Hey guys, Im new to the camera kinda stuff, I have done alot of research the lat few weeks and i think im nearly ready to buy a camera after i get the camera I am gathering i will learn alot more once i start taking photo's of different objects/things.

I will be mainly using this camera as a "Motor sport" hobby, Drifts, circut drags, photo shoot of cars.

I have started a shopping list but the 2 lens that i have chosen are nearly the same except one is a L-Series and the other is a Sigma lens.

As well as for the filters, I have read a few things eg: When working in the sun its better to have a filter, What filter would or should i be looking at, I am buying my gear from Photo Continental.

CANON EOS 50D 15.1MP DIGITAL SLR CAMERA BODY ONLY

SANDISK EXTREME DUCATI 8GB CF CARD

Description CANON EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM LENS

Description SIGMA (MINOLTA) AF 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO LENS

Thank you in Advanced: Chad

Here is your problem,

I'm definitely not trying to come across as rude but at the end of the day, Do you REALLY need to spend that much and do you really need a DSLR?

I'm not one to talk myself but I do take this hobby pretty seriously myself, whether or not you will is a different story.

The Canon G9/G10 is an AMAZING point and shoot camera that takes fantastic photos @ a lesser price, Matt Mead has one I believe and he took some beautiful landscape shots with it.

Alot of people are going, buying DSLR's like hotcakes and are using them as a general point and shoot camera, then taking them to their full capacity of use.


At the end of EVERYTHING..

Photograher>Camera.


Thats a good setup tho if you do wish to go with it, the canon L series would be abit better

Good point, and i know it's been discussed before. The photographer is the key to a shot.

BUT, i don't think Chad would want a point and shoot camera.. i doubt a g9 or 10 would be able to capture cars going side ways better than a dslr?... but i could be wrong

Personally, i would go with the L series if i had the dosh. Just because i haven't used the sigma's before and i doubt it would yield better results than the L. But in ur case, a sigma would be great lens for starters.

Good luck with your choice Chad

I bought all of my recent DSLR gear from Rainers Camerhouse in the city. Im sure they will beat any price that Photo Continental quote you.. Teds & harvey normans couldn't match their price.

The price of the DSLR body a Rainers was only 5% more expensive then Camerasdirect (web shop). The camera grip/memerycard/battery/2nd battery/filter was cheaper then Camerasdirect. and the bonus with Rainers was you have the Australian Canon warranty, were as Camerasdirect you don't..

IMO.

Get the Canon 450D Enthusiast pack as well as the L series 70-200mm IS.

No point wasting all the money for a 50D if your just starting out

Thats fine,

But no where in the post did it state it would out perform a DLSR, it'd be much better for his application, depending on what's he's doing. Don't take that harsh, as I know you'd probably know much more then me

You have some good points there, But the difference in prices are not much different from the 450D to the 50D this is why i am going for the 50D you can get an enthusiast pack with a few extra stuff from a store for around $2200.

You can buy the 50D for around $1700, + lens and a few other little things.

IMO for a starter into the hobby who is definately interest ( they believe ) .... more than most, I would buy a 300D, 10D or a 30D SECOND HAND. These go for less than $500. Take the rest of you money and buy a good lense.

These were shot on the weekend with a 10D and 30D. Lenses were a Sigma 18-55 f2.8 and a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS L series.

http://www.boostcruising.com/forums/index....howtopic=379911

The reason is this.... if you loose interest you will always get the $400 you spent on the body back and about 80-90% of what you spent on the lense. If you buy a new body.... it will be worth less than half in a bit over 12 months from now.

I think Wat'r has the best idea, why buy a brand new 50D. I know what Kanzai is saying by you buying what is Canon's semi-pro model (If the 5DII can be considered pro and I consider it that) camera, and you may not even use it to it's full potential but ultimately it's your money and your prerogative. I'd go a 30D or a 40D even if it's cheap enough with the 17-85.

As for the tele's, I've used BOTH the Sigma 2.8 & the Canon and I find them both to be very impressive and if I had the cash I would PROBABLY (not CERTAINLY) buy the Canon but the Sigma is still a very nice lens, fast, just as heavy, finished in black instead of "Hey look at me" cockhead-white (I believe this is the offical colour name). Plus if you can get a cheap 70-200 Sigma price from an AUS stocking grey-importer Cr Kennedy the only official Sigma importer will give you that price plus an aus warranty which is unbreatable value!

40D + 17-85 + 70-200 sigma/canon would be a pretty mad kit, then you have the short end for statics, portraits etc etc and the tele for the big tracks, portraits and statics. It's all covered however I'd expect that kit to reach into 2500large not inc bag, memcard, extra batts, grip?, flash?, filters.. it aaall adds up!!

350D + grip would still suit you very well until you were advanced enough to need/want more, after all Matt Mead only recently went up from a 350D + non-L lens (55-250) and he's taken some of what i consider the best shots I've seen for aust racing so that says an absolute fuckload to me about the capabilities of camera vs person as it should for you.

i just bought a 50d body, ef lense way to go! dont bother wasting your money on the crappy 18-35mm lense!

Do you mean the 18-55? It's not THAT bad, sure it isn't the best but it's not THAT bad, after all, are you shooting for a mag or showing large prints? No? Then that's probably all you need anyway!

18-55 is a machine, ive shot for a mag with it

Pssht you have not, you're a hack and we all know it!

My shit's been published.. In the readers section