Should I upgrade from 400D to 60D/7D or buy great glass? [Archive] - AusPhotography:: Australia's Premier Photography Forum::

colormeter

08-09-2010, 9:08pm

Hi

I have 400D and
lenses are

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EFS 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS Lens
Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM.

I know these are not great lenses but I bought them as I was starting with photography.
Now I feel that I should upgrade my setup.

At first I thought I should go for good quality lens now and keep 400D for another year or two.Later I saw some low light photos taken with 550D with same lens as mine and I was really impressed.

Now after spending almost 2 years with 400D I wanted to go for new class and started researching for higher class camera. Everybody from whom I asked suggested to go for 7D and buy one all rounder lens like 15-85mm. It would set me back around $2300+.

Another option is go for new/used quality lens for time being and play with it for some time to learn more about quality photography. I do not make any money from photography, it is just hobby so sometime I have to work harder with my other self to justify the cost.

I can stretch my budget to $2500 but will it be really worth spending on 7D+lens?

I am very confused at the moment.

please guide me in right direction.

thanks

hyper

08-09-2010, 9:37pm

Unless you really need the low light capabilities/resolution of the newer bodies, stick with what you have and upgrade your glass. Identify what you enjoy shooting the most and upgrade that particular lens: portraits - upgrade the 50mm; landscape/general zoom - upgrade the 18-55mm; sports/wildlife - upgrade the 75-300mm.

Wobbles

08-09-2010, 10:56pm

Have you considered a 50D? Most reviews so far are calling the 60D a "side-grade" rather than upgrade. It appears more biased towards video, so unless you are particularly interested in that direction I think the 50D is a much better 'traditional' DSLR and as the price has dropped significantly much better value. It will still be a major performance step up from your 400D. This will also leave you more money for better glass. Otherwise go all the way to 7D.

In terms of a new lens, as Hyper recommended, if you are on a budget you need to decide on what style of photography is your priority. Portraits - for the money the 50/1.8 is hard to beat but if you want something a bit more refined look at the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8. Landscape "wide angle"- the Sigma 10-20/4-5.6 is probably best bang for buck, Canon 10-22 is good but more expensive. General Purpose "walk around"- Sigma 17-70 is again good value, Canon 17-55 is King in this neighbourhood but big$$. Sports (wildlife, you really need longer lens) save up your money and buy one of the Canon 70-200's, f4is if you can't wait or hang out for the f2.8is (may get a bit cheaper now that the ii is out).

Cheers
John

Gremlin

08-09-2010, 11:44pm

Go lens cos if you do end up getting a 50D or 7D the lens should work on those too.

Mircula

09-09-2010, 6:17am

Hey,

I would suggest you to get a used 40D and a used good lens! I dont think 50D has a lot of advantages over the 40D and is still much more expensive.....

I got a mint condition 40D with under 4000 shutter actuation for $530.....

That saves money, you have a great body and a great lens and all is good.

I just upgraded form 20D to 40D. Aussome :)!

Cheers,

Mirc

arthurking83

09-09-2010, 9:52am

LOL! timely post(and not unexpected mind you!).

FWIW, I say go for a 7D.

I have no idea on how well your current lenses work, but you also haven't specified a particular genre of photography that you concentrate on either.

if you do a lot of landscapes, then I would suggest a 7D and Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6.
If you do a lot of portraits.. I have no idea on what works and what doesn't work in Canon world, but I'm sure there are there are some good quality cheap lenses that can produce high quality portraits.. if not a Tammy 28-75/2.8 or 17-50/2.8(or Sigma equivalent) will work well on any camera

Second hand 50D plus second hand 17-55 maybe??

as far as I can tell from all the publicity, the 60D is a downgraded body type(level) compared to the 50D.. so the 7D would make more sense in the long run, catering to any as yet unseen future needs for a longer period.
I think if you want to upgrade the camera body, then you really should be looking top get one with a lot more features/advantages than one you already have.

I think, to get a more accurate recommendation from someone that may have different priorities to yours, you should specify what your preferred photographic genres are.

Speedway

09-09-2010, 10:10am

I went through a similar quandary with my 400D 18-55, 75-300 kit + 50 1.8. I went the lens upgrade first with 10-20 and 18-250 sigma's also a 90mm tamron macro was added to the kit. These lenses provided a whole new learning curve. About 9 months later I was able to up grade to the 7D and also got the 150-500 sigma, another learning curve but not as steep as a body and lens together would have been. I kept the 400D as a back up and last weekend was walking around the local sports ground with both bodies the 7D with the 150-500 and the 400 with the 18-250 taking photos of the football and netball finals for the local newspaper this saved constant lens changing which would have been difficult with the on and off drizzle all day.
PS. I was originally going to upgrade to the 50D but the 7D was released just before I did and this seemed a much better option and I'm still of the same opinion.

debs

09-09-2010, 10:20am

Sometimes I wished I would have just bought a couple of nice lenses instead of upgrading to the 7D, but I know that I would have eventually bought it anyway, so I'm glad I am "learning" now on the 7D. It is a nice camera.

Analog6

09-09-2010, 10:34am

Buy great glass - bodies are updated so often you'll always be able to get something good. Go for some L glass and watch your images improve as you get the hang of them.

MarkChap

09-09-2010, 10:38am

I don't know why people keep comparing the 60D to the 50D, the Op is not considering changing from a 50D to 60D, when compared to a 400D, which is what the OP has, the 60D is streets ahead, well ok maybe not streets, but definitely a worthy upgrade.

You don't tell us which direction your photography is taking ?

My opinion - 7D/60D and keep your lenses, there is no use/benefit in getting the 15-85 with the 7D/60D.
If you really want 1 and only 1 all round lens you would be better suited with the 7D and a tammy 18-270 VC, this covers, pretty much, the focal lengths you currently have.

The 60D is going to be a lighter body than the 7D, articulated screen, same ISO range, same video functions. The AF in the 7D is going to be ahead of the 60D.
The 7D is a bigger, physically, and heavier body, which is something I like.

Do yourself a favour and head into a retailer that has both, after the end of the month for 60D, and hold/play with both. The biggest factor for body choice is which one feels better in hand. If you don't like the feel of the body you won't get the best out of it.

Now to the second part of your question - "or get great glass"
What are you going to shoot predominantly ?
Great Glass for serious/concerted birding is not exactly great glass as a walk around street photography lens or portrait lens.

At the end of the day -
What do you want to do in your heart ??
If you want an upgraded body, and you let your decision be guided from the responses here, which will lean well and truly to the "buy glass" option, then at the end of the day, you will still be unhappy with both your photography and your results.

wanderer51

09-09-2010, 6:39pm

This is a timely thread as I was thinking (almost) the same...that is whether to upgrade my now two year old 400D body, or invest in better glass. After umming & ahhing and in general dithering about, I decided to upgrade the glass as there is really nothing wrong with the 400D (less than 6000 shutter actuations) and it does everything I want.
As I have already upgraded the 75-300 kit lens that came with the camera with a Sigma 28-300DG 3.5-6.3 (bought s/h from this forum) I am now thinking of upgrading the 18-55 to either a Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 or a Tamron 10-24 3.5-4.5 and perhaps adding a Tamron 90 Macro...but only if I think I can justify the usage.
Might upgrade the body in another 15 months just before we go overseas again...so I can claim back the GST at the airport :)

rwg717

09-09-2010, 7:00pm

Whatever you do, I would advise you to avoid the 60D for the time being....not that there will be anything wrong with this camera but Xmas is not that far away really and the retailers will have an absolute "field day" with this new offering from Canon.

I found this out when the 50D was released and paid almost 3X the price I should have. As wobbles said, there are still a few 50D's about and I would investigate one of those first, still 15.1 mpx and a great camera, you should be able to grab one for less than $1000 landed and this gives you more money for glass!!!!!

Your lenses are really the centre point of the kit, with a reasonable reputation already earned, they last for years if cared for properly and I'd be tipping all my spare cash into them before I would bother handing all my hard earned over to Ted's Cameras et al.;)
Richard

gje38752

09-09-2010, 7:38pm

ZedEx

09-09-2010, 8:35pm

As suggested, I would stick with your 400D or get a used 40D. Having owned a 350D in years past, it was a great camera, albeit not good in low light or at higher ISO's. The 400D wasn't that much better in this regards. The 40D is a fair bit better than both, but it really depends on what you're doing. Once you get good glass you'll never go back. My 24-70 on my 5D is just incredible, and when my cheapo-ebay-damaged 70-200 gets fixed i'm sure it will blow me away too :)

MarkChap

09-09-2010, 9:34pm

Lots of advice here, some I feel quite appropriate for you, I would suggest grabbing one of the 50D and put a 15=85 on it, a great combination for under $2,000, which would probably do everything you want.

Why ?
What is the OP shooting ????

Making camera and lens, especially, recommendations, with out knowing what the intended use is, is just silly.

When we know the intended use I am sure we can point in the right direction

soulman

09-09-2010, 11:05pm

Buy great glass - bodies are updated so often you'll always be able to get something good...Indeed. I think any recent body is more than adequate in terms of image quality, but lenses are highly imperfect. It follows then, that better lenses will produce a greater improvement in the quality of your images than a new body. Something like a 7D would inevitably just tend to show up the shortcomings of your existing glass more.

...stick with what you have and upgrade your glass. Identify what you enjoy shooting the most and upgrade that particular lens...This sums it up pretty well I reckon.

TOM

10-09-2010, 6:54am

keep the camera, and buy a couple (35mm and 75MM) of fast primes. you will think that you've just bought yourself a new super high ISO fantastic camera.

Arg

10-09-2010, 3:35pm

More info needed. Which part of your current photography is yielding results you are not happy with? Are you frustrated by limitations in your kit, in some particular aspect, preventing you from getting the shots you want? For all I know, you might only need a tripod...! Details please.

"Step back from counter. Pick up mirror." cheers
Arg

arthurking83

10-09-2010, 11:11pm

keep the camera, and buy a couple (35mm and 75MM) of fast primes. you will think that you've just bought yourself a new super high ISO fantastic camera.

This is actually sound advice, but in some ways, only to a limited degree.(but still good)

I don't know the Canon lens range all that well, but the OP already has a 50/1.8 lens to play with.

.... so the assumption, kind of stands to reason, is that in low light with an f/1.8 lens may be lacking in terms of quality for them!

35mm will give a slightly wider FOV, but if low light and f/1.8 doesn't give the OP results that they desire, then the 35(or 75)mm lens may have to be at least f/1.4(or faster) and we're starting to refer to expensive options here($1.5K plus???)

So the other opinions mentioned were 'better lenses' .. and in that group we can put a 17-55/2.8, and a 24-70/2.8(I think this is generally considered to be two of the most common lowest denominators when most people refer to better lenses).

Are either the 17-55/ 2.8 or 24-70/2.8 going to give the OP any perceived improvement in IQ in low light over the 50/1.8?

a 35/1.4 and or a 24/1.4 or as TOM suggested a 75/1.4(if one exists) may give some IQ advantage.

but the OP is stil stuck with a camera sensor that is a coupel of generations behind in terms of sensor design and hence SNR, apparent noise in low light, and not able to use the added higher ISO range that a newer camera is capable of.

The 400D allows ISO.. what?.. 3200?
The 7D allows an ISO setting of .. 12800?(sorry I don't know the technical specs of the two cameras either?)

to the OP, to be sure that you get what you want(if I'm correctly understanding your reasons to upgrade in the first place!? :confused013) head over to DPR(that I know of) but I think there's another site called the digital image resource or something similar!?

Search for 400D images at high ISO, and also for 7D high ISO images too, and keep the ISO value of the test results the same for for starters to compare how far technology has moved ahead, and also check the newer camera at the second highest ISO setting it offers.. because in ever review I've seen the highest ISO is basically a marketing gimick only!
Using tabbed browsing, and as long as the review site has conducted consistent testing over the years(DPR has been good), you should be able to see for yourself if the high ISO advantage is worth the upgrade path to the 7D alone!(I think it will be).

Also note!! That in upgrading to a higher res modern sensor that has even the same ISO result as the earlier model, for printing!!! at the same output size, the more modern higher res sensor will give a cleaner looking print in terms of noise/grain.. at high ISO.

Speaking of printing! I recently printed an 8x12 image for my mother(of her) and a few other smaller 4x6 versions too(with a Nikon D300). My first real batch of prints I've ever done(up til then, I've not been interested) the image was taken at ISO6400, and looks quite OK even at full size on the screen. There is noise, but for ISO6400(relative to what we have been used too until only 3/4 years ago.. it still looks quite ok.
The first comment she made on seeing the 8x12(basically A4 size) was that it reminded her of her fathers photos, but in colour. Her father passed away about 12 years ago, aged 97.
She remembered those old grainy early 1900's photos of him in the army(in his 20's/30's), and if her grandfather. In a way I felt sort of relieved that she associated the noise as old film like grain, whereas we technogeek types don't.. we only see noise.
to me it didn't look like any of those old 1920's-30's images at all(and I have them here with me to compare!).. anyhow, she got a thrill from the images at least :)

electricmic

16-09-2010, 6:32pm

Im going to throw in my vote for better glass first.

More glass should show your camera in a whole new light.

I read a survey once that suggested most pro's would take a cheap body and expensive glass over and expensive body and cheap glass.

phild

16-09-2010, 7:35pm

I'd be tempted to look at the 7D and 15-85, given that Nikon has just announced the D7000, I expect that Canon won't be able to resist dropping prices to compete and the fact that the dollar is up.

I think there's too much emphasis given to high end glass, I had an 18-200 Canon lens and a Sigma 17-70 before getting my L series stuff, both were decent lenses and not that expensive.

Arg

17-09-2010, 11:52am

It's time for the OP to come back in with some more info. Where are you, colormeter? We need answers to posts 18 and 19.
How are you using your kit?
Where are you noticing deficiencies to your needs? Camera? Lens? Which lens?
Or have you just got money burning a hole in your pocket?

pnit

17-09-2010, 2:53pm

Hi
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EFS 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS Lens
Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM.

These are the exact lenses I started out with when I had my 300d! It's a great kit, but once you start getting a taste for good glass....

If the 400d still does everything you want (ie. print size, noise levels, speed etc) then go ahead and get some glass. Getting a new lens, I think, is even better than getting a new camera. It opens up shooting opportunities you never had before.

Here's a quick run down of how I upgraded:

Canon 10-22mm. If you like taking landscapes, party photos, sun sets, architecture... I bought this one when I was contemplating buying a new camera. Best choice I ever made.

Canon 28-70mm 2.8L. Was given this as payment for a job by a photographer mate. Would never have bought something like this otherwise. A real eye opener for me as I'd never had L quality before. Too heavy and large for a walk around, but I did it anyway for the quality.

Upgraded to 30d. Because 300d limitations were getting to be too much.

Canon 70-200mm f4 IS L. Best lens in my bag. The difference between the 75-300 and the 7-200 is astounding. No more blurry telephoto shots.

Canon 35mm f2. Because I wanted something small and light for holidays. With the 30d it can almost fit in my wife's hand bag.

7d + Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Just took delivery of this today. 7d is good, but I was really more excited about the lens. Finally, a walk around telephoto that doesn't weigh a tonne.

I never had much money to spend on gear (except for body purchase), so it took me quite a few years to get to where I am now.

$2500 is quite a bit. My 7d purchase (with lens) was below $2000. $2500 would go a long way towards lenses and/or a body on the grey market (50d is below $850 now!!). It really depends on how you shoot and what you're looking to do with your kit. And remember you'll be getting some of you money back when selling your current equipment.

Jimbo

17-09-2010, 3:17pm

I would personally make better lenses my priority, and upgrade the body later. Good quality lenses (eg L series) will last you a lifetime. Eg for $2500, you could probably get something like what I did when I used my 300D, ie 24-105L f/4 & 70-200L f/4, and there is a world of difference between these and kit lenses. Only after I had these and my 50/1.8 did I upgrade the body.

Yes, the newer bodies will outperform at higher ISO, but how often are you shooting in such conditions?

jeffde

17-09-2010, 3:56pm

Set your budget - buy the good glass for what you need and then upgrade the camera later - I used a 70-200 f2.8 on my 400D (and still do) to great success. What money's left over will determine you camera purchase but a 50D is good value at the moment as its being replaced - but wait to long and it won't be available...

colormeter

22-09-2010, 9:59am

Hi everybody
thanks for reply.
I am back.

i have read all replies and many atricles/discussions on other forums as well.

Now I realise that lens upgrade is better choice.But I will be upgarding to 550D also. I will be buying glass instead of spending on 7D.

reasons for upgarding to 550D

1. better sensor with gapless tech
2. better IQ at high ISO
3. HD video
4. Better battery

upto this point even I did not knew exactly what I am interested in shooting.

now after analyzing some of photos, I think I like to shoot in order of preferences

1. landscapes
2. architecture
3. flowers
4. Fast objects (moving machines, birds, kids) [not good at this. I am learning ]

lens i am considering

1. Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L USM Autofocus Lens
2. Canon EF 16-35mm II USM L F2.8 Autofocus Lens or Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens

sorry for late reply.

thanks for all the info. some wise man said "knowledge is power, it helps to make better decision" and I am getting all the info from here to make better decision for my interest and my money.

these days i am realising that photography as hobby is very expensive. I was also reading about studio lighting and watched some videos on youtube.

I realised that if photography has 100 steps to learn i am still in 1-5 steps.

long way to go.

ZedEx

22-09-2010, 5:56pm

no way would I waste my money on a 24-70 f2.8L on a crop body!! I love mine on my 5D which is full frame, but it makes absolutely no sense on a crop body. Get the 16-35mm for a tad more which will be a better range on a crop body, and if you decide to go to a 5D, it'll be an awesome super-wide angle :)

pmack

22-09-2010, 7:37pm

I would suggest you to get a used 40D and a used good lens! I dont think 50D has a lot of advantages over the 40D and is still much more expensive.....

I got a mint condition 40D with under 4000 shutter actuation for $530.....

That saves money, you have a great body and a great lens and all is good.

I just upgraded form 20D to 40D. Aussome :)!

Cheers,

Mirc
if you can get one that cheap, then yeah go for it, but i sold my 40D (8500 actuations) on ebay last week and it went for $700 (with free postage)
or you could buy a new 50D from dwi for $836 delivered
no contest IMO

Mircula

22-09-2010, 7:41pm

wow, 700....yeah i was lucky, i bought it locally in canberra....i am really astonished that the 50d goes so cheap these days. anyway, 40d is great, as well for beginner who want to get into photography a bit more than using it in green square mode.....

pmack

22-09-2010, 8:39pm

actually it was someone from ACT who bought mine!
yep the 40D is a great camera for sure, guess that's why they are very popular on ebay still, though they should get cheaper when the 60D gets a move on.
it's just a pitty that for the people with 40 and 50D's, you've got to jump up to the 7D if you want to update in the future (as the 60D is of course a step sideways...)

colormeter

22-09-2010, 8:47pm

if you can get one that cheap, then yeah go for it, but i sold my 40D (8500 actuations) on ebay last week and it went for $700 (with free postage)
or you could buy a new 50D from dwi for $836 delivered
no contest IMO

How to check shutter actuations?

wattsgallery

22-09-2010, 8:51pm

Not my standard answer but I would say it depends on what you mean by better glass.

If you are going for say the great 10-22 or maybe a Tamron 17-50/28-75 2.8 which are fine steps up then they still suit the 400D but if you are looking your next major lenses being the L series ones then I think they are not well balanced on the small rebels but that is just my view. BTW I rarely take the 24-70L off my camera but it is a 5D and if you buy one be warned you will have gone full frame within a few months:)

pmack

22-09-2010, 8:59pm

How to check shutter actuations?
there's a program i think you can use to check.
otherwise you can look at the numbering of the photos, but only if its your own camera and you konw how many times (if any) it has ticked over 10,000 shots, and whether or not you reset the counter manually at any time...
i never reset my numbering and it didn't tick over 10,000 and reset, hence i knew that the number of the next shot was the nuber of actuations or shots taken.

ZedEx

22-09-2010, 9:03pm

going by the card numbering is also complicated if you have switched cards between bodies. I had my 40D from near-new and racked it up to about 9600 on the card numbering, then put the same card in my 5D which continued from 9600 upwards. I know roughly how many actuations i'm up to but to be sure there is a program like you say that should be able to check. Some cameras also record this number in the EXIF details

there's a program i think you can use to check.
otherwise you can look at the numbering of the photos, but only if its your own camera and you konw how many times (if any) it has ticked over 10,000 shots, and whether or not you reset the counter manually at any time...
i never reset my numbering and it didn't tick over 10,000 and reset, hence i knew that the number of the next shot was the nuber of actuations or shots taken.

pmack

22-09-2010, 9:37pm

going by the card numbering is also complicated if you have switched cards between bodies. I had my 40D from near-new and racked it up to about 9600 on the card numbering, then put the same card in my 5D which continued from 9600 upwards. I know roughly how many actuations i'm up to but to be sure there is a program like you say that should be able to check. Some cameras also record this number in the EXIF details
oh yeah you're right, i just checked my library of shots, turns out my numbering went from 400 to 9000 at one stage (from putting a card in from a different camera), then from 3000 back to zero at another stage (not sure what i did there)
Hmmm i think i told a fib in my ebay ad :(
ahh well 8500 vs 1100, close enough.

RaoulIsidro

22-09-2010, 9:55pm

Offside: I will quote what I said about the Canon XXD series in some previous thread...
"The Canon XXD series peaked at 40D, crashed at 50D and burned at 60D" Canon killed it.
Now about your choices, I would say the 400D is still a capable camera.
Buy a great lens.
My personal suggestion to you: Canon EOS EF 16-35mm f2.8
It will work on Full Frame should you decide to move to FF.
It will work gorgeous on your 400D.
My 17-35mm f2.8 is now over 14 years old. It has seen 3 camera upgrades.
A good lens lasts.
A good camera lasts 18-36 months... (until the next model)

ZedEx

23-09-2010, 6:56am

Just one thing I'm not too sure of with the 50D. Everyone always says how much of a failure it was, but was it actually a backwards step to the 40D? I'm planning on selling my 40D and getting the 50D for almost the same price. The major thing being lens micro adjustments. This is something that is important to me. Also, the higher resolution screen would be very handy for focus stacking with liveliew.
BUt I know that based on image quality alone, there is really no need to upgrade, but the 50D never lost any features, did it?
The 60D on the other hand, the 60D can get the heck out! :p

Offside: I will quote what I said about the Canon XXD series in some previous thread...
"The Canon XXD series peaked at 40D, crashed at 50D and burned at 60D" Canon killed it.
Now about your choices, I would say the 400D is still a capable camera.
Buy a great lens.
My personal suggestion to you: Canon EOS EF 16-35mm f2.8
It will work on Full Frame should you decide to move to FF.
It will work gorgeous on your 400D.
My 17-35mm f2.8 is now over 14 years old. It has seen 3 camera upgrades.
A good lens lasts.
A good camera lasts 18-36 months... (until the next model)

MarkChap

23-09-2010, 7:50am

Maybe I am missing something here ??

The salesman in me loves these sorts of threads, Colourmeter, what real benefit do you get going from a 400D to a 550D ?? Yeah you get video, big deal.
You are just putting commission in some salesman's pocket, you will be back here in no time asking whether you should upgrade your body because "even though I bought a 550D (which is not that different to a 400D) I am still not getting what I wanted."

Do yourself a favour, no seriously, do yourself a favour, and if you are going to upgrade bodies make it a worthwhile upgrade in the first place.
Get yourself a 60D body only, have you looked at the street price compared to a 550D
I have done the hard work for you
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod1840.htm - 550D - $1139.00
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod2471.htm - 60D - $1499.00

Don't listen to the knockers, I will bet not one of them has actually had a chance to try one for themselves, whilst a variation from the traditional xxD series the 60D is still a serious unit, handles noise exceptionally well up to 6400 iso,

Seriously do not through good money after bad, think about where you want to go and the most economical way to get there long term.

electricmic

24-09-2010, 2:42pm

Seriously do not through good money after bad, think about where you want to go and the most economical way to get there long term.

Possibly the best photo gear advice ever.

colormeter

27-09-2010, 7:20am

Hi

I had planned to go 550D body upgrade but 7D was also in back of my mind. I went to camerahouse and had play with both 7D and 550D. As i already have 400D so there was not big difference in handling of 550D but when I held 7D in my hand it felt great in my hands.

now i have planned to buy 7d only.

for lens i had come down to two choices
1. EF S 15-85mm (have read good reviews about it). approx $1000
2. 24-70 mm f/2.8L approx $1900

as there is huge price difference, I will be going with 15-85 at the moment.

I will upgrade lens next year to L series as i have set limit on budget to max at $3000 per year on photography related purchases.

Do you think I should wait for Christmas offers?
i have seen good offers on point and shoot in the past but don't remember about dslr promotions.

thanks everybody for replies.

ZedEx

27-09-2010, 7:25am

You have made a good choice in the 15-85 vs the 24-70. I don't know why people always throw two different focal lengths up for discussion. Although the 15mm on a 7D is equivalent to 24mm on a full-frame dSLR like a 5D, the 24mm as printed on a 7D is equivalent to like 37mm or something on a 5D. It's an annoying focal length and offers no benefits. If you want a wide angle that is still L glass, look into the 16-35 f2.8L or the 17-40 f4L both of which are good walkaround lenses on a 7D

Hi

I had planned to go 550D body upgrade but 7D was also in back of my mind. I went to camerahouse and had play with both 7D and 550D. As i already have 400D so there was not big difference in handling of 550D but when I held 7D in my hand it felt great in my hands.

now i have planned to buy 7d only.

for lens i had come down to two choices
1. EF S 15-85mm (have read good reviews about it). approx $1000
2. 24-70 mm f/2.8L approx $1900

as there is huge price difference, I will be going with 15-85 at the moment.

I will upgrade lens next year to L series as i have set limit on budget to max at $3000 per year on photography related purchases.

Do you think I should wait for Christmas offers?
i have seen good offers on point and shoot in the past but don't remember about dslr promotions.

thanks everybody for replies.

colormeter

27-09-2010, 7:39am

Mircula

27-09-2010, 7:54am

i would consider the sigma 17-70 as well. Cheaper than the 15-85 and definitely better value for money. Besides it is a really sharp lens!

rhanesworth

28-09-2010, 6:17am

I am looking at the 60D. What a great camera. Compare it with the 7D and you should see the 60D is the way to go. In camera processing for both RAW and JPEG's, can correct for lens distortions. I am looking at the 24 - 105 L lens, for the money just over $2000 you can have both

bricat

28-09-2010, 6:32am

I think I paid around $1600 for 7D grey market and bought kit lenses. Now the dollar is better again you can buy it cheaper still. And your lens can be bought grey market too. I am a novice so I bought the best camera body I could afford at the time and will upgrade the lens side when(if) money is more available. cheers Brian

Arg

28-09-2010, 6:58am

thanks for reply.

I just called my friend to let him know about my choice. He has 5D mk II and 24-70, 70-200 and 16-35, all L series.

He also suggested 16-35 over 24-70. he said only buy 24-70 after upgrading to full frame.

regarding video recording, he told me that there is difference between manual controls in movie mode between 5D and 7D. He said 7D does not offer same level of manual control as in 5D. I was under the impression that they both have similar level of video controls.

It is not going to change my choice but i am just curious.

Video: your 5D friend does not know 7D as well as he thinks, the 7D actually has a better video setup than the 5D, though I am reporting website verdicts I don't actually know or care video too much.

Lens: you are getting strange advice from FF users, who seem to think your top priority should be compatibility with FF. I disagree, it is wrong to think you will ever need FF. And if you one day do, you can get good resale on the better models of EF-S lenses.

(1) the 24-70 is not a good focal range on 7D (38-112mm equiv) if you are looking for a bit of wide and a bit of tele in the one lens. This is a 1kg lens with no IS and no natural role on a 7D.

(2) the 16-35 is also an odd focal range on 7D (26-56mm e): very restrictive and for no gain. This lens really only has a home as an ultrawide on FF.

(3) the 15-85 is a superb lens with a great focal range (24-135mm e). I have done 2 overseas tours recently with a 35mm camera with primes 28, 50, 135 and 300mm, and on both occasions I never used the 300mm except for a few wildlife shots. So, I would have been covered by a single 28-135mm! So, it is a great focal range, recommended.

(4) if you want the ultimate and can afford it, the 17-55 is my second recommendation. Equivalent to 28-90mm it is a short allrounder and, get this, it has even better image quality than the three already excellent FF 'L's 16-35, 17-40, and 24-70! Combine the constant f2.8 and the bonus of excellent image stabilisation missing from the three 'L's, and you have the perfect crop sensor lens of this type. Fancy that: your crop sensor camera will have a superior lens to the FF's! (and guess what: the lens maketh the image more than the sensor in 99% of general photography).

Choice of camera: 550D is a great choice and a big big upgrade to a 400D. There is an online review saying huge step up from 400D in all sorts of ways, but I can't find it quickly But I have to agree with you on 7D.

colormeter

29-09-2010, 9:46am

i agree 17-55 f/2.8 is great lens but it is bit over the budget for me now.

now with 7D, 15-85, 16/32GB CF, extra battery i will be out of pocket for around $3000.
i will wait one-two more months to see some Xmas offers.

I want to shoot new year fireworks in 7D and start new year with new camera.

unistudent1962

29-09-2010, 8:28pm

The 550D is a good choice, I upgraded from 400D and kit lenses a few months ago. Went for a 17-85 IS USM on eBay ($400, you'll probably get one for $300-$350 now). I can see a definite improvement in imgae quality over the kit 18-55 regardless of the negative comments I've read on here about this lens. I also went to a 70-200 f4L IS. Make up your mind about what you want, get the best price you can from online stores, then send an email to as many bricks and mortar stores as you can asking them for a quote. I bettered the $4500 rrp price of all the gear I bought (550D {w/18-55 IS as a backup for my 16yo daughter to use on the old 400D body}, 70-200 f4L IS, BG-E8 Battery Grip, 2 x 8GB Sandisk C10 Memory Cards, Spare Battery, Lowepro Backpack, UV Filters {for protection}) to just on $3000. Australian stock with Canon Australia warranty.

grauniad

09-10-2010, 2:18pm

ZedEx says 24-70mm f/2.8 lens is not appropriate for a crop body. I think 16-35mm f/2.8 lens is even less appropriate for a crop body. Much better to get Sigma 10-20mm or Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens for landscape photography on a crop body. But good zoom lenses are too expensive. Learn to love primes. Much better value for money. Use your 50mm f/1.8 more. Buy a relatively cheap 28mm f/2.8 for a wider angle view.
Rodney

Ploddy

09-10-2010, 3:18pm

I stuck with a 350D for years and slowly acquired L glass instead. Although I coveted each new body that was released, I stuck to my guns and got the glass I wanted, knowing that I would get teh body eventually and when I did, would have a great kit to match.

I took awesome shots on the 350D with my 24-105 L, 100 2.8 and 50 1.4 and never regretted the decision.

I am totally convinced that average body + good glass beats good body + average glass any day of the week and twice on shoot days.

As for glass, have you considered the 24-105 L? It is no good for wide shots, but as a general walkaround, it cant be beat IMHO. Also, save for the L, it may be twice the price but you will want it eventually, might as well get it first and save the hassle of selling your non-L stuff on ebay :)