Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
This is a pretty cool setup.
I used to have a D700 but sold it for 5D2 since I needed more resolution and the camera was too slow for other uses so it was kind of like the odd man out.
I agree about getting newer 70-200.
Now let's see some photos. :)
Well he is one of the Canon Explorer's of light http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=ArtistsListAct
If you see large prints from the P&S, they are not that bad. When I say large I mean like 6 feet tall. In NYC in Photo Plus Expo every year I see some nice prints from older cameras. If...
If you play on the P&S's strengths (low ISO, high depth of field), then they can be comparable quality and sometimes it makes things a bit easier (e.g. macro). Some P&S have good lenses and some kit lenses of some DSLRs are not that great.
Some P&S do things no modern DSLR do. e.g. some have...
Me, I'd chose Tokina 11-16 2.8, Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, and 100L Macro. That extra speed is versatile and there's no gap in the general purpose range. I do not like 2x-xxx lenses on crop cameras as I think wide view is necessary to be general purpose.
If you want a fast normal, consider Canon 35...
That's a good selection. I'd invest more in the range which I'd use more though. If you can wait you should. Using your 18-105 do you know your tastes already?
Tamron is coming out with 17-50 2.8 with image stabilization so I'd rather have that. I would invest in the new 70-200 VR II as...
I have no use for 24-70 or 70-200 on a crop sensor. 24/28-xx is great for walkaround. On a crop it's not wide enough. 70/80-200 on full frame is great as 70 is good for full body. On crop it's too tele.
As for quality, I don't like Canon lenses on crop cameras. They are not as crisp.
I don't think Canon's lenses are good on the modern crop cameras. So I'd consider upgrading lenses regardless. That's just my experience and opinion. If you can really use the new body's feature, it makes sense to get it.
If you're enthusiastic about photography, you'll get new lenses and lights before a new body.
I vote for XSi as a body although I do prefer Nikon's cheaper lenses...
Thanks for the comparison. It reminds me a little of when I had a D700. But I think yours are a little better. That's amazing the difference between those generations.
The only lens in your budget is the Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro. The build is crap. If you drop it, it would probably die but the images are great.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/cosina/pool/
Agreed. It's in budget and will stay as part of a kit for a while. The 18-55 can still be kept for wider angle and if you need more quality for portraits in longer run the 85 1.8 is a great next purchase.
I had a D700 for a little while. I didn't find ISO 6400 usable. All in all not a worthy upgrade for me from my D300. Yeah if we need reach, more pixel density matters. That's why I kept my D300. There's no way I'm going to spend more $ on a larger telephoto. 300mm is my max. I'm going to wait...