Starting over

[Hoodie Ninja]

I am having to start all over getting my camera equipment.  Our house was robbed last week and all of my gear was taken.  ALL of it.  How convenient of me to store it all in a easy-to-take backpack.  Grrrrrrr! 

I will get some money, but not all, for my camera equipment because they consider it "business property" and only cover up to $1000.  Double grrrrr!  Note to others...if you ever have your stuff stolen, NEVER tell them you make any money using it!

I also had some jewelry stolen, so I will be getting money from the insurance for that.  Of course, I will not buy more jewelry with the money and just add it to my camera fund.

I was already planning on buying the Canon 5D Mark II when I get my tax refund back, so now I will have to buy all the rest.  I know for stock, I don't need a battery grip, but I also do landscape photography and would like to do star trails so I need the battery grip for that...so I'll be getting one of those along with at least one extra battery and more when I can afford them.

After that, the 580EX II flash is on my list, since the camera doesn't come with a flash.  I have 3 soft boxes for my studio, so I think I'll be okay with lighting.

And lastly.....a lens.  I am thinking of the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM.  It will have wide angle and good zoom.  I hate to spend THAT much money on a lens.  I wish it had wider aperature and that it didn't have push/pull zoom.  Do you think it would be possible for them to someday make ONE perfect lens that fits every need?  Probably not, but one can click their heels and pray to the camera gods in the hopes that it could come true.

So, how does that sound?

[PeterChigmaroff]

Wow, sorry to here about that. I think the 5DII will take you a long ways however I'd get the kit lens,, 24-105. It's very good and the extra speed and
quality are better than the extra length.

[Rahul Pathak]

I'm really sorry about this. We got hit by burglars at the office last year and it totally sucks.

Thought this post might be of use:

http://www.arcurs.com/gear-i-regret-buying-and-things-i-really-love

Cheers,

Rahul

[Hoodie Ninja]

Yeah, getting robbed is never fun. 
Thanks for the link.  I like Yuri's site.  I've really been researching lenses, but you never know how you'll like them until you start using them. 

I'm really sorry about this. We got hit by burglars at the office last year and it totally sucks.

Thought this post might be of use:

http://www.arcurs.com/gear-i-regret-buying-and-things-i-really-love

Cheers,

Rahul

[Hoodie Ninja]

Wow, sorry to here about that. I think the 5DII will take you a long ways however I'd get the kit lens,, 24-105. It's very good and the extra speed and
quality are better than the extra length.

I really wrestled with trying to decide on a body.  My original camera was only a 400D, so the 5DII will be a big jump for me.  But I think it will do me for a good long time so I won't have to upgrade so soon.
I don't think the kit lens is really what I'm looking for.  I need wide and I also need zoom.  Previously I had the 17-40mm f/4L and the Sigma 70-300mm macro.  I wasn't happy with the quality of the Sigma, so I'd definitely want better than that. 

[gostwyck]

And lastly.....a lens.  I am thinking of the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM.  It will have wide angle and good zoom. 

So, how does that sound?

Awful! That lens is way too big & heavy for every day use __ in fact it's not much good for anything in my view.

I have 8 L glass lenses but use the 24-70 f2.8L for about 95% of all shots I take. Nothing comes close it as a 'general use' lens. If I had to have only one lens then that would be it.

[le_cyclope]

Sorry to hear that... 

I will get some money, but not all, for my camera equipment because they consider it "business property" and only cover up to $1000.  Double grrrrr!  Note to others...if you ever have your stuff stolen, NEVER tell them you make any money using it!

When I renewed my insurances last fall, I did mention to them that I had some revenue from my photos.  So yes, I had to insure my equipment... But the good thing is that it cost me 28$/year to insure all my equipment (5 000$).  So it might worth to ask!

That said, try to focus on all the new stuff you HAVE to buy 

Claude

[Lcjtripod]

The 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM lens is a bad choice! Hire a strong person to carry it for you! 

I personally love the 24-105 IS Lens as a carry everywhere lens.

Sorry for your loss as I had a house and a studio burn to the ground and lost everything both times. (five years apart)

-Larry

[null]

My original camera was only a 400D

  That one is expected by the summer, if not later. It's a mythical cam.

[Hoodie Ninja]

Most of my photography work is done on a tripod, so weight doesn't matter as much...besides, then I can count my photography work in with my weight training! lol!
All seriousness, though, I had a wide angle and a zoom/macro that were my main lenses.  Perhaps getting two separate lenses like I had before would be best. 
If only I had unlimited money to buy ALL the lenses! 

