I have been looking at the Canon EOS 60D. And an IS 18-200 zoom. I am spoiled by the all in one macro/zoom capability of the Canon PowerShot series, but have not been satisfied with the resolution --especially in avian photography.
I do a lot of macro work and zoom work during the same outing. Is there a macro/zoom with great glass out there with IS that would pair with the 60D ? . It looks like I cannot afford better than the EOS 60D, stick with Canon, and have an articulated LED...I shoot lying on the ground a lot..
Am I wasting my money or would this system be worth it?
All of my shots are hand-held, so I don't want a heavy unit. Although, I will get a ball tripod when I can.
It is so frustrating to have a complete Minolta Maxxum set of lenses sitting in a bag, when I want the SLR quality in Digital. I am starting all over and it hurts!
The Canon PowerShot series has been wonderful to use and tote. But, it's non-SLR quality is finally strangling me! With my hand-held limitation ( I am a short woman and cannot stand in one place for a long time, toting killer equipment is definitely not an option) I want the most out of a lens- close and zoom, and if possible, macro!. I have no use for the small lens that comes with the body. It is not long enough for anything I want to do.
Help! Good Advice needed.
Also, I have been fortunate in the 35mm world to find perfect used equipment. It appears to be more difficult in the EOS 60D world!
Help, reviews and websites would be great! I have always had good luck with these sites plus a local store (which has now gone under). ---Adorama and B&H Plus Amazon if the deal is good.I have the DSLR itch, but I don't want to give my husband a heart attack!
Posted by Bill Chambers on February 15, 2011 at 2:17 PM
Lucy, can't help you with Canon equipment since I'm a Nikon user, but as far as buying used equipment, I've always had great luck with ebay. I've bought 6-8 bodies and a couple of lenses over the years and have never had a problem. I never use anyone with less than a 98% approval rating, and don't buy outside of the US. In my experience Adorama used prices are inflated too much and the used ratings seam skewed to their benefit. If I were buying used equipment from a dealer, I would use KEH. I have bought a good bit from them over the years and they are very reputable and fair IMO. Cosmetics mean nothing to me - I have bought "bargain" lenses from KEH that looked practically new, whereas "bargain" usually means pretty ugly on ebay. As long as the glass is clean, I don't care what the barrel looks like. Buying a non-pro body on ebay, I would be a little more careful as they can't take the abuse a pro body can, but if you still buy from a reputable source you can pick up a nice bargain usually. I've never purchased used equipment from B&H so I can't comment on them.
Posted by Wayne Jones on February 15, 2011 at 2:37 PM
Lucy,
Here are a few comments based on my limited experience. I had a small super-zoom before getting a DSLR. I chose Canon because my film camara was a Canon SLR, so I already had three lenses.
If you have a bunch of Minolta Lenses, why not get a SONY DSLR? They have some really good new ones, and you would not have to buy the lenses, which it the biggest expense for a system, anyway.
If you are switching to Canon because your Minolta lenses are not the best, Canon makes a new T3i with the same features as the 60D, but it's smaller and ligther. Just not as tough or weather-sealed. (I would spend a bit more for the 60D if a little more weigth is not that big a deal.)
BEST ADVICE: You will probably update camera bodies over the years, but good lenses and a decent tripod are permanent investments. AND a TRIPOD is something that will greatly improve your pictures. Tripods are much more necessary with a DSLR than with small cameras. (You don't need to spend that much on a tripod to get a pretty good one, either. I have a $675 Gitzo, which is great, but I also have a $250 Feisol which is lighter, holds just as much weight, so that's my backpacking tripod.)
Wide-Zoom Macro Lens: I have a Sigma 17-70 which is tack-sharp, and is much better for close-ups than any other so-called macro-zoom. I also have a Tamron 18-250 (similar to their newer image-stabilized 18-270) which is a very handy lenses and pretty sharp except wide open and at the extreme telephoto, but the Sigma 17-70 is the one that lives on my camera most of the time because of the better macro capability and sharpness. The longer Tamron is great for family pix, but the shorter Sigma is better for landscapes and close-ups.
