New Camera - Which Canon DSLR to go for?

valve90210

valve90210

valve90210

Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2006
Posts
4,288
Hi All

My department head has just been authorised to buy a new dslr to upgrade and work along side an existing Canon Eos 400D.

The 400D has worked well for us for the last few years and had coped in pretty much all the situations we need a camera for from bright outside use to very dark scenes in a theatre.

We currently have the stock 18 - 55mm lense - which is ok but gives pretty soft pictures - and a Canon zoom lense (which one exactly escapes me at the moment but I think it's something like 70mm - 200mm or about that) which gives much sharper pictures but is limiting when it comes to capturing an entire scene.

Can anyone recommend a new Canon body (sticking to Canon so we can share the exisiting lenses etc) which will be an upgrade to the 400D but not going too overboard (ie £1500 for a body is not an option) probably looking at about £400 ish maximum.

In addition can any one recommend a decent lense to go with it which could be shared with the 400D too. either something that would be much better quality than the stock 18-55mm wide angle or maybe something that would be a good compromise lense giving both width and zoom?

Any help very much appreciated! :)
 
TBH, with that budget and the requirement to stick to Canon (which I fully understand in this case) I really wouldn't bother buying a new camera body. Nothing much has changed with canon sensors since the 350D so don't expect noticible differences in images. If you had specific requirements like high speed auto focus or better low light then there are things like 7D, 5D mk2 or mk3, but at a much higher budget.


I would just put the money towards a better lens. Tamron 17-50mm etc. if you want a second body I would probably look at picking up a second hand 450d or 500d etc, whatever is cheap.
 
We definitely want a new body as we are taking so many more pics, we keep finding we have no camera handy to take pics as events are constantly clashing so we often end up with someone taking photos on a mobile...which are (95% of the time) useless when it comes to including them in publications etc.

So If we were to pick up a new (will definitely be new as second hand is not a term they understand here!! ;)) 600D and a 'Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Lens for Canon' They'd work ok together and given dcent results and still allow the use of the zoom lense as required?

Is there anything decent on the lense front that does both wide and zoom and is decent quality, I see Tamron do an 18 - 270mm lense, any good?
 
Avoid the super zoom!

Silly question but I think the 400D was the last Canon body to come with the non IS kit lens which was a real dog. The IS version that replaced it with the 450D is a much better lens so you might well find that just buying a 600D with kit lens will give you the improvement you need.
 
What is wrong with the superzoom lenses out of interest?

There doesn't seem to be any mention of IS on the kit lense so you might be right.

In which case it might be best to get the 600D with the kit lense and a second zoom lense if we could so both cameras have good capabilities...

What would be the best zoom lense to go for stick with Canon or go for Tamron or something?
 
valve90210 said:
What is wrong with the superzoom lenses out of interest?
Click to expand...

You know that old saying "Jack of all trades, master of none", well its that, but probably worse.

The benefit of interchangeable lens cameras is that you get superior imaging from being able to use different focal lengths.

You may or may have not heard before that people will tell you that the sharpest lenses out there are Primes, which are a fixed focal length.... in other words, they don't zoom.

A zoom which covers a really huge range is optically going to be poor compared to using a combination of Primes or smaller Zoom lenses with different focal lengths. If one lens really could do it all, then people would only ever buy one lens. The other factor is that superzoom lenses, especially cheaper ones will have a very restricted aperture.
 
Just to clarify guys, all these lenses have their purpose and quality does vary (generally in line with price).

I'm not sure what we are referring to as superzoom lenses here, but Telephoto Zoom lenses such as the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II are both highly regarded and very expensive.
 
As above get a canon 600d with the better kit lens, if you then want a wider lens get the canon efs 10-22mm lens (not cheap about £600) or if you want a better lens covering a similar range get the canon 17-55 f2.8 IS again not cheap but great optics and a wide aperture that will let in twice as much light at the wide end and four times as much at the Long end. You could then use the superior kit lens with image stabilisation on the 400d
 
Last edited:
If you do want a lens with a wider zoom range i would suggest getting a canon body with the 18-135 efs stm kit lens. Obviously no where near a long as the Tamron but a much better quality lens with much less distortion etc. You would probably only find this with the 650d or 700d body though
 
Genoma said:
Just to clarify guys, all these lenses have their purpose and quality does vary (generally in line with price).

I'm not sure what we are referring to as superzoom lenses here, but Telephoto Zoom lenses such as the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II are both highly regarded and very expensive.
Click to expand...

If you read the thread he asks for a recommendation on a Tamron 18-270mm, which with such a wide focal range that it is considered a super zoom.

The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II is a Telephoto Zoom covering a fairly standard zoom range, not a super zoom. It's also nearly 2k, so obviously vastly different to a £300 lens.
 
Right here's my opinion:

For the body go for a 600D, as it is the oldest entry level Canon body that is easily available, the 650D and 700D wont be worth the extra money.

Lens wise, a1ex2001 is correct that your current Canon EF-S 18-55mm doesnt feature IS and is quite pants. The newer generation of kit lenses, the IS and IS-II as well as the 18-135mm IS are all quite decent.

My recommendation would be to go with the EF-S 18-135mm IS lens as you will notice an improvement in image quality and you will gain zoom range and Image Stabilisation. Be aware that there is also a newer EF-S 18-135mm IS STM which is optically the same lens but features a stepper focusing motor, which mainly is a benefit for video use, and I dont think of any benefit at all on the 600D.

tl;dr: 600D with 18-135mm IS lens.

(If you buy from the magenta colourer Hong Kong based camera store with the popular Youtube channel you can get both of those for under £540 if you add them to your basket separately, and dont buy the kit which would cost £10 more)
 
Cheers, that sounds like a decent option actually...now if only i new the store you are talking about... :(

edit: Think I've found it, pretty good prices, thanks. Now to see if I can get the boss to order them.
 
Last edited:
I'm lucky enough to own the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 (non VC)and the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II. Both amazing lenses, but I will (again) stick up for my Tamron 18-270 2.5-6.3 VC PZD.

It's more than sharp enough, everywhere, to mean that photographic technique is the limiting factor, f3.5 at the wide end is fine for low light, in fact I prefer it for low-light static stuff over the 17-50 as the IS is superb and more than compensates for the 1-ish stop of light loss.

There does seem to be some photo-snobbery about superzooms. Maybe mine is a great copy, but I can't see why- it's a great tool, doesn't cost the earth, and if you want that massive focal range without swapping lenses or carrying multiple bodies, there's no substitute.
 
CGrieves said:
There does seem to be some photo-snobbery about superzooms. Maybe mine is a great copy, but I can't see why- it's a great tool, doesn't cost the earth, and if you want that massive focal range without swapping lenses or carrying multiple bodies, there's no substitute.
Click to expand...

Well there is, they are called Bridge Cameras or expensive Compacts.
 
I'm well aware of that, my point was that if you are just going to buy a camera and stick one lens on it to do every focal length, there is little point in buying a single lens reflex camera. Why not just buy something smaller which has that kind of range and still produces a good image.

If that is the requirement of somebody, then an interchangeable lens camera really isn't necessary for the user.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom