I've spent the past few weeks researching what to purchase for my first DSLR setup, and I finally decided to place my order tonight! I sprung for overnight shipping, hopefully everything is in stock.

• Canon Rebel T2i
• Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens
• Hoya 77mm DMC PRO1 UV Filter
• 32GB Class 10 SD Card

I'm really looking forward to having my own camera again!

Great buy

I suggest picking up the Canon EF Lens - 50 mm - F/1.8 its the best $80 you will spend on a lens and takes awesome photographs.

Here are some examples of what it can do
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ef_50_18ii/di...57621454263972/

Yeah, I'm going to borrow my friend's Canon 50mm f/1.2L lens quite a bit! I was debating purchasing the 24mm f/1.4L as my primary lens, but decided on the more versatile 17-55 f/2.8 for my first lens.

I want to shoot people riding bikes at night in city lighting with the fixed lens. 24mm seems appropriate for the 1.6x sensor, making it about 40mm. I guess if I end up using my friend's 50mm a lot, I'll invest in my own.

uv filter? lol noob.

Congrats on the purchase, first of all!




An understatement would be that the Sigma 50mm F/1.4 is worth looking into. Just going to put it out there for ya. I don't know how much of a difference the .2 loss of aperture will be to you-- for what it's worth, the Sigma is $500 and regarded as one of (if not the) best 50mm primes on the market...B&H has the Canon at...yikes! ...$1380. I'm not trying to push/influence you...I guess what I'm saying is, keep your options open!

Also, good call with the 24mm and knowing your conversion factor...40mm seems like a very pragmatic shooting option!

Congrats again, and post often, please!

Are you paid by Sigma or something ? 50mm 1.2 is not comparable to the Sigma 50mm 1.4 and is not the best prime on the market.

Congratulations on the new purchase, I'd like to see some pics once you get used to it.

I would suggest getting multiple smaller cards..one 32gig card and you take a ton of pics on that and then the chance something goes wrong and you lose ALL your pics. If you have a few 4 or 8 gig cards and split up the images then if one goes bad you dont lose everything


the sigma 50 1.4 holds it own pretty damn well to the OVERPRICED canon 1.2
Maybe you should look into some test between the two..and NOT a test done by the Digital picture. That guy is the biggest canon fanboy and he makes all his test of non canon lenses always in favor for the canon...I see you got experience with both the Siggy and Canon 50 in your gear there to make the comment

Yay!

Are you paid by Morton? Cuz you're mad salty about me suggesting a pretty decent 50mm prime for some reason.

I'm gonna go with 05X...I've seen enough unbiased reviews that I feel confident suggesting it to someone. Especially someone with a new system that might be a little cautious about dropping $1380 on a lens...that is, opposed to $500.

I spent the past few weeks reading countless lens reviews, I'm willing to invest in top quality glass when there's an advantage. I was hesitant to purchase the EF-S lens, since it's only compatible with 1.6x crop bodies, but it's the only fast zoom lens that will go that wide on a crop body, and it has the same optical elements as L series lenses. It cost more than the camera, but fortunately they hold their value should I move on to a full frame setup.

If the 50mm focal distance ends up working out, I'll certainly consider all the brands when I purchase my own. The Canon 50mm f/1.2L is quite expensive, but it's very sharp. I still think it may be too close for what I plan to shoot though, which leaves me back at the 24mm F/1.4L. It's sharp even wide open. If I don't end up shooting much night action, I won't invest nearly as much. It has the potential to be lucrative for me though, so I want to do it right.

I'm spending more for fast lenses because I often shoot handheld in poorly lit spaces, and I'm looking to avoid using a flash.

I am shocked..On the Digital picture. where you can look at the 100% ISO charts..it shows the Sigma has better IQ then the Canon 50 1.2

05, since when do you care about scientific, objective tests of photography equipment? (I have to say that, even when Im on your side of this argument)

Marks, why didn't you start a thread in here asking what camera to get? You would have gotten so much useful information.......

nice setup CM. same one i hope to upgrade to eventually.

Im not..I was just saying I was surprised to see the Digital picture to show anything but canon lenses giving the best IQ vs 3rd party. I will take sample images taken by people who are out using the lens all the time over pics of test charts anyday of the week.

You could also consider upgrading your body to something with better high ISO performance if you end up shooting in low light a lot.

my sigma 20mm f/1.8 is pretty much permanently attached to my camera.

that T2i is pretty impressive at high ISO for the rebel line

Oh is it? I haven't gotten to play with one yet. It still holds true though, you could upgrade to a 50D or 7D and have better ISO performance.

I dont know about that..I think the new T2i has a better high ISo performance then the 50D

Yeah the T2i has better ISO, I think it matches or beats the 7D as well.

Unfortunately Adorama just emailed me that they don't have the camera in stock. It was showing in stock when I ordered, then out of stock this morning. Hopefully one comes in soon.

