~£1000 budget for DSLR + Lenses

right, the handling of the d40x compared to the 400D is in my opinion flawed....many settings that should be (and are on the 400D) at hand are hidden in menus. Also, the lack of the mechanical drive for focusing rules out a lot of very good glass, such as nice primes, macro lenses etc. that are reasonably price

As to your earlier point about non-canon/nikon lenses, canon actually has the edge here, canon has the smallest distance between the sensor and the rear of the lens of any manufacturer.....and you can always move AWAY from the sensor with adaptors, but if you move towards it you start fowling things. I have an m42 screw mount adaptor for my 30D which allows me to use a lot of lenses such as the carl zeiss stuff, i can easily get an adaptor to use OM fit olympus lenses, and can also get adaptors to use nikkor lenses albeit without autofocus.

The CMOS of the canon is favourable in low light, and very similar in good light. The handling of the two is very similar but you can get the battery grip for the 400D at a later date if you decide that you do need a bit more size. The canon uses the cheaper compact flash cards vs sd, which also are common throughout the higher range of slrs so if you wanted to upgrade body you don't have to mess around with new memory.

There are far more "enthusiast" lenses avaiable for the canon too, such as the 70-200 F4....a slightly darker version of the profession F2.8 lens, but at ~£400....and just as sharp (some people debate that it's actually sharper). Same with the 17-40 F4L......not far from a grand less than the 16-35 F2.8, but arguably sharper. Again, nikon only do the £1k+ version of this lens.

The D40 doesn't have the ability to take a wired remote, which seriously limits long exposures at night as you are restricted to the 30 seconds or holding your finger on the shutter button (not ideal at all) where as the canon can take both wired and wireless.

Just my 2 cents :) I do think that for enthusiasts canon offer far more.....as a professional with the likes of the d300 and d3 on the market, when money isnt as much of an issue it's imo a much closer ball game, but at this end of the market it's in canons favour.....that's why the 400D is the only dSLR to ever make it into the top 10 selling cameras world wide :)
 
Ok,

I've picked up a 400D + 18-55 lens :)

Probably won't arrive until friday but doesn't matter because the Mrs isn't allowing me to use it until Christmas. A condition of me being impatient and buying it now!

Additional equipment...

I was planning on going for the Sigma 70-300. There's been many moments I've wished for a decent zoom lense/functionality on my old bridge camera. I've seen these on a certain site for around £90

Over the current kit lens what would I gain from the 50mm (nifty fifty?)

Oh, kit bag + tripod i will look for in the sales (if any) after xmas
 
if you get the sigma 70-300 make sure it's the APO version, the none apo is quite poor but the APO is very good VFM.

The nifty fifty will be a lot sharper than your kit lens, allow you to blur the background more and shoot in much lower light conditions :) must have imo for the money.
 
aztechnology said:
I won't take the easy way out and suggest loads of excellent L lenses.

We have the 400D and the 18-55 Kit lens, which is a bit dissapointing. I also have a 40D and 17-85 kit lens, and the results are mixed.

We have 2 24-85's which have good results, but are not wide enough to consider as an all day carry around lens.

We also have a 10-20 Sigma, and I'm not convinced mine is a good as other people's (though perhaps my standards are higher).

I would try the the new 18-55 IS, by all reports, it is a good lens. If you want to start to use real photographic skills, then a fast prime is essential, most recommend the 50 1.8, and I'd go with this (mine's an old mk1 version, it's excellent though makes a racket when focusing), though it's a bit long on a 1.6x format. A fast 35mm lens is an option, though it's not as an attrative option price wise.

Personally i'm saving for the 17-55 f2.8 IS, as it's a reasonable range and is reportedly excellent.

Honestly, without succumbing to the kit frenzy most of us get, I'd stick with one lens for a while (ideally, the 50mm 1.8) and learn your trade for a few months. After that, you'd know what the next lens will be. You'll know if you want a longer or wider lens.
Click to expand...

So once you start talking about having to upgrade the EOS lens, surely it's worth considering a D80 with 18-70mm lens for around £600!?
 
rG-tom said:
*Snip*
Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you said there, but there are a few points I want to add to;

The handling of the two is very similar but you can get the battery grip for the 400D at a later date if you decide that you do need a bit more size.
Click to expand...

You can get battery grips for the D40. Admitably they're not great but if its to add more wight and size then they do this pretty well and cheap..

The D40 doesn't have the ability to take a wired remote, which seriously limits long exposures at night as you are restricted to the 30 seconds or holding your finger on the shutter button (not ideal at all) where as the canon can take both wired and wireless.
Click to expand...

Doesn't restrict long exposures at all as you use use a wireless remote.

And something that is entirely personal but very important; I found the ergonomics to be less than good on the lower end Canons. This is the main reason I went Nikon. I still use Canon 350D sometiems at work and it still feels cheap and nasty compared to the equivalent Nikon. My advice as always has been try them both out and see which feels better (Both in terms of ergonomics and handling) If the D40 feels better then go with that, if they feel the same or the Canon feels better then go with that.
 
Rob200sx said:
I was planning on going for the Sigma 70-300. There's been many moments I've wished for a decent zoom lense/functionality on my old bridge camera. I've seen these on a certain site for around £90

Over the current kit lens what would I gain from the 50mm (nifty fifty?)
Click to expand...

As echoed previously, if you do go for the Sigma make sure it's the APO variant which is optically superior to the non-APO version.

As for your question regarding the nifty fifty, you will find that it provides sharper results compared to your kit lens at 50mm.

With this you will also find that you will have more flexibility when shooting hand-held or in low light as this lens will let more light into the camera without having the need to bump up the ISO or lower the shutter speed.

It's build quality is a bit plasticy and lightweight but for £60 the image quality can't be argued with.

Given the recent reports regarding the sharpness of the new EF-S 18-55mm IS kit lens I'd maybe consider punting your bundled kit lens and replacing it with this for the sake of spending an extra £60 you'll get improved image quality and decent image stabilisation

And you'll need a CF too :D
 
Actually i do have a question about the CF cards.

I've seen all sorts of speed types, what's suitable for a 400D? I assume the extreme's are only really for the 1DS etc?

Also, what would be a decent Wide Angle?
 
Sandisk Extreme III recommended, great prices and do the job perfectly: 2GB card for less than £20

They also bundle free recovery software with their cards called RescuePro - I had to use this once after accidently formatting the wrong card when shooting an event, saved me massive embarrassment!

Decent wide angle, depends how wide you want to go and how much you want to spend:

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Canon 17-40L
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS

Ultra-wide:
Canon 10-22
Sigma 10-20
 
Last edited:
alexisonfire said:
:confused:

400D
10MP
3FPS
100-1600ISO
9AF Points
2.5" Screen
No weather sealing

D80
10MP
3FPS
100-1600ISO (3200 Boost)
11AF Points
2.5" Screen
No weather sealing

Pretty damn similar in specs imo, the only thing i would agree with is that the D80 has far superior handling than the 400D.
Click to expand...

There is more to equivelency than the numbers on the page, the price points would suggest that the natural competitor for the 400D is the D40(x)
 
NeilFawcett said:
So once you start talking about having to upgrade the EOS lens, surely it's worth considering a D80 with 18-70mm lens for around £600!?
Click to expand...

We could flog the 18-55 and replace it with the new IS lens for not too much outlay (about another £50), though as I said earlier, I don't really like the 400D, and wouldn't put my money on it. For me the 1st DSLR wanted and could afford was the 40D, up until then I was still shooting film and scanning. The wife though does have a 400D, and she likes it and see no reason to upgrade the kit lens.

We are with Canon for historical / financial reasons, and if I'd had a free choice I wouild have waited for D300 that's just coming out now, though I doubt that I could convince my wife to let me spend that much.
 
Camera arrived Saturday :) (It's been squirrelled away until xmas though :( )

Have ordered the Sigma 7-300 APO DG Macro Lens & the Canon 50mm 1.8

However...
The Kit 18-55mm lens has a 58mm thread, the Sigma is also 58mm but the 50mm is 52mm!

I'm going to want to get some ND Filters & A Polariser but I won't really want to get two sets for the lenses!
 
With a swt of Cokin or Hitech filters, you can get one holder and two adaper rings, so you can fit all your lenses, now and in the future. As far as the CPL goes, getting a 58mm one and a 52-58 step ring will do you nicely....
 
Two solutions; Get filters that are too big, ie get all your filters in 77mm an use step down rings to make them fit the lenses. (77mm>58mm, 77mm>52mm) or get a Cokin/Hitech/Lee filter kit. Then you just have to get the right sized adapter rings. This would also mean that you can use Nd grad filters. :)
 
Rob200sx said:
However...
The Kit 18-55mm lens has a 58mm thread, the Sigma is also 58mm but the 50mm is 52mm!

I'm going to want to get some ND Filters & A Polariser but I won't really want to get two sets for the lenses!
Click to expand...

Personally I'd just get the exta filters. Swapping them around is a pain, and at this size they are not too pricey.

if you want to start using ND's then the best bet would be a Cokin holder or similar...
 
Last edited:
Have ordered all the Cokin bits required, thanks for your help :)

Two items left on the list to get

Tripod (probably the Manfrotto 190XPROB) (Do I need to get a separate head? Reading mixed articles about this)

Decent Bag to hold Camera, 3 lenses, filter etc

Will be looking around just after Xmas for these though.
 
The 190X ProB is a good versatile choice of tripod. Another option to consider is the 055ProB. Its a bit taller and a bit heavier but allows you to remove the centre coloumn as far as im aware. Yes you will need a seperate head (Unless you buy a Legs+head package). As for the bst head, it depends on what your shoot. There is no 'ultimate' head for all situations. I use a 322rc2 head for landscapes etc, and a 393 Gimbal head for wildlife shots. Id ideally also like a geared 3 way head for macro and landscape shots. But for general use, a decent ballhead or the 322rc2 is a good start.

As for bag, lots of people recommend the Lowepro Slingshot range, but I never reall got on with mine. I much prefer the rucksack type. If you can, try and go with Lowepro bags as they are superbly built. Ive got a Lowpro Pro Trekker and its built like a tank. Maybe you could look at the Lowpro Rover series? Hope that helps.
 
Thanks,

Is the 322rc2 suitable for fast panning? It's more likely I'll be using it at track days etc

We're going sales shopping on the 27th so does anyone know of any Photographic stores in any of the main shopping centres?

Milton Keynes
Lakeside
BlueWater
?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom