I currently have a Rebel XT, Sigma 28-70 f/2.8, Canon 50 f/1.8, and a 580ex II.
I just graduated from college and received a bit of cash from the family. I am looking to treat myself to an upgrade, which would you take?
The older body with the nicer lens, or the new body with the kit lens?
That's a tough call. 5 years (the age of your Rebel XT's design) is a long time in terms of a camera body - the technology has changed a lot. It's more than just megapixels - high ISO noise has improved, the viewfinder in the T2i is larger (more magnification), the autofocus system is better (2 more points, and the center one is a cross-type that takes full advantage of an f/2.8 or faster lens for more precise AF), the metering system is better, the T2i has slightly higher shot rate but double the burst capacity, etc. However, at low ISOs the image quality (not considering resolution) is pretty similar between the two bodies.
On the other hand, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is a truly excellent lens.
Thus, there's no 'perfect' answer here.
I think you should really consider what you find limiting about your current setup. Are you limited by the ISO of your body? Do you need a wider lens? (55mm vs. 70mm is not very different, but 17mm is significantly wider than 28mm.) Would you benefit a lot from IS in your 'walkaround' lens (if you're shooting people or other things the move, IS is not as helpful as you might think). How happy are with the IQ/performance of your Sigma 28-70mm?
Two more points to consider (apologies in advance if these add confusion), but depending on how you feel you're limited by your current setup, have you considered the 50D instead of the T2i? If you find the Rebel to be small in your hands, or the frame rate is too slow, the 50D is worth a look (unless you really want to shoot video). Also, one more body upgrade to consider is the T1i - yes, it's older than the T2i, but not by much. The feature improvements relative to the T1i are modest, and either would give you the main benefits over your XT that I listed above. The T1i body-only costs $650 right now - if you have the $1060 budget for the 17-55mm, getting the T1i body would leave you enough for another lens (e.g. the EF-S 60mm Macro), or a good quality tripod/ballhead (something everyone should have!), etc.
Either way, good luck with your decision, and congrats on your graduation!!
If you are looking at doing video, you'll want the T2i, not the T1i. The T1i has no manual controls in movie mode, and no external mic input, though you can always record audioseparatelyand mix in post. Not being able to choose your aperture, and ISO is fairly limiting in what you can choose to do.
On Flickr - Namethatnobodyelsetook on Flickr
R8 | R7 | 7DII | 10-18mm STM | 24-70mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 | 50mm f/1.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-300mm f/4-5.6L | RF 100-500mm f/4-5-7.1L
Giving you a go ahead on the T2i.
I have had mine for little over a month now, and still to this day i am constantly learning new things i can do with it, It constantly produces what I want it too.
My only advice would be to get just the body, wish i new more about lenses when I bought mine, the kit lens is decent and will get you started, but i have my eyes set on the much sought after 17-55mm 2.8 as a first upgrade followed by a the 70-200mm
In the Days of film, a camera was just a box to hang a lens on, so you concentrated on good lenses. Now, however, the digital sensor has entered the equation, and you need to balance a good lens with a good sensor. The images will be limited by whichever is the weakest. I'd buy a new 17-55mm lens, and later try to find a good used 40d or 50d to complete the upgrade. A T2i would also be a very nice upgrade, but cost more and not hold its value as well. The 40D's in particular seem to hold on to their value and they can be found for $500.
I am not terribly happy with the IQ of my Sigma. I would describe it assporadicat best. I did a few test shots today at differentaperturesand focal lengths and I found that I was only get sharp shots at 70mm at f/5.6 and at 50mm f/8 anything below that in focal length or aperture was quite soft.
I would really love a sharp lens that would be good for portraits with good bokeh. Low light functionality isn't a huge deal as I won't be shooting indoor sports, and I have a range of on and off camera flash options. A wide aperture would be mostly needed for bokeh reasons.
I have been recommended the 17-55, but I'm afraid it will be too short to give good bokeh. Is this true?
I've also considered the 85mm f/1.8, the 70-200mm f/4 L, and the 24-104 f/4 L.
The 85mm is wide and fast, but primes make for good 2nd or 3rd lens, not first lens, which is what I'm looking for. I'd be stuck at 85mm at all times, which is less than optimal.
the 70-200 f/4 looks great, but I'd still be stuck with my mediocre general purpose range Sigma.
the 24-104 f/L sounds great, but I'm worried that it won't giveadequatebokeh at only f/4.
I am also very enticed by the 40D. Could get one for about $600 of ebay, but again, I'd be stuck with my Sigma for general purpose.
Hey there,
this isn't a really easy question to answer. Mainly because it is all up to you [:P]
Try this: pixel-peeperthere you can select a camera-lens combination at whatever specs. This way you could figure out what your bokeh-needs are and when you are happy with it.
Personally I would suggest you to buy a good general purpose lens. Make sure your basics(camera+general lens) are good and you have a strong foundation to build up on.
Originally Posted by realityinabox
This is the reason I move the camera-upgrade out of the picture. Obviously you're better served with a lens-upgrade.
Try the pixel-peeper thingy, because I'm not sure what you'd expect from it. Personally I believe this is the best general purpose-lens there is to put on a crop-body.
Don't do it, get your basic set straight first...
Same here...
This lens rules on FF, but I'm not sure if it suits your needs. For instance, the 24mm is pretty long for a crop-body. Personally I like to use somewhat wider views. 24mm for me is great on FF, but on a crop I would have to step back too many times. And often it isn't even possible. But since you're used to your sigma's 24mm as your widest, the best one to answer this is you []
In my honest opinion, I would sell the sigma and buy the 17-55. Perhaps if you could sell the 350D you'd be close to buying a 2nd hand 40D as well?? Since the 24-105 is on your list, I assume it could be in your budget [:O]
Good luck!
Jan
Ok, first off <pedantry> "bokeh" actually refers to the quality of the out of focus blur - that's not really a function of aperture diameter or focal length, but rather, is determined primarily by the number and shape of the aperture blades and by other elements of the lens design, such as placement of the various elements relative to the iris diaphragm, the degree to which spherical aberration is corrected, etc.). The quality of the blur - "bokeh" - is different than the quantity of the blur.</pedantry>
I suspect you are talking about quantity of blur, not quality. Your maximal quantity of blur will be at the longest end of the zoom range and the widest aperture. With the 17-55mm at 55mm, a tight portrait will be well-framed at about 6 feet from the subject. DoF for that combination of 55mm+f/2.8+6 feet is ~4.5". With the 24-105mm, you'd get the same framing at 11.5 feet - DoF for 105mm+f/4+11.5 feet is ~6.5". So, you'll actually get a thinner DoF, and thus more out of focus blur, in a similarly-framed portrait with the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 lens than with the 24-105mm f/4L lens. So, the 17-55mm is 'better' for portraits, as long as you remember to get close enough to your subject (fill the frame!).
Regarding bokeh, the 17-55mm has a 7-bladed aperture, and the 24-105mm has an 8-bladed aperture; both are 'circular' (the edges are rounded for more pleasing bokeh). In practice, both lenses have very good bokeh.
So, you want a great 'walkaround lens' for a crop body, one that will also take good portraits. You want the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8. It's the best walkaround lens for a crop body. Period.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote