50D is finally here

[tlbradford]

UPS dropped it off this afternoon.  I was having a little buyers remorse over not going with the 40D when I saw it on B&H used for $729, and from most everything I have read it is a better camera in low light, but what the heck, I got a good deal on a like new 50D for a few extra bucks, I can always sell it.  No remorse after playing with it this evening, I am just excited to have a dslr after shopping and waiting for the last year and a half. 

My 18-55 lens has a flaw in it when looking through with the naked eye.  It looks like a little piece of lint on the inside of the front glass lens.  Should I just send it back for a replacement or is it easy to clean or blow out?

What little playing around I have done with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.  This lens is awesome.  I think I got a great copy which I was worried about from some of the reviews.  I will post some test pictures for you guys after I get a familiar with the software.  At this time, I would highly reccommend this lens for those that can't afford a 1.2.  We'll see when I get everything downloaded how well it looks after cropping and zooming in.

The 70-200 gets here on Thursday, and if the weather is halfway decent a little photo safari on Saturday is scheduled.

Anyway, I am just excited to be in the game.   

[Slider]

Awesome!!! 

[popeshawnpaul]

Send that 18-55 back to where you bought it.  You should have a 30 day replacement with the store you bought it from.

Don't regret the 50D.  I have a 40D and I'm envious...  You have more megapixels which is important, despite what others say.  You also have a high res screen on the back of the camera.  Good stuff.

The 70-200 is awesome.  A great lens.  Just wait until you hook it up.  The Canon 1.4x goes decent with that lens also making it a good 100-280 f4 lens. 

[tlbradford]

Thanks Shawn.  I learned a ton last night about the manul controls and settings.  We had a huge lighting storm, so I googled up instructions on how to take pictures of it.  It took me about 30 minutes to figure everything out, and I missed the storm by the time I was ready, but it sure educated me in a hurry and got me used to the controls (Which are pretty well thought out).  The LCD res is worth the money to me as a virgin dslr user.  In head shots of my kids this morning I could clearly see if the correct part of the face was in focus just by reviewing the screen.  I am annoying everyone around me by taking their pictures.  This is going to pay for itself in memories in its very first year. 

[popeshawnpaul]

Once you get that 70-200 you will be less annoying.  There is something about being on the other side of the room and taking their picture as opposed to being in their face.  People feel more comfortable with it and you generally will get good people shots that way.  I used my 70-200 during my daughters 4 year old birthday party this last weekend and at Christmas.  I can sit on the couch or be accross the room and get pictures of people without them knowing.  You just get more natural images that way.

When I use to shoot professionally, I would use a 200mm f2.8 L for most of my people shots.  Out on the street I would capture people doing things from afar with it and then come ask them their name and get the info on the shot from them.  Many times, they hardly noticed I ever took their picture and I got really natural shots.

When you get that new 18-55...    18-55

We really need to organize a spring shoot somewhere with a few of you guys that have new equipment.  Goats are really good this time of year and get low to munch on new green grass.  Or we could shoot something else.  I am getting a little stir crazy and need to get out...

[huntnphool]

I am getting a little stir crazy and need to get out...

Me too.

Congrats TL, can't wait to see some shots, you are going to love that purchase.

[tlbradford]

Cabin fever has set in for me too.  Especially after the most pathetic hunting season I have ever had.  I would be all for a spring safari.  I am hoping the weather is decent this Saturday.  If so I will probably go shoot the bison over by Cheney.  Something big and slow moving.

[popeshawnpaul]

There might be some birds in the refuge out there soon...  I like shooting red winged blackbirds.

[tlbradford]

Shawn, are you trying to tell me I should just return the 18-55?  I would be fine with that, and waiting a little bit to save up for a better lens.  Is there something you could suggest in an off brand, or a slower canon lens, that is a decent wide angle lens.  Possibly in the $400 range?  With the ability to crop so much with the extra mp's I am thinking I don't really need a zoom to fill the gap to get me up to 70mm.  

Sorry to bug you so much.  It is easier to ask a single knowledgeable person, rather than sifting through the arguements on Fred Miranda and leaving more confused on what I should do.  There is a ton of info, but it can be overwhelming.

[jackelope]

what about that 50MM lens i talked to you about, pope?

[popeshawnpaul]

Yeah Jackelope, the 50mm f1.8 is a nice faster cheap lens but it's not wide angle.  If you bought the 18-55 I would definitely return it.  Waste of money.  After you shoot with that 70-200 you'll never want to shoot with the 18-55. 

