# Pro Photo on a budget



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 4, 2011)

Hello, this is my first post on here, just thought I would get that out of the way.

I am looking at buying a good camera and one lens. I am deploying soon to Iraq and want to take the opportunity to get some unique photos. 
I have decided on a budget of around $2000.00 and have chosen a camera body and lens. I would like some input from you. let me know
if you agree or think there is a better option. I do not have these selections set in stone.

Thanks for the input!


*[Camera Body]* I chose this camera for the full frame sensor and high frame rate.
Price: $1000 (used, )
Canon 1D Mark II: 
8.2 Megapixels
full frame  CMOS sensor (19.1 x 28.7mm)
8.5 fps continuous (40 JPEG, 20 RAW)







*[Lens]* I chose this lens for an all around use and speed.
Price: $799 (new, B&H)
Filter size: 77mm
f-stop range: 2.8-22
minimum focus distance: 3.3' (1 m)






Let me know what you think.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 4, 2011)

Are you a Service man? reason i ask is both this Kit is big. and if its to fit in your Kitbag itself,you might strugle to pack crucial kit. but saying that. most cameras are soo its swings and roundabouts really.

I'd maybe suggest looking at a 7D instead of the 1D mkii. Just because its not as Bulky.But it might cost you a tad more unless your getting it pre owned.
Still boasts a hefty 8fps but it does have a 18mp sensor.

The other bit of kit you'll need. a Massive Cf card.a couple of them atleast!


----------



## redtippmann (Jan 4, 2011)

You might want something wider...


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 4, 2011)

1D is not a full sensor!  1Ds is but thats outside your budget.

I suggest getting a used canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mk1 and a used 5D.  That should put you around $2200.  The downside is it is only 3+ frames per sec.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 4, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> 1D is not a full sensor! 1Ds is but thats outside your budget.
> 
> I suggest getting a used canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mk1 and a used 5D. That should put you around $2200. The downside is it is only 3+ frames per sec.


 
I would not want a 5D in an environment where ruggedness is required. The 1D series is weather sealed and great for shooting photos or being used as a hammer.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 4, 2011)

Village Idiot said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> > 1D is not a full sensor! 1Ds is but thats outside your budget.
> ...



I agree in a sence,but if he's Being deployed,you might not allways have space in your pack for a camera and lens that big.

Unless ofcourse,he's logistics in which case,it'll be on the seat next to him


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 4, 2011)

just wanted to correct the op because he said 1D was full.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 4, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> just wanted to correct the op because he said 1D was full.



my bad. You are right about the crop factor, it is 1.3x I was confused with the 1Ds. That is interesting  since I want a full frame camera that shoots 8fps or more. I don't see one that is made by Canon. The Nikon D700 shoots 5fps and up to 8fps w/battery grip it seems.

I wont be going outside the wire very often I am a helicopter engine repairer/maintainer so i am not worried about having a kit bag.

Maybe you are right the Canon 7D would be a good compromise since it is higher Megapixel and still within the parameters i require.

OK OK here we go take two!

*Camera Body:* http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646908-REG/Canon_3814B004_EOS_7D_SLR_Digital.html *Canon 7D*

*Lens* http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/543923-USA/Canon_2044B002AA_EF_S_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_IS.html *Canon 55-250 F4-5.6*


----------



## Rob1n (Jan 4, 2011)

You definetly want a canon 1ds or 1d if you can live with small sensor, which is not as big an issue as some would have you believe. the lesser cameras in the range will not cope with the heat or the dust, what ever people say. the truth is the early mk2 shot in raw is a brilliant camera have both 1d and 1ds, would go for older 1ds given the choice. Your lenses will take the most punishment so don't spend too much. Lense hoods are the secret in those conditions, light is refracted off the dust in the air. Good luck


----------



## gsgary (Jan 4, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> > just wanted to correct the op because he said 1D was full.
> ...



Why do you want a full frame that shoots 8fps you will probably only use 1 of them or you may miss the one you want, i never shoot 8fps with mine , i have a 5D and 2 1Dmk2's and a 1Dmk1, 1 mk2 has been to hell and back still going strong

1Dmk2 and 24-70F2.8L


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 4, 2011)

I would take a good look at the newer Pentax stuff. Their whole kick for the last few years has been, compact, tough, sealed, durable and lightweight. I'm an adventure photographer, and I regularly put my gear through all kinds of reckless abuse. From being slammed into the side of a cliff repeatedly, shooting in very sandy environments like the Joshua Tree or Moab deserts, shooting in brutal arctic conditions on mount washington, being clamped to the front bumper of a truck for a timelapse, being left on the roof of a car, and flying off into the road (in a LowePro TopLoader bag)or being completely doused by a rogue wave while shooting some surfing. I've been using Pentax stuff in all these environments, and it has just kept on ticking. The K-7 and new K-5 bodies are what I primarily use now. This body is fully magnesium alloy with a SS chassis, and is smaller, lighter and better sealed than the 5D, 7D, 50D, D700, D300, or D7000. 

