Digital Camera Advice? [Archive] - Tennesspeed.Net Forums

Bob-E

12-27-2007, 09:57 AM

northtnguy

12-27-2007, 11:04 AM

You might consider an external flash. I got the 580EX II speedlite and a Tamron 17-50 2.8 when I got my 40D kit.

MikeW

12-27-2007, 11:31 AM

The 40D has a sensor cleaner built in , so I wouldn't mess with that.

Filters aren't necessary and if you don't get a good one it will degrade your optics. I use Kenko filters from Japan (http://hvstar.net/). These will take forever to get to you, but the price is so much lower. The only filters I would use are B+W, Kenko Pro 1 or Hoya Pro 1. I leave a UV filter on all the time and I also have a Circular polarizer which has a great effect on skies.

Manfrotto tripods are pricey, but very nice quality. I shop at www.bhphotovideo for stuff like that.

You'll definatly want a new lens eventually. Just shoot with that one for a while, then look back through your pics and evaluate if you need something wider (probably number 1 because 28mm isn't very wide) or longer or faster (wider aperture)

Enjoy the 40D. Wish I had one.

Thanks Bob-E The reason that I asked about the cleaner for the sensor was that I picked up the camera yesterday at Best Buy it had a worm looking line in the upper left of the viewfinder. Even with teh lens off it was still tehre. I didnt want to "mess with it" and took it back at lunch. they exchanged it for me no problem. Yeah I wanted a good UV filter and i will check teh one out that you listed above.

You might consider an external flash. I got the 580EX II speedlite and a Tamron 17-50 2.8 when I got my 40D kit.

External flash...is on the list for my birthday in FEB. I will check out the lens you listed above and see if Wolf or Durys will let me put it on my 40D body and see how it works.

Thans for the tips :cheers:

kwikrnu

12-27-2007, 11:51 AM

I have a cheap digital camera, but do have an okay regular camera, Nikon N90s and sb-26 flash.

I really like my bogen 3001 tripod and 3126 head. Some can be expensive and heavy, but they are usually bult well. If you want a taller one or one that can get closer to the ground you'll need to check your options. Check on ebay for a deal on a used one.

Tungsten

12-27-2007, 11:59 AM

In order of what I think is important...

1. Wide angle zoom lens. I shoot with a Tamron f/2.8 ashperical wide angle zoom a lot. A whole lot. It's probably my most used lens.

2. Tripod and monopod. You're going to want both. Bogen-Manfrotto is hard to beat.

3. Flash unit. I have a 580EX also but use it only about 20% of the time and even then only for fill with a Lightsphere diffuser over the head. I try to avoid using the flash whenever possible.

4. Corded remote control / timer. This is very handy for shooting low-light or long exposure shots and can be a ton of fun creatively. It's the next thing I want for my camera.

MikeW

12-27-2007, 12:22 PM

Tungsten I know you shoot in RAW... then do you do your editing in Photoshop or the Canon software? Is the speed of the Tamron lens to your liking over the canon lenses.

Tungsten

12-27-2007, 02:23 PM

I use Lightroom to do 90% of my processing. I may tweak the shots further in Photoshop but only if I want to run them through a filter like Noise Ninja.

The Tamron lens is a great lens, but if I was made of money I'd have bought the 2.8L wide angle Canon zoom instead. There is a very subtle difference in picture crispness between the two, but not enough for me to rush out and buy the L instead.

I do have a 70-200 f/2.8L that just astounds me, though. I'll use it more for shooting at sporting events, indoors at the kids concerts, or just for portraiture work. Everything else pretty much gets the Tamron wide angle.

:)

Cannon Fodder

12-28-2007, 10:01 AM

Lenses, you get what you pay for.