If I had about $400 I would sell my kidney and get a nice used 17-40 f4 L for about $500 used...  I did that and loved the lens.  Many of my landscape shots posted on here were shot with my 17-40 f4 L.  It is really sharp and good.  Plus, at f4 it isn't fast but it's still faster than the 18-55 which is f5.6...

It will also hold its value and you can drop it for the price you paid and upgrade when you need.  You'll be lucky to get $50 for that 18-55 if you ever sell it...

[tlbradford]

Thanks Shawn, I appreciate the honest advice.

[popeshawnpaul]

One other thing tbrad...

That 17-40 is built tough like an L lens.  It is also water proof and small/compact.  You can put it in your pack and not sorry about it.  When you are out in the weather you don't have to worry about it getting wet.  I thought that was not really much of an issue but over time having a weather sealed lens brings good peace of mind when you are out shooting.  We weather is a great time to shoot as well.

[tlbradford]

I have a 28mm f/2.8 canon lens from my dad's AE-1.  Is it worth adapting to my camera for landscape only shots?

[popeshawnpaul]

Probably not.  The mount will cost $35 and then you need to figure out how to do it.  Plus, on a crop camera a 28mm lens is about 45mm...  not wide enough.  Getting infinity focus on these lenses by converting them can be difficult and for landscape, you are shooting at infinity most of the time.  17mm is the start of wide angle on a crop camera.  That is one of the reasons I got that 10-22mm efs lens.  It's the only wide option for crop cameras.

[tlbradford]

Thanks again.  I'll just keep my eye out for a good deal for either the 17-40 or the 10-22.

[sooperfly]

Just a reminder, unlike some of the "L" lenses, the 17-40 isn't "weather-proof" unless you have a filter attached to the front of it.

It most likely won't be that big of a deal, especially if you aren't using a weather-proof camera, but I thought you'd like to know.

I have both the 17-40 and 10-22 and they are excellent lenses.  The 10-22 doesn't give anything up in image quality, only build quality.

[popeshawnpaul]

That's a great point Sooper.  I don't think it's weather proof...lol.

Here is what I got from the Canon website:

A new and affordable L-series ultra-wide-angle zoom lens that's ideal for both film and digital SLRs. Superior optics are assured by the use of three Aspherical lens elements, in addition to a Super UD (Ultra-low Dispersion) glass element. Optical coatings are optimized for use with digital cameras. This lens focuses as close as 11 inches (0.28m), and offers both Canon's full-time manual focus and a powerful ring-type USM for fast and silent AF. It has a constant f/4 maximum aperture, and offers the choice of screw-in 77mm filters or a holder in the rear of the lens for up to three gel filters. Finally, it offers weather-resistant construction similar to other high-end L-series lenses.

Sooper, when are you going to show us more high mountain lake pictures?

[sooperfly]

Yes, the key word in their description is "similar". Not the "same".  I'll see if I can dig up the official Canon literature that explains this.

For instance, if you have a Canon 1D series and say a 70-200 2.8IS attached, that combination, even without a filter on the front, is "weather-sealed".  You should be able to stand out in the pouring rain ( I have many times ) and they won't be affected.  Some of the other "L" lenses, like the 17-40, are not "weather-sealed" without a filter on the front.  If I remember correctly Canon and Nikon have a rating for how much they can handle.  To be sure, a lot of people still cover their gear up.  When I'm hiking I don't bother and haven't had any problem in heavy rains - yet.

It can also depend on the year the lens was made.  Some of the newer "L" lenses now have weather sealing while the older version didn't.

Here is a website showing the 17-40.  Go down to the bottom of the page and he has an animated gif with an explanation.

http://vahonen.com/photo/equipment/lenses/Canon17-40F4L/

It can be a moot point if a non weather sealed camera body is being used as that will be the weak link.

[popeshawnpaul]

That's a good point about the body.  Don't be fooled by some of these new cameras like the 40D and 50D that claim they are weather resistent.  I can say I've used my 40D in a light rain and not had problems.  I've had my 70-200 f2.8 L IS exposed to heavy rain with no problems.  I feel uncomfortable getting my 40D too wet.  It just isn't a 1-series camera and isn't as well sealed.  Most of the time I use a clear vegetable bag like you get in the vege/fruit section of the supermarket.