Sony Alpha 100 vs Canon EOS 400D

brianon

Was thinking of purchasing my first DSLR and have narrowed it down (in my price range (Canon being a bit cheaper) ) to these two cameras. Both have received good reviews. Can anyone recommend one over the other ?

Also, would really love to do some macro photography. Anyone recommend a cheap/decent macro lens?

Was looking at pixmania. They seem to be the cheapest.

Is it best to buy the camera with a lens or to buy body only and then buy the lens separate?

Cheers,
Brian.

Borderfox

Personally I would go for the Canon, but have you ruled out the Nikon D80?

brianon

Borderfox wrote:

Personally I would go for the Canon, but have you ruled out the Nikon D80?

Well its €190 dearer. I really only want to spend around €1000. And I was hoping to get an 'all purpose' lens and a cheap macro lens?!

Guess it depends on what lens I get.

Borderfox

Every review says the Nikon is a better camera in every way, might be worth the extra in the long run. What about a Nikon D40? All my stuff is canon so I am not biased in any way. Cheap macro go for something like a Sigma 70-300 APO. It has macro from 200-300 at 1:2. Just get a good tripod to keep it steady.

Borderfox

The lens is €200

Roen

Odd, any magazine review I read gave the nod to the 400D, but either way you won't be disappointed. €1000 seems a lot for a 400d. Here's a 400d + 18-55 for less than €600...probably about €650 with postage and insurance. That'll leave 350 for bits and bobs.
Best of luck anyway!

brianon

Thanks for the help guys. Borderfox: In terms of lens... you mention "Sigma 70-300 APO". I looked on pixmania and found several of those. How do I know which one? And also, how do I know if a lens will work with a Canon/Nikon or both?

Thanks again guys. Any other suggestions...let me know

Roen

It'll be designated Canon mount or Nikon mount, well it should be anyway. It definitely won't work with both!

brianon

Looking at these two lenses...what do people think.

http://www.pixmania.com/ie/uk/14606/art/sigma/lens-af-70-300mm-f4-5-6-m.html
&
http://www.pixmania.com/ie/uk/14601/art/sigma/lens-af-70-300mm-f4-5-6-a.html

punchdrunk

it's the second one you listed,you can buy it in town for 200 bucks!

brianon

Sorry for all the questions guys but if I got the cameras in the states Rebel XTi I think, would I have any problems with it over here ? In terms of lens compatability etc...

Roen

Nope,they'll be fine, not sure on chargers though.

melekalikimaka

just the badge outside thats different, charger on the other hand...

Biro

Charger is a little different, but it being a transformer anyway, can take either 110v or 220-240v input and will change it to the correct rating for the camera, be it a local camera or a yankee equivalant!!
All you'll need is the adapter for the two-pin american plug to 3-pin Irish/UK socket.
I read your first post and was going to say choose between the Canon and Nikon rather than Canon and Sony, but that seems to be the general concensus from other posters here.
And I wouldn't really pay too much attention to the "Nikon is better than Canon" or vice-versa arguements, because if you're at a level to be able to notice the difference then you really are at a level that is higher than this range! They're both excellent cameras for the money! Go with the best deal.

brianon

Thanks again guys.

So I won an auction on bay for a Canon Rebel XTi *400d) last night
No lens so now I need a lens (or two). I guess I am willing to spend €500 on the the lens. I would really like to do macro but first and foremost I just want to be able to take some general purpose photos & maybe some sports photography.

Don't know how much is possible with that budget. Any ideas ? I reckon the lens here http://www.pixmania.com/ie/uk/14601/art/sigma/lens-af-70-300mm-f4-5-6-a.html.

The description of that lens says ..."It’s the ideal lens for portraits, sports photography, nature photography, and other types of photography that frequently use the telephoto range.".

Does that cover what I have said I am looking for ? What about landscape photos ?

brianon

Ok. I have decided on two lens that should be in budget.

Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD-IF
CANON EF 50 F1.8 II standard lens

These good choices for a first time user ? Will I be able to shoot a decent range of photos ? (sports, macro, landscape)

Cheers,
Brian.

Calina

Depends on what sort of sports you're aiming for. I wouldn't think that you've anything like enough zoom in that.

I can't speak for anyone else but I would imagine that you really should have at least 200mm zoom for sports. I use the Sigma 70-300 DG APO on a Canon 350D which has been mentioned in despatches around the forum lately and I would not be without it.

I shoot watersports.

For the record I have the following:

1) the kit 18-55mm from Canon
2) Sigma 70-300mm DG APO
3) Sigma 50-500 DG

At the moment it's covering me for everything I need although I do precious few macro shots. Sports, landscape and portraiture I do okay with. You probably don't need the third lens for a good while yet and the second lens is 199E in just about every camera store in Dublin city. My next lens will probably be some kind of a wide angle.

brianon

Thanks. The 2) Sigma 70-300mm DG APO. Where in Dublin (I am in Limerick) can you get it for 200e ?

Its 250e on pixmania.

elven

They'll do you fine *but*

28mm on a 400D anticipating the digital crop factor will give you nearly 45mm which isn't that wide at all for landscape shots. Not something that would bother me, but you might want to think about how much you'd use the really wide end. People have different styles/tendencies. Then at the telephoto(ish) end you've got 120mm (again taking 1.6 crop factor into consideration) which is fine if you're at the side of the pitch but doesn't give much of a stretch if you're any further away. Generally it's a good walkabout lens but for the money, and in one package, you won't get something that will cover all your bases. As far as I can tell it isn't a macro eitherso you will be limited to a minimum focusing distance of over 12 inches or so, you'll be able to shoot a large flower but no bugs!!!

As far as it goes, you have to start somewhere and I'm sure you'l make use of this lens for years even if you have to add wider and longer lenses to your collection as time goes on. Other gear heads round here will be able to tell you more about this particular model, my opinions are based on focal length only.

Oh, and the 50mm? Don't think about it, just buy it. You'll have a lovely light, compact, low light capable sharp lens, then you can buy extension tubes later and do the macro thing too

Calina

brianon wrote:

Thanks. The 2) Sigma 70-300mm DG APO. Where in Dublin (I am in Limerick) can you get it for 200e ?

Its 250e on pixmania.

You can definitely get it in Conns Cameras (next to the Brown Thomas carpark not far from Grafton Street), and in the Camera Centre in Blanchardstown Centre and Grafton Street. I'm pretty sure there's a camera shop just at the top of Kildare Street which sells it for around 200E as well. Don't know the name though.

Two versions of the 70-300mm are available, one with APO and one without. The difference in price is about 40E. I find the lens to be very sharp (have the APO version) and I like it a lot.

B0rG

Somebody mentioned in this thread that Nikon is actually superior to Canon... And I'm still wondering why...

Biro

B0rG wrote:

Somebody mentioned in this thread that Nikon is actually superior to Canon... And I'm still wondering why...

They mentioned that the Nikon was superior to the Canon in every way too - according to every review that they read. Methinks that they were reading the wrong reviews!

B0rG

Biro wrote:

They mentioned that the Nikon was superior to the Canon in every way too - according to every review that they read. Methinks that they were reading the wrong reviews!

Obviously

brianon

elven wrote:

They'll do you fine *but*

28mm on a 400D anticipating the digital crop factor will give you nearly 45mm which isn't that wide at all for landscape shots. Not something that would bother me, but you might want to think about how much you'd use the really wide end. People have different styles/tendencies. Then at the telephoto(ish) end you've got 120mm (again taking 1.6 crop factor into consideration) which is fine if you're at the side of the pitch but doesn't give much of a stretch if you're any further away. Generally it's a good walkabout lens but for the money, and in one package, you won't get something that will cover all your bases. As far as I can tell it isn't a macro eitherso you will be limited to a minimum focusing distance of over 12 inches or so, you'll be able to shoot a large flower but no bugs!!!

