What type of camera do you use?
 

I'm looking to buy a new camera for urban photography and I was hoping to find out what most of you like to use. So, what camera do you use and are you happy with it?

Canon 5D
Canon Digital Rebel Xti

Both are great. In terms of sheer value and bang for the buck, the Xti can't be beat. :)

--don

I use Olympus C-7070WZ and I am very happy with it. However, you should get a Canon or Nikon since that is what everyone uses.

Nikon D50. I think the D80 would be the closest match now.

Rebel XT

kinda wish I had at least the XTi though as dust on the sensor is a pain.

Nikon D40 DSLR

The D40 is great bang for the buck for somebody wanting to get into DSLR photography without plopping down a thousand dollars. Now you can find it with the kit lens for under $450. It's been great to learn with. I'm looking at something like a Nikon D90 for my next camera in a year or two.

With urban photography you're going to be doing a lot of walking, and possibly riding transit and (in my case) bicycling. If you get a DSLR you need a good camera bag. I love my Lowepro Slingshot 100 AW bag. It's the smallest in the line, but holds my D40 with attached lens plus 2 extra lens with room for cell phone and other stuff. Very rugged and somewhat discrete bag and allows you to swing it around and be ready to shoot in seconds.

Canon 30d with a bunch of lenses:
Canon 75-300 (for some zoom. I use it very rarely. Usually when I'm hiking or something. It's kind of a POS actually. El Cheapo Zoom.)
Canon EFS 18-55 (comes with 30d usually)
Sigma EX-DG fisheye (for pano's and virtual tours)
And my favorite, and the one I would recommend for Urban Photography if you pick up a Canon, the EFS 10-22 Ultrasonic. It's a beaut.
I have a Canon Speedlight 430EX whatever for a flash.

I also shot a few other camera's bit none are relevant to your post. The 40d would fit your needs perfectly. Maybe a bit over the top actually, but being the 30d's replacement it picks up on a long lineage of great pieces from Canon. You'd be happy for years. Even a used 30d would be fabulous.
Spend on lenses! It's really worth it.

I have a Canon 20D. I've had it for 3 years as of November 4th. Prior to then, it belonged to Don B, who (when I lived in Phoenix) loaned it to me for a couple major shoots. :D I bought it after he upgraded to the 5D (it's hard to believe the 5D is that old of a camera).

Now that the new 50D has come out, and reviews show it offers only a marginal increase in performance over the 40D, I may pick up a 40D. They're down to around $900 new from reputable dealers.

My lenses are:

17-40mm f/4 L
50mm f/1.4
70-200mm f/4 L

I also have an old Tamron 28-200mm "superzoom" from my old film camera. I don't use it often, but it has been useful a couple times when I needed a range of focal lengths, and could only bring one lens (such as hiking). It's plenty sharp up to around 120mm.

I have the Canon 30d, which is a great camera with the exception of its tenency to acquire dust on the sensor. The 40d has an autocleaner and I've been thinking of upgrading (particularly now that the 50d is out).

I will say that the metal body Canons are quite stout. I've accidentally dropped mine 2X on concrete it's luckily come through both. The metal body does kind of suck in cold weather. It froze my fingers THROUGH my gloves last February in Chicago.

Lenses:
Canon 50mm f1.2
Canon IS 17-85mm f4-5.6
Canon IS 70-300mm f4-f5.6

I'm still pondering picking up an f2.8 lens of some sort, but I didn't really care for the photos I got from a rented Canon 24-70mm f2.8

Whoa!

How do you like it?

Doh! I'm retarded. f1.4! I don't use it that often.

Ah, ok. The f/1.2 is quite an expensive lens!

I really like my f/1.4. I had the 1.8 before, and while it's great for the price, the 1.4 is better (not just for being 2/3 stops faster, but for generally better image quality at all apertures, including even better sharpness at f/8 etc.)

Whatever you decide Double L, don't waste your money on the cheapo kit lens. Spend more on a better piece of glass. At least with Nikon I'd suggest that. I regret footing $100 on that lousy one I've got. Don't get me wrong, it takes decent photos, but the build quality on it is atrociously cheap. Maybe some day I'll get a replacement for it. For now I tend to use, a Nikon 50mm F1/4 and a Tokina 12-24mm F/4.0.

Hi all, right now I have a Minolta Z6 which has a 12x optical zoom (420mm equivalent) but I've decided on upgrading to the XSi:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...on_eos450d.asp

After everything I've researched, I'm planning to buy the body and lenses separately. Researching cameras was a little tedious, but researching the lenses - well, I'm a little overwhelmed. I know that getting a comparable lens for the XSi is cost-prohibitive (not to mention those suckers are too big and bulky), but maybe something 250-300mm is do-able? I'm also hoping to find a decent "everyday" wide-angle lens so any recommendations? The photos I've posted are basically the main use I'll have - buildings, cityscapes, occasional "people" shots. Let me know what you think - and if you can post examples, that'd be awesome.

Thanks! :)

What's your budget for the two lenses?

I'm trying to keep it about $400-$500ish - is that reasonable?

^ No. It would be best to buy two L-series lenses if you could afford it.

If you have to buy just one and you need the most range, get a Canon EF-L 24-105 mm lens (more expensive L-series lens @ $1,200 or so). It will give you the most versatility overall.

The Canon EF 10-22 mm (non-L-series @ $600 or so) wide angle lens is a superb wide-angle lens (some say it has L-series build and quality for a third of the price), although you will be sorely lacking on the telephoto end of the scale. I suppose you could pick up a tampon (Tamron) or Sigma 200 mm or thereabouts telephoto lens for about $300 or so, but it is clearly not going to be as good.

I used to own the Canon EF 75-300 mm telephoto lens (not an L either, @ about $500). Very soft on the upper end of the range - not a great lens at all. The Canon EF-L 100-400 mm telephoto lens is better, but it is also a lot more money (roughly $1,200 now).

--don

It's on the tight side, but still doable.

The Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens is only slightly out of your budget at $550.00. On your 1.6 crop factor camera, it will give a 29-320mm equivalent focal range. It's wide enough for cityscapes, architecture, etc., and also long enough for telephoto shots. And having image stabilization is always beneficial.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-18-200mm.../dp/B001ET6QFY

Also, here's an extensive list of various Canon and third party lenses that may helpful:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=141406

I use an Olympus C-7000. It's a 7.1 megapixel point and shoot that has manual controls too (as many a I've ever seen on that type of camera, which is why I bought it.)

It's getting kinda dated though, and it pretty beat up too. My biggest issues with it are the slow autofocus and it's trouble with low light shooting...but then again it is a point and shoot. I've learned to work around most of it's shortcomings at least. I'll be getting a DSLR sometime soon though.

Can you post up some links with some shots that you've taken with that lens? I've been thinking about picking that one up next for my 40D.

I must say that the lack of IS has me slightly concerned since I shoot free hand.