Awful! That lens is way too big & heavy for every day use __ in fact it's not much good for anything in my view.

I have 8 L glass lenses but use the 24-70 f2.8L for about 95% of all shots I take. Nothing comes close it as a 'general use' lens. If I had to have only one lens then that would be it.

[Hoodie Ninja]

They won't let me just up the amount for my camera equipment....I need separate "business" insurance, which is more because it includes liability.  $225/yr.
Trust me, I am definitely focusing on the buying process.....no sense on focusing on anything else! 

Sorry to hear that... 

When I renewed my insurances last fall, I did mention to them that I had some revenue from my photos.  So yes, I had to insure my equipment... But the good thing is that it cost me 28$/year to insure all my equipment (5 000$).  So it might worth to ask!

That said, try to focus on all the new stuff you HAVE to buy 

Claude

[Hoodie Ninja]

I normally hike with ALL my camera gear in a backpack, which is quite heavy so I am used to the weight.  A lot of times I have books and magazines stuffed in there, too! lol!
But perhaps it would be better for me to get something like I had before, which was a 17-40mm and a 70-300mm.  I also had the 50mm 1.4 and the 18-55 kit lens, but those weren't used as much.
Ooh, fire...my biggest fear.  You lose irreplaceable things that theives don't want...like things your kid made for you or deceased parent left or family pictures, etc.  That sucks. 

The 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM lens is a bad choice! Hire a strong person to carry it for you! 

I personally love the 24-105 IS Lens as a carry everywhere lens.

Sorry for your loss as I had a house and a studio burn to the ground and lost everything both times. (five years apart)

-Larry

[Hoodie Ninja]

Hmmm...push the ignore button or respond? lol!   Some models came with a unicorn-type horn on them to fight theives off with. 

My original camera was only a 400D

  That one is expected by the summer, if not later. It's a mythical cam.

[madelaide]

My original camera was only a 400D

  That one is expected by the summer, if not later. It's a mythical cam.

It's that the one I have? A.k.a. XTi?

Regards,
Adelaide

[Clivia]

Paul,
I have the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM. I use it on a tripod, and have had loads of pictures taken at the 300 end accepted for stock.
Previously I had the Sigma equivalent, and it was useless for stock.
Try to buy the 5d with the kit lens. It is a great walk round lens.

[zymmetricaldotcom]

I am having to start all over getting my camera equipment.  Our house was robbed last week and all of my gear was taken.  ALL of it.  How convenient of me to store it all in a easy-to-take backpack.  Grrrrrrr!

And lastly.....a lens.  I am thinking of the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM.  It will have wide angle and good zoom.  I hate to spend THAT much money on a lens.  I wish it had wider aperature and that it didn't have push/pull zoom.  Do you think it would be possible for them to someday make ONE perfect lens that fits every need?  Probably not, but one can click their heels and pray to the camera gods in the hopes that it could come true.

So, how does that sound?

Sounds like you forgot: a German Shepherd.

[Hoodie Ninja]

Canon Rebel XTi EOS 400D.  Too many names for the same camera!

My original camera was only a 400D

  That one is expected by the summer, if not later. It's a mythical cam.

It's that the one I have? A.k.a. XTi?

Regards,
Adelaide

[Hoodie Ninja]

I think what I am going to do is get the 17-40mm f/4L again (loved that lens) and perhaps the 70-200 f/4L IS with either a 1.4x or 2x extender.  And later I'll get my 50mm f/1.4 I had.  I need the wide angle for my waterfalls and landscapes and I need the telephoto for nature/animals.  The 50mm is a good portrait lens.  I can do all my stock with those lenses.  I had the Sigma 70-300mm macro, and I got pictures accepted, but they weren't as sharp as I wanted.
Paula

Paul,
I have the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM. I use it on a tripod, and have had loads of pictures taken at the 300 end accepted for stock.
Previously I had the Sigma equivalent, and it was useless for stock.
Try to buy the 5d with the kit lens. It is a great walk round lens.

[Hoodie Ninja]

I am having to start all over getting my camera equipment.  Our house was robbed last week and all of my gear was taken.  ALL of it.  How convenient of me to store it all in a easy-to-take backpack.  Grrrrrrr!

And lastly.....a lens.  I am thinking of the 28-300mm f/3.5-4.6L IS USM.  It will have wide angle and good zoom.  I hate to spend THAT much money on a lens.  I wish it had wider aperature and that it didn't have push/pull zoom.  Do you think it would be possible for them to someday make ONE perfect lens that fits every need?  Probably not, but one can click their heels and pray to the camera gods in the hopes that it could come true.

