Which low cost DSLR to buy?

[IAN SUN]

Hi all I just lost or had my Nikon digicam pick-pocketed on the weekend, grrrr.
Guess I'll use it as an opportunity to get my self a DSLR. Which one should I buy? D40?
Lens compatibility with RED ONE, a Quicktime movie mode and sub $1000 cost are my requirements.
Any suggestions from you supremely knowledgeable folks will be greatly appreciated.

[HD Hildebrand]

Hi Bro, how ya' doin'?

Are you putting a Nikon mount on one or both of your Reds? If so, I'd go with the Nikon still. I have the D70s which I will be selling and in turn picking up the D40x - this way my raw stills (10.2mp) will be similar in size to 4k Red footage. I plan on using for timelapse on the same shoots I'll have my Red and then will be able to swap Nikon lenses with my Red as well.

Cheers,
Dale

[IAN SUN]

I have gone back and forth on the issue of RED lenses or Nikon mount for the camera we'll be keeping in house, I'll probably wait for reviews of shoots with the Nikon mount and various Nikkors before making a final decision.

The other camera will be placed with a rental house so it will retain the PL mount.

[Michael Hastings]

Hi all I just lost or had my Nikon digicam pick-pocketed on the weekend, grrrr.
Guess I'll use it as an opportunity to get my self a DSLR. Which one should I buy? D40?
Lens compatibility with RED ONE, a Quicktime movie mode and sub $1000 cost are my requirements.
Any suggestions from you supremely knowledgeable folks will be greatly appreciated.

Why are you going nikon? It seems that the Birger mount for canon EOS is more fully developed and capable of some more things. Plus you can use an inexpensive lens adapter to mount nikon lenses on the canon mount but you can't do the reverse, i.e. put Canon on the nikon, because of the flange focal distance. Also Canon goes wider with the 10-22mm EF-S. Nikon is 12-24. (the old 8mm is fisheye - these newer lenses are rectilinear)

Any of the rebels and the 20d and 30d have almost exactly the same imager size so will be a good viewer and light meter for the red. XTi is 10plus megapixels.

[IAN SUN]

Why are you going nikon? It seems that the Birger mount for canon EOS is more fully developed and capable of some more things. Plus you can use an inexpensive lens adapter to mount nikon lenses on the canon mount but you can't do the reverse, i.e. put Canon on the nikon, because of the flange focal distance. Also Canon goes wider with the 10-22mm EF-S. Nikon is 12-24. (the old 8mm is fisheye - these newer lenses are rectilinear)

Any of the rebels and the 20d and 30d have almost exactly the same imager size so will be a good viewer and light meter for the red. XTi is 10plus megapixels.

Sounds like a pretty good argument to me, I was just going with the weight of bias. What has Nikon got that you can't get with Canon, other than subjective questions of image characteristics?

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Birger Accepts Nikon Mount.. I have a d40 and LOVE it... never shot canon or canon glass.. so no comment

[Poi Boy]

Spend a couple more dollars and get the D80.
Aloha
-A

[Evin Grant]

Have to agree, the D80 is the better body. The D200 is tha all around winner though, if you have the coin.

[IAN SUN]

I would consider the D80 price point, D200 is too rich.

[Password Expired]

Another vote for the Nikon D80

[Gunleik Groven]

D200 here.

It was gone for a month, and I had to work with a 70 and a 50.

I didn't think I'd have missed my 200 as much as I did.

And it's rock solid and waterproof.

Gunleik

[Richard Story]

Hi Bro ~

I recently purchased a D80 at Henry's (in Toronto) at their Used Equipment store - I got the D80 (brand new, not even used once) for $950. I was going to get the D40x but for $150 more I figured the D80 was worth it. Sean Carley & I will be using Nikkors on our Red so the D80 is not only a great camera for stills, it will also serve as a director's viewfinder and will be very useful when scouting locations.

PS: Henry's also had several D40x's in their used / nearly new dept ($650 I think).

[David Mullen ASC]

I just got the D40X, mostly because I read that it was lightweight compared to other DLSR's, which it is. And it wasn't too expensive.

[Michael Hastings]

Birger Accepts Nikon Mount.. I have a d40 and LOVE it... never shot canon or canon glass.. so no comment

Again, why Nikon, if you are about to make a new purchase?

Birger will have at some point a Nikon mount. It is harder to do because of the mechanical pin actuation of the iris function on Nikons rather than the all electronic of the canon setup. Birger has been making a canon EOS mount for years so a version for Red didn't require much new development.

Further there is still the argument that the Canon mount gets you both Canon and Nikon mount (for the investment of a $50 adapter) yet native Nikon does not allow use of Canon lenses at all because the flange focal distance can never be right.

Looking for somewhat objective reasons, and/or even some good subjective reasons to choose Nikon over Canon.

BTW I have no significant investment in either canon or nikon but have owned both at one time or another, so I am trying to figure which inherently makes the most sense in conjunction with RED - setting aside bias of reputations made many years ago in the film still photography world. Before this thread I pretty much had decided that the Canon made more sense. The birger mount which is overall better developed for Canon and the existence of the SuperWide 10-22 Canon EF-S were extremely compelling to me. (Nikon's rectilinear wide starts at 12mm, it is a 12-24) It seems to me that as far as new lenses both Nikon and Canon have some pretty good glass throughout the range. I like the idea of a few of the low cost older manual Nikkors that evin has tested and recommended, but seems that those would work just as well on the Birger Canon with an inexpensive Nikon to Canon EOS adapter with little downside.

Further it seems that at $950 for the birger mount with full mount capability and full electronic control of iris and focus for all modern Canon lenses plus $50 for the adapter to use Nikon manual lenses it is hard to see why anyone would purchase the $500 physical-only mounts for either Canon or Nikon from RED, rather than stepping up. Finally, other than having followed it closely here on RED I have no relationship to birger and have never even spoken to them - it just seems obvious that they have an excellent solution.

In other words please explain to me what I am missing in so many people pushing Nikon.

[IAN SUN]

Hi Bro ~

I recently purchased a D80 at Henry's (in Toronto) at their Used Equipment store - I got the D80 (brand new, not even used once) for $950. I was going to get the D40x but for $150 more I figured the D80 was worth it. Sean Carley & I will be using Nikkors on our Red so the D80 is not only a great camera for stills, it will also serve as a director's viewfinder and will be very useful when scouting locations.

PS: Henry's also had several D40x's in their used / nearly new dept ($650 I think).

Richard, thanks for that info I'll check Henrys and see what they have used, although I must say their new stuff is always overpriced.


I just got the D40X, mostly because I read that it was lightweight compared to other DLSR's, which it is. And it wasn't too expensive.

Hey if the D40X is good enough for David Mullen...
Thanks David, I'll handle one and see how I like it.


Again, why Nikon. Birger will have at some point a Nikon mount. It is harder to do because of the mechanical pin actuation of the iris function on Nikons rather than the all electronic of the canon setup. Birger has been making a canon EOS mount for years so a version for Red didn't require much new development.

Further there is still the argument that the Canon mount gets you both Canon and Nikon mount (for the investment of a $50 adapter) yet native Nikon does not allow use of Canon lenses because the flange focal distance can never be right.

Looking for somewhat objective reasons, and/or even some good subjective reasons to choose Nikon over Canon.

BTW I have no significant investment in either canon or nikon but have owned both at one time or another, so I am trying to figure which inherently makes the most sense in conjunction with RED. The birger mount which is overall better developed for Canon and the existence of the SuperWide 10-22 Canon EF-S were extremely compelling to me. It seems to me that as far as new lenses both Nikon and Canon have some pretty good glass throughout the range. I like the idea of a few of the low cost older manual Nikkors that evin has tested and recommended, but seems that those would work just as well on the Birger Canon with an inexpensive Nikon to Canon EOS adapter with little downside.

Again you make a very persuasive argument, for the Birger mount and Canon. Does anyone have a strong argument for going with the Nikon mount?

On the Canon side do you recommend the XTi?

[Steve Gibby]

For my run 'n gun DSLR work, I bought a Canon XTi (400D) a few months ago for $680 - 10 megapixel RAW. I've shot extensively with it since then and I really like the camera and results - especially for the money. Side note on that: I used the XTi with a wide zoom to shoot the pics of RED One (Boris) with the RED 18-50 CF zoom this past March for my NAB magazine article about RED (Studio Daily). Link: http://www.studiodaily.com/main/news/7959.html

Shortly I'll be getting the Canon 10-22 zoom for use with the XTi, and the Birger Canon adaptor so I can use the 10-22 with RED #8 in a custom water sports housing that will be made by Mike Hastings ("aquavideored2006").

