deltaA330 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 20 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3716 times:
Ok so I'm completely new to the DSLR game. I've been using a point and shoot all of my life and have finally decided to upgrade before my trip to ORD and LAX this spring. I am on a relatively tight budget and so I've narrowed my choices in cameras. First let me say that the lens I will be getting is the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Telephoto Zoom Lens. The camera decision has come down to either the Canon EOS Rebel XTi or Nikon D3000. What are your opinions? If anyone has used these cameras, please let me know about your experience, as well as the pros and the cons of the camera. Feel free to offer other opinions as well!
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5672 posts, RR: 40 Reply 1, posted (6 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3708 times:
Go to a camera shop and have a feel for the cameras with a telephoto lens on them. Go for the one you think feels best. If you've used either brand before, sticking to that brand maybe of some use at the beginning with familiarity. The XTi is a couple of years older than the D3000, which makes me wonder if it's a worthy comparison. I guess you have a pretty tight budget because that Sigma 70-300 is rubbish for anything beyond maybe 150mm. Not a bad place to get techniques right etc though; and I suppose that'd be the most important thing for someone just starting up.
Believe me when I say that it's rubbish The colours are so flat with the Sigma. But as long as you're satisfied and you're having fun, that's all that matters. Make sure you find other uses for the camera outside aviation too!
deltaA330 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 20 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3693 times:
Yes I can definitely see the difference, the problem is price. Do you think it would be worth an extra $50 for the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II Telephoto Zoom Lens even though it has 50 less mm?
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5672 posts, RR: 40 Reply 5, posted (6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3692 times:
Well seeing that you're just starting out, it wouldn't really matter.. In a way, it comes down to the point of whether you want the extra 50mm at the tele end. The best option is going to a camera store and seeing for yourself if you'd prefer one over another. The 55-250 has the advantage of image stabilisation too.
deltaA330 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 20 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3688 times:
Very helpful ideas, many thanks!!! You were such a help. I did notice some of your photos are from LAX. I will be there this spring. Any good spots you can recommend? Also if you wanted to see what I've managed with a point and shoot so far here's a link: http://www.myaviation.net/search/search.php?uid=34092
Imperial Hill is the main spot and I'd recommend going there. It's a good place to begin. In-N-Out isn't too bad either but that spot can be very dependent on the lighting conditions; to the point that it's not a good place to shoot from in winter (though there are a few alternatives around that area).
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, RR: 8 Reply 9, posted (6 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3588 times:
I'd have a serious look at the Canon EF75-300 f/4-5.6 USM III. It's crap above about 200mm but pretty sharp before that - especially considering it's a budget lens. I borrowed a friend's Sigma equivalent once, and all I can say is, never again!!! I reckon you'd be fine with the 55-250 also, although it hasn't the build quality of the 75-300.
Here are a few of my images here shot with the Canon 75-300 USM III...
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (6 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3400 times:
The last one is in 'decent light' because that's the way the edit makes it look. In fact, I think this was shot at f/6.3 just before sunset, at 1/250th shutter. The original frame is very dark and murky.
My copy of the 75-300 III performed equally well in dull weather if you used it to its strengths. As far as I know it had the new style USM; I certainly found it quick to focus.
I'd sooner recommend it over both the Sigma equivalent and the 55-250 IS.
megatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 250 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3400 times:
The D3000 seems like it's very similar to my D40x, but with an upgraded AF system that includes more points. It apparently also has a 'guide' mode which may be useful to you just starting out but to be honest I managed just fine by reading the manual and shooting, shooting, shooting.
You can also get the D3100 used now that the 3200 is on the scene, which seems to be a better camera. I was happy with the D40x image quality aside from the brightness and saturation tweaks it needed to tone things down a bit.
deltaA330 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 20 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (5 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3389 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 16): The reason I ask is, if your trip isn't until early spring, you have a couple of months to save a little more money and maybe get a better camera/lens.
Ok, I see where you are coming from. My only thing is that I need for for late December also now because my parents planned another trip. I will be spotting at KOMA and KMKE. So I thought I had time, now I realize I don't have as much as I originally thought. Also, I'd like to take it out to my home airport, KGRR, for a couple test runs before my trips.