The K-5 is a great new camera. 16mp, 7fps, iso80-51,200 (and amazingly clean up to 12,800), and a 14.1 stop dynamic range, which is the most of any camera ever tested by DXO Mark.

Pentax also offer a lineup of really well sealed lenses, from the pro grade DA* series, to the WR series of weather sealed kit lenses, which no other brand has. Which means you can have a fully sealed kit without having to have big expensive pro glass if you don't want it. And even their DA* lenses are much smaller than the Canon/Nikon pro options, since they are maximized for APS-c, rather than for FF. 

I'm not a salesperson, but I'm just fully convinced that the Pentax lineup is the best for people that need a small, tough, sealed system for harsh, adventurous conditions. Going with a kit like this would be much, much smaller and lighter than a 1DmkII and 70-200, while offering much newer technology like far better ISO, much wider DR and HD movie capabilities. Also, the Sigma lens isn't sealed, and your weather sealing is only as good as it's weakest link.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 4, 2011)

Spend the extra cash and get this Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video

It's going to be Bright as hell(and as hot as too) I never use Is on any lens On bright Day's,one of the reasons i'd go for the 70-200 f4 non Is.I dont think you'd need the f2.8 version,or because of the light you'll get,the Is as you'll be shooting Fast shutter speed's.on a plus side,it's weather sealed!

you could go for the Original idea but with this lens instead of the Sigma. But the 7D is an impresive camera. the only downside is if you want something wide angle.as the 7D is a croped sensor. if you want something a little wide (not that wide on a crop) i'd get a 28mm/2.8, It's quiet cheap,but you might find it useful     Thats my input,hope ive helped you,in some way

Edit: Oh and Maybe get some armour or something for the Body  might be useful if it's sitting around an Air hanger with you


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 4, 2011)

GeneralBenson said:


> I would take a good look at the newer Pentax stuff. Their whole kick for the last few years has been, compact, tough, sealed, durable and lightweight. I'm an adventure photographer, and I regularly put my gear through all kinds of reckless abuse. From being slammed into the side of a cliff repeatedly, shooting in very sandy environments like the Joshua Tree or Moab deserts, shooting in brutal arctic conditions on mount washington, being clamped to the front bumper of a truck for a timelapse, being left on the roof of a car, and flying off into the road (in a LowePro TopLoader bag)or being completely doused by a rogue wave while shooting some surfing. I've been using Pentax stuff in all these environments, and it has just kept on ticking. The K-7 and new K-5 bodies are what I primarily use now. This body is fully magnesium alloy with a SS chassis, and is smaller, lighter and better sealed than the 5D, 7D, 50D, D700, D300, or D7000.
> 
> The K-5 is a great new camera. 16mp, 7fps, iso80-51,200 (and amazingly clean up to 12,800), and a 14.1 stop dynamic range, which is the most of any camera ever tested by DXO Mark.
> 
> ...



Very interesting. I will definitely look at the Pantex line-up. I have always been a fan of Canon, however my last camera was a Nikon N80. I sold It because film is of no use to me anymore... =P

I think you have given me a lot of good input and I will update my thread hear once I look into the Pantex cameras and also possibly the 1D option with a different lens. the 7D is a nice camera, but now that I think of it. with a 1.6x crop, that is quite a bit! I want a full frame (i may be able to settle with the 1.3x of the 1D mkII) However I want to be able to use a ultra wide angle lense on the camera as well if i chose to. Full frame would be the best deal for me, but I want at least 5fps (6fps would be better) and a minimum of 8mp...

This is a tough choice for me because I REALLY want full frame, but don't want to sacrifice a lot of MP or continuous speed since I want to get some good action shots...



> Spend the extra cash and get this Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video
> 
> It's going to be Bright as hell(and as hot as too) I never use Is on any lens On bright Day's,one of the reasons i'd go for the 70-200 f4 non Is.I dont think you'd need the f2.8 version,or because of the light you'll get,the Is as you'll be shooting Fast shutter speed's.on a plus side,it's weather sealed!
> 
> ...



This is good advise as well. I almost chose the 4.0 70-200 canon lens but figured i would have a better range with the 7D using a 55-250 since it is going to be cropped so much. I am going to keep looking. Thanks for your input =)


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 4, 2011)

You can go ultra wide on cropped sensor if you buy EF-S ultra wide like the 10-22mm


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 4, 2011)

OK I looked at the Pentax and they are all 1.5x crop. other than that they are fine. Sony also has some nice full frame cameras although I don't think they would have as many options as far as periphrasis. Here is a nice sony camera for the price though Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) DSLR-A900

Anyway for the moment I am sticking with my original choice of the Canon 1D MarkII because of the lower crop (1.3x) and it still has 8.5 fps and good quality for $1000.

and the lens i am going with is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video


----------



## pbelarge (Jan 4, 2011)

One thing about buying Canon, is the extensive set of lenses available to you.

My 2 cents:

7D - there are plenty used ones on POTN.
24-105L - a very good lens with good length on the 7D. This lens has great write-ups and can handle your soon to be location.

I would also invest in a good cleaning package, you will eventually need it.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 4, 2011)

pbelarge said:


> One thing about buying Canon, is the extensive set of lenses available to you.
> 
> My 2 cents:
> 
> ...



The 7D is nice except the fact that it has a 1.6x crop. That is a little much. I admit that otherwise it is a superb camera. I think if I had the money I would go with the Nikon D700 Nikon D700 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) 25444 B&H Photo because it is full frame 12.1mp and 5fps continuous burst (MB-D10 battery grip with an optional EN-EL4A battery and BL-3 Chamber Cover) This is a steal for only $2349.

But I think I am still stuck on the Canon 1D with this deployment. Ill try to find a protective case and lens protective cap. This should work nicely for what I want to capture.

The budget is just for the camera and lens by the way. I plan on getting a omni-pod and possibly a flash with diffuser and of course extra batteries, four 4GB high speed CF cards and probably a loupe and well how about you just look at my wish list... 

obviously I am not getting a 5D but It would be my pick if I was buying a new Canon. (although now I'm steering more toward the Nikon D700, these peripherals will be for the 1D =)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/wl/3B9426663D


----------



## John Mc (Jan 5, 2011)

I'm Gathering your wanting Full frame(or close too) due to the fact you used to Shoot Film? and what are you planing to shoot? Like Photojournalist stuff,Landscapes,group portrait's/portraits?

How are you going to store the photo's if you dont mind me asking?whilst 16gb's of card's is alot.I'f your Snapping away frantically at high speed,your going to use the space up.

Keep in mind that it'll do for now.Your going on Deployment,and if you've not got anyone at home(wife,dependents) your Salary is going to build up. Come back,and either Buy a 5D or D700 and sell the "war" camera  (or keep it for sentimental value)


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 5, 2011)

John Mc said:


> I'm Gathering your wanting Full frame(or close too) due to the fact you used to Shoot Film? and what are you planing to shoot? Like Photojournalist stuff,Landscapes,group portrait's/portraits?
> 
> How are you going to store the photo's if you dont mind me asking?whilst 16gb's of card's is alot.I'f your Snapping away frantically at high speed,your going to use the space up.
> 
> Keep in mind that it'll do for now.Your going on Deployment,and if you've not got anyone at home(wife,dependents) your Salary is going to build up. Come back,and either Buy a 5D or D700 and sell the "war" camera  (or keep it for sentimental value)



Hey Thanks for your comment. You are inside my head =) yeah I am married, however she is going home to live with her parents and brothers while I am deployed so she won't be spending that much money. We have an 8 month old son as well. He is awesome!

Anyway I plan on saving about $40,000 while deployed. half of that is going to be going towards a new car for the fam. about $10,000 is going into savings and the other $10,000 will be used for things we need around the house. New TV (im selling our current one). kitchen table other furniture etc...

I would definately get the D700 when I get back. The 5D is a measly 3.9FPS and that would be annoying to me. The D700 can get up to 8fps. I definitly want full frame.

I am keeping the 1D mk II for a second body. I think since it is cropped I will use it for my long lenses and then use the D700 for the portrait and wide angle lens.

As far as what I want to be shooting. While in Iraq probably action shots. Some landscapes and some candid portrait and some posed portraits.

I would like to use an Epson P7000 Epson P-7000 Multimedia Photo Viewer B31B192002 B&H Photo Video

Thanks for the input =)


----------



## gsgary (Jan 5, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> John Mc said:
> 
> 
> > I'm Gathering your wanting Full frame(or close too) due to the fact you used to Shoot Film? and what are you planing to shoot? Like Photojournalist stuff,Landscapes,group portrait's/portraits?
> ...



Nothing wrong with 3.9fps this was taken with a 5D and these dogs are fast


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 5, 2011)

gsgary said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > John Mc said:
> ...