I have a high opinion of Nikon also. I still have my first Nikon that I bought in 1969 in Hong Kong (Nikon F) - and I still use it sometimes when I want to shoot film. I think you'll be happy with a Canon XTi, or a Nikon D40 or D80, but I also think Mike Hastings made some good points about the utility of the Birger adaptor.

[Jaime Vallés]

I think you'll be happy with a Nikon D80 or a Canon XTi, but I also think Mike Hastings made some good points about the utility of the Birger adaptor.
Yeah, seriously. I hadn't even thought that I could use Nikon lenses with the Birger Canon mount and an adapter. It really makes me lean towards Canon for my still lenses. I have zero lenses right now, so I'm not committed to one brand or the other. But Canon seems to have more objective advantages at the moment (not subjective ones like image quality, contrast, etc.) I'll wait to see tests from LART and others to determine which brand to go with.

[Evin Grant]

Further there is still the argument that the Canon mount gets you both Canon and Nikon mount (for the investment of a $50 adapter) yet native Nikon does not allow use of Canon lenses at all because the flange focal distance can never be right.

This is true, but I just don't like the idea of a mount in a mount. The Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts are sloppy enough as it is, put them together and who knows what kind of accuracy you can expect. I've read in quite a few reviews how there are significant differences in the manufactuing tolerances and QC are in these mount adapters. If you own primarily Canon EOS lenses and want to throw on the ocasional Nikkor It's probably the way to go.



Further it seems that at $950 for the birger mount with full mount capability and full electronic control of iris and focus for all modern Canon lenses plus $50 for the adapter to use Nikon manual lenses it is hard to see why anyone would purchase the $500 physical-only mounts for either Canon or Nikon from RED, rather than stepping up.

There are only two reasons, price and availability. The Red Nikon F mount will ship with the camera, since I don't own any PL mount or Eos mount lenses I am forced to either buy the Red F mount or wait till the Birger ships to shoot my Red one. $500 is not chump change but I will make far more than this in the intervening months till the Birger Nikon mount ships.
And there are some fine, inexpensive Nikkor primes that will work the same on this mount as on the Birger, and for the cost consience Reduser this makes a bunch of sense.



Looking for somewhat objective reasons, and/or even some good subjective reasons to choose Nikon over Canon. In other words please explain to me what I am missing in so many people pushing Nikon.

What you're missing is the legacy and adaptability of the Nikkor line. Canon lenses are fine performers but for whatever reason don't seem to engender the kind of "Lens Lust" that some Nikkors do. I've owned a whole bunch in my time and while some where winners and some where losers it's just nice that they all still mount on my D2x and I could be using a 12-24 DX AFS Nikkor on the Birger mount one minute and a 1972 35mm 1.4 H.C. the next. (The latter being a classic design still not improved on). Consequently even shooters who switched to Canon recenlty for the better Hi-ISO performance have kept thier Nikon lenses. At least the classic manual focus ones. There is a strong pull toword tradition in cinematograpy, and even though the EOS mount promises much in convience and flexibility it lacks the direct connection to the lens that many filmakers crave (This is just my speculation). Even Red themselves have conceeded this by making thier own lenese mechanical when they could have developed an internal motor system ala USM or AFS. Personally I'm very excited to use the Birger AFS Nikon mount for remote opertaion and DX/G lenses but all my primes are direct drive manual focus Nikkors, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but that's just me.

P.S. Yes you could still do this with the EOS adapter but each of us is going to have to determine on our own if this is acceptably sturdy to meet th rigors of professional filmaking/EFP.

[IAN SUN]

For my run 'n gun DSLR work, I bought a Canon XTi (400D) a few months ago for $680 - 10 megapixel RAW. I've shot extensively with it since then and I really like the camera and results - especially for the money. Side note on that: I used the XTi with a wide zoom to shoot the pics of RED One (Boris) with the RED 18-50 CF zoom this past March for my NAB magazine article about RED (Studio Daily). Link: http://www.studiodaily.com/main/news/7959.html

Shortly I'll be getting the Canon 10-22 zoom for use with the XTi, and the Birger Canon adaptor so I can use the 10-22 with RED #8 in a custom water sports housing that will be made by Mike Hastings ("aquavideored2006").

I have a high opinion of Nikon also. I still have my first Nikon that I bought in 1969 in Hong Kong (Nikon F) - and I still use it sometimes when I want to shoot film. I think you'll be happy with a Nikon D80 or a Canon XTi, but I also think Mike Hastings made some good points about the utility of the Birger adaptor.

Thats great Gibby, I'm looking forward to the Birger test from LART. I'll go try out an XTi.