Tungsten

12-28-2007, 10:26 AM

Lenses, you get what you pay for.
Not always. The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 that I use is a good example of getting a great lens for a good price.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/284399-REG/Tamron_AF09C700_28_75mm_f_2_8_XR_Di.html

josh99ta

12-28-2007, 11:28 AM

Cannon Fodder

12-28-2007, 01:10 PM

Not always. The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 that I use is a good example of getting a great lens for a good price.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/284399-REG/Tamron_AF09C700_28_75mm_f_2_8_XR_Di.html

I was comparing it to some no name lense. Say a 500mm mirror isn't going to take the same type shots as a 500mm optic, which is more pronounced in low light. But a 500mm mirror is also less than $150 bucks where an optic is going to run well over $500, how far over depends on the speed of a lense.

Tamron is a well known and well trusted company.

MikeW

12-28-2007, 01:20 PM

The lens you have is a pretty versatile lens to begin with and you can do a lot with it. I wouldn't worry about a lens right now.

Yeaa the little that I messd with it last night the lens worked great. It is far better than the other two canon lenses that I have (which are crap). The IS USM lens is great. The color of the 40D is awesome and focus speed is way faster than anything else I have ever had.

Cannon Fodder

12-28-2007, 01:20 PM

The lens you have is a pretty versatile lens to begin with and you can do a lot with it. I wouldn't worry about a lens right now.

I'd look into getting a good UV and circular polarizer filter (Bob-E's suggestions were spot on), a quality tripod (again, Bogen/Manfrotto are hard to beat for the price), and both a corded and a wireless remote.

After that I'd look into getting lenses and flashes, but get the basics first. Build yourself a good foundation.

I slightly disagree, a good TTL flash would be one of the first things I bought along with a UV and polarizer. The built in flashs are OK for close things but they fall off quickly as the distances increase. UVs are indepensable of keeping dust off the outer element and protecting it from scratches bumps etc. If you bust or scratch the UV you out what ten bucks max.

MikeW

12-28-2007, 01:54 PM

UV filter will be asap... It may take a while for the one that bob listed to get here so i will pick up one local until I can get a good one. One reason I want a filter on this lens is that there is not any area after the "glass" to protect it at all. A filter &/or a lens hood should help it stay safe/clean. Anyone use a hood

JohnC

12-28-2007, 02:37 PM

Lenses, you get what you pay for.

Wrong, sucka! A $499 Sigma 10-20mm F/4-5.6 EX DC HSM is a real nice lens for going wide with the smaller sensor digital cameras v/s the Nikon 12-24mm at over $1,000.

Some examples shot with some Nikon DSLR's and Sigma...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2050/2070375762_f9e301a507_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/217/447560177_6befe87cb2_b.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dan_gilligan/image/87946197/original.jpg

http://www.photocross.org/cafe/dilworth1.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ruilopes/image/63064594.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ruilopes/image/82905962.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ruilopes/image/82904891.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ruilopes/image/82906259.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/catalyst/image/83234021.original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/sreeves31/image/76787063/original.jpg

Shot I took...
http://home.comcast.net/~nx330mustang/Schermerhorn1_1.JPG

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2244/2079628097_ddd0121e95_o.jpg

http://danielsfotos.smugmug.com/photos/209890021-O.jpg

http://danielsfotos.smugmug.com/photos/211001594-O.jpg

JohnC

12-28-2007, 02:38 PM

http://lh6.google.com/elizabethwickland/RwR8ubsoCnI/AAAAAAAABPs/9gGPU82SNJ0/s800/dsc_7664.jpg

http://elf8.smugmug.com/photos/223809610-O.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mzelmar/image/84061682.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/scherrer/image/73199933/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/scherrer/image/73199929/original.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2347/1809406051_e7a475a8ce_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2142/1917079249_5a42cea404_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2288/2074826364_a17e28b85c_o.jpg

http://www.photosbynancy.com/forums/lenses/sigma10-20/070428_4008.jpg

http://alexf.smugmug.com/photos/231725559-L.jpg

http://alexf.smugmug.com/photos/232007365-L.jpg

MikeW

12-28-2007, 04:08 PM

Ok I have looked at lightroom software and it is pricy... I have PS CS2. Are there sites where lightroom can be found for a good price? Or will CS2 work for a noob?

