Well, I've decided to make the jump from Digital Camera (Sonly DSC-V1) to Prime Time Medium/Advanced camera.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16830120030

But I've read some things on the lens that comes with the canon, so... Do you suggest I just get the body

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16830120028

and get a better lens?

If so, what lens should I get?

I'm thinking of getting a macro lens but I also take pictures of athletic fields, so I needed somthing kindof multi purpose, and if you suggest the stock lens then that's fine I just need to know for an Intermediate photographer, should I just stick w/ the stock lens, I mean i'm sure this one is better considering I'm coming froma Sony DSC-V1 even though that's a good camera, I'm sure this lens is 10 times better.

It would also help if one of you could give me the size that I need for that camera. And no one wants to buy a lens that dosent fit the camera.

Also, if you can please find another place where I can get the camera for cheaper if it isnt $30 or more cheaper, then don't even bother.

First off, about the lens not fitting. Any lens labled EF or EF-S will fit the Digital Rebel XT with no problem, so pretty much, any recent lens. I believe that the older FD's do not mount on the newer EF and EF-S bodies.

I would get the 28-135mm, its a wide angle/mid telephoto lens that has fantastic quality. It doubles as a very nice macro lens with .5m minimum focus(1.6ft) and has IS to hold your shots still in low light places. but thats $420..

If you need a cheap lens, and dont mind being not zoom, the 50mm F/1.8 prime is a fantastic treasure! $75 for a very quality lens, its my next buy.

I would get the XT in black, as I've seen the silver, and the paint looks very cheap. I'm glad I did not get mine in silver. It looks more professional in black anyhow. :D http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16830120029

That website is the cheapest I've seen from a reputable seller. I buy from newegg all the time, great site and service.

to summarize, go for the body and the 28-135mm if you can afford it ($1089 total), It will help step you up into sports photography and it is great for macros. If you cant afford it, get the 50mm f/1.8. ($735) The kit lens is good at wide angle, but the 55mm end is very soft. needs an aperature of around f/13 to produce clear shots IMO.

This lens... correct?:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16830998376

Also, I was thinking about getting a few filters later on, mostly gradients like these:

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/251490611.htm
http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/251490702.htm

But I wasn't sure if eveything would fit, I'm aware I need the 72mm adaptor ring:

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/251491593.htm?bct=%3Bpi251490702

as well as the filter holder:

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/251490736.htm?bct=%3Bpi251490702

But, if any of that is incorrect, I don't want to have to buy anything that I don't need or buy not enough and be short handed becuase I wasn't researching.

The Cokin adapter and grads may or may not be helpful to you. If you do want to work with grads though that is the adapter ring and holder to get. The only grads I carry are neutral density grads, and that is only because I am still old school. You can accomplish the same effect by shooting in RAW and processing twice, once for the highlights and once for the shadows then combine the two photos using PS and a mask.

The Cokin adapter and grads may or may not be helpful to you. If you do want to work with grads though that is the adapter ring and holder to get. The only grads I carry are neutral density grads, and that is only because I am still old school. You can accomplish the same effect by shooting in RAW and processing twice, once for the highlights and once for the shadows then combine the two photos using PS and a mask.

RAW? That's an image format correct?

RAW? That's an image format correct?

Correct. You'll get the most flexibility and best end quality by shooting RAW. But it does require a little more effort. If you have Photoshop CS it's not that big of a deal though. RAW conversion software is part of Photoshop now. And you can accomplish the effect as split neutral density filters, in Photoshop, if you're willing and able. It's not that hard. I don't use those filters anymore. And we can help you if you want to learn.

For a do-it-all lens, I will co-sign on the 28-135 IS. I have had one for years and thoroughly abused it. I don't think there's another lens that's as versatile and has comparable image quality for the same kind of money. I bought it for travel photography and then used it for almost everything. It allows you to get closer, the 135mm telelphoto end is very useful for sports and landscapes, the auto focus is excellent, and the IS works wonderfully. If you haven't looked yet, here's a link to reviews for it:

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens reviews >> (http://www.photographyreview.com/sf-1/befid-96323/pid-27141263/productreviewscrx.aspx?dnatrs=zoom_lens-canon)

Hope that helps.

Photo-John is correct about this lens, he help me make my decision on it a month ago, and its been nothing but fantastic. :-D The link to the one on newegg is correct, and for $5.95 shipping Fedex 3 day, you cant beat it!

Okay, then that'll be the lens I'm getting.

On a scale of 1 - 10 what do you think of the macro shot quality?

I also have Adobe Photoshop CS2, I was wondering where can I find this RAW Conversion? Is it a plugin or is it built in to Photoshop.

Also, are you saying that I should just do the RAW thing instead of getting a filter? Or... What exactly are you emplying that I do.

I'd rate it a 7 or 8. but with tubes, a 10. see the picture in my signature, I took it with that lens, and 2 tubes.

you can capture alot of detail @ 135mm at a focus distance of 1.6ft. tip: manual focus for macros with this lens, sometimes its off, sometimes its spot on, but dont get me wrong, it is an amazing lens!

I'd recommend you get the kenko 12+20+36mm extention tubes to compliment this lens in its macro abilities. $150~ for 3 tubes, and its just as good as the canon counterparts, except muuuch cheaper. Are you still going with the silver body?

For photoshop CS2, you have to download a plugin called Camera Raw 3.X (I think its at 3.4) and then whenever you import raw images into the program, it goes right to the raw editor. An alternative is to check out the beta of Adobe Lightroom on adobe's website. I think that program is very well suited for raw editing, even in its beta stage. Take a look at that.