If I had 2000 to Spend today I'd buy ?

[Bubbleyboy]

If You were to spend up to 2000 today on a new set up what would you buy and why .
canon 550d twin lens
canon 550d body and which lenses (remember 2000 )
Second hand 5D 2 good condition as cheap as possible .
Canon 450d spending more on better lenses
Canon 1000d as a start and investing in the best lenses I could get(examples would be good)

[Xenedis]

For me, $2K would buy one lens, or most of a lens.

Unfortunately your question is hypothetical, too vague and really won't get you any useful answers.

The questions I pose to you instead are:

1. Do you have $2K to spend?
2. What do you want to shoot?
3. What gear do you have now?
4. Is your gear limiting your photography?
5. What do you want to do that your current gear cannot do?

If you're needing assistance with choosing gear suitable for you, you'll need to explain your circumstances so that people can suggest something appropriate.

[Kym]

Also: What Genre are you planning to shoot?

Eg. Birding needs a good long lens, and you can use a 2nd hand 450D; landscape a 10-20, portrait a nice fast prime (50 - 100 range) etc

[ricktas]

A gift voucher for the owner of Ausphotography!

[Wayne]

None of the things on your list...because they are all inferior Canon products.

[Xenedis]

Also: What Genre are you planning to shoot?

Very important -- so important that I neglected it! <Gives itself the hose>

Since fixed; thanks.

[ollie]

only 2k?

[Dan Gamble]

On ebay for $2k you can get an EOS 550D w/ twin lens kit, Speedlite 430EX II and some left to play with (I got a tripod).

I chose this kit because I'm a beginner to DSLR photography and wanted an affordable body that would give me a good range of features that I could use in a good rage of situations do the most with and have the flexibility of moving from auto to manual modes as I learn more and build more confidence (whilst still getting some good shots in full auto modes so I believe).

I can't afford a DSLR AND a video camera and, being a Dad, I like to have the choice so the 550D was a no brainer with 1080p video also.

It's a good starter kit that should take me far so I've been told. As I don't have a style preference or speciality as of yet I didn't get too far into researching types of lenses and filters. I just saw what seemed like a good versatile Kit.

The Nikkon D90 was a close second choice at a simlar price, with the standard lens, as the 550D and I think the CMOS in the D90, whilst less MP than the 550D, might have mathematically less pixel bleed (or something) but the video was 720p on the D90 and, as I said, I'm no where near being a pro photographer yet and I don't know if the microscopic differences will matter as much to me as it might for someone with more skills and a better eye.

I have a little left over too so it'd be good to see what everyone else thinks of as a good list of things to get for their kits with the cash.

[Bubbleyboy]

I hear ya there , we all gotta start some where , to build up our collection .
I'll be mostly doing the family thing with some weddings (homestyle not pro) thrown in .
I like landscapes , beaches and nature (spiders , bugs and birds as well as some flowers) These should keep me busy till the end of this century as a start so will strart as an amature and move up as my skill and knowledge expands . Artsy may come later.
I like the items you have chosen in your kit . And within budget.

My quandry is a choice between high end starter ie 550D or go for a low end expert 1 with larger sensor (38 x 24) I think . Lenses are a collection that can be built up over time as the need arises.

I know that its an open question but I'm trying to avoid saying in 6 to 12 months I wish I had bought xxx model . Trying to benifit from members that have traveled the journey ie start with a 7d and learn along the way what the capabilities are or go the 550D and use it to the max as its more capable than youll ever be.

You can only ask for honest assesments and opinions.

Bubbleyboy

[Kym]

Ok, http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...to-george.html That's closer to the truth in some ways than I want to think about

But, ANY modern camera body will do! 1000D is more than enough.
550D will have more features than you are likely to ever use.

Good glass = good Image Quality
You keep glass and change bodies over time

[ving]

new camera body... NOT CANON!

[fabian628]

If You were to spend up to 2000 today on a new set up what would you buy and why .
canon 550d twin lens
canon 550d body and which lenses (remember 2000 )
Second hand 5D 2 good condition as cheap as possible .
Canon 450d spending more on better lenses
Canon 1000d as a start and investing in the best lenses I could get(examples would be good)

If 2k only i would go for a second hand 1DII (can get for $800 if u find a good deal) 17-40mm f/4 $600, 200mm f/2.8 mark1 $600.

My experience has been that brand new camera equiptment is very expensive, especially depreciation of bodies. Theres not a great deal that can go wrong with the camera, if it is working, it should work just like a new one.

[amandathorson]

I would be careful about buying second hand, just cause cameras have a limited shutter life so I would check on how much the camera has been used before you purchase it. That is the problem with buying ex pro gear, it might be cheap but it also might last you a couple of months.
The 550D is a great camera, I've used it before and it is wonderful to start off with. I wouldn't go with the twin kit I would be more inclined to get an 'enthusiasts kit' with either the 18-135mm ($1799) or 18-200 ($2000) just cause they are better optically and more versatile.

[Dan Gamble]

I wouldn't go with the twin kit I would be more inclined to get an 'enthusiasts kit' with either the 18-135mm ($1799) or 18-200 ($2000) just cause they are better optically and more versatile.

I must admit that I was very overwhelmed by choice of camera alone when making my first dslr purchase, let alone looking at lenses. My fear probably lead to to get what I thought was seemingly "more versatile" for the price. That was using the NooB equation of two lenses that do what one does in another package should mean that each is more specialised in its range.

I joined this site and I hear a great deal about "Glass this and Glass that". I need more lens education for sure and can't think of a better place to start learning and it would have helped greatly when making the decision on which "package" to get.

Guess Glass is next on the wish list... but I'm afraid it will no longer fit into my 2K budget.

[Kym]

Guess Glass is next on the wish list... but I'm afraid it will no longer fit into my 2K budget.

Depends. You can get a nifty 50 (f/1.7 or thereabouts) for any of the major brands for a reasonable price, even 2nd hand.
Or a fast walkaround Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 (or Sigma 24-70)

It's as you go longer the price goes up.

[fabian628]

I would be careful about buying second hand, just cause cameras have a limited shutter life so I would check on how much the camera has been used before you purchase it. That is the problem with buying ex pro gear, it might be cheap but it also might last you a couple of months.
The 550D is a great camera, I've used it before and it is wonderful to start off with. I wouldn't go with the twin kit I would be more inclined to get an 'enthusiasts kit' with either the 18-135mm ($1799) or 18-200 ($2000) just cause they are better optically and more versatile.

true, but 95% of fleabay is just hobbyist either upgrading or selling equiptment becuase they dont use it.
IN my experience, the majority of entry level equiptment is pretty much new, most people buy it,baby it, decide this is too much for them and sell.

as for pro bodies, just hope they havent done 300k clicks, even so, a sutter replacement is not too expensive

[exwintech]

I might be jumping 1-out with this, but I've already decided that my first DSLR will be a Pentax, partly because on a low fixed-income, their ability to use a wide range of very nice older lenses is a big advantage.

So, if I had $2,000.00 to spend - here's what I'd do:

$1,139.00 - Pentax K-X with the Pentax 17-70mm kit lens (Digital Camera Warehouse) as a neat walk-around lens.

$670.00 - Pentax 55-300 DA ED - general use, some friendlier-distance birds, etc.

That's $1,809.00 - leaving $191.00 for some good SDHC cards, and another set of Eneloops.

As none of that is very heavy - my Slik F740 tripod would be adequate for a while, if used carefully.

Then add some second-hand lenses - an A-series 50mm, etc, as searching finds and finances allow.

Regards, Dave.

[makro]

buy a plane ticket to a picturesque location and use the gear that I have

[Bubbleyboy]

Thanks for the answers fellas ? some better than others but all welcome , it takes all kinds to make a site interesting . I found the experiances of the noobe (sorry cant remember name offhand) and his experiance with his new 550d .
There have been some nikon vibes coming from god knows where so for now I,m waiting for the new D3100 to appear in the flesh to compare with the 550d which I like atm .
I think the 3100 may be cheaper bodywise and allow me to spend more on a mulifunction type lens ie 17-105 , 200 or 250 whatever will keep me within budget.
To that end are Tamron and Sigma lenses in a better or similar class to canon or nikon lenses?
You seem to get more lens for $ in the non genuine lenses but its not worth it if the quality of photos is mared by the lens , the aim is to get better not worse .


Bubbleyboy.

[mynxt]

Canon or Nikon is like the old Ford and Holden debate. That preference is totally yours. I won't even look at another brand of camera. Why? No idea, just love my Canon.

About the Tamron and Sigma lenses, if you look at people's signature with the list of the gear that they have you will find lots with Tamron and Sigma and genuine lenses. So I wouldn't say the quality is worse. People also have more than one camera body as well.

I myself have the 350D and have two kit lenses. I've had it for years but only recently started devoting the time to learn to use it and take better photos. I haven't posted heaps of photos on the site yet, but the ones I have I haven't had anyone complain about the lens or the camera being an issue. More me needing to learn more

I don't see a problem with starting with a low end camera and working your way up. You need to master the basics before anything. You can always add better lenses to a simple body anyway.

Landscape/waterscape are more my thing and I'm finding I need filters and remote shutter release and a tripod and the right bag to trek with and all other little things to help me take a better photo, rather than needing a better camera body.

So I would start basic and learn and work your way up. Find what your area is going to be and then you will have a better understanding of what it is you really do need.