I forgot to say, that I need the lens to sync with the autofocus in the Canon body. My eyes are not what they used to be....but close enough for me to mentally "adjust" autofocus.
Wayne, your lenses sound great, but will they work with AF? I went to the Tamron website and it does not mention it.
I considered the Sony option, but dismissed it because of the Autofocus problem.
Posted by Buck Ward on February 15, 2011 at 5:25 PM
Hi Lucy
There is an alternative to the 60D. Canon has just announced the new Rebel T3i, which has an articulated LCD. Smaller, lighter, and less expensive than the 60D. I don't think it is available yet, though.
Posted by Buck Ward on February 15, 2011 at 5:29 PM
Posted by Wayne Jones on February 15, 2011 at 5:37 PM
Lucy,
Third party lenses like my Sigma and Tamron are made specifically for certain cameras like Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta and Pentax, so they work fine with bodies they were made for. Not sure what your issue is between your Minolta lenses and the Sony bodies. Perhaps some very old ones don't AF, but that's true for Canon, too. I know people who use old Minolta lenses on Sony bodies, and they work fine (even though one salesman tried to tell people the AF would not work). I just don't know all the details for specific lenses.
BTW, I should note that my comment about tripods sounded like the cheaper ones are just as good as the expensive ones. However, the old addage "You get what you pay for" is still generally true. I did break my Feisol when I fell on it once, and the rubber feet tend to fall off, but the company has super customer service, and they fixed it free and sent me extra rubber feet for free, too. The Gitzo (which I bought used) appears to be built stronger, and they have a great reputation. Is it worth the extra $425? If you have that kind of money, and you need the best there is to make a living or go on a once-in-a-lifetime safari, it may be. But if you are on a tight budget, some of the other brands do the job. I could probably break the Gitzo if I fell on it, too, but it does not have loose parts that get lost.
Posted by Keith Bauer on February 15, 2011 at 6:44 PM
Lucy: Are your Minolta lenses the "Maxxum" series, or are they the older version from Minolta. If they are the previous generation, the mount is different and won't work on the Sony Digital SLR's. If they are Minolta Maxxum lenses, they should mount and autofocus just fine.
Son of a son of a Sailor ....I haven't used my Maxxum 600si since the mirror detached (the 2nd time) years ago on vacation. At that time I purchased "the New" Digital Canon PowerShot GS2
I am on my PowerShot SX10 IS. You mean, that I could have been using my Maxxum lenses on a Sony digital body?!!!
I bought the Maxxum used and never had a manual, but loved it dearly! It was a real workhorse for me, and the lenses still look new! The lenses are great glass! I have a Maxxum AF 28-80 with Macro and a Maxxum AF 75-300. If these will synch with the IS and the AF of the Sony, sign me up! I never liked Sony, but with my lenses and all my filters, I could learn to like it!
If I can do this, what Sony model should I get? These are compact.light lenses, but , I'm sure they weigh a lot compared to today's lenses and would need a sturdy body.
My hands are a little shakier now, so I doubt these are IS lenses. Tell me the small si is the old way of saying Image Stabilization!!! But with an IS camera body, will that even matter?
Speak to me....................I LOVE this Network!!!
Posted by Buck Ward on February 15, 2011 at 9:12 PM
With Sony DSLRs, the anti-shake mechanism is in the sensor, in the camera body, not in the lens, so all lenses are anti-shake. (I think)
Posted by Wayne Jones on February 15, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Yep, I think you are in business. My son-in-law has the same lenses (at least the focal length is the same) and they both work fine on his Sony body, which is image-stabilized with any lens. I'm not familiar with all the models, but they have a lot of choices, right up to a full-frame 24+MP sensor model. That's another decision for you, too. If you get an APS-C sensor body, you will probably want to get a lens shorter than your 28mm., but maybe by saving money on the lenses, you could move up to a full-frame model, where 28mm. is a real wide angle. Of course, if wildlife is more important to you than landscscapes, the smaller sensor will give you more "reach." In either case -- don't forget that tripod! Have fun shopping.
Has anybody tried the Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Digital SLR
It sounds great, but I am so used to thinking only Canon and Nikon as options (Canon preferred), frankly, I'm scared to try anything else.. the body is $799 which is comparable to many Canon Cameras. read that the lens that comes with the camera stinks, so I'd be buying the body only.
If anyone has used this camera, I'd like to know what Canon they would compare it to. Almost sounds to good to be true. But my Minolta glass is so fine, it's difficult to pass up a body that uses it. And, yes, the IS is in the body....so you can use any lens, even 20yr. old AF lenses!
One of the biggest features is the noise reduction. It actually says that this camera performs almost as well hand held as on a tripod. Plus, it has some special mirror, that gives you the best live view in the business....know anything about that?
Posted by Glenn Starr on February 16, 2011 at 6:24 PM
Lucy,
I'm a Nikon shooter but have a good friend that shoots Sony and loves it. He calls me the "Nikon Elitist!" I think you are fine going with Sony. Do keep in mind that you get what you pay for to some extent. Being a Nikon shooter I pay 20% more for a lens or a comparable Canon Body or lens.
I had my reasons for going the way I did so not starting a debate. But, if $$ were my primary consideration you can't go wrong going Sony so that you can use your Minolta lenses.
Well, I "ponied" up for a 60D with an 18-200 all around zoom lens.. Got it on Amazon (Beach Camera). And tomorrow, I think I have a deal on a f/2.8 100mm macro.
Discussion
13 repliesI do a lot of macro work and zoom work during the same outing. Is there a macro/zoom with great glass out there with IS that would pair with the 60D ? . It looks like I cannot afford better than the EOS 60D, stick with Canon, and have an articulated LED...I shoot lying on the ground a lot..
Am I wasting my money or would this system be worth it?
All of my shots are hand-held, so I don't want a heavy unit. Although, I will get a ball tripod when I can.
It is so frustrating to have a complete Minolta Maxxum set of lenses sitting in a bag, when I want the SLR quality in Digital. I am starting all over and it hurts!
The Canon PowerShot series has been wonderful to use and tote. But, it's non-SLR quality is finally strangling me! With my hand-held limitation ( I am a short woman and cannot stand in one place for a long time, toting killer equipment is definitely not an option) I want the most out of a lens- close and zoom, and if possible, macro!. I have no use for the small lens that comes with the body. It is not long enough for anything I want to do.
Help! Good Advice needed.
Also, I have been fortunate in the 35mm world to find perfect used equipment. It appears to be more difficult in the EOS 60D world!
Help, reviews and websites would be great! I have always had good luck with these sites plus a local store (which has now gone under). ---Adorama and B&H Plus Amazon if the deal is good.I have the DSLR itch, but I don't want to give my husband a heart attack!
Here are a few comments based on my limited experience. I had a small super-zoom before getting a DSLR. I chose Canon because my film camara was a Canon SLR, so I already had three lenses.
If you have a bunch of Minolta Lenses, why not get a SONY DSLR? They have some really good new ones, and you would not have to buy the lenses, which it the biggest expense for a system, anyway.
If you are switching to Canon because your Minolta lenses are not the best, Canon makes a new T3i with the same features as the 60D, but it's smaller and ligther. Just not as tough or weather-sealed. (I would spend a bit more for the 60D if a little more weigth is not that big a deal.)
BEST ADVICE: You will probably update camera bodies over the years, but good lenses and a decent tripod are permanent investments. AND a TRIPOD is something that will greatly improve your pictures. Tripods are much more necessary with a DSLR than with small cameras. (You don't need to spend that much on a tripod to get a pretty good one, either. I have a $675 Gitzo, which is great, but I also have a $250 Feisol which is lighter, holds just as much weight, so that's my backpacking tripod.)
