A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Help Choosing Canon 20D Setup (Body, lenses, flash, etc)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 9th 04, 09:10 PM
A
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Help Choosing Canon 20D Setup (Body, lenses, flash, etc)

Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.



  #2  
Old November 9th 04, 09:21 PM
Charles Schuler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"A" wrote in message
...
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.


You are definitely ready to go digital!

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.


I have a 300D and it's a great camera. The 20D is a lot better. The
Minolta might be just fine, too.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?


If you can afford the 17-85, go for it.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?


I have the IS version and get shots without a tripod that would be
impossible (for me) to get otherwise.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?


The 420EX should be fine unless you need some of the exotic features and the
higher output of the 550EX. Also, you might want to look at the Sigma 500
DG super.

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?


Personally, I'd never buy a Microdrive. 1GB CF cards give a fair bang for
the buck.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.


Only you can decide.


  #3  
Old November 9th 04, 09:22 PM
Aerticus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi A

You only live once

What's a couple of bucks on a system like that?

Personally I'd run with the Canon and apply a serious bit of chinese wrist
burn to your retail outlet

Ask to see the manager - lay down the spec then negotiate

If you get fed up with it in a few months time - just ship it over to me :-)

Aerticus

ps - you will not thank me for this now b-u-t in the long run you'd be
better of with Photoshop CS (enrol at a night school - anything at all that
will allow you to qualify for the academic version of the full CS suite from
Adobe. Your free time for the next few years has now evaporated)

A
"A" wrote in message
...
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.





  #4  
Old November 9th 04, 09:31 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A wrote:
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed.


I am not sure you have really great reasons to changing, but that is
your choice.

Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.


I agree. I now own a 20D



So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.


I chose the 20D in part due to the specs, but also due to the fact that
much of my Canon equipment would carry over. I did not really research the
Nikon line, although I have nothing bad to say about them.


20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?


The 17-55 is a very versatile lens. Remember than that 55mm is equal to
about 88mm. For me that works very well. Of course I already had the
24-85mm lens so I have a good coverage for other situations that the 17-55
might not cover. It all depends on your personal usage. That 24-85 does
well for most of my sports work. The 17-55 is a good general use lens. BTW
the 17-55 is not quite as sharp as the 24-85, but is well wroth the cost.
Maybe you will want to get it to start with, based on the cost alone.


20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?


I have not had any problems with my 75-300 USM, but if I did not own
it, I would likely go for the IS lens.


20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?


Not from me. I have not used flash much in recent years, so I have
limited my flash to the built in flash so far. I will be reading replies to
this question however.


Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?


I chose two 1 GB cards. About the same cost and with two cards if one
goes bad, you are not dead. I some situations, it means you can continue to
shoot while your assistant downloads the other card.


Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.


--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #5  
Old November 9th 04, 10:24 PM
Eric Miller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


" Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices
are between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF
card. The Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this
respect. Any recommendations?


You want the fastest card available; right now that's the Sandisk Ultra II
cards. I buy the 1GB models - same price per GB as the 2GB models, but

more
protection against "accidents" (i.e. not keeping all your eggs in one
basket, should something bad happen to a card).


You do not necessarily want the fastest card available. But you should give
the above advice serious consideration. I use a 4gb Hitachi Microdrive in my
10D when on vacation. However, when I am shooting local sporting events like
triathlons, I need speed. If you are shooting landscapes, you don't really
need a superfast write speed. If you are shooting events where you will
actually fill your buffer, then get a fast card [or if you will be shooting
at high elevations where you can't use a Type II card]. I haven't noticed
much difference in READ speeds of the various cards that I use. The write
speed of the microdrive is much slower than than the Type I cards. I assume
the larger file sizes of the 20D will take a little longer to write on any
give card than the 10D.

Another consideration is that microdrives and IS use battery power. I cannot
say how much effect this has, but when I use a microdrive in conjunction
with an IS lens, it seems that the batteries do not last very long. If you
choose the microdrive and the IS lens, you might want to also consider the
battery grip and some extra batteries.

Eric Miller


  #6  
Old November 9th 04, 10:32 PM
Robert Barr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup


until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money.


You pointed out your best alternative.

Right now, there is no better value in digital than a slightly used
version of yesterday's news. The 10D is going for less than $950, and I
recently paid $612 for a very nice D60.

Let someone else take the brunt of the initial cost, and make yourself
the beneficiary of their dire need for the latest & greatest.

For folks who can afford the newest, great. For the rest of us, keep in
mind that just a few years ago, the D30 was THE hot item. You can have
one today for a fraction of the cost.
  #7  
Old November 9th 04, 11:47 PM
gerry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

With all respects, if you are bothered having film half used in your camera,
then spending four figures on new equipment you may not use that much may be
a mistake at the moment. Prices are coming down all the time. I'd stay put
until you couldn't afford NOT to buy one.

By the way, the Nikon D70 has a 1/500th sync speed against Canons 1/250th.

  #8  
Old November 10th 04, 12:22 AM
ED UNDERWOOD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"A" wrote in message
...
Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.


Go Digital. Just my opinion but film and processing cost help make the
digital
solution much more affordable.

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.


I happen to agree with you choice... Canon. I shoot with a 10D and feel it
is
a great system so of course I'm biased.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?


I have a 28-300 Sigma for all around vacation shooting and goofing around.
Not
an EX but its ok. For pro work (sports) I shoot with a 50-500 EX Sigma. I
would love
to own the Canon glass but.... just can not afford it right now.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?


Again Sigma EX lens are less expensive and good image quality. 70-200 f2.8,
100-300 f4, 80-400 f4.5-5.6, 50-500 f4.5-5.6 all in $800-1000 range.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?


Being a frugal type of guy I have a Sigma 550 DG Super. Full e-ttl.

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?


I use 2 1gig CF cards, I'm told the microdrive uses more battery. Each card
hold
about 300 pics at the highest jpg setting about 4 megs per pic.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.


You might want to consider the 10D... prices are comming down now that the
20D is out.
Since you can preview all your pictures before paying for prints and you
have no film cost
and no processing cost... you might save more than you think.

Good luck in your upgrade.

Ed


  #9  
Old November 10th 04, 01:16 AM
Michael Meissner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"A" writes:

Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.


Note, there is the flip side about needing to change a memory card at crucial
points. One of the prosumer cameras (Panasonic FZ20) I give negative marks to
because the memory card slot is on the bottom, and I would have to disassemble
the camera from the flash bracket to change memory (and this summer, I was
photographing an event and did have to change memory cards fast).

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?


The chepaer 75-300IS has a reputation for being soft at 300mm.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?


The one concern is the microdrive is a miniature disk drive, and is somewhat
more fragile than the fast CF card. Depending on your needs, you might either
consider multiple cards and/or a portable storage device (battery operated disk
drive that has media slots and can copy media cards in the field, though most
devices are limited in terms of copying speed and battery power).

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org
  #10  
Old November 10th 04, 07:50 AM
Ken Tough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

gerry wrote:

With all respects, if you are bothered having film half used in your camera,
then spending four figures on new equipment you may not use that much may be
a mistake at the moment. Prices are coming down all the time. I'd stay put
until you couldn't afford NOT to buy one.

By the way, the Nikon D70 has a 1/500th sync speed against Canons 1/250th.


But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and
have used the digital all the time. (It's easy to 'process' a
'half used' memory card..) I really ought to shoot off that film,
but just automatically pick up the digital, especially since I'd
have to get down to a shop to drop it off and pick it up etc.

I'm not sure I agree on the OP's comment that accessories are more
expensive for Nikon than Canon. The lenses are likely to be more
than the body for either camera, and the Canon lenses seem to cost
more across the board. If she makes her choice and buys good Canon
or Nikon gear, then she could upgrade the body later and still use
the lenses. If he avoids the EF-S/DX, he could even use them on a
film 35mm. The only money she'll be wasting would be the difference
between the body now and the body later. So maybe a cheaper D70
[waiting for the next generation] or a 10D could be an idea.

--
Ken Tough
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON The Great Pretender) Steven M. Scharf 35mm Photo Equipment 92 September 3rd 04 01:01 PM
Canon 20D and new lenses - official Tony Spadaro Digital Photography 23 August 21st 04 02:25 AM
Master Mason Handbook Doug Robbins 35mm Photo Equipment 0 July 15th 04 03:33 PM
Ultimate Stocked Canon Camera Bag (Lens Selection) - LIMIT 6-7 lenses please! Nick J 35mm Photo Equipment 9 June 26th 04 01:12 PM
Flash for EOS D-Reb. Gisle Hannemyr Digital Photography 3 June 25th 04 04:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.