Thor Hakonsen
New Member
The one that gets 94 points is the "old" 100mm f/2.8 USM, not the new IS 
Best DSLR camera for my needs?
- Thread starter SliK JiM
- Start date
Peter Kraemer
New Member
I use the Canon 50D.
Lenses:
Canon 70-200 4.0 L IS
Tokina 11-16 2.8
Canon 50 1.8
some older lenses
and the Tokina 100 2.8 macro is ordered, but in the moment not available.
Now I´m looking for a good standard zoom lens (24-70 or 24-105)........
DGray
Avid Member
550d
Jim, the 550D does have a finer sensor, and will resolve more
detail with less noise than it's predecessor. Its also better at high ISO shooting.
I don't really have a dog in the fight when it comes to the brand of camera. Canon had the best range of lenses for me when I jumped in. They still do for me, or I would switch to Nikon.
Sorry to see how much you have to pay for the kit in the UK. In the US they are very much less, and there are lots of used around for about 70% of the low new price.
I did not find the kit lens on my first Rebel to be acceptable. I subsequently only bought the body when I upgraded and used the money to buy better lenses.
Jim, the 550D does have a finer sensor, and will resolve more
detail with less noise than it's predecessor. Its also better at high ISO shooting.
I don't really have a dog in the fight when it comes to the brand of camera. Canon had the best range of lenses for me when I jumped in. They still do for me, or I would switch to Nikon.
Sorry to see how much you have to pay for the kit in the UK. In the US they are very much less, and there are lots of used around for about 70% of the low new price.
I did not find the kit lens on my first Rebel to be acceptable. I subsequently only bought the body when I upgraded and used the money to buy better lenses.
Last edited:
jessica
Avid Member
Coming in late lol,
I guess I should have been more clear, I meant between the Cannon Models the OP was listing.
Every one knows there is a big difference in body when it comes to the brand name. It all boils down to preference I guess
jessica
Avid Member
OP: Best thing to do is hold each model in your hands and see what feels best for you
EDIT How the heck did this double post happen lol
hun73r
Member
To answer your original question on deciding between the two models I would have to say it is a matter of deciding on two differences:
Megapixel increase from one to the other - which is not significant unless you are blowing up poster sized images (15 for the 500 and 18 for the 550).
Ability to access higher ISO settings (Up to 6400 in Auto mode for the 550 and 1600 for the 500.) IMO anything much higher than 1600 and you get a lot of noise so I do not know how important this is.
Other than that they both use the same DIGIC 4 Processor with a 3:2 aspect ration. You cannot go wrong with either and poeple usually go with the highest megapixel they can afford.
I would say that if buying a macro lens is not possible due to bugetary constraints after purchasing the 550 then I would go with the 500 and a good macro lens as that will ultimately make you happier.
Megapixel increase from one to the other - which is not significant unless you are blowing up poster sized images (15 for the 500 and 18 for the 550).
Ability to access higher ISO settings (Up to 6400 in Auto mode for the 550 and 1600 for the 500.) IMO anything much higher than 1600 and you get a lot of noise so I do not know how important this is.
Other than that they both use the same DIGIC 4 Processor with a 3:2 aspect ration. You cannot go wrong with either and poeple usually go with the highest megapixel they can afford.
I would say that if buying a macro lens is not possible due to bugetary constraints after purchasing the 550 then I would go with the 500 and a good macro lens as that will ultimately make you happier.
SpinyFranky
New Member
All sensors in the Camera bodies are based off of the flagship, with the flagship being "the best".
No the A700 sensor is not fullframe as the A900's, but yes the technology is based off of it. That is why the A900 costs about $3000 and the A700 was $750.
Also I support Tamron and Sigma, they are not "no name lenses". They are third party, and like brand name they have their hits and they have their misses. Personally I have just always been a believer in buying a lens that was made by the people who made the body, im not knocking third party quality - im just stating preferences.
