I am impressed with my current camera, but there are just a few things bugging me.

The photos generally seem a bit noisy as soon as light conditions aren't perfect, and once you go past ISO100 you need Neat Image (the DP review says ISO200 but I disagree).

Taking motion shots with it is also not the best, I prefer still photography but it would be nice to have something better in this regard.

Lastly the magazine I sold my photos too recently said ideally I should submit higher-res photos (mine is 5MP) so a 6.1 or 8MP camera would obviously help in this regard.

I've found a 350D package with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II standard zoom lens and an EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 telephoto zoom lens for around $AU 1500 (~1100USD) which appeals to me......but as you point out I'm not sure I really need it. :?

I agree with everyone that both are great cameras. But also I recommend looking into the "System". Down the line when you want to upgrade, where would you go? E.g. 30D or D200? Which system has the better lens to fit your needs? E.g. 18-200mm VR ;) ? By the way the Kit lens for the D70 (AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED) is an awesome lens.

Remember the 1.5x multiplier on a Nikon and 1.6x on a Canon. That will give you the effective equivalent range of a 35mm camera.

So the 18-55mm would be really 27-82mm on a 35mm for a Nikon. And 18-55mm would be 27-88mm on a 35mm for a Canon.


Rumors are floating around that the D70s will be replaced by Photokina in Sept.

the camera is the strong point, both of those lenses are total crap IMO...

buy the body only, and spend a little extra ona wide angle, and at least a 70-300 IS if you go for the canon.

you would regret from day 10 with the stock 3x zoom lens.... sure, there are tricks to make it work better, but it isn't very sharp.

So would the 350D body and a 70-300 IS lense be enough for what I do (cars)?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons3is/

What about that as a 'smaller' step up if you're not sure about the shelling out just yet :?

Yeah I had a look at it, but I don't think it really solves any of the problems with the S2 I have......except a 1MP increase which isn't worth the price IMO.

Only a 70-300 will give you no wide-angle at all. The Sigma 17-70 is a good performer in comparison to the kitlens and is quite affordable. Sure, an EF-S 10-22 or a 17-40 L is excellent (I own both of em), but they cost a lot more.

Good lensreviews are done by Klaus: http://www.photozone.de

Yup exactly. Now if you will ONLY be at the track it might work out. But if you are walking around and see a car in the parking lot, you'll have to run your ass all the way over to the other side of the parking lot to grab a picture of it.

Otherwise you'll only be shooting parts of the car.

I am sorry, but yes, on paper the specs are impressive, but SLR quality will definitely improve his pics a lot! Not only having a bit more than F3.5 could always help, but also the picture quality in a general way will be MUCH better, no more noise or almost and his camera IMO has too much noise quite often... faster operation times and blah blah. IMO there are just a few bridges that could really make you doubt for a while, but if you have the money and want to go around with a bigger camera, definitely an SLR is always worth it

It is for me, but in this case, keep also the stock lense just in case.. 70mm still need some meters between you and the car and sometimes you don't have it :bah:
Anyway every time I can, I use the 70-300, not only because of the superior quality, but because (like you I think), I prefer cars shoot from far away, and it's much easier to get a blurry background of course, which is always nice ;)

Believe me: I had the Pro 1 which was a pretty damn good camera and was wondering for quite a while if a SLR was a wise choice.. I closed my eyes, bought it and slapped me right away for beeing so silly not having bought it sooner :!: you won't regret it and 350D + 70-300IS isn't that expensive afterall ;) and will keep your boat floating for a while ;)

I think my mind was just made up about 15mins ago......I saw a 550 Maranello with an SL55 parked behind it. Since its already 5:30pm light was pretty low so I had to set the ISO to 200 to get a reasonable shutter speed (1/20 with IS is acceptable) but the pics are noisy as hell. :(

As has been mentioned with an SLR I can use higer ISO settings and still get acceptable results.....

ISO 400 is still pretty damn fine without using progs like neat image to reduce noise. ISO 800 once noise-reduced, still good ;)

that said, with the 70-300 IS, at 70mm you can shoot slower than 1/60 if you are as shaky as me :P and you'll need to be quite far away to get both cars :P

Again, you won't regret it :!:

What are peoples thoughts on this kit?

http://www.camerastore.com.au/Nikon+D50+Twin+Lens+Kit+(Black)+18-55+%26+70-300-details.htm

I assume that 70-300mm lense is a cheap one if included in a kit like this....

I'm looking at about $2K for the 350D with 70-300 IS, so this would be a cheaper alternative - but what is the tradeoff?

Indeed, but then you'll still have to buy the batt grip, some fast CF cards (if you didn't already had CF cards which was my case :/), a bigger and convenient backpack and maybe a 58mm polarizer (dunno the diameter of the one on the S2IS) ...
The extras also cost a lot, you have to keep this in mind, unfortunately.

dingo, really, DO NOT buy a non-IS 300mm lense! I did and it was such a dumb mistake!

As Darkel said, the battery grip is mandatory, ence a second battery :)

But 2000 is pretty much what you'll end up spending probably.. not that much more

I know....thats what I'm "scared" of. :P I already have the 58mm polarizer for the S2 so at least I can re-use that. :D

Alrighty then.....back to the 350D then. I'm going to the shop tomorrow morning and knowing myself I won't be able to resist once looking at something on the shelf.