lloyd

12-28-2007, 04:54 PM

Ok I have looked at lightroom software and it is pricy... I have PS CS2. Are there sites where lightroom can be found for a good price? Or will CS2 work for a noob?
Quit with all this bench-phtography & let's see some damn pics!!1!

josh99ta

12-28-2007, 05:15 PM

Cannon Fodder, it depends on what he's using it for. I do mainly automotive with natural light and I dont really need a flash. When I do the fill flash on the camera is enough most of the time. Flash photography is an ENTIRELY different ballgame, and I think it would be best to hone his skills without complicating things right now. Thats what my suggestions were based on.

And you should almost always shoot with a hood. It helps to reduce lens flare and control the light coming into the lens as well as to protect the lens if you do happen to drop the camera. Hood + UV filter almost ensures you'll never hurt a lens too bad if you happen to lose the handle on it.

hibbs

12-28-2007, 05:30 PM

And you should almost always shoot with a hood. It helps to reduce lens flare and control the light coming into the lens as well as to protect the lens if you do happen to drop the camera. Hood + UV filter almost ensures you'll never hurt a lens too bad if you happen to lose the handle on it.

Please listen to this, it saved my 17-40L lens.
I dont have too much more to offer, if you ever get a chance check out Durys downtown. I consider them the only true photo shop in Nashville and they will normally match online prices from places such as B&H.

Tungsten

12-28-2007, 05:38 PM

Please listen to this, it saved my 17-40L lens.
I dont have too much more to offer, if you ever get a chance check out Durys downtown. I consider them the only true photo shop in Nashville and they will normally match online prices from places such as B&H.

Really? I tried to get them to match the price on a Manfrotto tripod earlier this month and they wouldn't budge.

Bob-E

12-28-2007, 06:20 PM

Wrong, sucka! A $499 Sigma 10-20mm F/4-5.6 EX DC HSM is a real nice lens for going wide with the smaller sensor digital cameras v/s the Nikon 12-24mm at over $1,000.

whoa mega image post.

Thing is you;ll find many people find $400-500 an exorbitant price to pay for a camera lens, so I wouldn't call the 10-20 cheap.

As for flashes: I waited a long time before I got my first off camera flash and then several flashes. I wanted to get the science down on taking without flash first. Flash photgraphy is a whole other world if you use it for more than P mode and it will just slow down your learning curve on non-flash photgraphy. At least this applied to me in the "slow-learner" category.

I would work on learning all the camera body aspects: ISO, aperture, shutter speed, Creative Modes, different metering modes.

Then work on composure. I would rank composure #1 and metering a close #2 in order of photography importance.

Then you should bone up on some post processing. This can make or break some photos, especially those taken with a kit lens.

Then get into flash, flash metering, mutli-flash, bouncing, diffusing, etc.

Just a quick .02 off the top of my head, subject to editing and denial at any time;)

JohnC

12-28-2007, 08:10 PM

whoa mega image post.

Thing is you;ll find many people find $400-500 an exorbitant price to pay for a camera lens, so I wouldn't call the 10-20 cheap.

Gotta love examples instead of 2nd hand advice, ehh? :D :lol:

I'm not rich, but $400-$500 lenses are cheap compared to the real high quality Nikkor Pro Glass. :meh:

JohnC

12-28-2007, 08:16 PM

Please listen to this, it saved my 17-40L lens.
I dont have too much more to offer, if you ever get a chance check out Durys downtown. I consider them the only true photo shop in Nashville and they will normally match online prices from places such as B&H.

They're higher than B&H? :stare2::stare::-X:jaw::blink::meh::yuck::ugh::ugh2::shake: I think I'll stick to online shopping. :lol:

Cannon Fodder

12-28-2007, 10:44 PM

Gotta love examples instead of 2nd hand advice, ehh? :D :lol:

I'm not rich, but $400-$500 lenses are cheap compared to the real high quality Nikkor Pro Glass. :meh:

Look at some of the Canon IS USM series lenses.

Cannon Fodder

12-28-2007, 11:07 PM

Thing is you'll find many people find $400-500 an exorbitant price to pay for a camera lens, so I wouldn't call the 10-20 cheap.

Finally someone sees my point. A $100 f/4.5+ will not shoot as well in low light as say a $500 f/2.8, depending on what your are doing. With the slower lenses you have to hold the shutter open longer for a given film speed. Now granted if you want a long depth of field the smaller aperture will be of no problem, but if you want a short depth of field the f/4.5+ isn't going to give you the same effect as an f/2.8 especially in low light with any movement.

I started with and still shoot an all manual 35mm Pentax, no integrated flash and no available TTL flash. IMO a good flash is an good initial investment. The built in flashes I believe are a lot better now then from when I messed with them years ago when the guide number for them was quite low. I have seen this just with my cheap Powershot A75 comparing it to some of my old Vivitar 35mm.

I haven't really shot anything creatively since highschool and even then I worked more on the technical aspects than the composure. I just have a defective creative side of the brain, was killed during grammer school :lol:

JohnC

12-28-2007, 11:10 PM

Look at some of the Canon IS USM series lenses.

Your point? :confused:

JohnC

12-29-2007, 12:17 AM

I still don't get how you all call a new $499 lens expensive when the comparable Nikkor (http://www.adorama.com/NK1224AFSU.html) costs nearly twice that. Moreover, the Tokina (http://www.adorama.com/TN1224NKAF.html) and Tamron (a bit more) (http://www.adorama.com/TM1118NKAF.html) are almost in the same price range as the Sigma wide zoom. :confused:

My main point is the $499 wide zooms are a cheap as you can get in that class (10-24mm). They're definitely not expensive considering the Nikkor is near $1,000.

Edit: I know I gave Nikon pricing, but the same can apply for pro Canon v/s after-market lens brands.

Bob-E

12-29-2007, 01:06 AM

JohnC

12-29-2007, 01:42 AM

Think of it as not comparably expensive, but just EXPENSIVE. As in: "I just paid 1k for a new camera and now you tell me I need 2 $500 lenses to make super awesome pics?" knowwhaddimsayin dawg?

So where is the cheaper alternative to a 10-24mm range wide zoom that makes quality images such as the suggested lenses I linked, and I'm not talking a sack full of beat up 10 year old used primes either. :shrug: :confused: :lol:

Cannon Fodder

12-29-2007, 10:49 AM

So where is the cheaper alternative to a 10-24mm range wide zoom that makes quality images such as the suggested lenses I linked, and I'm not talking a sack full of beat up 10 year old used primes either. :shrug: :confused: :lol:

http://porters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=110043&Category_Code=L1G&Product_Count=1

Fisheye. :lol:

http://www.adorama.com/SY1935CA.html

There is a lense that is close in spec that is a forth of the price. This is the point I made. Do you think that this cheap lense will produce the image quality that a Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Canon, or Nikor lenses produce?......You get what you pay for in glass. For most normal people they probably wouldn't notice the difference in the images. However, a pro may notice image distortion due to how the elments are ground or may they may be of alignment, spots due to trash between them...... And to slighly bust your bubble it isn't the always the quality of the equipment that provides the shots, sure it does help. I have seen some things shot with a cellphone camera, by a pro as an experiment that looked equally as good as what he did with 2 other cameras. It will probably take me a while to dig up his site though.

JohnC

12-29-2007, 12:32 PM

http://porters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=110043&Category_Code=L1G&Product_Count=1

Fisheye. :lol:

http://www.adorama.com/SY1935CA.html

There is a lense that is close in spec that is a forth of the price. This is the point I made. Do you think that this cheap lense will produce the image quality that a Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Canon, or Nikor lenses produce?......You get what you pay for in glass. For most normal people they probably wouldn't notice the difference in the images. However, a pro may notice image distortion due to how the elments are ground or may they may be of alignment, spots due to trash between them...... And to slighly bust your bubble it isn't the always the quality of the equipment that provides the shots, sure it does help. I have seen some things shot with a cellphone camera, by a pro as an experiment that looked equally as good as what he did with 2 other cameras. It will probably take me a while to dig up his site though.

I agree on price v/s quality. :)

Those two lenses in the links don't compare at all to the wide zooms I posted links to. :lol:

FWIW... For a DX sensor, the 18-19mm range isn't as wide as it would be on 35mm film or FF digital. I think the digital crop is like 1.5x. That's why most lenses for DX digital that are called a wide zoom start in the 10-12mm range. I'm sure you already knew that though. :D ;)

JohnC

12-29-2007, 12:41 PM

And to slighly bust your bubble it isn't the always the quality of the equipment that provides the shots, sure it does help.

Forgot about this part....

Yeah, if you suck and don't know what your doing, even the best equipment won't produce quality images. :lol:

northtnguy

12-29-2007, 12:42 PM

Think of it as not comparably expensive, but just EXPENSIVE. As in: "I just paid 1k for a new camera and now you tell me I need 2 $500 lenses to make super awesome pics?" knowwhaddimsayin dawg?

That's the problem that some people face when they don't do their research on what all is involved when getting in to a dSLR camera system. These people are going to be the typical P&S type snapper and they don't see any advantage to having 'good' glass on a dSLR. They think they can take the cheapest lens and do the job of a professional. :lol:

JohnC

12-29-2007, 12:43 PM

That's the problem that some people face when they don't do their research on what all is involved when getting in to a dSLR camera system. These people are going to be the typical P&S type snapper and they don't see any advantage to having 'good' glass on a dSLR. They think they can take the cheapest lens and do the job of a professional. :lol:

Thank j00!!111one

Agree!!! :D:cool::D:cool::D:cool:

Cannon Fodder

12-29-2007, 12:51 PM

I agree on price v/s quality. :)

Those two lenses in the links don't compare at all to the wide zooms I posted links to. :lol:

FWIW... For a DX sensor, the 18-19mm range isn't as wide as it would be on 35mm film or FF digital. I think the digital crop is like 1.5x. That's why most lenses for DX digital that are called a wide zoom start in the 10-12mm range. I'm sure you already knew that though. :D ;)

Yeah yeah yeah. :-p The fisheye was a joke and the other was aprox. the same focal length, but it showed the difference between the lenses vs price. I don't know why in the hell they didn't just make the CCD or CMOS a FF 35mm to begin with that way you didn't have the effective difference in focal length.

Some day I will invest in a DSLR and another 35mm that I can use the same glass between them. I still like 35mm and my old K1000 since the only thing that uses batteries besides the flash is the light meter in the camera. And for most of the things I use it for I can "fudge" for the aperture or just bracket if I don't have the light meter. :)

Cannon Fodder

12-29-2007, 12:53 PM

That's the problem that some people face when they don't do their research on what all is involved when getting in to a dSLR camera system. These people are going to be the typical P&S type snapper and they don't see any advantage to having 'good' glass on a dSLR. They think they can take the cheapest lens and do the job of a professional. :lol:

Actually I know a person with an XTI that uses it as a P&S. She bitches about it not doing this that and the other and she never has read the manual on the thing, just leaves it on auto.

JohnC

12-29-2007, 12:55 PM

Actually I know a person with an XTI that uses it as a P&S. She bitches about it not doing this that and the other and she never has read the manual on the thing, just leaves it on auto.

Buy a cheap P&S and offer to trade her for the XTi after showing her the awesome pics it makes. :lol:

Cannon Fodder

12-29-2007, 05:19 PM

Buy a cheap P&S and offer to trade her for the XTi after showing her the awesome pics it makes. :lol:

It was actually her birthday or anniversary present a year or so ago. First her husband got her a new Fuji P&S and she bitched about it and I think broke it on purpose because it wasn't the Canon she wanted. So they took it back and got the XTI, yeah she will bitch until she gets what she wants. :lol:

I guess I can't really say anything, I leave my A75 on auto all the time but I'm just taking snapshots of stuff, she has done weddings and a few other things. :D

Cannon Fodder

12-29-2007, 06:05 PM

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/k800i/index.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

Finally found his site.

