Questions

Arkanoid · 30 Mar 2007 at 22:59

After much deliberation between spending the extra on a Nikon D80 or Canon 400D I decided to go with the 400d.

If the D80 had the CCD cleaning there would have been no contest.

Anyway, I am a noob.

So I bought the 400d with kit lens/Tamron 50-200/2gbCF from well known retailer.(The Tamron seems pretty good)
I mostly am interested in landscapes. Didn't realise how much a good lens was going to cost. The kit lens really isn't very good. I have been looking at the Canon 17-40. approx £500.

Is this worth it or should i be looking at a fixed focal length lens?

Comments welcome.

And yes, I've had a few beers 2nite

(it's a struggle to typee so no gaming!)

Combat squirrel · 30 Mar 2007 at 23:14

tamron 17mm-50mm f2.8 is good for the money, maybe next model up in the line if you have more money

DizMatt · 1 Apr 2007 at 17:57

you can go wide in 10 or 12mm in canon or sigma
for as wide as I need to go I use the 17-85 IS USM which is about £300-400, a great walkabout lens and full of stabilised goodness
a great alrounder

Geffen · 1 Apr 2007 at 19:28

First the kit lense isn't bad if you use if at F8-F11 but saying that i did come to the same decision to replace it. I ended up looking at the Canon 17-40L and the Tameron 17-50 F2.8. I brought the Canon in the end am slightly regretting it. It takes great photos and is very sharp but it big heavy and the range is a bit short for a walk around lense on top of that its more expensive then the Tameron.

Will probably be looking to sell my canon shortly and replace it with the Canon 10-22 and the Tameron 28-75 F2.8.

If you are into landscapes then i would look at one of the super wide zooms like the Canon 10-22 or if you want a more general lense look at the Tameron 17-50. While Primes have their place, they're smaller and faster than zooms they don't offer the flexability. They can also work out more expensive if you need to buy two or more primes to cover a range of focal lenghts.