A dilemma

Pinarello

Hi all,
I'm going to New York in 6 weeks time and i'm really looking forward to going to B&H Photo.I want to buy the Canon 1D Mark III and a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM. Only trouble is i've done the sums and might not be able to raise the cash in time for both.What would people here do?

1.Buy the Camera in B&H and the lens off Uncle Albert?

2.Buy the lens from B&H and save the money for the camera at a later stage?

Any advice is greatly appreciated...:)

CabanSail

What Body do you have now?

What do you want shoot?

Generally you will get more improvement from better glass than a new body.

Pinarello

I have a Canon 400D.I think the 70-200mm is a bit too heavy for the 400D.I want/like to shoot sports, especially cycling.:)

challengemaster

I'm currently using the 400D + battery grip with the 70-200 f/2.8 L

Seems alright for me..

If you want to see what pics are like, check my flickr. All the drift ones were the day I broke-in the 70-200

Also apparently the IS is negated by the extra size/weight. Save yourself the extra few $$$! Buy a monopod tbh

CabanSail

For Sports I think you will get more benefit from a long fast lens.

ttcomet

Don't forget option 3) Sell a kidney and get both

In case you already only have the 1 kidney though I would buy the lens before the body.

Given all the noise on the web about the 1Dmk3 focusing issues what will you do for warranty? Do B+H sell Mack or similar warranties?

Calina

(bloody dial up)

Do you know what it is about the 1D Mk III you want over your 400D?

My instinct would lean towards the lens and forget the camera for now.

I was all set to acquire a 1D Mk III about a year ago - it was on the schedule. I wasn't happy about the price but on offer at the time was the 30D which didn't have certain things I looked for, so reluctantly faced up to the scary money for a 1D. Then Canon announced the 40D and it fulfilled my key criteria which were a) improved weather proofing and b) a very decent fps. Some time has taught me that for what I want from the fps 6.5 is almost too much. Not interested in the 1D any more.

Pinarello

I had looked at the 40D and i was surprised it has 6.5fps burst.The 1D Mark III i thought was better built and would be a better camera for outdoor use.I had also seen the reviews about the 1D Mark III on the net and i did think twice about it.If phtographing bicycle races they are held in all weather.And as you said the 40D has been improved for outdoor use.But based on your advice Calina i will buy the lens first and a new camera can wait until another day.

AnimalRights

I can recommend the 40D too, I had both the 400D and 450D and tbh they struggled with the 70-200L 2.8IS, it felt like the lens was dragging behind when I moved the camera in any direction as CM said earlier the battery grip would prob help this out a fair bit, when I switched to the 40D it coped with the lens so much better and I now find it much easier to compose a shot now.
As for the trip if you insist on the 1D I would simply borrow money of somebody.

City-Exile

The 1D Mk III is a pro body.
The 40D is a prosumer body.

The 40D could cope easily with cycling.
If you get the 40D, I'd advise getting the grip too.

You'll get more benefit from the lens than the body.

Calina

Pinarello wrote: »

I had looked at the 40D and i was surprised it has 6.5fps burst.The 1D Mark III i thought was better built and would be a better camera for outdoor use.I had also seen the reviews about the 1D Mark III on the net and i did think twice about it.If phtographing bicycle races they are held in all weather.And as you said the 40D has been improved for outdoor use.But based on your advice Calina i will buy the lens first and a new camera can wait until another day.

I shoot watersports and from the water as well.

That being said, I'd a 350D which stood up to the weather pretty okay as well.

Fireman

I would agree with Calina, I had the very same dilemma going on in my head for months, eventually I purchase the 40D and have never looked back, I shoot Rally's (Car) and the local Motor bike road race along with other stuff and have no problems
So the 40D & the lens might be an option and save lots of €€€€€€

Pinarello

I have to say i'm overwhelmed by the response i've gotten to my questions.It seems like anytime B&H is mentioned here on the Photography forum it like a chain reaction.People have nothing but good thing's to say about the shop.I would like to thank all who have taken their precious time to reply to my query.There are too many people to mention or single out, but i appreciate each and every comment. I will definately buy the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM lens first based on everyones recomendations.The camera thing is still killing me as no matter how many times i've looked at the demo on B&H of the 40D i still keep coming back to look at the 1D Mark III....:)

City-Exile

Of course you'll favour the 1D Mk III, but it's more than 3 times the price of the 40D. All I was saying is that if money was the issue, you'd get vaule for your buck with the 40D.

Pinarello

City-Exile wrote: »

Of course you'll favour the 1D Mk III, but it's more than 3 times the price of the 40D. All I was saying is that if money was the issue, you'd get vaule for your buck with the 40D.

I understand what you are saying City-Exile.I first bought a 400D to see if i would like the Photography and i have to say i'm absolutley nuts about it.As an aspiring photographer or an accomplished one you tend to appreciate sights more than the normal person, especially when viewed through lens.If i'd known i was going to like it so much i'd have bought the 40D first.What i'm afraid now is if i buy the 40d will i keep asking myself when i come home from the US should i have pushed the boat out for the 1D Mark III? But the more advice people like yourself give me about the 40D i could end up going down that route...;)

challengemaster

TBH do you really need the IS version? You could save a bit..

Pinarello

I've seen people on the Photography forum buying the f/4 version of the lens and then selling it on adverts.ie a while later to buy the f/2.8.I hadn't thought about the non is version.Is it not better to have it? Do you have this type of lens Challengemaster???

AnimalRights

I had the 70-200 f/4 non IS version, I sold it 2 months later to a bloke who went on to sell it less than a month again!
I upgraded to the 2.8 IS.
I far prefer IS to Non IS, then again thats bleeding obvious I guess. :pac:

City-Exile

Just a point, the 40D is far superior to the 400D.
Totally different beast!

Pinarello

City-Exile wrote: »

Just a point, the 40D is far superior to the 400D.
Totally different beast!

Yes it is.I've just been looking at it on dpreview.com.It looks the business.And when used with the battery grip it should be big enough to support the 70-200mm.My friend has a Nikon D300 and there is not much difference to the two of them.but i'm sure some of the Nikon users in the forum here would beg to differ....;)

challengemaster

I got the 70-200 f/2.8 L about 2 weeks ago, using it with the 400D and battery grip..

AnimalRights

I went through what this guy went through.

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=hLED6S2wYzw&feature=related