I think I have made my decision! Opinions?

Planning to purchase my first DSLR and I have been laboring over all the information available. While I am grateful for the information I think I am a little "bonkers" having analyzed it to death! LOL! Still, I thought I would run it past the dpreview community before making the final leap.

My main focus will be to capture our three year old in various settings as well as some portrait and event work down the road. So, I am looking for a camera that will perform well in in low light situations (indoor and out) as well as be able to capture shots in motion. I would like to start with a lens that is good all around and then work my way to more pricey primes.

Here is what I have decided to go with:

1. Canon EOS 7D (body only)
2. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
3. Canon EW-83J Lens Hood

Your opinions and suggestions are appreciated. I welcome both pros and cons of the above combination as I don't want to miss something only to learn it after the fact.

Scott Jacobs said:

Planning to purchase my first DSLR and I have been laboring over all the information available. While I am grateful for the information I think I am a little "bonkers" having analyzed it to death! LOL! Still, I thought I would run it past the dpreview community before making the final leap.

My main focus will be to capture our three year old in various settings as well as some portrait and event work down the road. So, I am looking for a camera that will perform well in in low light situations (indoor and out) as well as be able to capture shots in motion. I would like to start with a lens that is good all around and then work my way to more pricey primes.

Here is what I have decided to go with:

1. Canon EOS 7D (body only)
2. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
3. Canon EW-83J Lens Hood

Your opinions and suggestions are appreciated. I welcome both pros and cons of the above combination as I don't want to miss something only to learn it after the fact.

Click to expand...

nice for a first DSLR. instead of the Canon 17-55 I would have gone with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or 18-55IS and used the difference for a telephoto zoom, possibly a prime and external flash but you will enjoy that setup.

Just wondering if there is any particular reason that your opting for a 7D rather than a 450D or 500D for your first DSLR. There is a fairly significant cost difference that you could put into more/better glass. Will your future event/portraits be professional grade?

Just curious!! 8o)

-Jeff

--
Barely able to spell DSLR!

you can do anything you are talking about for $400-500.

spending that amount of money on an item that loses its value and will be replaced by the time you will attempt to make money with it seems a bit of a chase for no good reason.

if you want to have a beginner dslr for that much money go right ahead.

if you want something that big that will potentially stay home due to it's size/weight, go right ahead.

if you think you NEED that to do what you say you need it for, go right ahead.

seems specs, forum opinion, gear lust have taken the place of what you need to do the actual job you speak of as people do that with far cheaper cameras every day ant to very good effect.

Scott Jacobs said:

Here is what I have decided to go with:

1. Canon EOS 7D (body only)
2. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
3. Canon EW-83J Lens Hood

Your opinions and suggestions are appreciated. I welcome both pros and cons of the above combination as I don't want to miss something only to learn it after the fact.

Click to expand...

That's an excellent choice and I'm sure you'll enjoy it. That lens is also superb. It's nice that you can afford to indulge yourself with a quality tool like the 7D and that lens.

So many people with entry level cameras think that other beginners need to have an entry level camera for some reason. They get quite upset and a bit jealous when someone like you chooses a quality tool over a plastic entry level. I think it's a great choice and probably Canon's best crop camera made.

Having a more robust camera will serve you in many ways as you learn and enjoy photography. You will be able to learn with tactile buttons and dials rather than the typical entry level wading through menus. You have a durable magnisium frame with environmental sealing. You have a real optical glass pentraprixm viewfinder rather than the cheap and dimmer pentamirror arrangement found in entry level models.

That's also a great lens. The nice thing about buying quality glass is not only the quality image they are capable of but the cost. Good glass often brings nearly what you paid for it when you bought it. It's a bit like a long term inexpensive lease. I have Nikon lenses I purchased years ago which I could sell at or near what I paid.

That fast quality lens combined with that camera will take excellent images if you do your part. IMO, that quality camera will make it easier to do so.

Remember, don't look back. There are many on these forums who look at your purchase and are jealous. There's absolutely zero reason to buy an entry level model if you can afford a better one. The price of quality only hurts once. The price of cheap can hurt over and over. Judge by the responses.

Your next purchase might be a quality flash and or a tripod. I'd wait on a telephoto until you feel the need. Most importantly, have fun taking great images of your three year old. It's a joy and time passes.
--
Cheers, Craig

who's got entry level dslr's here?

