Why shouldn't I buy a Canon 40D?!

[dafunky1]

I've got previous digital camera experience but no SLR experience. I always buy something I can grow into and items that are good value for the money. I'd like to get more into photography, take a class, blow up some photos for the house but not really go pro right now.

This morning I purchsed the 40D and 17-85 Lens pkg from Futureshop for 1578 plus GST (1,658). They also threw in the EF75-300USM lends for $200 additional (on seperate receipt). [EDIT - I'll be returning the 75-300 lens based on initial feedback]

I don't have a lot of time to make a final decision (14 day return policy) and I'm off to India in 30 days where I'll be using the camera I purchase.

I know there's a lot of peeps on here deep into this...I seek all opinions and thoughts.

And if not this camera....then which one?

Cheers...

[KorruptioN]

The 40D + 17-85IS is a decent walkaround package for a fairly good price. I don't agree with some of the ergonomic decisions Canon made but the output is fairly good when it matters. The 70-300USM they gave you is garbage... they weren't giving you a "deal".

[ryan_lau100]

The 40D + 17-85IS is a decent walkaround package for a fairly good price. I don't agree with some of the ergonomic decisions Canon made but the output is fairly good when it matters. The 70-300USM they gave you is garbage... they weren't giving you a "deal".

haha korruption you always manage to take the words right out of my mouth. pretty good package as he said. 75-300 you can get used on CL or here sometimes. saw it today actually for $120. 40d is a nice camera. i really like the upgrades from the 20 and 30. my advice is decide NOW so that if you do keep it you have time to shoot like no tomorrow to learn before your trip. my friend made the mistake of dropping $700 on her dslr and then only taking a few pics before she headed to europe. trust me on this decide asap and shoot. i will always say yes it was worth it and good job but thats just me. take back the 75-300 though because i guarantee you there will be one for sub 150 now used. i sold mine not too long ago for 150 and it was MINT.

[CSAgent]

First mistake - bought a camera from Futureshop. Second mistake, 75-300 lens as a deal? Laughable.

The one thing you did right is buy a Canon. But, since you know nothing about SLR, the learning curve is going to be very steep.

Did you do any research prior to getting an SLR? If you're new, you should have just got a Rebel series/D-40 series/A100.

The 40D is geared towards the serious enthusiast to semi-professional market...

[dafunky1]

First mistake - bought a camera from Futureshop. Second mistake, 75-300 lens as a deal? Laughable.

The one thing you did right is buy a Canon. But, since you know nothing about SLR, the learning curve is going to be very steep.

Did you do any research prior to getting an SLR? If you're new, you should have just got a Rebel series/D-40 series/A100.

The 40D is geared towards the serious enthusiast to semi-professional market...

I did do some research which led me to this purchase. I quickly outgrow things I buy...so I don't won't to go in to simple and rather would like to challenge myself. I didn't think it really matters where I purchase the camera from. I just took advantage of Futureshops price beat policy. Why should I pay more for the same thing elsewhere....unless you know of somewhere cheaper in Calgary?

You did echo the 3 previous posts regarding the 75-300 lens. I'll be returning that based on your feedback. What longer range lens should I purchase instead as my second lends option?

[hagbard]

I hate Canon. Search on my name and "Canon lost my lens" if you want details.

[Babo]

Not sure how much you're willing to spend on a longer lens but the 70-200 f4L non IS is pretty cheap for an L.

I see them listed on CL for ~500

[AudiDude]

I did do some research which led me to this purchase. I quickly outgrow things I buy...so I don't won't to go in to simple and rather would like to challenge myself. I didn't think it really matters where I purchase the camera from. I just took advantage of Futureshops price beat policy. Why should I pay more for the same thing elsewhere....unless you know of somewhere cheaper in Calgary?

You did echo the 3 previous posts regarding the 75-300 lens. I'll be returning that based on your feedback. What longer range lens should I purchase instead as my second lends option?

Shoot like crazy in all kinds of light and study your exif data to help you finetune your skills. If you have a Canon savvy friend, he/she can accelerate your learning if you can do a day of shooting with them.