Here is an example of something ive never heard of, and would never trust to buy off of ebay.
http://cgi.ebay.com/500mm-f-6-3-Mir...ViewItem&pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2ead06a95a
Perhaps its good? But ive never heard of it before and im not gonna be suckered by the "enjoy great images at a fraction of the price"
The "price" is usually the indicator of quality, and the more effort/craftsmanship that went into the product the higher the price is - capitalism at its finest.
S.F
Chris Anderson
Dr. House of Chameleons
I have to agree with those of you who are saying that the lenses are the most important thing for taking good photos and they should be what you primarily invest in.
Many of you are familiar with my photos. I use an almost 7 year old entry level DSLR (Canon EOS Digital Rebel/300D) but I have good lenses and lighting (Canon 100mm Macro & Twin Lite setup, for example). I don't think anyone can claim that this old entry level DSLR body doesn't take exceptional photos with the lenses I have. I do not use the kit lens because the photos simply are not very good.
As far as what is the better investment, lens technology does not change nearly as quickly as camera body technology. If you spend more money on good lenses, that investment will last a lot longer than spending more money on a body and the payoff in the image quality is much better as well. I plan to upgrade my body to a more professional one before long (its definitely time) but I am not itching to upgrade my lenses.
The 500D will have more capabilities than you can handle for quite a while. At some point you may want to upgrade your body but at that point, you'll want a higher level body, not a 550D. If you can save that extra £120 and put it toward nice glass, do it.
Chris
Many of you are familiar with my photos. I use an almost 7 year old entry level DSLR (Canon EOS Digital Rebel/300D) but I have good lenses and lighting (Canon 100mm Macro & Twin Lite setup, for example). I don't think anyone can claim that this old entry level DSLR body doesn't take exceptional photos with the lenses I have. I do not use the kit lens because the photos simply are not very good.
As far as what is the better investment, lens technology does not change nearly as quickly as camera body technology. If you spend more money on good lenses, that investment will last a lot longer than spending more money on a body and the payoff in the image quality is much better as well. I plan to upgrade my body to a more professional one before long (its definitely time) but I am not itching to upgrade my lenses.
The 500D will have more capabilities than you can handle for quite a while. At some point you may want to upgrade your body but at that point, you'll want a higher level body, not a 550D. If you can save that extra £120 and put it toward nice glass, do it.
Chris
yoza717
New Member
I think that a quality lens is more important than a more expensive body as far as Image Quality goes when using the camera in regular conditions. It is when you are pushing the camera to its limits is where the more expensive bodies earn their keep. Like low light conditions, faster frames per second, more dials to easily change settings or weather sealing.
I have lenses that have gone from film cameras to my latest digitals...so my camera bodies come and go, but good lenses have always stuck around.
Here are a few (non chameleon related) shots, showing what a nice lens will do....you may recognize the surfer, Kelly Slater.
I have lenses that have gone from film cameras to my latest digitals...so my camera bodies come and go, but good lenses have always stuck around.
Here are a few (non chameleon related) shots, showing what a nice lens will do....you may recognize the surfer, Kelly Slater.
Attachments
SliK JiM
New Member
Well, its the 550D over the 500D, but reading some of the other posts, I'm quite possibly overstepping my mark on the photographic pyramid! Maybe I should drop myself down the ladder a bit...
Tell me about it! It was even worse when the exchange rate was £1:$2 not too long ago. I bought some Oakley's a while back in Canada (3 maybe 4 years) for roughly £40. Back in the UK they were £150!
OP: Best thing to do is hold each model in your hands and see what feels best for you
EDIT How the heck did this double post happen lol
I have, I want both!
Precisely my thoughts about the Mp's. I certainly dont need 18!
Low light is something I probably wont be doing for a while, so it's not necessary atm.
Right, well, after all of this, I'm guessing my better option is to get a 2nd hand lower spec body and spend the money on lenses for now. In that case, what is a good option to go for? I think I prefer canon, but my old man swore by Nikon so I'm not too fussed but I'm aware its pretty much one or the other if I'm planning for the future!
So, any suggestions!?
Thanks
Thor Hakonsen
New Member
In the second hand market the best you can do these days are a Nikon D300 (imho)
www.thorhakonsen.com (pics taken mostly with D300)
www.thorhakonsen.com (pics taken mostly with D300)
SliK JiM
New Member
They're some really impressive pics! 2nd hand D300's are around £700 (body only) from my brief searching! Can get a 5D for that sort of price too...
There are 50D's for around £550. I need to keep looking, but it's looking promising!
Dave Weldon
Avid Member
Howdy,
Funny, I just bought the Canon 550D yesterday. I've been waiting a couple of weeks for Costco to get them back in stock. I even called the Costco headquarters and got them to divert some to my local store that, otherwise, didn't get any allocated! Six came in and I showed-up before they were even out of the shipping box. With the Costco instant in-store rebate, it came to $800+tax. The 18-55mm IS kit lens is ranked better than the older, original 18-55 kit lens that came with my old 300D (close to $1000 when new in 2004!) Why did I buy it at Costco?: That way I could get my bananas and Cheerios at the same time .
I came sorta close to buying the 5DII (my brother has one along with his old 1Ds-II) but I just couldn't justify it.
I'll probably buy the 100mm 2.8 USM macro next. I also have access to a number of "L" lenses that my brother professionally uses (www.weldoncolorlab.com) but I'm sure that 90% of the time the 18-55 and eventually the 100mm will cover most of what I want to do. I also have an old 75-300mm USM that I pull out when there is some critter running down the telephone pole wires...
I plan on having some fun with the HD video as soon as I upgrade my PC, especially the graphics card.
I've got to pick-up a Sandisk SDHC Extreme III 8GB (class 6) memory card today. I think I found a local store with them for about $45 (if they have them in stock).
I had fun reading the comparisons on DPREVIEW:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos550d/ (Don't forget the pull-down list!)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos500d/
Side-by-side (add your choices and compare):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp
Funny, I just bought the Canon 550D yesterday
. I've been waiting a couple of weeks for Costco to get them back in stock. I even called the Costco headquarters and got them to divert some to my local store that, otherwise, didn't get any allocated! Six came in and I showed-up before they were even out of the shipping box. With the Costco instant in-store rebate, it came to $800+tax. The 18-55mm IS kit lens is ranked better than the older, original 18-55 kit lens that came with my old 300D (close to $1000 when new in 2004!) Why did I buy it at Costco?: That way I could get my bananas and Cheerios at the same time .I came sorta close to buying the 5DII (my brother has one along with his old 1Ds-II) but I just couldn't justify it
.I'll probably buy the 100mm 2.8 USM macro next. I also have access to a number of "L" lenses that my brother professionally uses (www.weldoncolorlab.com) but I'm sure that 90% of the time the 18-55 and eventually the 100mm will cover most of what I want to do. I also have an old 75-300mm USM that I pull out when there is some critter running down the telephone pole wires...
I plan on having some fun with the HD video as soon as I upgrade my PC, especially the graphics card
. I've got to pick-up a Sandisk SDHC Extreme III 8GB (class 6) memory card today. I think I found a local store with them for about $45 (if they have them in stock).
I had fun reading the comparisons on DPREVIEW:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos550d/ (Don't forget the pull-down list!)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos500d/
Side-by-side (add your choices and compare):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp
summoner12
Avid Member
Glass is where it's at.
well if we're showing off glass
(in order of purchase)
Canon 28-135mm IS USM (don't like this lens much...mostly for clarity)
Canon 18-55mm IS (GREAT value! I like this lens)
Canon 100mm USM Macro (Love it!)
Canon 100-400mm L IS USM (LOVE IT! I want to marry is!)
well if we're showing off glass
(in order of purchase)
Canon 28-135mm IS USM (don't like this lens much...mostly for clarity)
Canon 18-55mm IS (GREAT value! I like this lens)
Canon 100mm USM Macro (Love it!)