JohnC

12-29-2007, 11:29 PM

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/k800i/index.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

Finally found his site.

Ken Rockwell and his views... :meh:

About link #3

I somewhat disagree with Ken Rockwell when he yaps about the quality of gear not being a factor in good images. That may have been slightly true in the film days, but in digital it's different. We're still in the primitive stages with digital and image quality of most digital cameras is not even up to 35mm film quality yet.

For an example, let's say I have a camera that sucks and is terribly noisy by ISO 800 but I need to stop motion of a subject at near dark and to do so I'd have to use ISO 1600. Well, without the tool (a camera that performs at high ISO), I can't take the shot and definitely can't get the quality. It would be so blurry and grainy that even if the composition was awesome, the overall picture would be crap!

I mean, if I’m shooting with a D80 with a slow F/5.6 lens, and another person is shooting a D3 or 1Ds MKIII with an f/2 lens in a dimly lit basketball gym, who’s photo’s do you think will look best?

Sure, the photographer has to have a good eye for composition, the passion to go out and find something worthy to photograph, and needs the skills to know how to use his or her equipment to its full potential. I don't argue with that because we all know it takes an artist behind the camera as well as having the tools to do the job.

This isn't the mega pixel argument where viewing everything degraded and resized down to internet viewing specs looks alike. Rather it's arguing the fact that in digital, the equipment does play a role in image quality depending on the subject and conditions you're trying to shoot in.

Now if you shoot stationary subjects at ISO 100 all day in bright light, you have a lot less to worry about equipment wise.

I just love how these people try to convince wannabe photographers on the internet that equipment doesn’t play a role in quality images. :lol:

I love his example of the cheap camera versus the 5D cropped, chopped, and resized or whatever, down to small internet viewing specs. I pegged the 2nd photo right off as being the “better” of the two and made by the 5D. Nice attempt for him trying to use the lack of color and contrast to prove which was better – that could have been a color and saturation setting in the 5D being set to low or normal while the other was set higher. But I chose the 5D photo for having more detail and brightness in the foreground and background and giving it more depth of field.

JohnC

12-29-2007, 11:37 PM

And one more point....

If it were true that cheap P&S, cell phone cameras, etc., were all good enough quality wise, don't you think the pro's would be using those instead of their $20,000 pro DSLR camera systems? What a fricken joke these tools are for trying to convince everyone cheap P&S cameras are as good as pro gear. :lol:

Cannon Fodder

12-30-2007, 12:06 PM

I just love how these people try to convince wannabe photographers on the internet that equipment doesn’t play a role in quality images. :lol:

Because for the most part it doesn't. And most do use the cheaper equipment when they are not on a paid shoot.

JohnC

12-30-2007, 12:45 PM

Because for the most part it doesn't. And most do use the cheaper equipment when they are not on a paid shoot.

Prove it! Go buy a $150 P&S and you and I will go shoot anywhere we agree and compare the images as shot right out of the cameras (D80 v/s $150 P&S).

:callout:

I can even bring along a D40x, Sony DSC-F828, and two Nikon L3's to compare by. :lol:

Cannon Fodder

12-30-2007, 04:24 PM

I haven't really shot anything creatively since highschool and even then I worked more on the technical aspects than the composure. I just have a defective creative side of the brain, was killed during grammer school :lol:

I couldn't even if I wanted to. :lol: And I still say you get what you pay for in glass and it isn't all the camera it's the person behind it.

MikeW

01-08-2008, 12:55 PM

Looking for a hood and Filter...

Seems that the hood is out of stock any ideas where to find one?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162036-REG/Canon_2676A002_EW_78B_II_Lens_Hood.html

What about this filter?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/391176-REG/Hoya_XD72UV_72mm_Ultraviolet_UV_Pro.html

Still waiting on Tungstens bag too but may have to pick one up if they dont hurry up and ship his new one to him.

