For starters: Good lens & cheap body or vice versa?

[Geoff F]

A 20D is a good sturdy bit of kit; I still use my 10D as a spare, or for rough use. Possibly a bit low in pixels by today's standards but that won't really matter unless you need to print bigger than A4.

Check the lens specs again. There is a Canon EF 24-105 lens which I suspect that might be. If so, it is a well respected strongly constructed lens. I paid over £800 for a new one last year, and I thought that was a bargain. Alternatively there is a Canon 28-135 which is still a good lens but around half the cost.

But unfortunately, although they are both good general purpose lenses they are a bit small for wildlife. I would recommend getting something that goes upto 200 mm at least, and 300mm would be better.

I found the Canon 70-300 IS to be a good all rounder, but although it is regarded as something of a budget lens it still isn't exactly cheap if you get a new one. There is a 75-300 without IS at a much cheaper price but it is an older design which never became popular.

Sigma and a few others do ultra cheap lenses that go up to 300 mm but they are rather flimsy and I don't recommend them. But there are a few of the mid price third party lenses that may well suit you for an acceptable price.

So if the 20D is still available at a price that would allow you to add say £500 for a bigger lens, I would go for it. You might also need to allow around £100 for a decent tripod.

You may find this lens review site useful http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview

[Ollie]

Originally Posted by BillyPilgrim

If you're intending to take bird and mammal shots I'm not sure what use you would get from the 28-105 though?

I agree, 300mm would be the minimum in my opinion and 400mm would be better. You are going to have to get very close to any bird or mammal with anything less than 300mm

[nigel_b]

That specific body/lens combination has gone but I wasnt intending to use the lens for wildlife, it was just being sold with the body.

Thanks for all your advice. Just keeping my eye open for a 30D.

[Ukwildlifeo]

I had a budget of £1000 May last year and I decided to get the sigma 150-500mm which is about £700 new. I over spent a bit and went for a £500 pentax k20d body but I would recommend the sigma 150-500mm as your start and then get the best body you can with what left in your budget in the mount of your choice.

One thing I will say is when in the non pro spec market dont write off the non Canon/Nikon brands - in many cases you get more for your money!

[DrNickBurton]

+1

I reckon the 150-500mm is just about the best bang for your buck. In any case it's the best way to get 500mm (not 420 ) for under £1k (other than perhaps the 50-500mm?).

After that, choose your body according to handling. IQ-wise there probably little to choose between say Pentax, Nikon, Canon. It's a matter of deciding which handles best for you (go to the shop, try them out, you should be able to pick a favourite without too much trouble - one of them will just feel right ).

Do remember though that you are buying into a sytem, not just a body. This will affect/restrict any future purchases you make, so it's worth thinking a step ahead of your first lens. I mention this because in your original post you said that the £1k budget is just to start :-)

Originally Posted by Ukwildlifeo

I had a budget of £1000 May last year and I decided to get the sigma 150-500mm which is about £700 new. I over spent a bit and went for a £500 pentax k20d body but I would recommend the sigma 150-500mm as your start and then get the best body you can with what left in your budget in the mount of your choice.

One thing I will say is when in the non pro spec market dont write off the non Canon/Nikon brands - in many cases you get more for your money!

[Ukwildlifeo]

Originally Posted by DrNickBurton

+1

I reckon the 150-500mm is just about the best bang for your buck. In any case it's the best way to get 500mm (not 420 ) for under £1k (other than perhaps the 50-500mm?).

Funny you should mention the 50-500mm Bigma, I was originally going to get this lens but a few months before I got my camera it jumped from £700ish to over £1000! The 150 went up to £700 so I got that instead. As for which is better Ive seen reviews favouring each one and another in depth one concluding there is basically nothng in it image quality wise.

[AndyElliott]

Canon and Nikon have 90% of the DSLR market... This isn't because they are the best technically (although some of their gear is top-notch, some of it is far from it), rather a combination of technical, marketing, historical and economic muscle (and crazy past decisions by their competitors!).

So I would echo the consideration of non-CaNikon kit...

I would always go with Olympus. There lenses are of consistently high quality, even in their 'standard' range. Their 'pro' range (middle tier) lenses are an equal or better than the majority of the Canon L series glass and the 'top-pro' (top tier) are a true joy. They weren't dubbed 'the Japanese Leica' for nothing... They have won numerous awards for their gear and any perusal of quantitative magazine reviews (look at any of the DPReview or Popphoto on-line reviews as an example).

Add to that the 2x crop factor of fourthirds, they have inherent advantages for the wildlife and macro photographer (both in terms of reach and larger depth of field at wide apertures - e.g. a 300 f2.8 lens rarely is used at f2.8 for bird photography on a 35mm 'full frame' camera because the DOF is so small as not to get the whole bird in!). All of the pro and top-pro lenses are dust and water sealed. Olympus cameras were the first with LiveView. The Achilles heal of fourthirds until recently was sensor performance. This gap has narrowed with the competition (check out the industry standard DxOMark sensor comparison of the Canon 7D and the Panasonic GH1 - the most recent fourthirds-format sensor camera - DxOMark review for the Panasonic Lumix DMC GH1) and will be likely non existent with the E-3 and E-620 replacements that are about to be unveiled.

A question was asked on one of the dedicated fourthirds users of which pro togs use it... The reply list is long - Any Pro Shooters Using 43d's/M43d's??? - Four Thirds User discussion forum.

Add to this that the hire of fourthirds kit via E-Group UK (E-group equipment hire - Olympus UK E-System User Group) is cheaper than any of the Canon or Nikon hirers for equivalent kit in the UK.

Sorry to over-eulogise, but there is too much of a blind assumption that the answer must be Canon or Nikon because they have the large slice of the market. Also, there is a lot of nonsense talked about with respect to fourthirds format ...

Check out my piccies here: Picasa Web Albums - OlympusAndy

Andy

(edit: oh, and the Bigma is also a credible, cheap long lens for Olympus bodies too!)

[DrNickBurton]

A couple of years back, I went for the 150-500mm over the 50-500mm because it has OS, and pretty good OS at that (I guess if you have a Pentax body though, with built in stabilisation, that's not really a differentiator).

These two Sigma lenses are hugely popular - it seems like you are guaranteed to see at least a couple of people weilding one, whenever you go to a reserve.

Originally Posted by Ukwildlifeo

Funny you should mention the 50-500mm Bigma, I was originally going to get this lens but a few months before I got my camera it jumped from £700ish to over £1000! The 150 went up to £700 so I got that instead. As for which is better Ive seen reviews favouring each one and another in depth one concluding there is basically nothng in it image quality wise.

[AndyElliott]

Originally Posted by DrNickBurton

A couple of years back, I went for the 150-500mm over the 50-500mm because it has OS, and pretty good OS at that (I guess if you have a Pentax body though, with built in stabilisation, that's not really a differentiator).

These two Sigma lenses are hugely popular - it seems like you are guaranteed to see at least a couple of people weilding one, whenever you go to a reserve.

The main issue with the Bigma, like other Sigma lenses is the QC at the factory. There are good ones and bad ones... Fortunately, Sigma support in the UK seems to realise this and are generally very good about fixing bad ones. The bigma is good, but isn't a match for an non-third-party prime lens. It's probably about as good as the Canon 100-400 over that range - but then the 100-400 isn't particularly sharp either.

This is particularly true on the crop-sensor bodies where the MTF requirements put onto the lens is particularly severe. The highest res bodies (e.g. the Canon 7D) put even more pressure on the lens. I suspect if you go for the Bigma, you will eventually want more and outgrow it.

Andy

[DrNickBurton]

Yeah, it does happen - these days I use a Nikon 500mm f/4 VR

I had alot of fun with the Bigmos though - it's a great lens to start out with, and fits the OP's budget nicely.

Originally Posted by AndyElliott

The main issue with the Bigma, like other Sigma lenses is the QC at the factory. There are good ones and bad ones... Fortunately, Sigma support in the UK seems to realise this and are generally very good about fixing bad ones. The bigma is good, but isn't a match for an non-third-party prime lens. It's probably about as good as the Canon 100-400 over that range - but then the 100-400 isn't particularly sharp either.

This is particularly true on the crop-sensor bodies where the MTF requirements put onto the lens is particularly severe. The highest res bodies (e.g. the Canon 7D) put even more pressure on the lens. I suspect if you go for the Bigma, you will eventually want more and outgrow it.

Andy