If you don't want to draw attention to yourself use a 70-300 F4-5.6 IS USM.IS works great and it has good reach, do not confuse this with the 75-300 IS as the IQ is much better with the newer lens. If you want to be seen and can stomach no IS, get a 70-200L F4. The F4 vs F4-5.6 isn't a big deal unless you like to use 300mm worth of zoom indoors.

The 17-85 is pretty much all I need on vacation. 17 is pretty wide and I never really zoom to 85. I like to take photos that show as much as I can to make you feel like you were there all over again.

If anything I'd rather have a 10-20 Sigma to get more in. I own the 10-20 Sigma, the 17-85 IS and the 70-300 IS USM. I had the 70-200 F4 L, but returned it after being told by six security guards at the Rogers Centre that the lens was too "big", and I had difficulties holding the 70-200 F4L still @ 200 mm.

[sterdeus]

Shoot like crazy in all kinds of light and study your exif data to help you finetune your skills. If you have a Canon savvy friend, he/she can accelerate your learning if you can do a day of shooting with them.

If you don't want to draw attention to yourself use a 70-300 F4-5.6 IS USM.IS works great and it has good reach, do not confuse this with the 75-300 IS as the IQ is much better with the newer lens. If you want to be seen and can stomach no IS, get a 70-200L F4. The F4 vs F4-5.6 isn't a big deal unless you like to use 300mm worth of zoom indoors.

The 17-85 is pretty much all I need on vacation. 17 is pretty wide and I never really zoom to 85. I like to take photos that show as much as I can to make you feel like you were there all over again.

If anything I'd rather have a 10-20 Sigma to get more in. I own the 10-20 Sigma, the 17-865 IS and the 70-300 IS USM. I had the 70-200 F4 L, but returned it after being told by six security guards at the Rogers Centre that the lens was too "big", and I had difficulties holding the 70-200 F4L still @ 200 mm.

I also have the 17-85 and 70-300 lenses. I'm not an expert but I really like the 70-300 and it looks good at 300. I took some clear shots of the lunar eclipse a few weeks ago. If you're looking for reach and you dont want to spend too much, look for a used 70-300.

[2000fordfocus]

Did anyone mention Canon Rebel XSI is coming out along with a new sensor? The sensor should be better than the one used on 40D and has 14bit RAW... This dslr body will probably better suited for you! And no, dont get the kit lens!

[sfu_engineer]

First mistake - bought a camera from Futureshop. Second mistake, 75-300 lens as a deal? Laughable.

The one thing you did right is buy a Canon. But, since you know nothing about SLR, the learning curve is going to be very steep.

Did you do any research prior to getting an SLR? If you're new, you should have just got a Rebel series/D-40 series/A100.

The 40D is geared towards the serious enthusiast to semi-professional market...

:evil:

I don't think anyone can lose buying either Nikon OR Canon. Both are really good camera companies with great lens. Many of people from Canon will say ... well all the people taking photos at sports events use white L lens so Canon MUST be good. Well maybe Canon is better for sports, as Nikon had a pretty poor high-speed shooting camera back then, but you never really get to see what portrait, city, landscape, nature photographers use do you?

Sorry about the rant everyone, and I personally hate Nikon vs Canon debates but I just had to go out there and defend Nikon! ;)

[AudiDude]

I also have the 17-85 and 70-300 lenses. I'm not an expert but I really like the 70-300 and it looks good at 300. I took some clear shots of the lunar eclipse a few weeks ago. If you're looking for reach and you dont want to spend too much, look for a used 70-300.

Here is the 70-300 IS USM on my 20D

ISO 100, F5.6, 1/160, 180mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3183/2302537806_6d82b91ef9_b.jpg

ISO 100,F5.6, 1/320, 300mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3255/2301732733_968abd7b11_b.jpg

ISO 100,F5.6, 1/320, 300mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3066/2302534290_8e85c5a492_b.jpg

[KorruptioN]

And no, dont get the kit lens!

Because everybody needs expensive L-lenses to take pictures?