kja

Quick and dirty: Evaluative when you want to include the exposure for the whole scene. Not good if you are exposing for something relatively small that is really bright or dark and the rest of the frame is opposite. Spot: you aim the camera at the subject you want it to expose for and it "ignores" the rest of the frame. A good option for the above problem. Center weighted: evaluates the entire scene but gives more preference to the exposure needed for the centre of the frame instead of the outer rim.

I'm sure there is an equivalent Nikon forum but I have no idea what it is, sorry!

For second hand stuff keep an eye on POTN - they have a very active sellers forum.

Oooo toooo cutie-pie!! Thanks for sharing her with us!

Gorgeous photos, Everyone :rolleyes: Just for fun here's one at sunset looking away from the sun. Baby Canon SD1200 P mode, ISO 800 I think

BTW - what kind of dog is that? It looks like Hooch but I never can remember what he was either.

That first one and the caption are totally Laugh Out Loud!! Love it!

LOL I agree, I still mine heavy!

OOO, I love my 70-200 Looks like you're already seeing how fab this lens is! Can't wait to see your whippet running shots FWIW I am usually at ISO 640 or greater when shooting the Ridgies running, but I am usually out there either early morning (sun's up but still relatively low in the sky) or late afternoon when there's still plenty of daylight but not as harsh as midday. I find I have to crank the ISO so I can keep the shutter and aperture to what I want (I'm usually around 5.6 or 6.3ish for aperture, I think. I found wider open I wasn't getting enough of the exact focus I wanted and stopping down a bit still gives me good background blur).

The house must be clean by now! I want to hear about the lens

I wouldn't hesitate to buy one

Is there a difference? Yes. Is there a difference you will notice in using them? Not if you've never used either as both will perform well. The Canon IS rocks socks, but the Sigma is no slouch and is very good value for money. The Sigma will be slightly slower to focus (if you haven't used both, it shouldn't be something you notice) and *may* not do quite as well in very low light or very low contrast, but often this can be overcome to some degree with practice. I have a good friend who swears by his Sigma 70-200 and he shoots in some of the crappiest light/conditions imaginable. Is there a difference in image quality? If you sit in your deep dark basement and look at things at 400%, then you might see some. Normal, healthy people probably won't be able to tell too much LOL There are a little variances in the pop factor out of each lens but frankly, it's nothing that a tweak here or there in your camera settings or in your post processing won't solve. the Sigma does really well in real world sharpness and it's bokeh isn't bad at all. IMHO the sigma is awesome value for money. I bought the Sigma 50-150 2.8 before my Canon 70-200IS 2.8 figuring I'd sell the Sigma...but I don't sell it because it's a great lens, works spot on, I like the extra range on the wide side sometimes and it's nice having a backup that I know can step in and do the job should something happen to my primary.

Yay!! Have fun!!

No, third party lenses are built in either Canon or Nikon or Sony or Pentax mounts. When you order them, you simply make sure to order the one that says Nikon. There are no extra bits to order or fuss with - they are ready to go out of the box. But you don't want to order the wrong one and end up with a Pentax mount for your Nikon Look here - the first on the list says "Nikon", the next one "canon", then "olympus" ... just read the whole description before clicking the Buy button.

Yup, you'll need to stick with Nikon or one of the third party brands: Tamron, Sigma, Tokina and make sure you get the Nikon mount. Third party makers do some awesome lenses. They also do some very very good lenses that will help keep your budget in tact while still giving you nice glass to work with.

Both Nikon and Canon have offerings that are very good at high ISOs. If you go Nikon you need to get the most recent bodies as it's only been the last 1-2 generations that have conquered the noise thing. If you go Canon and are happy at 800 you can go back quite a ways in models. Heck, even something like the 20D will handle ISO 1250-1600 as long as you nail the exposure; your 30D should be giving you those results, too. Not as clean as the newer 40D, but still pretty good. The new 7D or a 40D would be great options in the Canon range. Pointee...she means crop sensor. On the Canon XXXD and XXD range the crop is 1.6; on the 5D/5DII it's a full frame, no crop factor. IDIII is a 1.3 crop sensor. Basically a 100mm lens becomes a 160mm lens on a 1.6, a 130mm on a 1.3 and 100 true on a FF. So your longer lenses give you more "reach". That's totally oversimplified, of course, but you get the idea

Cool, thanks, Ash. More than seeing the photos, which I know will be nice I'd love to hear what he/you thought/think of it. Fast to find focus? Sharp all through even wide open? Noisy? And it's this one, right? Sigma 571101 SIGMA 24-70 F2.8 IF EX DG HSM FOR Canon Not this one -> Sigma Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS

Congrats on the new toy!! When you get time, I'd really love to hear more about the Sigma 24-70 2.8 as I keep tossing back and forth about adding the Brick. In the research I've done the Sigma does really well but stumbles in low light/low contrast and is considerably slower to focus (and noisier). I'd love to hear what you think as you put it through it's paces coz altho the Brick is a great lens, I have never ever really wanted it ... but I kinda like that range so the Sigma would be an option :D

It depends on the len. With the 60mm to get 1:1, yes, you need to be all up close and personal. With the 100mm you get more working distance so can be farther from your subject. Otherwise they work exactly the same way as any other lens

The 100mm macro is an incredible lens. It will do 1:1 macro and it's great for portraits. The 60mm macro is also fabulous, half the weight and length and just a splendid piece of glass. I reach for my 60 far more often than my 100 (but won't be giving the 100 up!) There are so many lenses that could suit your needs it's hard to give advice really unless you have some clear goals. If it were me, I'd be using this opportunity to get the most expensive piece of glass I was looking at as that would be the best deal and it's so much easier to save for smaller ticket items My lust lens right now is the 135L. I don't really know why, it just is.

Nope

Love em as always

Canon has a few different models at a variety of price points. Some have the option of coming with a kit lens or two. Have a little looksee through the photo area here as several have recently purchased new cameras and those threads have some great information as well as details on prices and where things were bought. The Canon 1000, 400 and 450 are all good starting places and will be lowest in price; the Canon 40D is awesome and you won't grow out of it anytime soon. Good luck and have fun shopping!!

LOL yup sounds like a hacked (stolen) copy

I'm not judging but when you guys say "free" you mean stolen. Just be clear about the truth, whatever route you choose. bec - I really like both of your conversions Well done!!