Still looking at tri-pods but not sure i want to sink 300-400 bucks in a tri-pod at this point. $100-$200 would be better for me right now.

Bob-E

01-08-2008, 01:16 PM

You can buy the filter from www.hvstar.com for alot cheaper if you don't mind buying from Hong Kong. Yes it's a very good filter. The hood can be had from ebay (http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=EW-78BII+&category0=) for alot cheaper too. I've ordered from hvstar many times with no problems. I've also ordered from Hong Kong ebay stores, but the last time they never shipped. I got my money back, but I never got the product. About a 90% success rate which is worth it for me to save so much money.

I have a Canon bag (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351537-REG/Canon_9320A003_200_DG_Digital_Gadget_Bag.html) I'll sell ya. Like new. $30.

Thanks for shopping Bob-E direct :)

Tungsten

01-08-2008, 01:18 PM

The bag I had ordered seems to be on indefinite backorder now. :(

MikeW

01-08-2008, 01:22 PM

I have a Canon bag (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351537-REG/Canon_9320A003_200_DG_Digital_Gadget_Bag.html) I'll sell ya. Like new. $30.

Thanks for shopping Bob-E direct :)

The bag I had ordered seems to be on indefinite backorder now. :(

David if your bag is out of the mix I will get Bob-Es'. When yours does come in I may be ready for an upgrade. I just need something to put this dang thing in :lol:

BOBE PM me so we can meet up and "handle our bizness". 140mph yo

HemiRam

01-08-2008, 01:59 PM

Still looking at tri-pods but not sure i want to sink 300-400 bucks in a tri-pod at this point. $100-$200 would be better for me right now.

My wife has several tripods. I can't recall the brand off the top of my head (Bogen maybe?) but I know they are quality units. If you don't mind a used one I'll get with her and see what model they are and what she'd turn loose of one for.

MikeW

01-08-2008, 02:30 PM

My wife has several tripods. I can't recall the brand off the top of my head (Bogen maybe?) but I know they are quality units. If you don't mind a used one I'll get with her and see what model they are and what she'd turn loose of one for.

USED! FTW I am a 3rd generation junk man so used is perfect for me :lol:

Let me know what she says please sir :cheers:

HemiRam

01-08-2008, 02:50 PM

USED! FTW I am a 3rd generation junk man so used is perfect for me :lol:

Let me know what she says please sir :cheers:

Will do. I know we have at least two of them. Can't really use but one at a time.

northtnguy

01-08-2008, 08:37 PM

MikeW

01-09-2008, 11:04 AM

You can get the lens hood here. http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/product-features.asp?id=226554060&redir=y

THANKS! I will order it from there :cheers:

Another question for you guys...

I found on-line a Used Bogen 3211 (aka 3011BN) tripod but it has teh 3126 Vid Camera head on it. I assume the head can be swapped with ease...right? What head should I get if I buy this used combo? Will the Bogen 484RC2 head fit without any issues?

Bob-E

01-09-2008, 11:34 AM

I found on-line a Used Bogen 3211 (aka 3011BN) tripod but it has teh 3126 Vid Camera head on it. I assume the head can be swapped with ease...right? What head should I get if I buy this used combo? Will the Bogen 484RC2 head fit without any issues?

Shouldn't be a problem. I did the same thing with an old Manfrotto tripod I had.

MikeW

01-09-2008, 11:54 AM

Kool thanks BobE

northtnguy

01-09-2008, 08:30 PM

I can't believe no one as said anything about Amvona. They have some pretty good photographic equipment. You can either buy from the retail online store, or buy via their e-bay store. Things are less expensive if you get it through e-bay. http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=amvona&category0=

Tripods, pan heads, ball heads .... lighting equipment, back drops, etc. I don't really care for the ball heads, but got a pan head from them. Very good quality for ~$15.00 (including shipping)

Don