As far as it goes, you have to start somewhere and I'm sure you'l make use of this lens for years even if you have to add wider and longer lenses to your collection as time goes on. Other gear heads round here will be able to tell you more about this particular model, my opinions are based on focal length only.

Oh, and the 50mm? Don't think about it, just buy it. You'll have a lovely light, compact, low light capable sharp lens, then you can buy extension tubes later and do the macro thing too

So with cropping then even a 14mm lens (the smallest I've seen) is effectively still only 20mm? With me Canon 400d. What would be the best (at reasonable price) lens to get for portrait and also what about a fish eye lens ?

Ok. I;ve now seen a 10mm but thats still 16mm right ?

melekalikimaka

B0rG wrote:

Obviously

nikon>canon


nuff said

B0rG

melekalikimaka wrote:

nikon>canon
nuff said

Yeah xmas is in the year, and nobody gives a flying f about nikon or canon superiority.
We'll have it next year

brianon

Ah crap. I bought a lens last night..."Tamron SP 28-75mm XR Di f/2.8 for NIKON AF". Whats that you say? Thought I bought a Canon camera ? Yes I did.

So why did I buy the Nokon lens for 300e ? Cause it was late and I was tired

What a muppet. I emailed the guy UR Galaxy on ebay and he said it is already sent. What am I to do ? Return it at probably a cost of 80$ postage over and back? Sell it? ahhhhhhh

joolsveer

B0rG wrote:

Yeah xmas is in the year, and nobody gives a flying f about nikon or canon superiority.
We'll have it next year

On the contrary a lot of people do seem to care about the answer to this question.

Calina

most of them seem to have Nikons though.

elven

brianon wrote:

So with cropping then even a 14mm lens (the smallest I've seen) is effectively still only 20mm? With me Canon 400d. What would be the best (at reasonable price) lens to get for portrait and also what about a fish eye lens ?

Ok. I;ve now seen a 10mm but thats still 16mm right ?

Just to confuzzle you even more, if you get an EF lans (made for the digital body) it won't have a crop factor. If you don't see yourself changing for a full frame body (a 5D at the moment) antime in the next 5 years I wouldn't worry about not buying EF lenses.

Anyway. Hold yer horses... wait until you've had the thing for a couple months and see just what you get into shooting, don't want to go spending all your cash at the start trying to cover all bases then find out you're just into sports and don't care about mad wide angle shots. Get the mid range zoom, get the 50mm, and start taking pictures. I started with a 28-80mm (on a film body mind), then I got an 80-200mm and then I got the 50mm and some extension tubes to allow me to shoot macro. I think I only take the 200mm lens out for one in every 50 pictures I take, but I also don't use the kit lens that I now have (18-55mm) at the widest point very often either. TBH, I have my 50mm on prolly 80% of the time. Other people live with the 10-20mm permanently fixed on their camera, other's the 300mm. You got to learn what you like before splashing out too much, save it for when you know what you really want.

Oh, and sell the Nikon lens...

brianon

elven wrote:

Just to confuzzle you even more, if you get an EF lans (made for the digital body) it won't have a crop factor. If you don't see yourself changing for a full frame body (a 5D at the moment) antime in the next 5 years I wouldn't worry about not buying EF lenses.

Anyway. Hold yer horses... wait until you've had the thing for a couple months and see just what you get into shooting, don't want to go spending all your cash at the start trying to cover all bases then find out you're just into sports and don't care about mad wide angle shots. Get the mid range zoom, get the 50mm, and start taking pictures. I started with a 28-80mm (on a film body mind), then I got an 80-200mm and then I got the 50mm and some extension tubes to allow me to shoot macro. I think I only take the 200mm lens out for one in every 50 pictures I take, but I also don't use the kit lens that I now have (18-55mm) at the widest point very often either. TBH, I have my 50mm on prolly 80% of the time. Other people live with the 10-20mm permanently fixed on their camera, other's the 300mm. You got to learn what you like before splashing out too much, save it for when you know what you really want.

