Ok, I admit it. The Panasonic FZ50 was a mistake. Remember those noisy night pics I posted in the HDR thread a few weeks ago? Those were taken at ISO200. :oops: I've gotten a lot more into photography over the last few months than I ever expected to when I started taking pics of planes. Especially night photography. And I'm the sort of person who takes a lot of pride in my work. So if this is going to be a serious hobby, I really should do it right.
Fortunately, the FZ50 doesn't look like it's going to be a very expensive mistake. It looks like I can resell it for not a lot more than I paid, and I can use the proceeds towards a DSLR. The prospect of plane-spotting with a DSLR seemed expensive to me, because good telephoto lenses are expensive to buy. But not to rent! Adorama Rentals has the Canon 100-400 L or the Nikon 80-400 for $35 per weekend. That, I can afford. So really, all I'd need to buy is a body and an everyday lens; I could rent a long lens for our nycaviation adventures, until I can afford to buy one I'll be happy with.
So, I need advice in starting small. I'm leaning towards Canon, primarily because I like their options better on the low end, and I like how they handle the big lens-small sensor issue better than Nikon. My mind can be changed if someone has compelling arguments, but don't start a flame war please :)
Say I bought a used Digital Rebel XT for $374. The XTi is $550ish new, and there don't seem to be a lot of them used...is the XTi that much better that I shouldn't consider an XT? For the same price, the XT is better than a 10D, right?
Lens options I've considered (all prices are B&H):
1) Tamron two-lens kit (EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 and EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6) for $209
2) Canon EF 28-105mm f/4-5.6 USM Autofocus for $149
3) Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Autofocus for $219
I know the best lens is (3). And I know that the Tamron kit is going to be fairly low-quality lenses. But at that level, how much difference am I going to see? Less sharp images? Chromatic aberration? The Tamron 70-300 doesn't have IS, but usually if I need a long lens I'm either using a tripod or a fast shutter speed, so is that a big deal? Keep in mind that I'd probably rent a 100-400 L for weekends I knew I'd be spotting.
Any of these options would be a big step up from what I have now, right? Am I making another mistake by trying to go cheap to start out? Anything else I should be looking at? Anyone looking at upgrading and want to sell me their used stuff? :)
Bookmarks