Thats a cool shot! my N80 only shot about 3fps and it was not fast enough so i figure at least 6 should be good. not to say you can't get great shots with only 4fps but the faster you can shoot, the more chances of you getting that money shot =)


----------



## gsgary (Jan 5, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > 3bayjunkie said:
> ...



That shot is also ISO3200 and shot on one shot how i shoot lots of different sports, i shot this event with the 5D because of the light and the 1Dmk2 is not as good as the 5D at ISO3200
This is the 1Dmk2 at ISo1600


----------



## John Mc (Jan 5, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> John Mc said:
> 
> 
> > I'm Gathering your wanting Full frame(or close too) due to the fact you used to Shoot Film? and what are you planing to shoot? Like Photojournalist stuff,Landscapes,group portrait's/portraits?
> ...



Haha,Im in the same Boat,im using Black and White Film at the moment and i'd love to have the idea of a Full Frame.
i'd Maybe Pick up a Wide angle lens For the 1D MkII if your also doing Landscapes,Like a 28mm/2.8,In  the Uk it's Like £150,Might be a good thing for your Kit,Even if its  used ones or twice a Week.

I must say,Ive seen some shot's from Iraq Ect,but they've been from journalist's. I'm looking forward to see an enlisted man's shot's.

One thing i'd maybe ask, Shoot honestly, Capture the good and the bad side of both side's out there. I think your Photo's Will benifit it.


----------



## Yucel (Jan 5, 2011)

buy new gear, it gets old fast... unless you like to save a few bucks and just try something out quick and plan on reselling urself soon for whatcha really like.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 5, 2011)

Right, forgot to meantion that. Pentax, for the time being is fully committed to the APS-c format. People have different views on that, as to whether it good or bad. I think it's a bit of both. Would I like FF? Sure I would. But really, for my line of work, durability, weight and size are far more important than sensor size. And since Pentax is committed to APS-c, all the lenses are maximized for that, and are there for smaller. Pentax is the only brand that make a (reasonably) full lineup of pro quality FF equivalent APS-c lenses. Meaning, that my 50-135mm f/2.8, which is the equivalent focal length of an FF 70-200, is smaller than the Nikon 24-70/2.8. here are pleny of aps-c lenses out there for most brands, but for the most part, everyone reserves their top quality optics and build quality for the 'pro' FF lenses. So, I really like being able to travel with the focal length equivalents of 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 70-200/2.8, 150/2.8 macro, 300/2.8, 450/4 in one backpacker that isn't even that big of heavy. 

Up until recently, the only reasons that I wanted FF were for the much better noise handling and the depth of field/perspective advantage. But now, with the outstanding sensor performance of the K-5 and D7000, which share the same sensor), the Noise performance is good enough that it's not even an issue anymore. 

What is it about FF that makes you want it so badly? As someone already pointed out. there are plenty of ultra wide aps-c lenses out there that are the equivalent of the widest FF glass.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 5, 2011)

GeneralBenson said:


> What is it about FF that makes you want it so badly? As someone already pointed out. there are plenty of ultra wide aps-c lenses out there that are the equivalent of the widest FF glass.




It's Cause it's the same size as 35mm neg's. I use both film and digital,and i'd rather not have 2 set's of Wide angle/tele/prime lenses. I'd rather spend the money and just get one set of lenses. That's my Reason


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 5, 2011)

I say stick with film and buy an f5. 

10fps, full frame, and more durable then any dslr--all for around $300!


----------



## Gruen Photo 7 Design (Jan 5, 2011)

bump for the 5D
i would take a zoom lens - 24-105 or 24-70 2.8
you will want wide angle shots as well


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 6, 2011)

djacobox372 said:


> I say stick with film and buy an f5.
> 10fps, full frame, and more durable then any dslr--all for around $300!


Plus $100 a week for film HAHA! why do you think i stopped shooting film in the first place.



Gruen Photo 7 Design said:


> bump for the 5D
> i would take a zoom lens - 24-105 or 24-70 2.8
> you will want wide angle shots as well


good idea. I will probably bring one =)



GeneralBenson said:


> Right, forgot to meantion that. Pentax, for the time being is fully committed to the APS-c format. People have different views on that, as to whether it good or bad. I think it's a bit of both. Would I like FF? Sure I would. But really, for my line of work, durability, weight and size are far more important than sensor size. And since Pentax is committed to APS-c, all the lenses are maximized for that, and are there for smaller. Pentax is the only brand that make a (reasonably) full lineup of pro quality FF equivalent APS-c lenses. Meaning, that my 50-135mm f/2.8, which is the equivalent focal length of an FF 70-200, is smaller than the Nikon 24-70/2.8. here are pleny of aps-c lenses out there for most brands, but for the most part, everyone reserves their top quality optics and build quality for the 'pro' FF lenses. So, I really like being able to travel with the focal length equivalents of 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 70-200/2.8, 150/2.8 macro, 300/2.8, 450/4 in one backpacker that isn't even that big of heavy.
> 
> Up until recently, the only reasons that I wanted FF were for the much better noise handling and the depth of field/perspective advantage. But now, with the outstanding sensor performance of the K-5 and D7000, which share the same sensor), the Noise performance is good enough that it's not even an issue anymore.
> 
> What is it about FF that makes you want it so badly? As someone already pointed out. there are plenty of ultra wide aps-c lenses out there that are the equivalent of the widest FF glass.



I am a perfectionist. I don't want my wide angle lenses cropped. (or any of the for that matter, but i can deal with a d1 cropping it at 1.3 if i must... its better than 1.5 or 1.6...)



> It's Cause it's the same size as 35mm neg's. I use both film and digital,and i'd rather not have 2 set's of Wide angle/tele/prime lenses. I'd rather spend the money and just get one set of lenses. That's my Reason



ditto.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 6, 2011)

Stuck with a 1D MKII??! I'll buy it for half of what you did when you get back if you want to get rid of it cheap.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 6, 2011)

Village Idiot said:


> Stuck with a 1D MKII??! I'll buy it for half of what you did when you get back if you want to get rid of it cheap.



I am probably going to keep it as a secondary camera for when i get my Nikon D700.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 7, 2011)

At this point I have decided to get the 

*Canon Mark II:* I found one on ebay for $724.99
Canon EOS 1D Mark II Body only 8.2 mp Good condition - eBay (item 320639174269 end time Jan-12-11 14:52:42 PST)

*Canon 18-200mm:*
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Autofocus Lens 2752B002 B&H

I don't plan on doing any indoor photography. and this is a good lens with both wide angle and telephoto.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 7, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> At this point I have decided to get the
> 
> *Canon Mark II:* I found one on ebay for $724.99
> Canon EOS 1D Mark II Body only 8.2 mp Good condition - eBay (item 320639174269 end time Jan-12-11 14:52:42 PST)
> ...



That lens won't work on that body. Only EF lenses will, the EF-S lenses will not mount to full frame or aps-h sensor cameras unless they're modified and I don't know if that lens can even be modified.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 7, 2011)

Village Idiot said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > At this point I have decided to get the
> ...



However like someone pointed out earlier in this thread, the 1D Mark II is not full frame. it has a 1.3x cropped sensor.

Canon EOS-1D Mark II digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review

i see it only says EF mount on the specs but maybe that was before the EF-s came out? Anyone know if it will work?


----------



## gsgary (Jan 7, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> At this point I have decided to get the
> 
> *Canon Mark II:* I found one on ebay for $724.99
> Canon EOS 1D Mark II Body only 8.2 mp Good condition - eBay (item 320639174269 end time Jan-12-11 14:52:42 PST)
> ...




No that is a crap lens, can do anything but nothing good, and does not fit


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 7, 2011)

OK if figured it out...

here is the new lens, what do you think? 

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Autofocus Zoom Lens 880-101

(i only want to carry one lens since i may be moving locations a bit. I think i will pack a 1.4x teleconverter and some filters.

Any advise on what else to bring? I may be between fobs at times.


----------



## RyanLilly (Jan 7, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> OK if figured it out...
> 
> here is the new lens, what do you think?
> 
> ...



Sorry, Sigma's "DC" lenses only work On 1.6x crop cameras. It may mount on a 1D, but there will be severe vignetting at the wide end.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 7, 2011)

RyanLilly said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > OK if figured it out...
> ...



well i have to admit i have never bought a lens for a dslr. i have always has film slr cameras. so how do i know if it works with my 1.3x crop?


----------



## ChadHillPhoto (Jan 7, 2011)

IMO the Canon1D MKII is a MUCH better choice than any Pentax, Sony, Sigma.

Not only because Canon's are better camera's (IMO)but in Iraq you are going to want that thing to be sealed and tough as nails..plus Canon being 1 of the biggest brands out there it will be easier to get accessories, repairs etc.

Good luck and do post your images if you find the chance!


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 8, 2011)

ChadHillPhoto said:


> IMO the Canon1D MKII is a MUCH better choice than any Pentax, Sony, Sigma.



I realize that you already qualified this statement by putting IMO, and that everyone is entitled to an opinion. But there's really nothing to substantiate that comment.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 8, 2011)

GeneralBenson said:


> ChadHillPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > IMO the Canon1D MKII is a MUCH better choice than any Pentax, Sony, Sigma.
> ...



Neither does your comment, nor this one as a mater of fact,Some people are biased towards the System they use, and it shows that both of you's are.