[Poi Boy]

One thing to keep in mind when buying one of the dslr be it nikon or canon, the glass is everything. Most of these cameras are packaged with a cheap lens that seems like a very atractive deal but are poor performers. I highly recomend buying body only and buying the faster pro level lenses even if you can only afford one. They are more expensive but make a huge difference in image quality. This is especially true if you want to use the same lens on red one.
Aloha
-A

[IAN SUN]

Good advice that, thanks.

[Darwin]

For under 1k D40x hands down! However you can get a D200 for $12-1300 dollars hold and compare the D40x or for that matter the D80 along side the D200 and you will see where that extra money went. Hard to beat the D200 for price point! I could write a book on the D200 I like mine that much! Then there is the Nilon D2X and I have been a life long Nikon guy....but at that point I would jump ship and buy Canon EOS-1D Mark III

[Paul Leeming]

Keep in mind none of the real DSLRs have a movie mode, so you'll be missing that if it's a dealbreaker for you.

I use the XTi myself and have the EF-S 10-22mm USM, the EF-S 17-55mm IS USM and the EF 70-300mm IS USM. All are great lenses and I had the whole lot calibrated recently as a package by Canon Japan (under warranty) who did a fantastic job in making them as accurate as they could be.

Having said that, although I'm watching the Birger EOS mount with interest, I plan on buying Red PL mount lenses with the cameras so I may not even end up getting the Birger kit. It depends on finances and the results of LART who will hopefully have the EOS mount with controller to test.

[Michael Mann]

Another vote for the D200. (I owned the D70 before).

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I got my D40 for $495.. i dont shoot professionally.. so i didnt care about the MP's. i mainly bought this camera for a trip to florida and had old manual nikon glass, so i thought why not!

[IAN SUN]

thanks guys, of course I am looking for a low cost camera so so anything north of 1000 is out of the question. I will use it as a director's viewfinder.
Would have loved a VGA movie mode in a DSLR, but I suppose the manufacturers don't do it because of the mirror (shouldn't be an impossible task though, open it up and monitor on the rear LCD).
Too bad, its a very handy feature to be able to capture decent quality video with a still camera and not having to fish out another device when there is tons of action going on around you.

[Michael Hastings]

First of all, please don't take any of my comments as being too strong or argumentative. Ultimately the Nikon/Canon debate is like the BMW / Mercedes choice - damn but they are both pretty nice. I don't think you can go far wrong either way. Secondly, my comments are geared to people like me that don't have a DSLR yet or any significant stock of lenses. If I were like Evin and had a number of Nikons (and particularly ones that had been calibrated and tested) I would stick with Nikon.

Third: I am not looking at the use of still SLR lenses as a way to be ultra low budget - i.e. the $1K to $1500 budget. I am looking at using modern still lenses to create a situation where full use of the 4K resolution of RED can be achieved with say a $5K to $15K lens budget as opposed to buying a set of Zeiss or Cooke lenses for $50K - $100K. These lenses would be owned by me and used for my own and rental EFP and documentary projects as well as low budget features. I anticipate these projects can deal with the limitations of non-cine style lenses. The higher budget features and commercials will rent real cine lenses. I also think in many EFP cases these lenses may work better than cine style lenses - particularly regarding image stabilization.

Therefore, although the $500 for a RED Canon or Nikon isn't chump change - a $500 difference isn't going to make or break things as far as a decision. Again, my financial situation - and I think this is true of most RED purchasers coming from the pro video world - is the $70K difference between a $10K lens package and an $80K package, not the difference between $1K and $2K. The other consideration is that there is a resale market where if I buy a new Canon or Nikon lens, literally within 3 days I can sell any of them on ebay for a small loss. Not so with Zeiss or Cooke cines.

My biggest decision will be whether to leave cine style lenses entirely to my local rental houses, or to also purchase the RED zoom.


This is true, but I just don't like the idea of a mount in a mount.


I fully agree that a mount in a mount is no good for day in day out shooting and lots of changes. But it is attractive to me that if I occasionally wanted to use a specialty Nikon - say that sweet deal on the 58mm f1.2 Noct Nikkor you got - I have the option. But it doesn't work the other way (you can't do Canon on a Nikon mount - an adapter can make the distance longer which is what you need for Nikon on Canon, but it can't make it shorter. "cut it twice and it was still too short..."(an unknown carpenter)




$500 is not chump change but I will make far more than this in the intervening months till the Birger Nikon mount ships.

What you're missing is the legacy and adaptability of the Nikkor line. Canon lenses are fine performers but for whatever reason don't seem to engender the kind of "Lens Lust" that some Nikkors do. ... and I could be using a 12-24 DX AFS Nikkor on the Birger mount one minute and a 1972 35mm 1.4 H.C. the next. (The latter being a classic design still not improved on). Consequently even shooters who switched to Canon recenlty for the better Hi-ISO performance have kept thier Nikon lenses. At least the classic manual focus ones.

see above re: lens lust classics. As far as the 12-24, it would be a harder decision for me if the Nikon superwide zoom started at 10 (or less) like the Canon. Even without considering underwater, superwide is a real issue. It seems to me that for any other focal length need there are always some good options in either line, but if you need that 20 percent wider angle it is a problem that it just doesn't exist in the Nikon mount. Usually you can get closer to a subject or crop it in post, but a lot of times its harder to get farther back e.g. in a car, a small room, a boat, etc. and that extra wide is essential.



Even Red themselves have conceeded this by making thier own lenese mechanical when they could have developed an internal motor system ala USM or AFS.

I am pretty sure the fact that they didn't do internal motors is more because whoever is making the lenses doesn't currently have that technology. Regardless if RED or someone else were to develop their lenses it would take a lot longer to do it with internal motors. I wouldn't disagree with your point about tradition, but that probably wasn't the deciding factor.

I think it boils down to this - the immediate gut reaction of most of us would be to lean Nikon, but I think there are a number of compelling benefits with Canon/birger for those with mid range camera lens budgets and/or for EFP shooters, that they should take a long and careful look at Canon before going Nikon.

Again, all of my comments are meant to clarify or create discussion, not indicate any big disagreement - I have been reading your lens threads for months and really appreciate all of it. Believe me, you had me searching ebay for old Nikkors, but I've also been considering the birger for months (see the bubble blowers thread) and the more I found out about it the more I was pushed in that direction.

[Siva Kollipara]

I am planning to buy D40 from Costco comes with 18-55mm, but I have seen members some talking about D40x and some time D40.
Is there any difference between D40 and D40x..? Or are the same?

[Jaime Vallés]

I am planning to buy D40 from Costco comes with 18-55mm, but I have seen members some talking about D40x and some time D40.
Is there any difference between D40 and D40x..? Or are the same?
Yes, there's a difference. The D40 is 6.1 megapixels and the D40x is 10.2 megapixels. Check out http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2 for a complete listing of features of both.

[Matt Uhry]

Not sure if it's been mentioned but the D40 will not have AF with some Nikon AF lenses - the ones that are driven from the camera body by shaft. Mostly these are AF primes of slightly older design, includes many lenses that you might want to use on your Red.

If you are up for spending some money the Canon L line looks nice. Too bad about the lack of a manual iris.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry

[kunal2]

Hi all, to b honest am a quite long time user of canon film slr and recently bought a CAnon 20D which am very satisfied with, tho the contruction quality is
not that good compared to Nikon,they seems more robustly built and to last,when i had my EOS 5 film slr the dial knob got loose after 7 month of usage,it's now two years that i am using my Canon 20D, i must say that i am totally satisfied with it,but recently i've started getting problem with the hotshoe it has started getting loose and sometimes it doesn't fire my 580EX flash,i have so many friends using Nikon and they never complain having problem ,now i have made up my mind to buy Nikon stuff,but the decision is very hard,i've heard zat Canon sensors is the best is it true ? am posting some of my recent work and wanted to know if anyone here has ever done this kind of shoot using a Nikon D70,D200 or D2X,please try to understand i only just want to have lasting body,
thx all
kunal
(please be advise that the links below contain nudity)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7645949@N08/1048342505/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7645949@N08/1048342407/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7645949@N08/1048342395/in/photostream/

[IAN SUN]

Some very nice images in that gallery Kunal, good work.

[Evin Grant]

Kunal, you can't go wrong with a D2xs in studio. The D200 is also a tough body, the only flaw in build quality is the rubber on the D2x CF card door, for some reason it seems to come off after a feew years. Mine's still hanging on by a small patch of glue. This is an easy fix but nothing's perfect.

[Evin Grant]

As far as the 12-24, it would be a harder decision for me if the Nikon superwide zoom started at 10 (or less) like the Canon. Even without considering underwater, superwide is a real issue. It seems to me that for any other focal length need there are always some good options in either line, but if you need that 20 percent wider angle it is a problem that it just doesn't exist in the Nikon mount. Usually you can get closer to a subject or crop it in post, but a lot of times its harder to get farther back e.g. in a car, a small room, a boat, etc. and that extra wide is essential.

There is a Sigma 10-20mm DX lens for Nikon mount you know, and from most reviews it seems on par with the Canon. Of course you would need the Birger Nikon mount to use it but it's there.

If you have no investment in a DSLR or in and legacy still lenses then IMHO there are two compelling reasons to buy into either system.

The first is backwards compatability (Nikon)

The second is universal electronic focus (Canon)

I'll qualify this by saying that yes you can use adapters to attach manual Nikkors to the EOS mount but as I've stated that is an imperfect solution at best in a professional filmaking environment.

Basically what this means is if you desire to focus all your lenses using the Birger electronic interface you are either limited to Nikon AFS zoom lenses or Canon EOS lenses.

For my part the 12-24/17-35(55)/28-70/70-200 f2.8 zoom system is pretty compelling. That and a set of f1.4 Nikkor primes and that's a pretty sweet pro glass system for under 10K. A similar 10-22/16-35/24-70/70-200 system could be built in Canon EOS as well.

[Tom Lowe]

I use a Rebel XT (8mp) mainly with my Canon 10-22mm. I love it.

I'll probably wait for the next generation leap beyond the XTi before I get another body.

[Damien Molineaux]

...

If you have no investment in a DSLR or in and legacy still lenses then IMHO there are two compelling reasons to buy into either system.

The first is backwards compatability (Nikon)

...

About backwards compatibility, I hear the cheaper Nikon bodies, ie D40 or D80, aren't compatible with all the older lenses, where as the D200 or D2 are. Is that correct ? Evin or someone else, do you know what's compatible with what ?

I have a bunch of older Nikon glass, mostly AI, I want to make sure if I buy a new body I'll still be able to use all my legacy glass. Which brings me to the question of the Birger Nikon mount, will it be compatible with all the legacy glass also ? Since we're talking about Birger, have they said when they expect to ship (the Nikon mount) ?

I would rather get the Birger mount for it's compatibility with AF lenses, if I can also use my classics, and not have to buy the Red Nikon mount. However, I need a Nikon mount when I get my camera, if things don't slip, in November.

Cheers,
Damien

[Evin Grant]

It boils down like this, all manual Nikon lenses will mount on the D40 but you won't be able to meter and you'll be limited to the "M" manual mode. The D80 will be able to use the Center weighted and Spot meters as well as the "A" aperture priority mode with Manual lenses. The D40 also can only auto focus with AFS lenses. This is really an entry level consumer camera.

The Birger mount will be able to interface with all Nikkors and control the aperture of all "G" series and "AF/D" series Nikkors. At the moment it will only focus AFS lenses electronically. So any Nikkor can be used on the Birger regardless of vintage.
ASFAIK

[Damien Molineaux]

Thank you Evin !

Are you in LA ? Up late or early ?

Will you be at IBC ?

With my regards,
Damien

[Evin Grant]

Up late, remains to be seen if I'll be at IBC. Lots going on.

[Jaime Vallés]

Why the overlap? If I'm on a budget, couldn't I get away with these?

Nikon F Mount:
Tokina 12-24 f4 DX ($500)
Nikon 28-70 f2.8 ($1400)
Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ($800)
Total: $2700

or

Canon EOS Mount:
Canon 10-22 f3.5-4.5 ($700)
Canon 24-70 f2.8 ($1000)
Canon 70-200 f2.8 ($1700)
Total: $3400

3 zooms and you have pretty much all the bases covered. Or am I missing something crucial in these lists?

Would you rather go with primes or a few zooms? Convenience isn't as much of a factor to me as price and quality. What do you all think?

[Evin Grant]

You could go with either, I'm going to put together two sets I can rent seperately or together, Zooms with the Birger (12-24,17-35,28-70,70-200) and manual focus high speed primes (14,20,28,35,50,85,105,135). They both have their place. You can go with the 12-24, 28-70, 70-200 option but all the 12-24s are F4 so shooting wider in low light might be more tricky, I just really like the charachter of the 17-35 so I don't mind the overlap. I might recomend the 17-55 over the 28-70, the gap between 55 and 70 is less useable than a fast 17-55 at f2.8. Even though I'm very fond of the 28-70 too. I guess I'm going with four zooms becasue I'm a glassaholic:help: