| Canon equipment sold by weight? |
[May. 10th, 2008|06:21 pm] |
| [ | Current Location |
| | Home | ] |
| [ | mood |
| |  content | ] |
I took the plunge today and bought some camera equipment that I had been looking at for a while.
I bought a 135/2L lens - a lens known for being remarkably sharp. It's also surprisingly heavy for its size, coming in at 750g, because of course of the large glass elements.
I got a 1.4x extender to use with my 400/5.6. Sometimes 400 is a bit too short, and Canon doesn't have longer options that fit my budget, so I figured that the extender was the way to go. The 400 should be sharp enough to stay usable even with the extender.
Finally, I got a Digital Rebel XSi (a.k.a. 450D, a.k.a. Kiss Digital X2) with its 18-55 IS kit lens, primarily to use with my 300 and 400 lenses (and of course with the 400 combined with the extender). Eugenia and I might also use it as a walk-around point-and-shoot when we want a better quality than a plan pocket camera but don't want to bother with the 5D.
The funny thing is that all 3 of those items have a cost that's almost proportional to their weight. Maybe Canon started to sell their equipment by the gram (BTW, that'd be about $1.30 per gram based on what I bought today, though I know that the rule doesn't hold throughout the entire range). |
|
|
| Comments: |
Why a 450D and not the 40D ?
with your 400mm , do you use a tripod or a monopod ? (Any recommendation, as I've just got myself a 400 f2.8 which is quite heavy.)
![[User Picture]](http://p-userpic.livejournal.com/51788831/720938) | From: ![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) jbq
2008-05-11 01:16 pm (UTC)
| (Link)
|
A few reasons for getting the 450D:
-more pixels. The extra pixel density compared to the 5D was really the primary reason for the choice. If I want to print 18x24" (i.e. 45x60cm) (the size my printer uses), I need the pixels. The 450D gives me an extra 10% dpi.
-lighter. 475g vs 745g. In situations where I don't care about weight and just want a walk-around camera, the lighter weight of the XSi will be nice (I can have the XSi with 18-55, 50/1.8 and 80-200 at barely over 1kg - that's a killer combination for the weight).
-cheaper. A 40D with an 18-55 (I didn't want the 17-85) costs several hundred dollars more than the XSi with the same lens.
I mean, it's clear that the 40D is fundamentally a better camera. When I bought my 10D in 2003, I had the choice between the 10D and the original Rebel (300D), and the 10D made more sense as my primary camera. Now that I have a 5D, the 450D just seems more appropriate as a backup.
As for the tripod vs monopod question, I tend to use both, preferring the tripod for static subjects in quiet locations and the monopod for moving subjects in crowded locations. I have a cheap monopod (I don't expect a lot of rigidity from a monopod anyway) and a variety of tripods (though I primarily use an ultra-light cheap aluminum one when traveling, and a heavier rigid one when I know I can get away with it). Since my heaviest lens weighs a quarter of the 400/2.8, I'm not sure that my experience will apply to your case - many people seem to recommend a tripod with a balanced gimbal head when using a heavy lens. | |
