Those look like pretty good lenses for a general purpose kit. Based just on what I've read here and elsewhere, the Sigma 17-70 is an easy choice over the Canon 18-55 non-IS kit lens..

With respect to the telephoto lens, 200mm is a bit short for wildlife photography(even considering that with the crop factor, you'll have a 320mm-equivalent field of view). You might want to consider a zoom that goes to 300 or 400mm...

I've been looking at the Sigma 70-300mm APO. Would this be better?.

Thanks for your help...

As for your choice of body; Very nice entry into DSLR.

As for your choice of lenses; Why macro lenses? Is this a special interest of yours? If your choice is based on the assumption "you might like to be able to shoot some macro shots", get one macro lens and accompany it with a versatile telezoom..

Alternatively consider these lenses:- Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macroto supply you with true macro capability (1:1) and some basic reach.

- Tamron 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical IF Macro AF.

To give you both wide angle and the length to also go out and do some birding or wildlife. Also greet for some candid portraits..

Tripod must for Macro (and with no stabilized lenses... ) also a must for long lenses..

Good luck and and you your birthday!.

Life's to short, enjoy it..

A quick question. Have you had the camera in your hand and did you like the feel of it? I'm asking since I was partly set on getting the 400D but found it way to small for me and went with Pentax K10D instead. I still find it a tad to small, but guess I can fix that with a battery grip..

Otherwise does it look like a nice choice!..

Bengarton wrote:.

Hi there. I am going to be getting a new dslr for my birthday. Thefollowing is the setup I am thinking of getting, and I wouldappreciate opinions as I am a complete newbie at this!! Many thanksfor the help..

Canon EOS 400D (Black) Body Only.

Nice camera, very good AF, a little small and feels kind of cheaply built although it is not..

Sandisk 2GB Ultra II Compactflash Card.

Tamron 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD Macro (Canon AF)Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro (Canon AF).

Neither of these lenses meet your intended type of photography..

I'll assume you have a pretty tight budget, which makes things difficult..

Get the camera with the kit lens it's included for almost free depending one where you get the kit. Stopped down a little it's not bad optically and will serve the purpose for a wide angle lens until you can afford better..

Portraits- Canon 50/1.8 about $80.

Now wildlife and sports can be the same or very different depending on the sport and the wildlife..

I have a 70-200 and it is WAY to short for wildlife. I had to crop an image by 2/3 of a bird in my yard. I was only about 15 feet away and I still had to crop the heck out of it to get a nice print..

I would go for either the 70-200/4 L and a Tamron or Kenko Pro 1.4 teleconverterorCanon's 70-300IS II..

That's my budget advice .

Gene..

Thanks for all the advise guys. Sure gives me a lot to thing about! I have tried playing around with the camera, and I do quite like the feel of it although I know what you mean about it being on the small side. I had been told that the Sigma 70-300mm would be ok for wildlife. I am not sure why I have gone for macro lenses! It is something I would like to try, but I guess I don't need both lenses with the capability!..

Yes I held it..

For my personal taste it's a bit to small also. I currently own a 20D and 1DmkIII. Compared to them it all feels "tiny". But then, I have relative large hands so the ergonomics of the 400D don't match. The 30D would compensate all that for you for "just" a few euro's more..

This is not saying the 400D isn't a good camera. It produces really nice photo's..

As for my advise on the lenses:.

In my opinion Canon lenses are IQ wise and build wise superior to the Tamron and Sigma lenses but then the OP might be on a budged. He suggested so by proposing the Tamron and Sigma brands himselfIn that price segment they are not bad. It's just a question of how many money you are willing to spend on them and what kind of quality that money can buy..

Hope you figure out your prio's and come to a rewarding choice..

Greetz..

Life's to short, enjoy it..

To be perfectly honest, you should hold out and getcanon lenses. They are far, far superior to that rubbish and they havegood upgrades and long zooms for all purposes. Read up abit like I did and you'll see that to make this camera shineyou need Canon with canon. I also have this model witha battery grip and IS lens and let me tell you for sportsor wildlife your better off keeping the kit lens, getting used tothe camera and maybe looking at the 75-300 IS lens which iskind of middle road for Canon but the IS is so so good for what you want.Camera for bday, ask for lenses for Xmas. Save up and berewarded...

That Sigma with APO in the name is an excellent choice..

BAK..

"Macro" is a word with a variety of meanings. In your case, it means closeups that are not extreme, and you'll find it very useful..

You'll need some extra software, too..

I usggest Adobe Photoshop Elements..

And a USB thumb-drive would be very handy for taking files to the lab for printing. A 1 GB drive is all that you'll need..

BAK..

I just got my first SLR (400d kit lens). I'm not sure where your level of knowledge is, but I would not have been able to explain the purposes for Aperture or Shutter speed if I had to. My pictures were decent in P mode but not great. The best thing I got was Gary Friedman's book (http://www.friedmanarchives.com/) and the 50mm 1.8 lens. He has a great statement in his book, "My answer to this very general question of 'what lens shall I get?' is, 'Whatever lens you have.' Learn to use it, and your camera. Once you get to the point where you start to become happier with your pictures, that's the time to start thinking about getting more lenses.".

I guess depending on how comfortable you feel already with a DSLR, and unless you already have a very specific goal for your photography that necessitates certain equipment, the best purchase to make may be a book like Friedman's. You'll feel more comfortable using all the modes and settings, understand the concepts in order to get the most out of the equipment. I could have read the whole book in one night!.

I would love to get the 17-55 2.8 IS lens (I shoot indoors and of people mostly) but I'm putting that off for the future...