Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
jaymevb

desiring some camera advice

Recommended Posts

We are looking to spend about $400 on a DSLR and are leaning towards an XT, XTi, or 20D. The XTi has a bigger screen and 2 more megapixels but does anyone have a good reason to choose one over the others?

secondly, would it be better to buy the body only and buy a better lens (but still cheap, the wife has me on a budget)or just stick with the 18-55 they come with? we're mostly interested in outdoor shots such as scenery, wildlife, flowers, fishing, water sports etc with some weddings and portraits mixed in. I really like the shallow depth of field look if that helps too. basically, is there a better lens than the 18-55 for less than $100 for our uses?

i know you have to pay to play, but this is what we have to work with for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can read this recent post: http://www.fishingminnesota.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1755411/New_to_photography#Post1755411

Also, re: the 18-55, it depends on which one it is. If it has IS, I can attest to the fact that it's a good lens. It also has macro ability for flowers. The earlier ones weren't so good. As far as wildlife is concerned, you better plan on saving a lot more ching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kit lens (18-55 non IS)that is usually packaged with an XT or XTI does not receive very favorable reviews. The newer lens (18-55 w/ IS) does have good reviews and I can add my own recommendation. It is currently the kit lens with a Canon XSI. I seldom even notice the Image Stabilization in my hobby use. This lens produces better, sharper pictures than the non-IS, older version.

The 18-55 IS lens on its own costs $120-140 from on-line sellers.

I don't think you'll notice the difference between 8 or 10 megapixels. If you can find an XT body and use the 18-55IS you'd have a very good combination and the cost should be close to the amount you stated. Good Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jay, CFRay makes sense to me. It's the kind of thing I'd recommend myself. The glass is by far the more important thing here unless you need a very fast camera for sports or the like.

You can pick up an XT and 18-55 IS for starters and then save for a telephoto zoom for down the road. A good quality zoom like the Canon 70-300 IS will run you more than the body and 18-55 combined, but IMO it's worth saving a bit of money for a better quality lens than spending $150 right away for one that's slow to operate and doesn't deliver really good image quality.

Just my $.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the advice, i wasn't sure if the image stabilization would make much of a difference on that small of a lens. i noticed that the fixed zoom lenses are pretty cheap even with low f's, how useful would a 50 f2.8 be?

is there a reason to choose a 20d over an XT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 20D and XT sensors and image quality are virtually identical, so the differences are the speed of operation and burst rate and added features the 20D offers over the XT. The XT also is quite small compared with the 20D. I used the XT as a backup body for a couple years and ended up buying the battery grip for it, which makes the body larger and easier for me to handle. If you don't need those things, save money and go with the XT.

A 50mm f1.8 (the so-called Nifty Fifty or Plastic Fantastic) is very inexpensive and tack sharp. The 18-55 zoom is nice because you don't have to move yourself forward or back as often as if you have a fixed 50mm. The weakest point of the old 18-55 kit lens comes out in high contrast and backlit situations, which can look pretty harsh with that lens. It also wasn't the sharpest lens around. The 18-55 IS version is better.

IS at those focal lengths isn't very important to me. Some really like it. I've fooled around with IS wide angles but ended up not caring much one way or another. My current wide is the Canon 17-40 f4L, which is not stabilized, and I have great luck with it. But someone else may tell you they think wide angle IS is totally the cat's meow. It's really just an individual thing. The IS runs off battery power, so a person really needs a second battery just to be sure they don't run out at a crucial moment. That's true of any camera body, but is just a bit more important with IS adding to battery drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reasons the 18-55 IS lens gets much better reviews than the kit 18-55, is not because of the IS. When I bought this lens, IS wasn't a factor in my decision. It's just an all around higher quality lens with edge to edge sharpness and no vignetting or CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



  • Posts

    • I am ready except it looks like it’s going to be warm and buggy.
    • My buddy does the same always revs the four wheeler up before he leaves. On his sits he would have someone else drive him in bait while he gets in the stand they rev the four wheeler and take off. Dinner bell come and get it
    • No clue yet somewhere with a cheap motel and some public land
    • Who's ready for the season? Cant wait!
    • After a while we only started hunting evening because we never had any come in the AM. We also started making a bit of noise when baiting (rattling cans) when we had two Bears working. They started coming in right after we baited so the bait, after noon and stay behind hunter seemed to work pretty well.
    • sorta helps, I'll find it...  thanks... me and google just got it.....     have to go see!!
    • Hall of Fame? You must be joking...... Every player starts out like that. No one starts out with a 23 m dollar contract. He still averaged about 15 million per year for his career, that average probably goes up if he plays past 2018. I think he will be ok.
    • Joe was also the 74th highest paid player the year he won the MVP. You may say he is over paid now but he was underpaid 1st half of his career. @Bobby Bass   I don't think Joe is a future Hall of Famer, not even close to borderline but a great player none the less. I think if the Twins would have made a deeper playoff runs back when Morneau was healthy and Santana was Cy-young would have helped. But Joes playoff numbers are terrible. I could maybe see HOF if he would have stayed at catcher his entire career though..... But he will more than likely end up winning a gold glove at 2 positions, and with one being catcher that is pretty elite.
    • Big Dave most if not all pro contracts are paying you for what you have already done with the hope that you will continue to produce. Looking at todays contract Joe's is not to out of line for a future Hall of Famer
    • Great! He is finally earning a contract close to what he is being paid. 
  • Our Sponsors