Lens or body upgrades.

stifler

stifler

stifler

Associate
Joined
22 Jan 2007
Posts
654
Location
rhyl
I currently have a canon 1000d with a 28-80mm ef and a 55-250mm ef-s lenses, so what would i be better off replacing, body or lenses???

I think the 1000d is pretty limiting as in low iso and fps and no video mode, might even consider changing to nikon, pentax or sony?????

Budget is around £600.

cheers.
 
If you want video it's a no brainer. You will need to change your body.

I won't comment on which manufacturer to buy as you need to try them and see what feels best to you. I went canon and have invested a lot in their line but if I could rewind with hindsight I would have gone Nikon :D
 
If you're happy with the lenses you have, stick with Canon. Does your budget include the money you'd get from selling the 1000D?
 
While video isn't essential it would be nice to have, i just think i've out grown the 1000d, i mainly photograph family days out, motorsport, my lad playing for his footie team.

Buget is £600 plus the sale of my kit, guessing i'll get between £200-300 for what i have.
 
If you want to stay Canon and want video, I'd suggest keeping the 55-250, sell the body and other lens and look at a 550D or 600D and a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
 
MY question would be do you REALLY need video? Like REALLY?

When you go out with your camera can you see yourself often recording on your DSLR or nipping to your Phone?

For example I was torn between a new 550D/600D or a 2nd hand semi-pro body. I needed great cross type focus at all points and a high burst rate, so I got myself a 40D, was a lot cheaper and really changed my view of a good body :P

I always say this but go second hand and pick up some L glass ;)
 
Been thinking about a 40d or 50d, tried a 60d today and liked the feel and size of it(bit to pricey though), video aint a must, for me a camera is for taking photos first and formost.

So which out of those two would be best, seeing as the 50d is only around £100 more. Also what lenses would be recommended i try to get.
 
Last edited:
Out of them 2, I'd have the 40D. The 50D doesn't add very much for the increased cost, IMO.

Lenses, keep the 55-250 as its an excellent lens for the price, and go for something like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and possibly a fast prime like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 for low light work.

I started with a 30D and the Tamron and Canon lens mentioned above (except the tele) and found it a brilliant starting point
 
Been reading up on the 40/50d and am going to get a 40, apart from the higher mp count(i only print upto a4 size so this area dont matter to much
) there really aint much difference from what i can gather.

I'll get the tamron 17-50 to. Also been reading about the tamron 70-300vc, would this lens be much or a lot better in terms of speed and IQ than my 55-250.
 
stifler said:
Been reading up on the 40/50d and am going to get a 40, apart from the higher mp count(i only print upto a4 size so this area dont matter to much
) there really aint much difference from what i can gather.

I'll get the tamron 17-50 to. Also been reading about the tamron 70-300vc, would this lens be much or a lot better in terms of speed and IQ than my 55-250.
Click to expand...

The 40D will still be more than enough resolution for A3 and larger prints ;)

Regarding the 70-300, I'd only bother changing if you feel you need more length. Personally I kept a cheap 90-300mm Canon tele for a few months until I got the 70-200mm f/4L, which is a massive step up. So, basically keep the 55-250 and save for either the 70-200mm f4L or the Canon 70-300 L. They're pricey, but the quality is a world apart.
 
Deffo keep your 55-250 IS, while the Tamron 70-300mm VC is superb (I have one) I'm sure you wouldn't see the benefits that the price difference may suggest.

The stabilisation on the Tamron is a little better, it will focus slightly faster and is a bit sharper but thats about it.

A 40D with a 17-50mm is still a fantastic combination and one I'd recommend everyday of the week.
 
Last edited:
My new Tamron 70-300 has just arrived. Whilst I was tempted by the 70-200 f4, I think I'll find the extra 100mm invaluable.
 
Lens every time. Unless there is a real specific need for a body upgrade, ie like needing video or much higher resolution.....
Don't think many have out grown a camera body in the last 20-30 years.... Just need to learn how to use them better.....
New and "better" cameras have just made photographers more lazy...... Better glass should show up in better images though.
 
So a 40d body, tamron 17-50 plus a 70-200 f4 would come to around £900, which is £100 over my budget assuming i get around £300 for my current kit.
 
That would give you a brilliant setup, and you can always sell your camera and 18-55mm first, and keep hold of the 55-250 until you save up a bit more to replace it with the 70-200mm
 
Its been awhile since i started this thread but after trying various cameras in my local shop i got myself nikon 5100 with a 18-105 vr lens for £540 and am very happy with it, the pictures it produces are a world apart from my old d1000.

So now i'm after a tele zoom and have been looking at the nikon 55-300 vr, tamron 70-300 vc and the nikon 70-300 vr, the reviews i've read are pointing me towards the tammy. Its only about £50 more than the 55-300 and over £100 less than the 70-300.

Anyone used any of these lens and what are your thoughts.
 
stifler said:
Been thinking about a 40d or 50d, tried a 60d today and liked the feel and size of it(bit to pricey though), video aint a must, for me a camera is for taking photos first and formost.

So which out of those two would be best, seeing as the 50d is only around £100 more. Also what lenses would be recommended i try to get.
Click to expand...

5Dmk1 would be my recommendation, else a switch to Nikon may be worthwhile...
 
stifler said:
Its been awhile since i started this thread but after trying various cameras in my local shop i got myself nikon 5100 with a 18-105 vr lens for £540 and am very happy with it, the pictures it produces are a world apart from my old d1000.

So now i'm after a tele zoom and have been looking at the nikon 55-300 vr, tamron 70-300 vc and the nikon 70-300 vr, the reviews i've read are pointing me towards the tammy. Its only about £50 more than the 55-300 and over £100 less than the 70-300.

Anyone used any of these lens and what are your thoughts.
Click to expand...

Depends a lot on budget constraints, I have the nikon 70-300vr and it is great for when I want to go light.

The Tamron is pretty similar so worth a try, sample variation may be bigger than any real optical difference. The only weak side of the Nikon is wide open at 300mm, the Tamron isn't any better here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom