Should I upgrade my camera body or get a new lens and tripod?

I just got 1000 bucks and want to spend it on camera equipment.

Right now I have a Canon Digital Rebel XT.

I want a good landscape lens or macro lens.

Should I get a better camera body??

What do you all think?

Thanks!!

FWIW, a good carbon fiber tripod from Gitzo will cost close to $650, maybe a bit less if you don't ever plan to use big glass. A good ball head will spend the rest of your $1000 and a small bit more. If you are going to do serious landscape images a solid tripod is mandatory for composition and steadiness. So, this is where I would spend the $$. You can add a 17-40 or 16-35 later. You could spend the money on a lens now, but you will want a good tripod set up relatively soon.

I too put lenses and tripods ahead of camera bodies. My tripod costs more then my camera. The tripod has had three different cameras on top of it now. I kept the tripod, got rid of the cameras one by one.


Kent in SD

You don't have to get a Gitzo, but they are good tripods. There are some VERY good combinations that would get you going with a carbon fiber tripod and a high quality head for ~$600. I chose the Velbon 630 and Acratech Ultimate head myself.

But depending on what you have for lenses, I would get a tripod and add lenses before I would buy a new camera body. The newer 10MP bodies don't give you a whole lot more in terms of image quality over your XT.

This is from someone who shoots with an XT. My Canon mount lenses are worth 4-5 times what the body is worth and my tripod is worth roughly the same. I do think the camera is going to start having some minor quirks. One of my AF indicator lights in the viewfinder went dead.

So what are some tripods and tripod heads I should look at??

Most of my photography is of wildlife, wildflowers, waterfalls, and I'm getting into landscape photography.

I would like a tripod that will cover all the bases.

Thanks!!

I agree with the thought process so far. Spend the bucks on a super tripod. Gitzo 3530LSV with a RRS BH-55 and you'll never be sorry. and you'll probably never have to buy another one in your lifetime (lifetime warranty on the Gitzo in the US).

No contest. Bodies come and go but good lenses and tripods are forever. We're still using lenses we bought in the 1960's and tripods we bought in the 1970's. We recently replaced our camera bodies because they were "too old." Yeah, those old clunkers had been around for four whole years! Spend the money on a body and you'll still be pining for a good landscape lens and tripod when it's time to replace the body again. Unless there were really compelling reasons to replace the body, I wouldn't even consider it.

Ok...so what tripod do I need to take photos of things on ground level? Is there a arm or something that I mount on the tripod to allow me to do this??

While I agree with the lenses and tripods philosophy. I'm going to try to put the brakes on just a little bit before Kyle goes out and spends $600 on a tripod that I believe would be overkill for him at this point.

Now, this is just MY opinion, and not meant to cast aspersions on others' opinions.

Manfrotto makes a 725B tripod with an integral ballhead and quick-release plate for about $125. It can handle up to nearly eight pounds of gear, and I shoot any Canon body and my 100-400 off it all the time, as well as my macro and landscape lenses. It is aluminum, not carbon fiber, but it is rock solid even fully extended, and since Kyle doesn't have any heavy gear or, as far as I can tell, any plans to buy heavy gear (like the 300 2.8, 500 or 600) in the near future, I think it makes sense to spend the $1,000 on the tripod and one or two lenses. He can get the tripod, the canon 100 macro and a good wide landscape zoom for that money or just a little more, and then he's all set for quite awhile. Partly, my reasoning is that until you need to spend $4,000 to $7,000 on a big super tele, you don't need a tripod strong enough for a supertele, and when you DO buy the supertele and can shell out the big bucks you can budget in a stronger tripod and head for an additional $1,000 or so.

Also, the 725B's shaft is reversible, so you can mount it and put your camera basically right down on the ground with a little futzing around. There certainly are tripod systems out there that allow for more ease of use for convoluted situations generally involved macro work, and some of those have been mentioned, but I've not yet found a macro situation this tripod couldn't handle, again with a bit of thought and futzing to get things just right.

Just seems like a top-level tripod would be overkill to me at this point.

I also agree the Mel about the relative strengths of the body you've got. I shoot the XT as one of my backups, and as far as IQ and print size goes, there's not much use in moving to a 10 Mp body. And while the 10 Mp bodies are upgrades from the XT and offer more features, some of which are crucial to certain types of photography, for landscape and macro work the XT is just fine.

And again, that's all just my opinion.

Thanks Steve...that was what I was worried about.

Kyle - I think Steve's advice is really good. The only other reason you might want carbon fiber that he didn't mention is weight. If you do a lot of hiking and find your tripod too heavy, it might factor in.

That being said, I have an aluminum Manfrotto (Bogen) 3021BPro that has a reversible, removable center column, and legs that spread out flat. Like Steve said, there's very little these kind can't do, and they are real solid for a reasonable price. These legs and a 486RC2 ballhead (not bad, but maybe you'd want to upgrade) were about $160 brand new. And I can't see myself replacing it anytime soon.

Is this what you have Steve??

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/428998-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_725B_725B_Digi_Black_Tripod.html

It's a good price right now too.

David,
What can you do with that center column if you remove it? Does it become an arm so I could do macro shots rather easily when taking photos of something on the ground perhaps?

I'm just thinking out loud right now.....it seems like this tripod would allow me to spread the legs all the way apart and have the center column mounted as an arm so that I could do wildflower photography with ease.

Am I right??

Thanks!!

I've got a removable column on mine (Gitzo 1349), and mostly it stays home. For low shots however, I've long used a Bogen Super Clamp. They're about $30 last time I looked. Mount your tripod head on that, then clamp it to the tripod leg. It's a whole lot more convenient than spreading all those legs flat, plus it's much, much easier to make minute elevation adjustments. Sure my tripod legs will go flat to the ground, but any time you do that they're out there tangling with brush, rocks and cactus.

Kyle, that's the one. Hank's idea is a good one, however, and I'll be picking up that clamp come April for the upcoming flower season. Less farting around to get the camera just so than with removing the center column.

Kyle - Yes, it does become an arm on my tripod. It can be useful for reaching the camera out at an odd angle or unreachable spot. But I haven't used it that way very much (just a couple of times to shoot down at the ground, without getting the legs in the shot). And keep in mind that it's no way as stable with the arm extended, so the timer and no wind helps a lot. I think for a lot of macro subjects, Hanks idea might be better.

And if you think you're going to be very close to ground level a whole lot, a sturdy mini tripod might make more sense than a full sized one...

To beat the Super Clamp drum a little longer (sorry!), I keep one clamped on my tripod at all times. I never know when a macro op will appear, but frankly it gets used in lots more ways. Need some more elevation? Use my step ladder, clamping the tripod head to the top. Need even more? Secure the ladder upright in the bed of my truck and add the tripod head to the top of that. Need extra lighting? Mount your camera strobe on the clamp and put it where it needs to be. Find yourself in an awkward spot but need a camera support, whether in the woods or on an industrial site? Mount your tripod head on something other than your tripod, whether on a limb or a pipe railing 14 stories off the ground.

It's undoubtedly my most useful and most used camera accessory.

Ok...so I'm thinking that I should get the 725B that's for sale at B&H photo, a super clamp. Is this all I need as far as tripods go right now? I don't need a better head or anything?

As far as new lenses goes...I've really had my eye on the Canon 100mm Macro. Is there a better option?

What would be my best bet for a good landscape lens? My 18-55mm that came with my Rebel XT is very useful, so I'd probably want something along those lines of focal length, maybe even something that will go out to 75mm or so?? What are my best options there as well?

Remember I want to keep this cost as close to 1000 smackers as possible!!

Thanks everyone, you have been a TON of help!

Kyle, the ballhead on the 725 is strong. With the 100-400 I've used the ballhead at all kinds of odd angles with no trouble, and it's been very solid.

I shoot the Canon 100 macro. For me, it's the best combination of focal length and price. It's wicked sharp, and since I use the 100-400 to shoot butterflies I'm not concerned with the lack of long working distance the 100 gives. It's one of Canon's best lenses for the money IMO. Of course, if you add the hood and tripod ring you're talking nearly another $200, but that can come later. I like the 17-40 a lot, even on our crop sensors, but with that, the macro, the tripod and clamp, you're up over $1,200. Other folks may have other options, but I've been a Canon OEM guy and that suits me.

Hank, I've been looking at a variety of Bogen clamps the last few weeks. Which one specifically (model No.) are you talking about, and do you need other parts with it?

Hank, I've been looking at a variety of Bogen clamps the last few weeks. Which one specifically (model No.) are you talking about, and do you need other parts with it?

I'd also like to know this. Thanks guys!

I read the fine print and you want this clamp without a stud, rather than the one listed as coming with the stud, which has only 1/4" thread. Along with it you will have to buy this stud with the 3/8" male thread on one end. With that stud in place, you don't need any other accessories. The tripod head screws right onto it.

BTW- As long as I had the site up to harvest links, I pulled this one. It's really handy for positioning when using the Super clamp to mount a small strobe. And no, the swivel arm is not stout enough for your tripod head/camera combo, handy as that would be.

I've pulled the links from Calumet due to familiarity with their site. You'll find the same stuff at B&H. It would be worth checking there to see if they had the clamp in combo with the 3/8" stud. Might save a few nickels that way.

So you mount that clamp on your tripod leg....so you camera is almost right on the leg then? Just wanting to be sure my mental image of this setup is correct.

How much play will I have with the camera with the head that comes with the 725 that I posted a link to? I'm just wondering if it will be fixed in a flat position or if I'll be able to swivel the camera around a bit.

Thanks!

You won't have any more play with that head mounted on the Super Clamp than in the traditional position. BTW- We have one of those heads, and it's fine until you get heavy gear on it, then the shaft between the ball and the base plate has a little more flex than I like. Not an issue with something as light as your existing body I wouldn't think, but plan to upgrade if you get into heavy or long lenses.

Back to using the SC- The combo of the SC and your head actually moves the camera a convenient distance away from the leg. You can spin and position the ball head and camera all over the place, as normal. But best of all you can rotate the clamp 360 degrees around the legs, shooting from inside or outside the three legs or anywhere in between. On top of that you can release the clamp and move it all they way up and down the leg of the erect tripod, then reclamp it where you want it. Absolutely NO messing with legs and leg locks.

And here's another benefit- The three tripod legs make dandy supports for light blockers and diffusers when you are shooting macros. Just use clothespins or clamps to hold a jacket or T-shirt in place to shade your subject.

You'll appreciate it in lots of situations, but I contemplated buying stock in Bogen after shooting blossoms inside a dense grove of beavertail cactus. You still had to watch where your hiney went as you looked through the viewfinder, but no spines in feet, hands, elbows or knees.

Is this the 100mm macro?? Seems a little cheaper that I thought I'd have to pay...what's the difference between the two as well?

http://www.adorama.com/CA10028AFN.html

http://www.adorama.com/CA10028AFNG.html

Also, are there any landscape type lenses of good quality that I could get and keep the overall spending around $1000?

That is the 100 macro and that is what it usually runs. You might check B&H also to compare prices. But if you see if new for much less than this and no rebate is in effect, there is something fishy.

As far as getting a landscape lens:

The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 are probably your two best bets for normal zooms appropriate for landscape. Both have excellent image quality and are in the $400 range.

For ultrawide, the Tokina 12-24 is a favorite third party lens at $500 though some folks opt for the Sigma 10-20 at about the same price. The Canon 10-22 runs around $700.

These are probably the cheapest options that will net very good image quality.

Also, are you looking for 1:1 macro in order to make giant bugs? If you just want close up photos of flowers and such, you might consider the 28-105. It has close focusing that is excellent for filling the sensor with flowers or similar sized objects and as was mentioned, this lens is $230 ish.

If you already have something that covers the 20 and up range, I'd place a high priority on an utrawide. We've got both the Nikkor 12-24, and at less than half the price as I recall, the 10-20 Sigma. It's embarrassing to have spend so much for the Nikkor, only to discover in side by side use that the Sigma is better!

Kyle - The difference between the two lenses you linked to is that one is Grey Market, and one is a US model. The difference between the two is explained at Adorama and at B&H.

"Also, are you looking for 1:1 macro in order to make giant bugs?"

Yep...but I should maybe think about that 28-105 as well...it could be a good starter lens for my landscape stuff. Can someone post a link to this lens though, I can't find it on any websites for some reason.

Thanks!

Also...what about the Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo. That lens looks pretty nice too! Would you all rank it better than the 100mm macro?

Right now this is what I'm thinking.....The Manfrotto 725B tripod with superclamp, 100mm macro, and 28-105mm for landscape. This gear along with my 100-400mm zoom lens will have me set i think!

I'm getting my money tomorrow so let me know if I should go in another route please.

Thanks for all your help guys!

I love my sigma 180 macro, and my bogen tripod and head have been great for me. I picked up a used acratech ultimate for $100 by watching the classifieds.

Nathan

If you don't have legs and a head you should get them.

A stable camera is the best compositional and technical thing you can have.

Lenses are likely NOT the limiting factor in the quality of the images your body records.

Pete D. - I'd invest the money myself, but that wasn't the question.

Is the tripod ring necessary for the 100mm Macro? Will it hurt my camera to mount the body to the tripod and have the lens hanging instead?

Thanks!

Dunno if you've bought your kit or not, but dont get the 28-105 if that is your main landscape lens. You will want something wider on a 1.6x body, and the Sigma 17-70 or Tamron 17-50 recommended earlier in the thread will be better alternatives, IMO.

The MPE 65mm len is a specialty lens. Start with the 100mm macro, which is far more flexible for use in the field.

Vandit

What about the tripod ring for the 100mm...is this a necessary purchase?