Oh, and sell the Nikon lens...

so no cropping on an ef lens!? So this lens...Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM Lens is actually 18mm - 55mm and would be good for landscape ?

Borderfox

I have a Sigma 70-300 APO in the box with the case and receipt, I am too lazy to put it on adverts.ie. I can let you have it for €120 and €5 p&p to Limerick? Served me well. I will put up some examples of shots taken with it.

brianon

Dang. I bought one on ebay. grrrrr

davmigil

brianon wrote:

Ah crap. I bought a lens last night..."Tamron SP 28-75mm XR Di f/2.8 for NIKON AF". Whats that you say? Thought I bought a Canon camera ? Yes I did.

So why did I buy the Nokon lens for 300e ? Cause it was late and I was tired

What a muppet. I emailed the guy UR Galaxy on ebay and he said it is already sent. What am I to do ? Return it at probably a cost of 80$ postage over and back? Sell it? ahhhhhhh

€300? Sounds a bargain. Stick it in adverts.ie or on the www.photographyireland.net for sale and you should sell it no bother.

Alun

elven wrote:

Just to confuzzle you even more, if you get an EF lens (made for the digital body) it won't have a crop factor.

Hang on, I thought we'd established a while ago on a thread in another galaxy far, far away that crop factors applied to 'digital-only' lenses as well? The only difference is that the image doesn't have to be as big as for a 35mm or full-frame sensor, and they can save on optics as a result. The only effect of putting the lens on a 35mm or full-frame digital camera (assuming it will fit) is that you'll get severe vignetting.

brianon

Alun wrote:

Hang on, I thought we'd established a while ago on a thread in another galaxy far, far away that crop factors applied to 'digital-only' lenses as well? The only difference is that the image doesn't have to be as big as for a 35mm or full-frame sensor, and they can save on optics as a result. The only effect of putting the lens on a 35mm or full-frame digital camera (assuming it will fit) is that you'll get severe vignetting.

Now I really am confuzzled



I have been trawling through google and still can't find a lens for landscape shots for around €300. Any suggestions?

Fionn

i'm totally baffled!!

anyway Brian.
This explains the crop factor

As was said you should be able to flog the Nikon lens handy enough! and that offer of the Canon version seems to be a good bargin.

failing that!

as elven said get the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens it’s light compact and takes very clear and crisp photographs and it’s the cheapest that Canon offer. Just don't buy it here in Ireland!!!!
Some other lens you might consider (But are a bit beyond your budget);

nice general purpose lens - Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens or a slightly cheaper one is Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM lens

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II has got good reviews.

on another note - perhaps it should be put in the sticky - that this photography lark can be very very expensive!!
:eek:

brianon

Ok. I have the camera and lens all bought. Got lost in the moment a bit and spent more than I should and even the wrong lens :rolleyes:

So this is what I will have (hopefully) early in the new year.

Canon Rebel Xti
Canon EFS 18-55mm Ultrasonic
CANON EF 50 50mm F/1.8 F1.8 MK II
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro

Tamron SP 28-75mm XR Di f/2.8 for NIKON AF :rolleyes:
Will have to sell the Tamron.

Thanks to all those who gave me advise. Much appreciated. Hopefully I've made some decent choices.

Calina

The sigma is a really nice lens.

I took this with it:



(linkback to flickr photo page under their T&Cs)

Biro

Alun wrote:

Hang on, I thought we'd established a while ago on a thread in another galaxy far, far away that crop factors applied to 'digital-only' lenses as well? The only difference is that the image doesn't have to be as big as for a 35mm or full-frame sensor, and they can save on optics as a result. The only effect of putting the lens on a 35mm or full-frame digital camera (assuming it will fit) is that you'll get severe vignetting.

I think you're right about that.