*waits for adorama guy to pop up out of nowhere and try to assist you*


(I've had the same thing happen to me)

the adorama user should be here within 1 business day to respond to your post

hold tight, CM

Sorry, Im not used to quantifying my equipment related comments. I worked indirectly for Gentec, Canadian distributor for Sigma for 3 years. There is nothing particularly wrong with the sigma 50mm 1.4, however it should not regarded as the best 50mm on the market and is most defiantly not comparable to the 50mm 1.2. I have used them both, I don't own either at this time. Construction wise, not comparable. Handling wise, not comparable IMO and that one is subjective. Now on a 1.6X crop, you will be hard pressed to see any real differences, aside from using lens charts. The Cannon 50mm 1.4 vs the Sigma 50mm 1.4, there my be a valid comparison there. Just not with the 50mm 1.2, apples and oranges come to mind. If your using a 1.6 crop you wont really get the full value of either lens until you are shooting full frame. Until then any 50mm 1.8 will work just as well minus the .4 stop.

Didn't mean to come out firing, its was the second or third time I read something the along the lines of that sigma 50mm 1.4 being the most highly regarded lens in the 50mm range and is alot cheaper than another lens that is incomparable.

Sorry for the post high jack,

best luck.






Just read the same thing 2-3 times and find it annoying, misleading. I would agree that 50mm is pretty decent, I would at no time say that it is regarded as the best 50mm lens on the market at only half the price of lens it cant be compared to.

If you say so but I have seen numerous people putting the 50 1.2 and Sigma 1.4 in side by side and the Sigma pretty much is running with it just fine...The difference between the L's and Sigma EX builds are SOOO similar they are both built like tanks. I would not call the 50 1.2 the best on the market either as it has its design flaw of the focus shift that cannot be fixed. I dont get your handling claim. What is there to handle? They are both about the same size and have a focus ring and thats it.

I recognize your qualifications, and I tip my hat to you sir. However, I would like to point something out. I suppose I should have clarified that I initially was referring only to quantifiable optical quality, since I've never held either of the lenses in my hands. In your comparison of the two lenses, though, you go beyond just optical performance by mentioning things like build quality etc--which, yes, is very important in determining the overall quality of a product. But if we're talking about overall quality of the lenses, then there is something that you have yet to mention--price. One question which needs to be asked, then, is: Is only slightly better optics, with moderately-to-significantly better build quality, and subjectively better handling worth paying almost $900 more for? Sure some people have tons of money, or like CM said, would pay a lot for quality glass. However you have to consider if what you get is what you pay for. Does the value of the product equate to its monetary worth? Maybe you can answer that since you've used both (I haven't). I don't want to guess but if I had to, I'd guess you get what you pay for in the case of Sigma...500 bucks, excellent optics and standard build quality. It doesn't seem like you get a fair deal for the 1380 you shell out for the Canon. In this respect the Sigma is a much better value (performance-to-price related ratio), which I guess is part of why I suggested it in the first place. Does this make sense at all? Idk if I'm not conveying my thoughts clearly...
You're right though, I probably shouldn't have suggested that the Sigma was so near to the top of the 50mm primes and in that sense I suppose I misspoke, my apologies. I meant more that, in general, it's a good option to look into.

Im not saying the Sigma 50mm 1.4 is a bad lens, just not comparable realistically to the Canon 50mm 1.2, First and foremost the L 1.2 is not an everyday lens or a nifty fifty at all. Where the 1.2 shines is what would set it apart from the EX 1.4. The amount of light coming through the lens while composing, that being the most important difference at least IMO/IME. Shooting situations or once in a lifetime situations like weddings, sunsets while on location, runway, low light locations etc. Seeing what you want to shoot without beam assistance or modeling is so important. I have used both the EX and L under that some of these circumstances and while shooting with the EX I was looking for more... Hyper focal shooting was problematic at best with the EX, again not an everyday situation, not as easy a process all the same.

Not as dramatic but a valid comparison, A 400 F5.6 and a 400 F4 and a 400 F2.8. They are all just as sharp as one another but the 2.8 costs more than the 5.6. All three of those lenses are purpose built just like a 50mm 1.8 1.4 and 1.2. For those reasons cannot be compared to one another based solely on price point.

As far as the 1.2 having focusing issues... I didn't it was always easy to work with @ 1.2 you are working with a paper thin DOF. There is a certain level of experience that comes with using super fast lenses, the two different copies I have used didn't seem to have any problems, once working at approx. 3 feet I made an adjustment and it went full back full forth and focused on AF lock. Anyone who separates ae lock and AF wont have an issue.

I didn't mean any offense to 50mm 1.4 owners, you have a great 50mm. All that I am saying is that there are very different tools, and shouldn't be compared so drastically.