Canon 100-400mm L IS USM (LOVE IT! I want to marry is!)
summoner12
Avid Member
The points here about lens longevity and body update frequency are the exact points I was making to someone yesterday when talking about this subject. I think I was justifying my 'investment' in lenses over the last two weeks
As an example... The 70-200mm L IS USM lens just got an update from the previous version, this year. When was the last update? Sept. 2001! Almost 9 years ago. This lens is a HUGE staple in the pro photog world... The best thing, photogs buy these new, use them on a job and flip them for about $200-600 off the list price. Chances are, they weren't beat up and were only used a few times, by a pro... so buying second hand would save a lot of money and you'd still get a great lens for a lot less than retail.Exactly my train of thought. Higher up in the thread when i was defending eBay I didn't realize till later what others meant by 'junk' on eBay. Yes, there is the sort of junk you mention... and I would NEVER even consider looking at those kinds of auctions. I would only buy a Canon or... if highly recommended, a Sigma or Tamron brand lens, off of eBay.
Dave, you aren't supposed to pull out a lens... your supposed to pull out some sort of projectile launching device.... like a gun or something
LOL JK About memory stick, cards... ect. I found this site when I was searching around for Compact Flash cards for my 50D..
CF/SD Performance Database
Thor Hakonsen
New Member
don't get me started
Dave Weldon
Avid Member
Howdy Kevin,
I was just looking at that site last night! I just called the local Samy's Camera and they didn't have the exact Sandisk in stock at the store that I wanted (it was on their main website though) but I may still stop by there later today anyway.
But first it's time for my wife and I to get our 5 mile beach walk done!
summoner12
Avid Member
don't get me started
Let's see it!
Sammy's on Fairfax? Are they open on weekends?
Thor Hakonsen
New Member
Offcourse I'm not hard to ask
Nikon AF-D 35mm f/2
Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4
Nikon AF-D 85mm f/1.8
Nikon AF-S 60mm f/2.8 Micro
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro HSM
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 HSM
+ flashes (studio, macro and "ordinary")
Teleconvertor, extensiontubes etc
Hm - I really thought it was more (
), but I sold some when I wen't full frame this winter. (Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro, Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8)
Jono
New Member
Lens and body are equally important, kinda silly saying they aren't.
However a quality lens should not lose its value over time if looked after properly.
I've been shooting on a 300D for almost 8 years and it has taken over 60 000 shots with only the shutter needing to be replaced. I have yet to come across a situation where I have needed a better camera so I have not 'upgraded' yet. It would have been nice to have a faster capture rate or higher res but not essential.
I shoot material for feature films, adverts, model portfolios etc. etc. I make a living manipulating images so I deal with them down to the level of individual pixels. What I'm getting at is you can still take great shots without spending a fortune and often all that extra cash is never utilized.
In this case I would suggest going for the 500 and spend the rest of your budget on a fairly decent set of lenses, a medium to wide-ish and a macro. Unless you plan on getting a job with National Geographic you are going to waste your money on anything more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I love having the best toys but when your final output is going to be what you show people at home or print yourself and web/email sized ones you upload you may as well spend the cash on something else. Next year there will be another range and your camera will be available for 3/4 the price you bought it for anyway
Think of your end format Vs your budget and work to that. Most of the time you won't be able to tell the difference between a great shot from a mid and top of the range DSLR regardless of the lens.
However a quality lens should not lose its value over time if looked after properly.
I've been shooting on a 300D for almost 8 years and it has taken over 60 000 shots with only the shutter needing to be replaced. I have yet to come across a situation where I have needed a better camera so I have not 'upgraded' yet. It would have been nice to have a faster capture rate or higher res but not essential.
I shoot material for feature films, adverts, model portfolios etc. etc. I make a living manipulating images so I deal with them down to the level of individual pixels. What I'm getting at is you can still take great shots without spending a fortune and often all that extra cash is never utilized.
In this case I would suggest going for the 500 and spend the rest of your budget on a fairly decent set of lenses, a medium to wide-ish and a macro. Unless you plan on getting a job with National Geographic you are going to waste your money on anything more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I love having the best toys but when your final output is going to be what you show people at home or print yourself and web/email sized ones you upload you may as well spend the cash on something else. Next year there will be another range and your camera will be available for 3/4 the price you bought it for anyway
Think of your end format Vs your budget and work to that. Most of the time you won't be able to tell the difference between a great shot from a mid and top of the range DSLR regardless of the lens.
