[navin]

Originally Posted by ampere

17-55 Canon is a fantastic lens to replace. ... In fact I would also suggest the 24-105 F4 IS L. Its the perfect all rounder lens. Good portraits and constant F4 add to the utility

I happen to have both the 17-55 and 24-105 and despite what the reviews all say I find the 24-105 responds faster (focus) and has nicer colour. I use it on a D60 so only the center of the FF lens is used.

[Torque123]

I have decided to take the plunge and buy a DSLR camera. The camera will be used mainly for wildlife photography and my budget is a maximum of 75K Rupees. Like everyone, am also confused if I have to buy Nikon or Canon.

After some online research, I feel that the lense options in Canon are more and a little cheaper compared to Nikon lenses. I know I will have to invest a lot more on a good telephoto lense a couple of months down the line. Hence I am tilting towards buying a Canon 60D or 70D. I also know Nikon 5300 & 7100 are also within my budget.

I will be visiting the Canon store & Nikon store this weekend to try these cameras myself. I need your inputs in deciding which one to buy. Please give your opinions on the camera keeping in mind the telephoto lense that I have to buy.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Torque123

I have decided to take the plunge and buy a DSLR camera. The camera will be used mainly for wildlife photography and my budget is a maximum of 75K Rupees. Like everyone, am also confused if I have to buy Nikon or Canon.

After some online research, I feel that the lense options in Canon are more and a little cheaper compared to Nikon lenses. I know I will have to invest a lot more on a good telephoto lense a couple of months down the line. Hence I am tilting towards buying a Canon 60D or 70D. I also know Nikon 5300 & 7100 are also within my budget.

I will be visiting the Canon store & Nikon store this weekend to try these cameras myself. I need your inputs in deciding which one to buy. Please give your opinions on the camera keeping in mind the telephoto lense that I have to buy.

First of all you have to figure out what sort of wild life you will shoot.

If it distant animals or birds, then you need a telephoto lens of at least 300mm.

If the distance is variable and the animals relatively big, then a zoom will be better.

Now how much light will there be? If it is mainly dawn/dusk type of situations then you need a faster lens.

Both Canon and Nikon have fantastic telephoto lenses, but both are extremely expensive, especially faster ones run into multiple of lacs, and the cheaper zooms (relatively) are pretty bad at the long end.

I find that the Nikon D3300 at less than 30K with kit lens is the best option, as it has 24MP sensor with no low pass filter (sharper images) and is extremely light. The price will enable you to get a decent telephoto - 300mm F4, one of the best value for money telephotos. The lens is much better at 300mm than all the zooms, including the 200-400 f4 which costs five to six times more.

I regularly take photographs of birds with my 16-85 at 85mm. After cropping the image to 800x800 pixels, I get excellent results.





Once you have spent a few months shooting wild life with the D3300, you will have an idea of what more you want from the body, and what features will help your work flow. That is the time to acquire a higher model body, which will give you more controls.

[sdp1975]

Originally Posted by Torque123

The camera will be used mainly for wildlife photography and my budget is a maximum of 75K Rupees.

If you want to save some bucks, purchasing used bodies and lenses are a good option.

I see used canon 300mm f4 and the 400mm f5.6 on jjmehta and the FB group "Bangalore camera buy/sell" on a frequent basis for around 65K . Exact prices will depend on age and condition - higher for something in warranty - but new lenses anyways would cost a lot more.

Similarly, used bodies are also available at good prices - camera bodies usually depreciate faster than lenses.

[Torque123]

Originally Posted by sdp1975

If you want to save some bucks, purchasing used bodies and lenses are a good option.

I see used canon 300mm f4 and the 400mm f5.6 on jjmehta and the FB group "Bangalore camera buy/sell" on a frequent basis for around 65K . Exact prices will depend on age and condition - higher for something in warranty - but new lenses anyways would cost a lot more.

Similarly, used bodies are also available at good prices - camera bodies usually depreciate faster than lenses.

Thank you for suggesting the used bodies and lenses option. I will check and see if there is anything interesting.

Originally Posted by Aroy

First of all you have to figure out what sort of wild life you will shoot. If it distant animals or birds, then you need a telephoto lens of at least 300mm. If the distance is variable and the animals relatively big, then a zoom will be better.

I find that the Nikon D3300 at less than 30K with kit lens is the best option, as it has 24MP sensor with no low pass filter (sharper images) and is extremely light. The price will enable you to get a decent telephoto - 300mm F4, one of the best value for money telephotos. The lens is much better at 300mm than all the zooms, including the 200-400 f4 which costs five to six times more.

Aroy - Thank you for your suggestion. I will try the Nikon 3300 as well when I visit the Nikon store this weekend. I am not that much into birding. But yes, I am looking at buying a minimum 300mm telephoto lense. It will be used mainly to shoot mammals. I think the Nikon 300mm f4 lense that you suggested is non VR. I will be buying a lense with VR/IS.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Torque123

Thank you for suggesting the used bodies and lenses option. I will check and see if there is anything interesting.



Aroy - Thank you for your suggestion. I will try the Nikon 3300 as well when I visit the Nikon store this weekend. I am not that much into birding. But yes, I am looking at buying a minimum 300mm telephoto lense. It will be used mainly to shoot mammals. I think the Nikon 300mm f4 lense that you suggested is non VR. I will be buying a lense with VR/IS.

The older 300mm F4 is non VR, but with good technique you will not feel the absence of VR. The reasons are many, but here are a few
. VR is to be switched off when on a tripod
. The lens is excellent at F4, unlike most zooms, so even if you use it at f5.6, with ISO of 400 or 800 you will be above 1/500 speed. You any way need higher speed for moving animals.
. At between 75 and 78K street price it is a bargain, the nearest VR option is the Canon at 98K.

[nilanjanray]

D5 rumour: http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/05/fi...5-rumors.aspx/ [list][*]New 20MP FX sensor[*]173 autofocus points (!!!!)[*]Same processor as the D4s (I would think the processor needs to be faster to handle so many more AF points)[*]Body design similar to the D4s[*]Currently scheduled to be announced in the second half of 2015
Now what the hell is Nikon thinking w.r.t. the D400 or D500 - the competitor to 7D Mk 2!


Edit: And official specs for the Canon 5DS R. 50 MPs. Imagine the crop potential. Interesting times.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum...eras/eos_5ds_r
[/left]

[Sudipto-S-Team]

Originally Posted by Torque123

After some online research, I feel that the lense options in Canon are more and a little cheaper compared to Nikon lenses. I know I will have to invest a lot more on a good telephoto lense a couple of months down the line. Hence I am tilting towards buying a Canon 60D or 70D. I also know Nikon 5300 & 7100 are also within my budget.

Which brand you want to go in for is ultimately your decision and I think at the entry level it doesn't make a difference - but the general rule of thumb, particularly for bird photography, is invest more in a good lens rather than a high end camera. Your investment in the camera will depreciate fast. They keep changing the camera model every now and then but the lens model remains constant for a very long time (relatively speaking). Therefore the investment in the lens holds much better in the long run.

In your place I would buy a 400 mm F 5.6 and a cheap 550D. Perhaps both from the used market. If you are hell bent on IS - go for the 300 mm prime.

My personal set up moved like this over the years -

• New 450D with used 100-400
• 450D with new 400 f5.6
• new 7D with 400 f5.6 (result of this combo is attached below)

To answer your 60D or 70D question - 70D any day.






Grey-headed Fish Eagle; Kaziranga, Assam

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Torque123

I am not that much into birding. But yes, I am looking at buying a minimum 300mm telephoto lense. It will be used mainly to shoot mammals. I will be buying a lense with VR/IS.

Originally Posted by Sudipto-S-Team

but the general rule of thumb, particularly for bird photography, is invest more in a good lens rather than a high end camera.

In your place I would buy a 400 mm F 5.6 and a cheap 550D.
Grey-headed Fish Eagle; Kaziranga, Assam

Nice shot.

The OP mentioned that he is more interested in shooting mammals. While I agree with what you said about birds, for mammals, I would choose a telezoom anyday, if I had just one long lens. I like the flexibility given my shooting style.

To demonstrate: A few different types of shots with the same lens. Downloaded from my Kanha/Tadoba roadtrip thread.

Mammal closeup


Forestscape


Bird in flight

[Torque123]

Originally Posted by Sudipto-S-Team

Which brand you want to go in for is ultimately your decision and I think at the entry level it doesn't make a difference - but the general rule of thumb, particularly for bird photography, is invest more in a good lens rather than a high end camera. Your investment in the camera will depreciate fast. They keep changing the camera model every now and then but the lens model remains constant for a very long time (relatively speaking). Therefore the investment in the lens holds much better in the long run.

In your place I would buy a 400 mm F 5.6 and a cheap 550D. Perhaps both from the used market. If you are hell bent on IS - go for the 300 mm prime.

My personal set up moved like this over the years -

• New 450D with used 100-400
• 450D with new 400 f5.6
• new 7D with 400 f5.6 (result of this combo is attached below)

To answer your 60D or 70D question - 70D any day.

Thank you so much for your inputs Sir. Will surely try the lower end Camera models as well. I am not that keen on going for a used equipment. I was advised on similar lines (was advised Canon 600D instead of 550D with the 300mm Prime lense) by my pals too. I am keen on IS as the camera will be used mostly hand held.

However among Canon 1200D, 1100D & 600D, which one do you think is better? I dont think a brand new 550D is available anymore. I know the 60D is way better than the rest i mentioned above. The 600D retails for around Rs 32K & the 60D for around Rs 48k.

For the lense i have drilled down to the Sigma 150-500mm & Canon 300mm prime. The Sigma retails at around Rs 65K & would give me flexibility. The Canon retails at around Rs 98K & will be faster with better image quality. It would be really helpful if you can give your opinion/comparison between the 2 lenses i have mentioned. The Canon 100-400mm is out of my budget.

For now i am kind of inclined towards the 600D & the 60D. I am ready to go for the Canon 70D but after all the suggestions i have got, i am confused. I want to know if it really makes sense spending that extra amount for the 60D or 70D.

[Sudipto-S-Team]

I stand corrected on the fact that you want to shoot mainly mammals. Thanks to Nilanjanray. In that case, yes certainly a zoom is more appropriate. Because in certain situations you might find only the ear of the elephant is photographable with your 300 or 400 ;-)

There is a new Tamron 150-600 also which is getting rave reviews. Sigma 150-500 is also great value for money. Many of my birding friends have it.

Honestly, I don't have much idea about the Canon models you mentioned. Generally speaking more expensive is always better when it comes to camera :-)

Most newcomers have an apathy towards used gear, which is understandable. If you are novice you might even be taken for a ride by some shrewd dealers. So it is perfectly all right if you are not too comfortable. But these days lots of people are getting into photography on a whim and are quickly either selling their gear or are upgrading. If you are smart you can get a great deal. Get your hands set. Sell it off on zero depreciation. Then buy something new.

By the way, for mammals even a 70-200 can be very good. If sticking to Canon - go only for L lenses. It is addictive.

[Sudipto-S-Team]

What is the lens/body combo for these shots? They are great shots and good post processing too.

[ajay_satpute]

@Nilanjan: The Forestscape photo is just outstanding !

I clicked this one at Tarkarli using the in-built 'Miniature'(Tilt-shift) mode.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Sudipto-S-Team

What is the lens/body combo for these shots? They are great shots and good post processing too.

D7100 + 80-400mm AF-S

Originally Posted by ajay_satpute

@Nilanjan: The Forestscape photo is just outstanding !]

Thanks. I have never used the tilt shift option :-)

[ampere]

Finally Canon catches up on the sensor front. 50MP based 5DS and 5DSR. Lets see does make it a level playing field?

Originally Posted by navin

I happen to have both the 17-55 and 24-105 and despite what the reviews all say I find the 24-105 responds faster (focus) and has nicer colour. I use it on a D60 so only the center of the FF lens is used.

A friend of mine has the 17-55 and the colour render is very good. And I have the 25-105 for general travel related purpose. And I love it. I find myself using it more and more compared to 10-22 which gets restrictive a bit.