No apologies or hat tipping necessary ! For $500 bucks your getting a great 50mm 1.4, better than Canon or Nikon can offer for that matter, bang for the buck wise. I would avoid comparing optical qualities in prime lenses of different build purposes... last time I checked the 1.8's out perform the 1.4s in that department. For some reason I decided to dig my heals in and state a point and at this point I may come of in a condescending manner... not my intention but it happens... ! I couldn't say if the HSM EX in weather proof but its build quality is inline with its end user cost... As far as your suggestion being right or wrong, its both. Depending on the point or comparison, which is why they would be best not compared at all, or compared on situation shooting. IE if I was going to use a steady cam and shoot HD video with an SLR ( thats a totally different can of worms... )

Something else to think about would be the situation of selling an item should you A) no longer have a use for it or Growing out of what the lens can offer. Buying L glass ( at least where I am from ) An L lens in like new condition will sell for retail amounts. IE I just sold my 100-400 ( S-2004 ) for $1750. new is $1850 + Tax. I like the value they hold. Not trying to knock Sigma, just advice to give someone researching what to purchase.

I had to cancel the 32gb SD card from my order, it was on backorder til April! I think I'll just try to find some 16gb class 10 cards locally. Anyone have any experience going from class 6 to class 10 cards? Do they really make any real world difference?

Still no ETA on the T2i

Not sure about the real difference in speed between the classes. I think I've been using a Class 4 CF card and never even thought about the speed, but I'll be going up to 6's when I get my T2i.

Ok I give up.

I'm surprised that the T2i could match the 7D though.

i saw a t2i at my local best buy on display. Didn't really look to see if they had it in stock. Why don't you try other stores?

That's what's so great about the T2i, it's basically the 7D's sensor. Early reviews were showing little to no difference in image quality. The 7D does of course come with a number of better/faster features.


Taxes, mostly. The camera still isn't 'officially released' so everyone is just taking pre-orders. They are shipping though, just in limited quantities.

Dilemma, a local store has the T2i kit in stock. I'd be looking at spending an extra $180 after taxes for instant gratification and a lens I'm going to replace in two days. Patience sucks!

CM, since you've done the research, a T2i is an upgrade on a 30D, verdad?

Definitely. A much better sensor, way better low light performance, newer metering and autofocusing system, video capabilities, etc. A lot has improved since the 30D was released.

For those comparing the T2i to a 7D, I believe these are the big differences:

Build quality - The 7D has a larger metal body, some weather proofing.
More ISO options - The 7D and T2i have the same ISO range, but the 7D offers more ISO increments.
Speed - The 7D has two digic processors, it has a faster burst rate, faster image processing, etc. 8fps vs 3.8fps
Pro Features - The 7D offers pro features like talking to wireless lighting systems, etc.
Autofocus Points - The 7D has a more advanced autofocusing system, 19 points vs 8.

I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things, but those ones stood out to me in my research.

I purchased a nikon d5000 about 4 months ago and i simply love it its the most amazing camera ive ever owned

spam.

thanks for the help, CM.

How is this relevant?

Silly Louisianaians...

The nice fedex man just delivered me a class 10 card. I can do some continuous shooting to give you a comparison if you'd like. Won't be the same as you'd get w/ the higher image size & what have you, but it might give you an idea as to whether it's worth it.

These class cards are useless when it comes to speed and the camera. With a rebel camera shooting 3-3.7fps any card on the market can keep up with it. Most of that is for transfer speed in the PC..The only real advantage the speedy cards would have would be in like the 1D shooting 8-10fps..I still use a Sandisk Ultra II and it ha no issue keeping up with me blasting off 10fps. Anyway the buffer in the camera is for that to hold the shots as it writes to the cards.

No, the buffer does get full. At least cannon says it does. Shooting w/ a class 6 the manual states the buffer will get full after ~9 shoots.

yea the buffer will get full in raw after 6 shots on the T1i vs 9 on the T2..but even with a slower card thats still enough to keep it going. Thats 2sec of time till full for each camera. Thats enough for pretty much most cards to keep up with the writing. Like I said I use Ultra II's and I really havnt seen any issue going machine gun with mine. Anyway how often does anyone shoot full blown speed..I could probably count on 1 hand how many times a year I shoot 10fps. Even then its probably only a 5frame burst. Unless your a pro ports shooter who does it all the time thats another reason speed isnt a huge factor.

Yea I realized later that it was actually pretty dumb. A 20mb raw file, shooting 3.5/sec, is going to outpace even a class 10 card in half a shot.

It's not enough for any card to keep up with the writing though, if you do the math...a class 10 card will write 10mb/s. A raw file is upwards of 20mb. A class 10 will be ready to write again slightly faster, but probably not fast enough to make any real noticeable difference.

I mentioned it for Chris because I know that part of what he wants to shoot is sports, so it might matter to him.

or



?

smart ass

i love a good port after dinner though.

I dont foresee ever really shooting past the 9fames the buffer can hold with a rebel. If you are shooting sports..by the time 2sec has gone by the action you are shooting is most likely going to be over.

The local store has the kit on sale for $811 apparently. I might go for it and just cancel the body from my Adorama order, I'm sure I could sell the lens on eBay. Decisions decisions...