Thanks! Purchase made!

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: SampSon
Do your sister a favor and hire a professional photographer for something as important as her wedding.

That was going to be my response if he said he was the only photog.

 

[Tal]

Originally posted by: pyonir

Originally posted by: SampSon
Do your sister a favor and hire a professional photographer for something as important as her wedding.

That was going to be my response if he said he was the only photog.

Well, it's a little late in the game to find someone who'd available at 2:00 on a Sunday. This Sunday. Had I known that I was going to be the only one, I could have done that, but at this point, I'm just trying to go with what options I have.

 

[IBuyUFO]

I would have done the wedding if I lived in your state.

 

[Tal]

In the cart ready to buy:
---------Definitely gonna buy----------------------
Canon Starter kit (Includes UV and battery)
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon 420EX Speedlite
52mm Haze UV-1
58mm Circular Polarizer
-------------------------------------------------------

The above should do well enough for the wedding, yes?

If so, the only thing is that I would like to have another lens that could do some candid shots and closer up stuff.

SO! That brings me to the last thing I need to decide before I goto bed.

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM -------> 189.99
Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Zoom Macro Super II -------> 199.95

The cheapest IS lens doesn't exactly fit into my price range if I want the rest of this stuff.

Which would you get and is there a difference between imported VS USA? The prices on B&H are a little cheaper for imported.

 

[NutBucket]

Meh, chances are you'll never use the warranty. Up to you. I think I bought USA stuff since the difference was so slight.

The filters look good. Should be good for what you need. I think if I were you I'd get the Canon telephoto and save for a true macro lens (100mm is 1:1 I believe).

 

[Tal]

Okay Nutbucket. You've stayed with me so far. How about the: Sigma Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 Compact Hyper Zoom Aspherical Macro Autofocus?

It also looks very nice and DPreview has good things to say about it. Would that be better than either of the 70-300's?

 

[NutBucket]

My photo-buff coworkers swears by this lens. Unlike the one you're looking at it has a true 1:2 macro vs. 1:3.8

The 28-200 would likely be better but its still not really a macro lens.

For a true macro lens get this or this lens.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: NutBucket
My photo-buff coworkers swears by this lens. Unlike the one you're looking at it has a true 1:2 macro vs. 1:3.8

The 28-200 would likely be better but its still not really a macro lens.

For a true macro lens get this or this lens.

meh just get close up lens. I got a Leica one for $5 on ebay. Two element ones are generally preferred though. They will give you the 1:1 closeness with your regular lens. Quality is comarable so I've read in many debates.
Here are a few macros I took with a $45 135mm F/3.5 I got from ebay with my $5 macro lens.. this is with my Pentax *ist DS.
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11215

 

[pyonir]

Well, all I can say is good luck. I don't think you have any idea what you are getting yourself into. Of course, it is family, so it'll be a lot easier. Take all your photos in RAW.

 

[alrocky]

Originally posted by: Tal
In the cart ready to buy:
---------Definitely gonna buy----------------------
Canon Starter kit (Includes UV and battery)
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon 420EX Speedlite
52mm Haze UV-1
58mm Circular Polarizer
-------------------------------------------------------

Don't forget an extra battery for the XT and at least 2 CompactFlash especially if you're shooting RAW. You may want to bring a laptop with a card reader so you can download and check your work. Direct flash is a bit too harsh so I use Lumiquest ProMax. Consider the Sigma EF-500 Super over the Canon 420. FredMiranda site for lens reviews.

An advantage digital has over film is that each succeeding shot doesn't cost more and the ease to check your work. Shoot lots and lots.

 

[Patt]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
zoom lens generally aren't too good for portraiture.
Get a nice fast prime lens. 85mm F/1.8
Or you could get the classic 50mm F/1.4
Prime lens are much faster in general, and are much sharper, and provides a more pleasant bokeh.

I disagree on the first statement that zoom lens aren't too good for portraits. Indeed, I find them better for it as you can more easily play with depth of field to focus solely on your subject.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: alrocky

Originally posted by: Tal
In the cart ready to buy:
---------Definitely gonna buy----------------------
Canon Starter kit (Includes UV and battery)
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon 420EX Speedlite
52mm Haze UV-1
58mm Circular Polarizer
-------------------------------------------------------

Don't forget an extra battery for the XT and at least 2 CompactFlash especially if you're shooting RAW. You may want to bring a laptop with a card reader so you can download and check your work. Direct flash is a bit too harsh so I use Lumiquest ProMax. Consider the Sigma EF-500 Super over the Canon 420. FredMiranda site for lens reviews.

An advantage digital has over film is that each succeeding shot doesn't cost more and the ease to check your work. Shoot lots and lots.

I like that Lumiquest deal. I usually angle my flash head anyway.

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: NutBucket
My photo-buff coworkers swears by this lens. Unlike the one you're looking at it has a true 1:2 macro vs. 1:3.8

The 28-200 would likely be better but its still not really a macro lens.

For a true macro lens get this or this lens.

meh just get close up lens. I got a Leica one for $5 on ebay. Two element ones are generally preferred though. They will give you the 1:1 closeness with your regular lens. Quality is comarable so I've read in many debates.
Here are a few macros I took with a $45 135mm F/3.5 I got from ebay with my $5 macro lens.. this is with my Pentax *ist DS.
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11215

nice pictures.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Patt

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
zoom lens generally aren't too good for portraiture.
Get a nice fast prime lens. 85mm F/1.8
Or you could get the classic 50mm F/1.4
Prime lens are much faster in general, and are much sharper, and provides a more pleasant bokeh.

I disagree on the first statement that zoom lens aren't too good for portraits. Indeed, I find them better for it as you can more easily play with depth of field to focus solely on your subject.

depth of focus depends more on the aperture than anything.
Zoom lens have a shorter range of aperture settings than prime lenses in general.

 

[tami]

i've used my 70-300mm mostly for landscape shots. it's not really an wedding type of lens, unless you expect to be pretty far away from the bride and groom throughout the affair. if you're too close, you may feel restricted and be compelled to move back a lot. i don't recommend it.

when i took pictures at my cousin's wedding, i used my 28-200 which was perfect for my needs.

note: the portrait advice given (a 50mm lens investment) is still a very good one. however, i'm sure you'll want to take some nice shots of the ceremony, and for that, a wide-angle zoom lens is a perfect choice.

the 70-300 sigma APO macro lens is cool for macro shots, but you have to be a good 6 feet or so away from the subject. i use my sigma 50mm EX DG macro for such shots. (i really want to invest in a 105mm or 150mm though when funds become available)

 

[randomlinh]

I had some shots that could have been real nice w/ my sigma.. but I just can't hold it steady, even w/ a tripod (it was an overcast day too.. heh). I'm also very stubborn and try to avoid upping the ISO, that and I need something in that range but for action... argh.. so spensive. good luck w/ the wedding.. somehow, I got drafted as the backup photographer for my friend's wedding tonight.. ha.. i have a year to improve (i honestly hope he was joking...)