If you are heading towards more pricey primes later on then money is not much of an object? People buy primes for a particular purpose, a specific type of photography usually. As this is your first DSLR I would be in no hurry to buy primes.

Your suggested starter kit for a crop camera only has one 'fault', that being it's weight & bulk. For quick casual but good snaps of your family, your wife at least may find it bulky & heavy. At christmas I picked up a friends Rebel & snapped away, it was light, fun & very competent. It made a refreshing change from my brick.

I have thought of getting a Pentax Kx just for the hell of it for casual snaps, they are small & inexpensive. I can't abide live view on P&S due to varifocal glasses.

Technically your choice is excellent, no question, for a crop camera. Portraits are better with full frame however. Just remember when your bag & the lenses you MUST carry reach 25lbs the little Pentax starts to look very appealing...why not buy your wife one?

--

Appreciative student of the late Joan Wakelin. 39 years later still enjoying it!

Whatever body and lens(es) you get, you should probably add an external tilt/bounce TTL flash. Say, something like a Canon 430 EX II Speedlite.

Built-in flash on any camera == the "red eye" special.

I certainly don't dispute any of the points made here. As for me, 20-30 years ago I was a very serious amateur (film) photographer. Spent a lot of time on my more-than-hobby and loved it.

After a very long hiatus from serious photography, now that my kids are old enough to require less-than-24-hours-a-day care, I've gotten back into it. I currently have the 500D, the 18-55 kit lens, the 50mm 1.8, the 85mm 1.8, and I will soon order the 17-55mm 2.8 IS.

In a word, I love it. There is SO MUCH to learn about digital photography (after being so familiar with film) that I'm really glad I started with an entry-level camera. Believe it: there is A LOT to learn. I've had my new digital set-up for more than 6 months now, and while I think my photos are improving, there is still a great deal to learn. I've told myself that only when I've mastered this camera, or nearly, will I upgrade (probably to FF).

Anyway, that's my $0.02. I certainly don't disagree with anyone on their tastes or preferences, but I'm really delighted with everything I'm learning with my 500D.

freealfas said:

who's got entry level dslr's here?

Click to expand...

Was I talking about you? I have no clue what you own. People might be envious of a quality camera or even a Canon. I don't know who might. We'll see who pops out of the woodwork to demand the OP get a plastic camera with no clue as to his means or income level.

My brother in law got a D300 as his first DSLR. He's well to do and there is no reason he should get an entry level. Entry level is a price point and does not mean it's a learner camera. They get a lot of features that can get in the way of learning photography. Entry levels often come with lesser quality glass. There's no reason a beginner has to have poorer glass.

Like the D300s, the 7D is a superb enthusiast camera with quality features and controls. They are excellent cameras to learn photography. The 17-55 f/2.8 is a superb quality pro-level lens. The OP will be able to take the best quality image he can learn how to make.

--
Cheers, Craig

Jeff Carlson said:

Just wondering if there is any particular reason that your opting for a 7D rather than a 450D or 500D for your first DSLR.

Click to expand...

The feature set of the 7D greatly appeals to me. While I see that the less expensive options can produce fantastic images, they are not as feature rich. In my original post I was being honest about the fact that general usage would be to capture my family. We have 10,000 plus images since our son was born and I am sure that he and family will remain the focus of my pics.

However, I do have loftier aspirations and would like a camera that I can "grow into" as opposed to "grow out of". For example, I am an HDR fan and am interested in trying my hand at it. While you can manipulate a single image to create the look, it is not a true HDR image. The 7D offers exposure bracketing at + - 3 stops. (I am aware that you can manually set the exposure compensation on the others but at 2 stops)

Also, the 7D can control external speedlites for a more dynamic and sophisticated approach to lighting concepts (with or without the on-board flash firing).

Not to mention the new AF system, metering, file options, video...

Jeff Carlson said:

There is a fairly significant cost difference that you could put into more/better glass. Will your future event/portraits be professional grade?

Click to expand...

I would like to think that I will attain a skill set that results in images worthy of a pro's perspective. Again, growing into a camera like the 7D (to me) means that instead of spending money down the road to upgrade the camera, I can spend it on additional pieces for my collection: tripod, remote, speedlites, lenses, etc.

So, while practicality is something to be considered, I am also looking at things from an artistic and capability standpoint. As with most things...it's all relative. ;-)

I agree with the sentiment. If the OP can afford a 7D and 17-55 as a starter, more power to him. Why not? "Afford" being relative, depending on priorities and means. Now, if that means that he has to wait longer to get a 580 EXII or a serious tripod, then maybe I'd suggest re-thinking, or at least biting the bullet and expanding his budget. Those two tools are/were indispensible in my progression (still very, very ongoing). With the 7D, though, he could go straight into off camera flash work, and I can't imagine not having a good quality tripod with equally capable ball head (I used to, but once you get one, you'll wonder why you waited).

It's not bull
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=34301317

Drew Saur said:

I have had 2 7D bodies with focusing issues, and the second is into Canon for the second time.

Click to expand...

Update Again: Newer News
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=34355182

Kerpal said:

Camera went back to Canon...they are asking me to chose whether I want it calibrated bang-on at a wider aperture (f2.8), with the tradeoff being smaller apertures (5.6 and smaller) would not be 100% accurate.

Click to expand...

The Canon 7D debate at the moment
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=34346715

MusicDoctorDJ said:

...every 7D body that I have seen so far brought in by a customer who bought them elsewhere (since we didn't carry them) came in because they just would not focus....I have only seen four or five of them, and every single one of them was defective right out of the box.

Click to expand...

--

General 'Buck' Turgidson: 'Well, I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.' ( Dr. Strangelove , 1964)

Guidenet said:

That's an excellent choice and I'm sure you'll enjoy it. That lens is also superb. It's nice that you can afford to indulge yourself with a quality tool like the 7D and that lens.

So many people with entry level cameras think that other beginners need to have an entry level camera for some reason. They get quite upset and a bit jealous when someone like you chooses a quality tool over a plastic entry level. I think it's a great choice and probably Canon's best crop camera made.

That fast quality lens combined with that camera will take excellent images if you do your part. IMO, that quality camera will make it easier to do so.

Remember, don't look back. There are many on these forums who look at your purchase and are jealous. There's absolutely zero reason to buy an entry level model if you can afford a better one. The price of quality only hurts once. The price of cheap can hurt over and over. Judge by the responses.

Your next purchase might be a quality flash and or a tripod. I'd wait on a telephoto until you feel the need. Most importantly, have fun taking great images of your three year old. It's a joy and time passes.
--
Cheers, Craig

Click to expand...

Thank you Craig, for the words of encouragement. I did ask for opinions so not too surprised at the response. While a bit harsh :x in tone, I believe it is a valid point that I can attain my basic needs with a less expensive camera. I suppose that I should have included my desires to create more artistic images as well as experiment with light. Not that this is impossible with less expensive cameras, just less convenient in that you can attain less in-camera and your hit rate will be less...especially as an amateur.

Up to a year ago we were happy with the images we were getting from our point and shoot cameras. Ten thousand plus shots later, I am frustrated with the image quality and light/dark issues in shots that we would have otherwise liked to display or share. Although the point and shoot variety have exposure compensation settings you are still saddled with a fixed lens and a narrow field of view. If these were my only intended areas for improvement I could see picking up a less expensive entry level DSLR or even the 50D. But why limit myself if I don't have to? LOL...to be honest...I thought I was using restraint with the combo I described! I could be going for FF, three L lenses (super wide zoom, 100mm Macro and a ridiculous telephoto), tripod, remote, 3 speedlites and a battery grip. Now that is gear lust my friend!

Scott Jacobs said:

Scott Jacobs wrote:

But why limit myself if I don't have to? LOL...to be honest...I thought I was using restraint with the combo I described! I could be going for FF, three L lenses (super wide zoom, 100mm Macro and a ridiculous telephoto), tripod, remote, 3 speedlites and a battery grip. Now that is gear lust my friend!

Click to expand...

yes, because all of that will make you a better photographer...

regardless, you're not the only one that can grab any of the kit's you've mentioned.

can't wait to see the images posted... why not let those do the talking...

I'd read the links noted below before diving into a 7d, seems canon is having it's usual QC issues...

enjoy what you purchase regardless...

freealfas said:

I'd read the links noted below before diving into a 7d, seems canon is having it's usual QC issues...

Click to expand...

Worrying for an early adopter but there's little doubt that Canon will get it sorted by whatever means necessary. The news isn't all bad though - linked below is a AF tracking comparison test and the Canon 7D does extremely well.

Auto Focus torture test
http://www.prophotohome.com/news/2009/11/26/autofocus-torture-test/

From the perspective of the typical user, the sheer number of AF options looks daunting. I count 33 setting choices available for determining how the AF system will operate:
C.Fn III: Auto focus / Drive
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/page12.asp

--

Group Captain Mandrake: 'I was tortured by the Japanese, Jack, if you must know; not a pretty story....Strange thing is they make such bloody good cameras.' ( Dr. Strangelove , 1964)

Scott Jacobs said:

But why limit myself if I don't have to? LOL...to be honest...I thought I was using restraint with the combo I described! I could be going for FF, three L lenses (super wide zoom, 100mm Macro and a ridiculous telephoto), tripod, remote, 3 speedlites and a battery grip. Now that is gear lust my friend!

Click to expand...

Lust, you'll have to catch up with my almost 50 years of it. LOL Except I went Nikon when I switched from Pentax in 1968. You've got a lot of catching up, my friend.

You might find yourself lusting after a full frame all the faster. I did. I moved to digital just 3 years ago and moved quickly from a Nikon D80 to a D300 which I loved. But, I didn't now how much I'd enjoy a camera until I bought a D700 this last summer. Let me tell you, it's wonderful. There's so much latitude in the files, that it's incredible. Rich beautiful detail. One of these days I'll be a good enough photographer to take advantage of it. :-0

You'll love the quality glass as well. I can tell you there's a noticible difference. For example, I have two lenses that cover 300mm. One is a superb Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VRII. It costs around $550 but performs better than it's price point, IMO. Because it's so small and lightweight, I often take it birding when I know the distances will be fairly short. I also have a 300 f/2.8 AFS VR I purchased last year that costs $5500 (I don't have a wife to keep me in line).

The point is that even though that zoom takes wonderful images, when I use the big boy, I can see the difference easily. Every feather stands out and every bit of texture to the skin. The eye detail is amazing. You don't have to be a pixel peeper.

Like Canon L glass, I tend to buy that level when I can for my Nikons and I just don't begrudge the price. My kids are grown, the house is paid for, my truck I paid cash, I paid cash for the fishing boat and a cablin on the river, and my retirement investments are where they need to be. I make a fair salary. I'm not wealthy, but there's no reason to buy other than what I want to afford. For some reason, there are some folks here who must think that just because they can't afford better equipment, others shouldn't either. They can get quite nasty about it, as you can see.

Part of the problem is that this is a gear forum. Many here consider the equipment more important than the pictures and I suppose they have a certain hierarchy to what price equipment certain people should have. Not only do some hate you getting a Canon and me a Nikon, but want you to stop at a 500D. Like I said, they'll come right out of the woodwork. Buying a better camera than they have or better than they think you should have is a bad choice for you, without them ever knowing your income nor what you've saved for this. It's just a bad thing to them.

Anyway, let me know when you've caught my level of NAS (Nikon Aquisition Syndrome) which is a particularly virulent strain of the more common GAS (Gear Aquisition Syndrome) many get. If you'd have chosen Nikon, you'd be in deeper water. LOL ;-)



--
Cheers, Craig

And I'll talk to him about a Nikon D300s. LOL I've kept my mouth shut so far because I think the 7D is a good camera, but I think the D300s is a better more mature design.

He also might just talk himself into a Canon 5D MKII or a Nikon D700 if enough say bad things about a 7D. You never know. He's thought about full frame.

--
Cheers, Craig

I was considering a 7D for my son since he currently has a 40D and heavily vested with several L lenses in his kit. Coincidentally on Fred Miranda's buy/sell forums there have been almost 20 used 7D's sold in a week whereas in the same time frame there have only been 3 D300s's..........this can be interpreted several ways, but I'm reading into it that Nikon owners are very satisfied.

--
Regards,
Hank

Its very exciting getting shiny new camera gear - I still get a thrill when I take mine out of the bag to use and I have had it for 6 months.

I went from a P&S to a 40D and even went so far as an L lens and while I wondered what on earth I was thinking I completely LOVE it - the better level of technology has taken me in entirely new places that my other camera couldnt cope with, and I am having a blast with it.

What ever you get, make sure you enjoy it and have fun with it. Personally I really recommend you get a tripod, it makes a difference with the sharpness - and you will notice it with the new (and very heavy) camera

Heres a post I put on my Beginner Photography Blog about learning to love my tripod - I was scared of it for months!

http://lensaddiction.wordpress.com/2010/01/25/techtip5-%E2%80%93-tripod-zen/

And if you are doing portraits you may consider a flash as your next major investment