I'm seriously going to pony up the cash and get myself the lens of my dreams: the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/canon/PRD_104368_3128crx.aspx#review0

But I'm wondering if my Rebel will do it justice, or if I should be thinking about upgrading to a pro body as well. We've got some extra cash coming with our tax return, so it'll be possible if that's what I really want.

What's your opinion? I've always heard that the glass is more important than the body. But a pro body will have some advantages, right? Or is my Rebel good enough? (It's the old Rebel, not the XT.)

You have the digital rebel right? For the film one I would say there wouldn't be much difference, but with the digital one, I've heard that it gets really noisy at iso 400. That might have some effect on how much difference the lens makes.

Well, the old Rebel is the exact same thing as the 10D, same sensor, same processor etc, only difference is the body and a firmware hack so the lens will be OK as it works very well on the 10D.

Now what you need to consider though are things like AF speed, low light shooting etc which be helped by going with a newer body. The ole DRebel is unbelievably slow AF wise even with the 70-200, especially when you are accustomed to the 1D like I am. Since I own both bodies I tested it when I got the 1D MKII N and the MKII N is a lot faster than the old 1D which is a lot faster than the DRebel....depends though on what you want and need.

Glad to hear your getting the new lens too, you'll love it!
JS

I'm seriously going to pony up the cash and get myself the lens of my dreams: the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/canon/PRD_104368_3128crx.aspx#review0

But I'm wondering if my Rebel will do it justice, or if I should be thinking about upgrading to a pro body as well. We've got some extra cash coming with our tax return, so it'll be possible if that's what I really want.

What's your opinion? I've always heard that the glass is more important than the body. But a pro body will have some advantages, right? Or is my Rebel good enough? (It's the old Rebel, not the XT.)
Does it have to be a pro body? The 20D has some very pro features for a consumer level camera and is a lot less money for the capability versus the 1D Mk II. Just a thought. I've got the 1D Mk II, and yes, I wouldn't trade it for a lesser camera now that I have it, but the 20D stacks up very nicely against it for a lot less beans.

I'm kinda of in the same boat as you Kelly. I plan on adding an "L" lens to my kit sometime this year, but I don't think I'm even going to consider a new body at this time. For me, the DRebel does pretty OK. It does have it's limitations that I find VERY anoying at times. Is there something that your DRebel doesn't do for you that a new body would?

I notices a huge dif. in focusing speed when I got my first USM lens. It was light years ahead of the kit lenses I had been use to and I'm sure you will notice a huge dif. with the 70-200mm. If your use to kit lenses, you will notice a major improvement with the 70-200mm.

At times I would love to get a new body, but the way digital cameras are advancing, I know that as soon as I upgraded, something better will hit the market and I will want that. So for me, I'm going to work on getting some good glass, then once I get that taken care of, I will figure out what body will meet my needs for years to come.

The pictures from your Rebel are indistinguishable from my 10D. The lens will just finally make the sensor shine.

At times I would love to get a new body, but the way digital cameras are advancing, I know that as soon as I upgraded, something better will hit the market and I will want that.

I have that same problem with computers, but I've found that if I need a new computer and get the best I can afford at the time, it lasts me several years, despite whatever upgrades come along. By the time I need another new computer, they've upgraded enough to make the purchase very exciting.

Well, the old Rebel is the exact same thing as the 10D, same sensor, same processor etc, only difference is the body and a firmware hack so the lens will be OK as it works very well on the 10D.


Glad to hear your getting the new lens too, you'll love it!
JS

For me, there is a noticable diffence from the 10d to the 20d. I guess it would depend on what you would be upgrading to.

Adina,

I don't notice the noise at ISO 400 on the DRebel, I see it starting at ISO 800 though.

Sebastian,
The DRebel and 10D are the same exact camera, just different body and updated firmware. You can hack the firmware in the DRebel to get the exact same things the 10D has.

JS

For me, there is a noticable diffence from the 10d to the 20d. I guess it would depend on what you would be upgrading to.

Adina,
There is no doubt the 20D is lightyears ahead of the 10D/DRebel, but that is normal as you see that with any new/updated Canon body.

JS

Well my DRebel is at 6.2 mp, while the 20D is 8.2 mp. I'd like that extra resolution, for what it's worth, as well as the improved dynamic range.

Of course I can't tell you much about Canon, but it's really two different fixes for two different problems. I'd try the lens with the camera you have first, then if it's not fast enough, etc - then look at a 20D, etc.

Sebastian,
The DRebel and 10D are the same exact camera, just different body and updated firmware. You can hack the firmware in the DRebel to get the exact same things the 10D has.

JS

I know, that's exactly why I said what I did.

Well my DRebel is at 6.2 mp, while the 20D is 8.2 mp. I'd like that extra resolution, for what it's worth, as well as the improved dynamic range.

Kelly,

The difference in resolution is really not that much at all. You gain just a shave at either end of the frame. The real strengths of the 20D are reduced noise and better AF.

Get the lens, there is no way the Rebel is "not good enough" for it. You are worrying about a nonexistant problem.

Kelly-
It's almost always better to invest in new glass before a new body. One thing to keep in mind about the 70-200 f/2.8L ISD is the weight. I can't remember if the Digital Rebel has a metal lens mount. If it does, great. If it doesn't, that might be a good reason to change bodies. I have heard a few stories of the 70-200 f/2.8L throwing the plastic lens mounts out of alignment. When you do get the 70-200, try to remember to hold the lens and not the camera. The lens is much heavier and stronger than the camera, and it's more balanced if you use the lens as a support instead of a camera. You'll find out.

People have been talking about the benefits of different bodies. They're right about the 10D and the digital Rebel being more or less the same camera. The main difference, for me, is that I can use AI Servo AF all the time on my 10D. I've also dropped my 10D on the pavement and chipped the body. But it still works fine. I doubt the Digital Rebel would have survived. Maybe you can test for us ;)

People have mentioned most of the benefits of the 20D, with the exception of battery life. The generation of cameras that Canon put out after the Digital Rebel and 10D have much, much better battery life. That's a big deal if you shoot a lot, and if you shoot in cold weather. The main reasons I've been interested in a 20D are higher ISO performance, better AF, and battery life. If you can afford both the lens and a 20D, I don't think you'll regret it. On the other hand, if you're considering a Digital Rebel, you should also consider a Rebel XT/350D. It has the better battery life, better ISO performance, and better AF. It just doesn't allow you to use AI Servo AF in any mode except the sports mode. If that doesn't matter to you, then it could be a great purchase - and a lot cheaper than a 20D.

John, I figured I'd get a monopod and keep it semi-permanently attached to the lens, wherever practical. I don't figure that's a setup I'd keep hanging around my neck very much, unless I want to invest in chiropractic treatements and regular massages.

I figured I'd get the lens first, and the monopod. The 20D is in my future, I'm just not sure when.

I'm seriously going to pony up the cash and get myself the lens of my dreams: the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/canon/PRD_104368_3128crx.aspx#review0

But I'm wondering if my Rebel will do it justice, or if I should be thinking about upgrading to a pro body as well. We've got some extra cash coming with our tax return, so it'll be possible if that's what I really want.

What's your opinion? I've always heard that the glass is more important than the body. But a pro body will have some advantages, right? Or is my Rebel good enough? (It's the old Rebel, not the XT.)


Excellent!!!!

It's spelled Nikon D200!

;-)

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

Congratulations on your new lens!!!

I figured I'd get a monopod and keep it semi-permanently attached to the lens, wherever practical.
Just to play devil's advocate, if you're leaving it on a mono will you gain much from IS? It's a heavy lens and it sounds like you don't want to hand-hold for that reason. I think IS would be much more useful handheld - anybody?

The IS will work just fine on a monopod, not on a tripod though. The 70-200 isn't so heavy (3lbs) and anyone should be able to use it handheld, especially with a light plastic body such as a DRebel. Even with the 3lb 1D bodies I have I don't use a monopod.....a bit of weightlifting (small weights ) doing some arm curls and so on will help.

JS

Just to play devil's advocate, if you're leaving it on a mono will you gain much from IS? It's a heavy lens and it sounds like you don't want to hand-hold for that reason. I think IS would be much more useful handheld - anybody?

My thoughts exactly. I see very little advantage to the IS, and I have owned it for a ocuple years now...

I just wish I had gotten the non-IS and saved myself the hassle of the lockups and the weight.

If you upgrade to a pro body with that lens, you may never use it. I'm trying to sell my 70-200 f/2.8 is usm lens because it's too heavy for the type of photography that I do.

With my 1ds and that lens, it's so heavy that I sometimes hate to use it. If you are going to buy that lens, the digital rebel will do it justice. The value of the glass is what you are buying. It's an amazing lens.

I don't think the step up to a pro body will give you any upside except for a downside in the size of your wallet.

Loren

John, I figured I'd get a monopod and keep it semi-permanently attached to the lens, wherever practical. I don't figure that's a setup I'd keep hanging around my neck very much, unless I want to invest in chiropractic treatements and regular massages.

I figured I'd get the lens first, and the monopod. The 20D is in my future, I'm just not sure when.

I have a monopod, 80-200 f2.8, big pro body - only use this gear on specific shoots where I'm sure I need the best. Too big, too expensive, too clumsy to carry around (especially the monopod - it doesn't fit in any of my bags).

The less you have to carry around the more you will use it.

Charles

If you upgrade to a pro body with that lens, you may never use it. I'm trying to sell my 70-200 f/2.8 is usm lens because it's too heavy for the type of photography that I do.

With my 1ds and that lens, it's so heavy that I sometimes hate to use it. If you are going to buy that lens, the digital rebel will do it justice. The value of the glass is what you are buying. It's an amazing lens.

I don't think the step up to a pro body will give you any upside except for a downside in the size of your wallet.

Loren
Just my two bits of course...but...IMHO once you upgrade to a pro body, there's almost no going back. I rarely use the 10D or D60 with my "L" lenses, even when I want to pack light because the weight savings aren't worth the speed adavantages I get with a pro body like my 1D Mk II. I guess it all depends on the subject you're shooting, but just about the only lens that graces my 1D is the 70-200 IS lens, and just about the only camera body that attaches to my 70-200 is the 1D. It's heavy, but it's not THAT heavy.
I still don't think you need to upgrade to a pro body unless you really need all the advantages of one. The 20D, the digital Rebels, used 10D's, are all more than adequate to the task, and the 70-200 will really make whatever camera you attach it to really shine, all for much less than a 1D or 5D.
Get the lens, shoot a bunch with your current setup, and then ask yourself if you really need a new body.

The 1D and 70-200 IS USM are not that heavy people. I have a torn rotator cuff and still shoot with both everyday, my shoulder doesn't hurt that much from the camera than it does without it. Poroper holding and carrying will prevent problems - never put a pro body camera like the 1D around your neck, always carryit on your shoulder. And just as Lionhart points out, once you start using this combo you won't go back. Even having the old 1D, the day I got my MKII N was the last day I used the old 1D, and the DRebel is sitting in a box hoping someone will buy it so it can get used. (sorry, the old 1D is my backup)

Sebastian - lockup with 70-200? sounds like another issue, I have never had the lens or body lockup. You may want to get that checked out.

JS