The Two lenses you've shown Wont work on the 1Dmk2,take a look at this
Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC Autofocus Lens AF020C-700 B&H
It's not going to be the best of quality Optical wise,nor is it weather sealed, but it fits and will do what you asked for. 

Other option is this Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM 2562A002 B&H
If your planing on taking a 1.4 extension,it'll obv increas the telephoto distance.but again it's not weather sealed.

My option would most likely be the Canon Lens,as ive had a bit of experience with it.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 8, 2011)

I think I would go with the Tamron
Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC Autofocus Lens AF020C-700 B&H

Thanks for the help. This seems like a good combination. 

here is a teleconverter i picked, but the chart says it won't fit. 
Canon 1.4x EF Extender II (Teleconverter) 6845A004 B&H Photo

do you think this one will work?
Tamron 1.4x Teleconverter for Canon AF AF14C700 B&H Photo Video


----------



## gsgary (Jan 8, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> I think I would go with the Tamron
> Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC Autofocus Lens AF020C-700 B&H
> 
> Thanks for the help. This seems like a good combination.
> ...



I wouldn't fit a converter to that lens it's not that good on it's own, lens converter are meant to be used with prime lenses. It's not a lens i would fit on one of my MK2's; your post say shooting pro that lens is no where near pro


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 8, 2011)

gsgary said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > I think I would go with the Tamron
> ...



Well I agree I wouldn't need a tele-converter for my photos. I just thought of taking one just in case. Like maybe i could see something far off while i was out in the middle of the desert. It might come in handy, ya never know.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 9, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > 3bayjunkie said:
> ...



A 1.4TC doens't add nearly as much extra reach as you would think it does.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 9, 2011)

John Mc said:


> GeneralBenson said:
> 
> 
> > ChadHillPhoto said:
> ...



I'm not biased towards any system. Pentax works best for what I do. Canon and Nikon both are better than Pentax at certain things. Pentax is better than Canon or Nikon at other things. What Pentax does best lines up with what I'm looking for. 

What is biased is a completely unsubstantiated state that the 1DmkII is better than any pentax, sony or sigma, which is just a total BS statement with nothing to back it up. 

When in reality, if you compare the 1DmkII to the Pentax K-5, you get:

               K-5      vs      1DmkII
MP           16 vs                 8
ISO         80-51200       vs 50-3200
Weight     750g             vs1220g
FPS         7 vs                   8
DR          14.1              vs 11.1
DXO score  82 vs 66
Body       Mag Alloy vs       Mag Alloy
Screen    3" vs                  2"
Video      1080p vs            None
Crop        1.5 vs                1.3
Sealed     Yes                vs Yes

And so on...

I'm not a fanboy. Canon and Nikon make really nice stuff. But I think it's ridiculous to make the claim that a 1DmkII is a MUCH better choice than any Pentax, Sony or Sigma.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 9, 2011)

gsgary said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > I think I would go with the Tamron
> ...



I'm with Gary on this one. You're talking about wanting some pro setup, but looking at consumer lenses, to put on an outdated pro body. Not saying the the 1DmkII isn't still capable of making great picture. But you seem to have this unnecessary fixation on getting something "pro", when if you could get something "not pro" that is more modern and likely better, for the same amount of money or less. And also have a fixation on FF, even though you've yet to give a good reason to need it, and seem to be ok with settling for 1.3 crop, but think that a 1.5 crop is an abomination. 

I think you'd be best off getting a more modern, semi-pro aps-c body, and a high quality lens to go with it.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 9, 2011)

ok here we go. 

this is my wish list for the canon 1D

Wish List - B&H Photo Video

I won't be buying everything at one time, but they are semi organized in the order I will be purchasing them. obviously the camera and lens will be first =)

@GeneralBenson

I would like full frame, it is better for doing wideangle shots, but obviously I am not going to get a full frame camera that shoots 6-10 fps for $1000. The Canon 1D is a good all around camera for shooting wide angle and also getting me the fast shutter speeds i want for doing action shots while deployed. and it is also very rugged and a sealed body.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 9, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> I would like full frame, it is better for doing wideangle shots, but obviously I am not going to get a full frame camera that shoots 6-10 fps for $1000. The Canon 1D is a good all around camera for shooting wide angle and also getting me the fast shutter speeds i want for doing action shots while deployed. and it is also very rugged and a sealed body.



I get where you're coming from, and see why you would think that. But the reality is that it's just not that true. Especially with the kit you are looking at. FF bodies aren't "better for doing wideangle shots", they just yield a wider perspective for a given focal length. So, an FF body will make a given lens look wider, provided that the lens has a large enough image circle to cover and FF sensor. 

