec actually mean? I'm a bit confused here. I've found that lens for £129.95, so it would make getting the kit lens a bit more of a viable option for a click and go setup as well as the long lens.

Thanks for all the other replies so far!
 
tom_nieto said:
What does the APO in the spec actually mean? I'm a bit confused here. I've found that lens for £129.95, so it would make getting the kit lens a bit more of a viable option for a click and go setup as well as the long lens.

Thanks for all the other replies so far!
Click to expand...

http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/lens-tech.htm

APO is explained there ^ but in short it means better glass in the lens.

I wouldn't bother with the 18-55, get the 50 f/1.8 and zoom with your feet.
 
messiah khan said:
50mm is a bit on the long side for landscapes though.
Click to expand...
A 50 should just about cope. It is a little long but is a great addition for lower light shooting. Assuming he gets the kit lens the 50 could be left for later if he decided he needed it.

I've got some nice landscape shots from my 50.

gt
 
I've just seen another offer from that high street store which includes the body and a sigma 18-200mm lens. This might suit me better as I wouldn't have to carry around two lenses. I could then in future invest in something more quality when necessary.

Saying the above, could I go with the sigma 28-300mm lens instead? Would I really have to stand back if I were shooting a portrait?
 
I don't have any experience with either of those lens but generally lenses that try to cover such a large focal length aren't very good.

You may well have to accept that for the money you are looking to spend you won't be able to get a telephoto, wide, walk about lens and a 400D.
 
tom_nieto said:
I've just seen another offer from that high street store which includes the body and a sigma 18-200mm lens. This might suit me better as I wouldn't have to carry around two lenses. I could then in future invest in something more quality when necessary.

Saying the above, could I go with the sigma 28-300mm lens instead? Would I really have to stand back if I were shooting a portrait?
Click to expand...

A group portrait maybe. 28mm is at the wide end of most individual portraits, though—probably more suited to environmental portraits. You'd probably be fine with a 70-300 for portraits, tbh: tons of people use 70-200 f/2.8s as portrait lenses.

I'd echo the comment about the quality of superzooms being iffy, though. Gord's nifty fifty and 70-300 suggestion remains the best one, IMO :)
 
The 18-55 is not as bad as a lot of folks say and can get some decent shots when stopped down a bit. There are plenty worse lenses out there, examples being the 18-200 type ultrazooms you mention. Yes, it's not as crisp as a 17-40L or, perhaps, even the Sigma 17-70, but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and should suffice until funds allow an upgrade.

The Sigma 70-300 is a great lens and holds it's own against lenses like the Canon 70-300 IS if you can live without the image stabilisation. On safari, you're likely going to have decent light and pleanty sunshine, so fast shutter speeds shouldn't be an issue, negating the need for IS.

Best prices I can see are about £430 for the body and kit lens, £18 for a 2GB Extreme III card and £130 for the 70-300 APO DG lens. Should all just about come in under your £600 budget.

The nifty 50 is a lovely lens and I use mine quite a bit, but I'd personally go for the 18-55 and 70-300 in your situation, then re-evaluate my lenses overall as I got more of a feel of what I particularly wanted to shoot.
 
^^Gord^^ said:
I wouldn't bother with the 18-55, get the 50 f/1.8 and zoom with your feet.
Click to expand...


My advice is that zooming on your feet with Lions is NOT a good idea. Buy a longer lens.

One of the things to consider is how important to you the shots on the safari will be. Is it a record shot, or are you hoping to get something special.

Pesonally I think that most safari shots are dissapointing unless you have booked a specific "photographic tour" safari. Personaly I would spend money on a quality "standard zoom" and forget the long end shots, that "might" shoot 10 pictures of a big cat. You will use the standard zoom a lot more, and the pictures of the journey will mean a lot more in years to come. If you want fantastic wildlife photos, buy a book...

If you are serious about the safari shots though, get a good telephoto (300F4 IS) and get on a good photo tour and be prepared to spend 2-3 days looking for _that_ shot, hang the expense, it might be a once in a lifetime experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom