Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3

    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

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    246

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    I recommend getting lenses first - I think they

  4. #4

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



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

  5. #5
    Senior Member nvitalephotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    south florida
    Posts
    323

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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.

  6. #6

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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!

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,163

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,163

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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



  10. #10
    Senior Member DLS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    258

    Re: Where to upgrade first? Camera? Lens?



    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •