I\'m planning to buy a dslr next weekend. It will be my first one (I only had P&S so far), and I\'ve spent the last few months deciding on what I want.
First of all, my budget is around 1200 euros.
Until just now I\'ve been planning out this setup:
Around ~230 euros for the SD card, tripod, extra battery and bag. Nicely in budget.
Since I\'m not ultra-excited about the 18-55 IS, from what I\'ve seen and read, I was wondering what other options there are.
I came across this combo:
Canon 40D body: 685
Tamron 17-50: 328
= 1013
The extras would be the same here (Lexar 8GB 133x CF instead of SD, same price), so just 50 euros over budget, I can manage that.
Now I\'m wondering, would the 40D + tamron combo be that much better to justify not getting the 100mm macro... I would be buying a longer focal macro lens eventually, and the 100mm just really appeals to me.
What drives me to this doubt is that I shot with my friends 30D a lot, as well as some shooting with a colleagues 400D, and I really like the xxD controls more. The 400D also feels a lot flimsier than the 30D. I assume the 40D and 450D have the same differences.
Of course, the 450D also has some advantages over the 40D.
I know it\'s comparing apples and oranges, but I would like some feedback on this decision :P
Thanks in advance!
Oct 09, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Previous versions of TweakMDS's message #6256683 « 450D vs 40D: last minute decisions »
