Ok guys, I know that I had a similar post before, but now I (think at least) am about to buy my first DSLR and I need some help. I know for sure it'd be either 40D or 50D, but not quite sure which one and what lens. Ideally, I'd get the 50D with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, but right now it's too expensive to me as I *do* want some tele lens ("L") as well. So my options are pretty much like this:


1. 40D + 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM


2. 40D + 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM + 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM


3. 50D + 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM


4. 50D +70-200mm f/4.0 L USM


The thing is that I really want the new VGA screen on the 50D, but I also really want a tele lens and want it to be an L lens - and the 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM is the only L lens I can afford right now, so other tele's are not an option right now. As you see from my list, if I go for the 50D I'll have to give up on either the general or the tele lens.


The 40D + 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM will cost me the same as the 50D body alone - but then bye bye fancy VGA screen [].
So I need your help here, especially your thoughts regarding #4 - which is a camera without a general purpose lens.


I shoot a lot indoors right now using my S60 P&S and I always wish I had more reach on the long end. The S60's long end in 35mm terms is about 105mm if memory serves me right. The 50D/40D +70-200mm f/4.0 L USM long end is 320mm (I need more help regarding this point BTW so I'll ask it at the end of this post *).


So, is it possible to have just the 70-200 for indoors? I don't mind and actually prefer taking few steps away from my subjects - and most of the time I have enough room to do that too.


And also, will the 70-200 be a good tele lens for outdoor uses? isn't it too short? I don't pretend to be a bird photographer with this lens, but is it at least possible to take SOME bird or wildlife photos with it or that'd be COMPLETELY impossible with this lens?





*Ok I promissed another question so there we go:


I've been around this site and forums (and few other sites) for quite enough time to understand most of the things including the crop factor thingy as well, but I must admit that I still don't get this 35mm equiv. thing (which also relates to the crop factor) 100%.


I do understand that, for example, my P&S at the long end is equiv. to 105mm on a 35mm/FF body in the framing/angle of view, or that a 40D with a 100mm lens will have the same framing as a 160mm lens on a 35mm/FF body. What I *don't* get is how magnification will be? Again, I've read not once that focal length is the same, and that "100mm is 100mm no matter what body you use"... so why I'm still confused? 2 reasons:


1. I keep reading that bird and wildlife photographers prefer a 1.6 crop body but can't understand why? because they don't need to crop the photo in the post processing? I doubt that's the reason as it sounds a bit dumb reason to me.


2. Now this is the main reason, I think, as to why I'm still confused - I don't have a DSLR.


Can someone who have both P&S and a DSLR please help me, and probably others, to finally **see** the differences with our eyes? Can you please take a picture of some object with both a P&S and a DSLR from the same distance? For example - take a P&S and zoom in until the focal length is equiv. to 100mm in 35mm terms, then from the same place use your DSLR with a 100mm lens... now, post the results, and let us know what exact P&S you use and what exact DSLR + lens as well.


One more thing... If I take the same picture with 2 lenses at the same focal length how much the final results are affected by the lens magnification capability? The EF 400mm f/5.6 magnification for example is .12 while the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 is .2, what's the difference then? (at 400mm of course)





Thanks again guys for reading such a long post []