But what generally happens, is that people with crop bodies just shoot with wider lenses to begin with, so it sort of ends up being a a wash. For example, the 28-300 lens that you want is kind of a classic focal length for FF. But there are plenty of 18-200 aps-c only lenses the effectively render the exact same angles of view as the 28-300 would on FF. The only real difference is that a 1D with a 28-300 will be considerably larger than a d300s with a 18-200. But what's worse, is that the mkII is aps-h, or 1.3 crop, which means you won't even get the same field of view as FF would have, nor can you use the aps-c lenses meant to give equivalent FL's. So now you end up with an FF equivalent of basically 38-400. And 38 on FF is not _that_ wide. If you got a aps-c camera with an 18-xxx lens, it would actually be "better at wideangle shots" than the 1DmkII with a 28-300 would be. 

It's all a matter of equivalents. 20mm on aps-c will look nearly identical to 30mm on FF, which would look nearly identical to 26mm on aps-h. And all other things being equally, I would defy just about anyone to look at a pile of image that are either 20mm aps-c or 30mm FF, and be ableto pick out which ones are which. 

I know that FF is generally regarded as "pro", and that it is lusted after as the holy grail of DSLRs, but the reality is that most people and they includes pros, don't have the legitimate of a need for actually having it. 99% of shots that can be made with FF can be made with aps-c, and with the way current technology is progressing, I would say that all of the current crop of semi-pro aps-c DSLRs are better than the 1DmkII is just about every way. 

I'm not against FF, nor do I think it's obsolete, but I think too many people just have this notion that aps-c isn't "pro" enough for them. And I too often hear people thinking that an FF body is the magic bean that will make their photography better. I don't care who you are, if you can't make good images with an aps-c body, you won't be able to do it with FF either. And don't think that just because you take a "pro" body out into the field, that you're going to being pro shots home with you. Barring a few extreme situations, what camera got used is one of the most insignificant factors in regards to whether an image came out great or not. 

Also, on another note, don't get to hard for FPS. It's not nearly as useful as you think it is. I've made many perfectly timed, peak-action shots, shoot just a single well timed shot; and I've shot many high FPS bursts only to somehow still miss the peak action of the moment. It's a very common misperception that all sports pros get great shots by just letting 'er rip at 10fps. Many action shooting pros still just shoot single well time shots, and in many cases, you don't have a choice. Pro NBA shooters, have big powerful strobes up in the ceiling that take over a second to recycle. So that means that one you take a shot, you don't get to take another one for at least a second, which in the world of sports, is a LONG time. So when Lebron comes down the court for a breakaway dunk, it means you get one chance to capture it at the perfect moment, because by the time those lights recycle for your next shot, he's already running back down the court celebrating. High FPS can be useful in certain situations, but most of the time, a well-timed shot is more useful.

It's sound to me like you're someone who is getting into photography and has aspirations of getting pretty advanced and/or going somewhere with it. But it also sounds like you've been hoodwinked and bought into all the web chatter that if you want to take great shots, you NEED a "pro" body, and that if you want to capture great action, you NEED 10 fps. Neither of those are remotely true. I would again defy anyone to pick up any magazine, through it, and tell which images were FF or aps-c, and which were single shots and which were from a high-speed burst.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 9, 2011)

GeneralBenson said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > I would like full frame, it is better for doing wideangle shots, but obviously I am not going to get a full frame camera that shoots 6-10 fps for $1000. The Canon 1D is a good all around camera for shooting wide angle and also getting me the fast shutter speeds i want for doing action shots while deployed. and it is also very rugged and a sealed body.
> ...



Thanks for your input, but i have done a lot of research and i would much rather have a larger sensor, for better quality (Canon 1D Mark II *28.7 x 19.1 mm* compared to Canon 60D *22.3 x 14.9mm*), than a larger megapixel rating. However. to each their own i say. No one is going to agree on everything. The most important thing for me on a camera at this point is full frame fast burst. Most people probably could care less about those factors. I guess it all depends what you want in a camera. 

I came strait out of shooting film. I have shot film for the past 3 years and I like my full frame sensors and I like a fast burst rate. I think people who never shot film before might not care as much about a full frame sensor. http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...rence-between-full-frame-cropped-sensors.html


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jan 9, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> GeneralBenson said:
> 
> 
> > 3bayjunkie said:
> ...



Fair enough. Hope it turns out to be just what you need and want.

Stay safe over there!


----------



## Restomage (Jan 9, 2011)

The 1D Mark II is a POS compared to entry level DSLR's now adays. I've used it many times with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS and I hate it. I really don't feel like going into details though, not trying to start a Nikon vs Canon war.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 9, 2011)

Restomage said:


> The 1D Mark II is a POS compared to entry level DSLR's now adays. I've used it many times with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS and I hate it. I really don't feel like going into details though, not trying to start a Nikon vs Canon war.



hey don't get me wrong. I love both Nikon and Canon. Actually after this deployment i plan on getting a Nikon D700. Then use it for my next deployment camera and when i come back from that get the next newest thing, so i always have two bodies and use the oldest for the deployment camera.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 10, 2011)

OK OK OK OK! I know you all are probably getting pretty tired of this, but guess what!? If it makes you feel any better you have all helped me in my decision one way or another. 

I have decided to take the advice of someone who commented on here and said I need to double my budget. So We are going to double it!

New budget is $4000 for just the camera and one lens. 

Here are the camera bodys I am considering

Nikon D700 Nikon D700 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) 25444 B&H Photo
Canon 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Digital Camera (Camera Body) 2764B003 B&H
Canon 1D Mark III (used) Used Canon EOS-1D Mark III 10.1 Megapixel Digital SLR 1888B002
Nikon D3 (used) Used Nikon D3 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) 25434 B&H Photo

Now I picked the bodies to chose from. What lenses would you suggest I get.
Make note that the higher the cost of the body the lower cost of the starter lens I can get...

Here I have updated my "wish list" with possible lenses. Take a look http://www.bhphotovideo.com/wl/3B9426663D

Keep in mind that I do not want to change lenses too much but I also don't want one with a rediculously high f/stop like f6.3. However If i need to buy a prime wide angle and then a zoom telephoto that is fine but I will only be buying one lens at a time with this budget. 

The time frame for this is one to two months.

Thank you for the help =)

~3bayjunkie~


----------



## John Mc (Jan 11, 2011)

I know im a Canon guy,and i would suggest Canon,but what i would get if i was you is the D3 or the D700 and the nikor 80-200/2.8 and the 50mm/1.4 or the 1.8 if you only want to get 1 lens,as its a cheap lens.
It's probably the better option then the Canon if you want a FF that bad,as the 5D wont offer you High speed continous shooting.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 11, 2011)

John Mc said:


> I know im a Canon guy,and i would suggest Canon,but what i would get if i was you is the D3 or the D700 and the nikor 80-200/2.8 and the 50mm/1.4 or the 1.8 if you only want to get 1 lens,as its a cheap lens.
> It's probably the better option then the Canon if you want a FF that bad,as the 5D wont offer you High speed continous shooting.



That is just a little over my budget but I think you are right. That would be a good combination =) I will probably get a 50mm f1.4 and the 20mm f2.8 to go with it anyway, but not as a primary lens.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 11, 2011)

OK this used D3 looks like a great deal for taking with me on a deployment. It is in 8/10 condition (only cosmetic wear) It is made to be rugged and has what I am looking for. Only $2999.00 Wow I love it =)
Used Nikon D3 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) 25434 B&H Photo

accompanied with this lens: AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED ($1099.00)
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Lens 1986 B&H Photo

This hits a little over $4,000 but I think it is a good starter kit.


----------



## jack58 (Jan 11, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> Hello, this is my first post on here, just thought I would get that out of the way.
> 
> I am looking at buying a good camera and one lens. I am deploying soon to Iraq and want to take the opportunity to get some unique photos.
> I have decided on a budget of around $2000.00 and have chosen a camera body and lens. I would like some input from you. let me know
> ...


Why are you asking when you said you already chose the above?
The way you worded the above post made me thing you already got it?
Were you just thinking or already got them?


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 11, 2011)

jack58 said:


> Why are you asking when you said you already chose the above?
> The way you worded the above post made me thing you already got it?
> Were you just thinking or already got them?



I didn't buy the camera. If you read it, you would see i said "I am looking to buy" not that I had already. But with lots of help from the people here posting in this thread I have come to realize that the 1D mk II would not be sufficient enough. read some of the newer posts on this thread.


----------



## KD5NRH (Jan 13, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> Here is a nice sony camera for the price though Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) DSLR-A900



Remember that the Alphas use (almost) every Minolta Maxxum accessory out there.  That means there's a lot of good-to-great glass gathering dust in people's closets if you can find it.  I just got a 75-210 f/4 and a 50mm f/1.8 that were forgotten in a bag with a broken Maxxum 7000 for free.

There are a few oddballs among the Minolta line; the 7000 and a few others use ISO hotshoes instead of the Minolta/Sony one ($8-15 for an adapter) and some of the early digital lenses are made for cropped sensors, but of course the film lenses are full frame.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 13, 2011)

KD5NRH said:


> 3bayjunkie said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a nice sony camera for the price though Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) DSLR-A900
> ...



wow! That is actually pretty cool. i did not know that =)


----------