Wide-Zoom Macro Lens: I have a Sigma 17-70 which is tack-sharp, and is much better for close-ups than any other so-called macro-zoom. I also have a Tamron 18-250 (similar to their newer image-stabilized 18-270) which is a very handy lenses and pretty sharp except wide open and at the extreme telephoto, but the Sigma 17-70 is the one that lives on my camera most of the time because of the better macro capability and sharpness. The longer Tamron is great for family pix, but the shorter Sigma is better for landscapes and close-ups.
Wayne, your lenses sound great, but will they work with AF? I went to the Tamron website and it does not mention it.
I considered the Sony option, but dismissed it because of the Autofocus problem.
There is an alternative to the 60D. Canon has just announced the new Rebel T3i, which has an articulated LCD. Smaller, lighter, and less expensive than the 60D. I don't think it is available yet, though.
Third party lenses like my Sigma and Tamron are made specifically for certain cameras like Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta and Pentax, so they work fine with bodies they were made for. Not sure what your issue is between your Minolta lenses and the Sony bodies. Perhaps some very old ones don't AF, but that's true for Canon, too. I know people who use old Minolta lenses on Sony bodies, and they work fine (even though one salesman tried to tell people the AF would not work). I just don't know all the details for specific lenses.
BTW, I should note that my comment about tripods sounded like the cheaper ones are just as good as the expensive ones. However, the old addage "You get what you pay for" is still generally true. I did break my Feisol when I fell on it once, and the rubber feet tend to fall off, but the company has super customer service, and they fixed it free and sent me extra rubber feet for free, too. The Gitzo (which I bought used) appears to be built stronger, and they have a great reputation. Is it worth the extra $425? If you have that kind of money, and you need the best there is to make a living or go on a once-in-a-lifetime safari, it may be. But if you are on a tight budget, some of the other brands do the job. I could probably break the Gitzo if I fell on it, too, but it does not have loose parts that get lost.
Son of a son of a Sailor ....I haven't used my Maxxum 600si since the mirror detached (the 2nd time) years ago on vacation. At that time I purchased "the New" Digital Canon PowerShot GS2
I am on my PowerShot SX10 IS. You mean, that I could have been using my Maxxum lenses on a Sony digital body?!!!
I bought the Maxxum used and never had a manual, but loved it dearly! It was a real workhorse for me, and the lenses still look new! The lenses are great glass! I have a Maxxum AF 28-80 with Macro and a Maxxum AF 75-300. If these will synch with the IS and the AF of the Sony, sign me up! I never liked Sony, but with my lenses and all my filters, I could learn to like it!
If I can do this, what Sony model should I get? These are compact.light lenses, but , I'm sure they weigh a lot compared to today's lenses and would need a sturdy body.
My hands are a little shakier now, so I doubt these are IS lenses. Tell me the small si is the old way of saying Image Stabilization!!! But with an IS camera body, will that even matter?
Speak to me....................I LOVE this Network!!!
It sounds great, but I am so used to thinking only Canon and Nikon as options (Canon preferred), frankly, I'm scared to try anything else.. the body is $799 which is comparable to many Canon Cameras. read that the lens that comes with the camera stinks, so I'd be buying the body only.
If anyone has used this camera, I'd like to know what Canon they would compare it to. Almost sounds to good to be true. But my Minolta glass is so fine, it's difficult to pass up a body that uses it. And, yes, the IS is in the body....so you can use any lens, even 20yr. old AF lenses!
One of the biggest features is the noise reduction. It actually says that this camera performs almost as well hand held as on a tripod. Plus, it has some special mirror, that gives you the best live view in the business....know anything about that?
I'm a Nikon shooter but have a good friend that shoots Sony and loves it. He calls me the "Nikon Elitist!" I think you are fine going with Sony. Do keep in mind that you get what you pay for to some extent. Being a Nikon shooter I pay 20% more for a lens or a comparable Canon Body or lens.
I had my reasons for going the way I did so not starting a debate. But, if $$ were my primary consideration you can't go wrong going Sony so that you can use your Minolta lenses.