DSLR for around £1200 - kit would be nice.

Think a 40D second hand and then some lenses to get you started as well.. maybe something like a tamron 17-50 2.8 and canon 70-200? Of course this is just an example and would depend on what you intend to shoot etc, could swap the telephoto for a wide angle etc?

Tripod would recommend RedSnapper they are really decent and I'm sure if you are a member of Talk Photography you get a slight discount as well :)

Flash wise how much are you planning to use it? Canon 430 EXii would suit you just fine if you are planning to use it quite a bit, if not some of the ebay flashes (Yonugo) are supposed to be alright and for the price as well :)

Then just get a lovely bag to put it all in and you should be good to go! I would definitely recommend the second hand market just for the sheer amount of bargains you can pick up, and then when you come to sell you won't lose a huge amount of money!
 
Rojin said:
I don't think Phate is in the market for a 5D classic anymore... He's snaffled something with a mkII on the end if I'm not mistaken :D
Click to expand...

Ford Fiesta ? ;):p:D

Nice one Jake.

As for the OP as Atticus says, go have a hold of a few cameras and see what fits your hands best. Depending on what you lump for and the areas (the ones you mention could fit into a few lens categories) you want to shoot will give a better idea of what to recommend :)
 
Mr Jones said:
the pictures shows that higher ISO, the 40D trumps.
Click to expand...

It really doesn't this is a myth that started from early reviews where certain features where not turned off because they didn't think they effected the raw file. They did.

The 50D has better high iso performance than the 40D and 7D. There has been a mass of evidence from the very experienced users on TP who compared them all.
 
dannyjo22 said:
It really doesn't this is a myth that started from early reviews where certain features where not turned off because they didn't think they effected the raw file. They did.

The 50D has better high iso performance than the 40D and 7D. There has been a mass of evidence from the very experienced users on TP who compared them all.
Click to expand...

Well I've had all three together and the 40D is cleaner at ISO400-1600 than the 50D, I wouldn't use either above that personally. The 50D did have a bit more detail though. The 7D I would use up to 3200 at a push. The 1DmkIII was a mile ahead in clean ISO over all three, which is to be expected. I can only go by what I have seen with the cameras I had.
 
Im now looking at 550D with a kit lens, about £800 or the D5 mk2 no lens £1900. I know, big difference in price and spec.

But im thinking in the long term, would getting the cheaper camera be a false saving. Its £1100 cheaper and with a lens, but for Paris, bit of sport action, partys and landscape, would the D5 mk2 be the better option.

I know, make my own mind up and i will. But if any of you have used both, let me know what you thought of them.

Colin
 
The full frame from the MKII might sound good for low light, the need for sharper lenses (transLate: more expensive lenses), and an older AF system compared to the 7D/550D, you might want to think twice.
 
Mr Jones said:
The full frame from the MKII might sound good for low light, the need for sharper lenses (transLate: more expensive lenses), and an older AF system compared to the 7D/550D, you might want to think twice.
Click to expand...

I've got 2 x L's and the 85mm 1.8 which is pin sharp?

Like I said, I've used one...yes the AF system on it for such a camera is horrendous but when the 5D 3 is released with the inevitable better AF I'll upgrade :)
 
Aye, if the MKIII have a AF on par or better than the 7D, it'd be mint. Still, in response to colinuk's post, the price difference is HUGE even if he's planning for the future. He can always start with cropped bodies with better lens before the leap into a FF setup.
 
If you don't need ff then don't bother buying it. The &D and 550D are very different cameras and I would go for the 7D just on solidity, size and feel before the 550D which is much more cheaply built (and of course is cheaper).
 
Mr Jones said:
Aye, if the MKIII have a AF on par or better than the 7D, it'd be mint. Still, in response to colinuk's post, the price difference is HUGE even if he's planning for the future. He can always start with cropped bodies with better lens before the leap into a FF setup.
Click to expand...

AH, I completely misunderstood.

I thought you were talking to me, not the op. Doh!
 
Having now 'handled' the 550D at the shop, it isnt for me. It didnt fit well, feel well and the fact it is plastic just didnt feel right.

Maybe im use to the Fuji bodies too much but this felt like a toy camera and not something id be happy using. Even the Auto focus for people walking around me was not that fast, the few test shots i took they were not pin sharp.

So, once again, back to the web sites to examine which one to get. All i want is the Fuji S5 with a better Fps, made by canon.... is that so hard lol..

Colin - not found a D7 to try yet, i did handle the D5 mk2, now that did feel nice, buttons in the right place and seemed to focus on things before i pressed the button. But £2000 hmm..
 
colinuk said:
snip
Click to expand...


Try a 60D?

It's the middle ground. Your going from one end of the scale to the other...either entry level DSLR to a full frame professional one? err bit extreme mate :p

The 40D, 50D and 60D are all middle ground SLR's, proper bodys on them that fit your hand better and feel fantastic, deliver great images, and don't have the price tag of the 5D2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom