Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?

Hi everyone,


first of all, I am quite new to digital photography with DSLRs so my equipment
is not that evolved and wide scaled.


Currently I am shooting for 1-2 years with my 450D and the standard kit lens (18-55mm).
But there more I shoot and get into photography techniques the more I get
to the limit of my current equipment.



<hr style="height: 1px; width: 200px; border: 1px solid #cccccc; color: #ffffff;" noshade="noshade" size="1" width="200" />



So now I was thinking to invest some money into better equipment.
But I don't really know where to start at first hand.


I already spent hours on this website reading the Canon Lens recommendations and other tips.


And since I love to travel and basically shoot anything especially landscape, nature, cities, people, small things
I am definitely getting a variety of lenses sooner or later. But to start with I am thinking of the:


- Canon EF 24-105mm 1:4L IS USM


So I can cover a lot of what I want to shoot.


Now the Problem is: I only have a 450D body which sometimes already bothers me when I try to shoot in darker areas,
without a tripod. The built-in Flash turns every person into a zombie and the ISO range is very limited.
So I often end up with blurry pictures.


So this is my second thought:


Should I better get a decent camera body first? And if so, should I go for the 60D or the 7D?
Or maybe wait until the 5Dm3 comes out to get a full format sensor right away?


But on the other hand my budget is limited and it would be ridiculous to shoot with such a camera
and my old kit lens ...



So you get my dilemma [^o)]


It would be really kind of you if you could give a beginner some recommendations!
What would you do first? And if I should go for a lens first, which camera body would
you recommend as a second purchase?


Thanks a lot !


-Shel

Somebody will do it, so it might as well be me: The EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is generally recommended as the best general purpose lens for crop cameras, however if you

I recommend getting lenses first - I think they

Upgrade lenses first, check to see what focal length you use most from your kit lens, you

as said before, lenses make a much bigger difference in image quality than a body does.


Also as said before the 24-105 is a great lens but may not be wide enough for you. I would get the 17-55 which gives you the f2.8 which will help a lot in low light. (you said this was an area you had issues with).


Since you said you do a variety of subjects including nature. I would also consider getting a good telephoto. Like a 70-200 or maybe the 100-400. I found that having that wide range of focal lengths really opens up a lot of new photography options.


Guess it really comes down to what your budget is.

Sounds like you are have reached the maximum potential of the stock lens not your camera. Not that hard of a task for a the given lens.


Lenses tend to hold there own longer than DSLRs. A lens that cost $1000 today will most likely cost $1000 in 5 years. The life cycle on lens is typically very long. Lenses are a better investment than the camera body.


If you want to stick the more economic EF-S camera bodies there are some good EF-S lenses. Like the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. The nice thing is you are not just restricted to EF-S lenses. Try the nifty 50, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, for about $100. It takes some great sharp pictures although it is not really fast a focusing on moving targets. The Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro lens is also nice.


The thing is that if you start buying some nice EF lenses you will always have them no matter the body you buy. A good piece of glass will always help you achieve the best image your camera can generate.


The other thing the flash on the 450D is pretty crappy, get the flash. Get the Canon Speedlite 430EX II and you will notice a world of difference, especially once you learn how to use a flash and bounce the light. When you upgrade later you can use this 430EX as a slave.


If I where you I would look at your old photo

Yeah you guys pretty much summed up what is holding me back on the 24-105.
I am losing the wider angle, which hurts me a bit because I like wide-angle shots.
And the crop factor adds to this. I might have to rethink what I want to shoot primarily.


If I remember correctly I am outside most of the time and I came into many situation where it was bugging me that
I didn't have a tele or a wide angle. So I am thinking of maybe adding a second lens like the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
in addition to the 24-105 depending on what Christmas brings to me hehe ... So I could cover everything from 10-105
(exept for 23mm ... ). And both of them seem to work pretty decent under conditions where there is not so much light as well, right?


What do you think? Would this setup work out?


And thanks a lot for the advice to go for lenses first!
Makes my decision a lot easier!

What is your budget?


You mentioned a 5DIII, therefore you must figure that a new 5DIII when available, will put you in this price range listed below.


You can get a new 5DII with a 24-105mm f/4L IS for $3299 at B&amp;H.


This way you get a Full Frame low light body as well as the wider angle benefit of FF, true 24mm FOV instead of 38mm, of course you will lose on the long end. You will still need to consider a flash for indoor use vs. a fast prime.


Purchased separately is $3550


Rich

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

Yeah you guys pretty much summed up what is holding me back on the 24-105.
I am losing the wider angle, which hurts me a bit because I like wide-angle shots.
And the crop factor adds to this. I might have to rethink what I want to shoot primarily.


If I remember correctly I am outside most of the time and I came into many situation where it was bugging me that
I didn't have a tele or a wide angle. So I am thinking of maybe adding a second lens like the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
in addition to the 24-105 depending on what Christmas brings to me hehe ... So I could cover everything from 10-105
(exept for 23mm ... ). And both of them seem to work pretty decent under conditions where there is not so much light as well, right?


What do you think? Would this setup work out?


And thanks a lot for the advice to go for lenses first!
Makes my decision a lot easier!

---

Keep in mind that if you have FF Body in your future then the EF-S lenses won't fit.


The 10-22mm is $720 now, then figure $100 bucks for a filter, so now you're up to $820. This lens is sharp and will take very nice pictures, I happen to have one, but keep in mind that it's slow in limited light situations, it doesn't have IS (which it probably doesn't need), it isn't weather sealed, and it won't fit on a FF body, if you ever decide to go that route. The widest I like for landscapes is 24mm full frame format. I find that if I go too wide then I feel a bit detached from the scene, as it's pushed so far back in the frame. The only reason I would go UWA is for architectural, or close up of a boat on a dock, or car when I can't back up.


I would rather see you put the $800 towards the 5DII / 24-105mm combo mentioned above. Then you will have weather-sealing, wide angle, IS and a much better body for any new lenses that you may purchase down the line. You also won't have to carry around the focally challenged 10-22mm.





Rich

Hi shel,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

So I could cover everything from 10-105
(except for 23mm...)

---

Yeah, I would suggest going back and having a look at what focal length the majority of your indoor shots are at and going from there because you'd be missing 23 - 38mm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

What do you think? Would this setup work out?

---

Yes it would, I think, but I would strongly recommend getting a Speedlight too...you'll love it compared to the on-camera flash.


Cheers,


Damian

The 10-22 and 24-105 make a great combination, I think you

@ Rich: You have a good point there.


I definitely want to go full frame some day. So EF-S isn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

I only have a 450D body which sometimes already bothers me when I try to shoot in darker areas,
without a tripod. The built-in Flash turns every person into a zombie and the ISO range is very limited.
So I often end up with blurry pictures.

---

With the comment you made I am not sure the 24-105L lens is the one you would want. The F4 is really better outside, I bought this lens when I just had my 50D and took it back because it just wasn't that good in the house. It had a problem with the inboard flash if you had the lens hood on it would block out some of the light close up inside. I think with a crop camera there are better options.


Keep in mind if you get the 5D Mark II and the 24 x 105 combination, there is no onboard flash. If you have a flash to put on the 5D you would be ok, if not it would be an additional expense.


I wouldn't worry about buying the EF-S lenses. The ones everyone suggested hold the values very well and you could easily resell it or trade up when you decide to go to a 5D in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

But I think I read somewhere that Canon might extend their full frame models to EF-S compatibility in the future.

---

No one knows. But I certainly wouldn't base any lens purchasing decisions on the possibility...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shel

10-22 + 24-105

---

It's a great combination! But depending on what you shoot, you might also consider the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the EF 85mm f/1.8 - a great general purpose zoom (the best for a crop body, IMO), and a very sharp and fast prime that I think is one of the best values in the Canon lens lineup (great for portraits, indoor sports, etc.). I find 17mm to be wide enough for most applications (on a crop body). That combo comes in lower than the 10-22mm + 24-105mm, and might leave you enough for a 430EX II. Also, if you're going to buy a 24-105mm, the best bet is to buy it with a 5DII as a kit, where you save substantially on the package.


Don't worry about getting EF-S lenses even if you someday get a FF body (although if you know that day will be next month, it's a different story). I used my 10-22mm for almost a year before I added a 5DII and 16-35mm L to my kit, and sold the 10-22mm for only ~$50 less than I bought it for (buy during a lens rebate like the current one, sell when there's no rebate...).


Good luck!


--John

1. Get the EF 24-105 f/4L IS, then save your money for a fullframe body.


2. Get the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, then save your money for a 7D or its upgrade.


3. Whether you want to stay with crop sensor or move to fullframe, that's up to you, but keep in mind that the difference between a 5D Mark II and a 7D is enough to get you another nice lens.

The photographer has a much larger affect on the image quality than the equipment.


We all like fine tools and the 24-105mmL is certainly excellent, but it is not going to solve a low light problem. if you have identified low light as a issue, get a lens with larger aperture, at least f/2.


This means getting a prime lens or two. Perhaps a 35mm f/2 and a 85mm f/1.8 to start.

forget waiting for the mystical 5d mkiiii and get the trusty 5D MKi!