New DSLR Camera Shopping

[GTAMADDOG]

I ended up with the 550D. I feel like a right arse by disregarding EyeKatcher's pleas but the 550D was in my budget and it's what I wanted.

 

GTAMADDOG, I too think that the 50mm lens will be a pain. You need a good all rounder lens for starting off (18-55mm). Maybe you can buy the body cheaper and then buy the lens on it's own? They're only like $100 and less AUD (not sure in pounds) but that's cheaaapp! I could help you look for something as I've spent the last 3months looking for bargain deals on eBay for cameras. Some online stores are exceptionally good too ;)

 

In an ideal world I would have a 550D. Infact, in an ultimately ideal world I'd probably have a 5D MKII but that's not going to happen any time soon :p

 

Is the 18-55mm lens actually any good? Some people seem to slate it, any others seem to say it's decent but images taken with it appear too soft some times which makes me wonder if I should bother with it or not.

 

£420 is about as cheap as I've seen them on eBay with the kit-lens, but they're badged as the Rebel T1i not the 500D. The lowest I've seen on a highstreet retailer's website is £470 with the kit-lens and badged as a 500D.

[Penfold]

Is the 18-55mm lens actually any good? Some people seem to slate it, any others seem to say it's decent but images taken with it appear too soft some times which makes me wonder if I should bother with it or not.

I'd say it's a pretty good lens, I used it for the first 10 months of owner my DSLR untill I had enough money for a different one and it had done me well. :D

[The Queen]

I really don't like the 18-55. It's rubbish and have tried it before on a friends camera. I recommend the 17-85 IS over it anyday, much better. ;)

[t.]

My Nikon 18-55 was fine, I wouldn't say it performed noticeably worse than my other zooms, besides only going out to 55, obviously. Although I haven't used it in a long time..

[TDU 505]

I really don't like the 18-55. It's rubbish and have tried it before on a friends camera. I recommend the 17-85 IS over it anyday, much better. ;)

 

I'd politely, but firmly disagree. The 17-85 is woefully soft. Only advantage it has over the 18-55 is its extended zoom range and USM for focusing. Optically, the 18-55 known to be superior.

[Penfold]

I recommend the 17-85 IS over it anyday, much better. ;)

 

That's about £250 more though isn't it... so you'd expect that..

[TDU 505]

That's about £250 more though isn't it... so you'd expect that..

250 quid for worse performance IMHO.

 

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens Comparison - ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results

 

Mouse-over for the 18-55 IS.

 

Even stopped down to f/5.6, the 17-85 is so much softer than the 18-55.

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens Comparison - ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results

 

I love the 18-55 IS really. It's cheap and excellent. The only upgrade I'll make is either the Tamron 17-50 or the EF-S 17-55 IS USM or the EF-S 15-85 IS USM. I'll take a pass on the 17-85.

[Penfold]

Yeah as I said always served me well my 18-55 although my photographer skills wern't as good when I used it most :lol:. But moved onto the 18-200 for all that extra zoom which is great for taking photos of cars! :D

[t.]

I know nothing about Canon lenses but this site is great, thanks.

[T0M722]

I'm just going to go ahead and assume that around 450pounds is the price range for you? I also know what you mean by wanting to have it badged as 500D/550D... I was looking for that too :)

 

 

(500D)If you get something like this, it has an extra battery, and you can buy the lens separately. It's about 60GBP for an 18-55mm IS lens on ebay.

Item 1

 

 

 

(500D)This comes with an extra battery, is the actual '500D' and has the 18-55mm lens included. All for 450pounds! I'm good, no?! :P Item 2

 

 

(550D) This is probably out of the price range but maybe if you sell something. I sold a bike of mine recently and got heaps for it. It's pretty much just the camera and a cleaning kit but if you want the 550D this is a good price i think. Item 3

 

 

 

(550D) If you're willing to part with the '550D' and settle for the 'Kiss X4' this is an excellent deal for you.Item 4

 

 

 

(500D) Here's a 500D with the 50mm prime lens and also it includes and extra battery and an extra SDHC card. Don't quote me on this but i think it's class 6. It's an alright price at 463GBP.

Item 5

 

That's all the hunting I can do at the moment but if you need anything else, just ask ;) :bananadance:

[GTAMADDOG]

Thought I might as well continue hi-jacking this thread a few months on instead of creating a new thread which also means quite a big bump :p

 

Thanks for all of the above links, I did look at them all but in the end I decided against spending so much money. I'm back looking at cameras again now but at half the price as I think I'll probably start getting into photography instead of faffing around with YouTube videos which don't seem all too successful any more.

 

This brings me on to wanting something cheap and cheerful. To be honest I'm only looking at second hand DSLRs (No more than £250) and other forums that I 'bless' with my presence seem to like recommending the Canon EOS 350D as a good starting point. I've been scanning the bay and found one which has caught my interest at £225 (Or Make an Offer) which comes with the 18-55mm lens, polarising filter and EW-60C lens hood which I've read is pretty useless but never-the-less it's something else that the cameras in the other auctions I've looked at don't have.

 

What are people's thoughts on the 350D as a starting point? If I do actually buy something this time around I'll probably wait until I next get paid and buy another lens but what are people's recommendations?

[TDU 505]

Thought I might as well continue hi-jacking this thread a few months on instead of creating a new thread which also means quite a big bump :p

 

Thanks for all of the above links, I did look at them all but in the end I decided against spending so much money. I'm back looking at cameras again now but at half the price as I think I'll probably start getting into photography instead of faffing around with YouTube videos which don't seem all too successful any more.

 

This brings me on to wanting something cheap and cheerful. To be honest I'm only looking at second hand DSLRs (No more than £250) and other forums that I 'bless' with my presence seem to like recommending the Canon EOS 350D as a good starting point. I've been scanning the bay and found one which has caught my interest at £225 (Or Make an Offer) which comes with the 18-55mm lens, polarising filter and EW-60C lens hood which I've read is pretty useless but never-the-less it's something else that the cameras in the other auctions I've looked at don't have.

 

What are people's thoughts on the 350D as a starting point? If I do actually buy something this time around I'll probably wait until I next get paid and buy another lens but what are people's recommendations?

 

It's a bit of a dinosaur, but if you're coming from a background of no knowledge whatsoever, it'll be fine.

 

Regarding the lens, try to find the 18-55 IS. The old 18-55 - the one without IS - has woeful image quality.

[The Queen]

I'm still sticking to my guns with the 17-85. Seriously, I don't think it's soft at all and have been using it for nearly 2 years. When I talked about the 18-55 previously, I have only tried the 18-55 Non-IS and that is what I thought you lot were discussing so my apoligies. I do think the 18-55 is still too short on it's own as a lens, even for just walking about with, and personally I would rather have the extra reach and slightly softer image quality of the 17-85 IS rather than better image quality and less reach of the 18-55 IS. That's maybe just me though and of course it depends on what you like. I just thought I would throw in my opinion.

 

True, the IS version is far superior, however I still don't think it is quite the same as the 17-85 for the reasons I have already stated. I've just had a quick browse on ebay and someone is selling one used for £200. Brilliant price and well worth it. Don't be afraid to go for used equipment as long as it's not completely scratched up and beyond repair etc...

 

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM Lens | eBay UK

 

However, you can pick up a new 18-55 IS for a shade less than £100 and it does seem a better choice if you don't want to spend as much. Decisions, decisions!

Please, for your own sake, don't just settle for the 18-55 Non-IS as it really is the pits. I have used it myself, as I said before, and it is awful so really do just go for it if it's a last resort.

-------------

 

Would you just be investing in one lens or would you want a short range and a zoom? If you were getting two I would stick with Mark's suggestion and go for the 18-55 IS and also probably the 55-250 IS which is a great lens for a shade less than £150. However, if you were only getting one, I would say go for the 17-85 IS as it's worth the money and, with the extra reach, it's a great walk-about lens. It really depends what you are into though. I see you have done a bit of motorsport stuff in the past, so with that in mind, you would be better off getting the two lenses rather than just the one.

[TDU 505]

I'm still sticking to my guns with the 17-85. Seriously, I don't think it's soft at all and have been using it for nearly 2 years. When I talked about the 18-55 previously, I have only tried the 18-55 Non-IS and that is what I thought you lot were discussing so my apoligies. I do think the 18-55 is still too short on it's own as a lens, even for just walking about with, and personally I would rather have the extra reach and slightly softer image quality of the 17-85 IS rather than better image quality and less reach of the 18-55 IS. That's maybe just me though and of course it depends on what you like. I just thought I would throw in my opinion.

 

True, the IS version is far superior, however I still don't think it is quite the same as the 17-85 for the reasons I have already stated. I've just had a quick browse on ebay and someone is selling one used for £200. Brilliant price and well worth it. Don't be afraid to go for used equipment as long as it's not completely scratched up and beyond repair etc...

 

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM Lens | eBay UK

 

However, you can pick up a new 18-55 IS for a shade less than £100 and it does seem a better choice if you don't want to spend as much. Decisions, decisions!

Please, for your own sake, don't just settle for the 18-55 Non-IS as it really is the pits. I have used it myself, as I said before, and it is awful so really do just go for it if it's a last resort.

-------------

 

Would you just be investing in one lens or would you want a short range and a zoom? If you were getting two I would stick with Mark's suggestion and go for the 18-55 IS and also probably the 55-250 IS which is a great lens for a shade less than £150. However, if you were only getting one, I would say go for the 17-85 IS as it's worth the money and, with the extra reach, it's a great walk-about lens. It really depends what you are into though. I see you have done a bit of motorsport stuff in the past, so with that in mind, you would be better off getting the two lenses rather than just the one.

 

 

Talking sense here, David! Sound advice here. :)

[GTAMADDOG]

Thanks for the advice, both of you. I do realise the 350D is getting on a bit now in the world of cameras but I'm not up for spending £500 on a camera like I was almost prepared to do a few months ago. I don't need a camera which can record HD video now so that saves me quite a lot of money. I'll either keep my FZ38 for filming or sell it on at some point.

 

 

Would you just be investing in one lens or would you want a short range and a zoom? If you were getting two I would stick with Mark's suggestion and go for the 18-55 IS and also probably the 55-250 IS which is a great lens for a shade less than £150. However, if you were only getting one, I would say go for the 17-85 IS as it's worth the money and, with the extra reach, it's a great walk-about lens. It really depends what you are into though. I see you have done a bit of motorsport stuff in the past, so with that in mind, you would be better off getting the two lenses rather than just the one.

 

 

I plan on getting a couple of other lenses at some point, I'll probably wait until I next get paid, I don't know when that'll be because I've been paid twice in two weeks but I'm only meant to get paid once a month.

 

Motorsport is the sort of photography I want to focus on although when things quiet down on the motorsport front I'll probably try out some landscape and wildlife photography. I've also been asked to photograph a wedding after-party in a couple of weeks (not the Wedding itself I wouldn't trust myself with that yet :p). I'd guess it'll be quite harsh lighting in places with disco lighting etc. How would you anticipate the 350D and any of the lenses mentioned to cope with that sort of atmosphere?

 

There's no rush to get a camera really but it'd be a bonus to have one ready for the party in a couple of weeks because judging by past experiences with my FZ38 I can't see it handling the lighting too well.

[TDU 505]

Motorsports, the 55-250 IS would get you long for cheap.

 

As for the party, I'll be a bit hesitant with the ISO performance of the 350D, which would be made worse by the relatively slow 18-55 (If you're thinking of getting it). But even so, there isn't really any f/2.8 glass that is within your budget. A speedlite might be out of budget too. I'd say, you're pretty much stuck. :p

[t.]

ISO performance is one of the things I really look for, but sadly the camera manufactures seem to know this and it comes at a premium. I'm blessed now that my camera produces no noise that interferes until north of 2000.

 

Indoors often requires an ISO bump or a wide ass f number (aforementioned 2.8 being my favorite), the cheapest way to get that wide is with a prime lens, but then you are limited to one focal length.

 

The EOS 350 is.. quite dated now.. I worry that if you buy it you'll become frustrated, especially with noise levels. That said I am a noise freak. It comes back to budget vs needs. I just sold my Nikon D5000 for £200... if only I'd seen this earlier.. ><

[T0M722]

No rush now but I'm looking to replace my 18-55mm with a new lens like it but with USM and better image quality. I want people's opinion on either the 15-85mm IS USM or the 17-55mm f/2.8 . These would be for standard lens that i use all the time. So I'm probably thinking 15-85 for extra reach.

 

But, is the 15-85 that much worse than the 17-55mm in terms of IQ and other stuff?

[t.]

Take practicality over super sharpness. While having a really crisp lens is great it's totally useless without the range. I am of course speaking in terms of spotting, if you are photographing other subjects (like ones that don't drive off) then sure, go for the sharp option.

 

I carry a 18-200 for general spotting and that is regarded as a mediocre lens for sharpness but tbh.. it's looks fantastic 90% of the time. Then I carry a prime for parked subjects so I can get it as crisp as possible.

 

18-200 (not the best shot I've ever taken with it)

 

 

-

 

35

 

 

The 35 is sharper sure, but I wouldn't call the 18-200 bad. Depends how anal you are.