So, how does that sound?

Sounds like you forgot: a German Shepherd.

I have allergies.  Guess I'll have to get another Boa or Python....or maybe a mozambique spitting cobra would do the trick? 

[yingyang0]

I personally love the 24-105 IS Lens as a carry everywhere lens.

I agree. I'd go with either the 24-105 IS L & 100-400 IS L combo, or the 24-70 f/2.8 L & 70-200 f/2.8 L combo.

[lisafx]

Wow, sorry to here about that. I think the 5DII will take you a long ways however I'd get the kit lens,, 24-105. It's very good and the extra speed and
quality are better than the extra length.

So sorry about your ordeal!  That is really scary.  More than the loss of your stuff is the sense of being violated.  We've been there. 

On the lens - DEFINITELY get the  24-105 kit lens.  It is really an amazing lens, and the kit deal is quite a bargain.  It is suitable for pretty much any stock-related shoot you want to do.   I paid full price ($1100+) for my 24-105 a year ago before it came as part of a kit and it was worth every dime. 

If you need more reach down the line you can always pay for a longer lens with the money the 24-105 earns you in microstock

[null]

Hmmm...push the ignore button or respond? lol!   Some models came with a unicorn-type horn on them to fight theives off with. 

It's my fault sorry. I thought you meant the mythical Nikon D400. I'm a Canon illiterate ;-)

[Hoodie Ninja]

Wow, sorry to here about that. I think the 5DII will take you a long ways however I'd get the kit lens,, 24-105. It's very good and the extra speed and
quality are better than the extra length.

So sorry about your ordeal!  That is really scary.  More than the loss of your stuff is the sense of being violated.  We've been there. 

On the lens - DEFINITELY get the  24-105 kit lens.  It is really an amazing lens, and the kit deal is quite a bargain.  It is suitable for pretty much any stock-related shoot you want to do.   I paid full price ($1100+) for my 24-105 a year ago before it came as part of a kit and it was worth every dime. 

If you need more reach down the line you can always pay for a longer lens with the money the 24-105 earns you in microstock

Thanks.  Yeah, the whole robbery thing sucks.  And so does trying to deal with the insurance people and wondering when the #%*@ I'm going to get my $$.

I'm one of those people who will research and talk to people until I'm about ready to bleed out my ears and eyes before I make a major purchase.  I'm even weighing my options if I were to get a lesser body like the 40D or 5D.  If I bought the 40D, I'd have much more leftover for lenses.   But I want the 5D primarily for it's lack of noise at high ISO's and it's better dynamic range (for my landscape work).

Not that I believe things just because "Yuri" said it, but on his website, he says the 24-105 isn't very sharp.  http://www.arcurs.com/gear-i-regret-buying-and-things-i-really-love (#8)  Do you find that to be true in your experience with the lens?

[Hoodie Ninja]

Hmmm...push the ignore button or respond? lol!   Some models came with a unicorn-type horn on them to fight theives off with. 

It's my fault sorry. I thought you meant the mythical Nikon D400. I'm a Canon illiterate ;-)

It's okay....I just thought you were being your smart-alecky self. 

[yingyang0]

Not that I believe things just because "Yuri" said it, but on his website, he says the 24-105 isn't very sharp.  http://www.arcurs.com/gear-i-regret-buying-and-things-i-really-love (#8)  Do you find that to be true in your experience with the lens?

No. Here's the truth: Yuri is an absolute perfectionist. If you're like that you probably shouldn't own a zoom lens because prime lenses will almost always be sharper. That's said I own it and I love the 28-105L. It's a great all around lens that produces professional results as you would expect from an 'L' lens. If you're anal about absolute perfection then maybe the 28-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L combo would be better. I have owned all three, and though the 28-70 is somewhat sharper than the 28-105 wide open, it's not noticeable enough for me to care and the extra zoom on the 28-105 makes it my general use lens. I suppose if I was photographing a landscape shot of lions running across the plains in the early morning I'd want the extra f-stops, but I haven't encountered a situation where I regret switching to the 28-105. The only times I've needed/used a lens at f/2.8 has been with big glass photographing animals at dawn and dust.

I don't own the 100-400 L, but if I was buying new gear I'd probably go with the 28-105L and the 100-400L. It's a rare situation where I wish I had a lower f-stop, but for me it's relatively common to wish I had brought a lens with more reach (but big glass is so fing heavy to hike with).

[madelaide]

It's my fault sorry. I thought you meant the mythical Nikon D400. I'm a Canon illiterate ;-)

You Nikoners, humpf! Living in your own small world!

Regards,
Adelaide

[ljooc]

If you are open to getting a non-Canon, check out the new Tamron 18-250 Di-II f/3.5-6.5 IF Macro. I got it a few months back and like it (most as an all around lens) The reviews have been quite good even by pros. Nearly all my landscapes are taken with this lens (I don't use the macro function as I have the 100mm f/2.8 macro). I actually got a re-furbished version from an Amazon partner and it came with a one year manufacturer's warrantly still for only $339 with free 2 day UPS shipping when a new one costs $479 or more. I called the company to find out what conditions, and why re-furbished before I placed the order. Turned out it was a lens they had rented out for a job but upon its return they serviced and put it back in the box. It was as new.

On a normal day plenty of light, the lens is very fast, otherwise, I shoot on tripod most of the time even outdoor, I find it balances my Canon 10D rather well.

On my blog the landscapes were all taken with this lens.

sorry to hear about your mishap. This depressing economy is certainly leaving its mark in every corner. Thanks for sharing your insurance claims experience, now we know.

jc

[Hoodie Ninja]

Not that I believe things just because "Yuri" said it, but on his website, he says the 24-105 isn't very sharp.  http://www.arcurs.com/gear-i-regret-buying-and-things-i-really-love (#8)  Do you find that to be true in your experience with the lens?

No. Here's the truth: Yuri is an absolute perfectionist. If you're like that you probably shouldn't own a zoom lens because prime lenses will almost always be sharper. That's said I own it and I love the 28-105L. It's a great all around lens that produces professional results as you would expect from an 'L' lens. If you're anal about absolute perfection then maybe the 28-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L combo would be better. I have owned all three, and though the 28-70 is somewhat sharper than the 28-105 wide open, it's not noticeable enough for me to care and the extra zoom on the 28-105 makes it my general use lens. I suppose if I was photographing a landscape shot of lions running across the plains in the early morning I'd want the extra f-stops, but I haven't encountered a situation where I regret switching to the 28-105. The only times I've needed/used a lens at f/2.8 has been with big glass photographing animals at dawn and dust.

I don't own the 100-400 L, but if I was buying new gear I'd probably go with the 28-105L and the 100-400L. It's a rare situation where I wish I had a lower f-stop, but for me it's relatively common to wish I had brought a lens with more reach (but big glass is so fing heavy to hike with).

Actually, Yuri says not to buy the 50mm either, and it's a prime    I didn't have the L glass version, but I had the f/1.4 and although it was a great lens and I'd buy it again, it was still a bit soft on my 400D.
I'm not a total perfectionist because I can't afford to be, but I would like to buy the better lenses since I plan on doing this for a very long time. 
I do photograph a lot of nature/landscape/animals, but I don't necessarily need the extra f-stops because I'm usually using a tripod.  And for stock purposes, I almost always get rejected if I use too shallow of a DOF.
I'm still considering all of my options, but perhaps the 17-40, 28-70, and the 70-200 would be a good combo.  I won't be able to get all of them right away, but I don't like buying things to just get by until I can get the real thing because it's money down the drain.
I'll have to keep researching until I bleed out my eyes before I make any purchases... 

[Hoodie Ninja]

If you are open to getting a non-Canon, check out the new Tamron 18-250 Di-II f/3.5-6.5 IF Macro. I got it a few months back and like it (most as an all around lens) The reviews have been quite good even by pros. Nearly all my landscapes are taken with this lens (I don't use the macro function as I have the 100mm f/2.8 macro). I actually got a re-furbished version from an Amazon partner and it came with a one year manufacturer's warrantly still for only $339 with free 2 day UPS shipping when a new one costs $479 or more. I called the company to find out what conditions, and why re-furbished before I placed the order. Turned out it was a lens they had rented out for a job but upon its return they serviced and put it back in the box. It was as new.

On a normal day plenty of light, the lens is very fast, otherwise, I shoot on tripod most of the time even outdoor, I find it balances my Canon 10D rather well.

On my blog the landscapes were all taken with this lens.

sorry to hear about your mishap. This depressing economy is certainly leaving its mark in every corner. Thanks for sharing your insurance claims experience, now we know.

jc

I've already researched the Tamron lens and I read about complaints of lens creep.  But more importantly, it's not high quality glass.
I'm hoping by sharing my experience, more people will be aware of what they need to do if it ever happens to them.