Equipment Need DSLR + Lens recommendation

Hello gents (and the rare lady).

I've decided to give my 450D + 18-55 kit lens to my sister and upgrade to something slightly beefier.

I've about $2000 to spend which can stretch to a maximum of $2500 if I dip into my SSD fund, but ideally I would like to keep it at or under $2K.

I'm familiar with Canons, most of the folks I know shoot Canons, so that my first preference. But I am also open to other suggestions.

So, the requirements (in no particular order or preference):

Types of pictures I intend to take:
1. Product photography
2. Landscape
3. General pictures of friends/family

At the moment, I am looking for only one body and one lens to get all this done as nicely as possible. I believe what I need here is decent body and what you folks would call a 'walkabout' lens (still a nooby with photography terms, so I might have got that wrong )

Video is not a must, but at $2K it'd be a nice thing to have

Please suggest away, and if I missed something while searching for similar threads, do feel free to scream at me and point me in the right direction

 

I don't see why you would even need another 450D to do that ? It is amaziong the quality of pictures people are getting with entry level D-SLR's like the EOS 1000 and D3000. If you are interested in making money with photography and have a colour calibrated/ colour accurate monitor then look at upgrading. Otherwise, I am curious as to why you need to upgrade ?

Not being funny like.

A Nikon D5000 or Canon 500D would be the most extravagant kit I would ever recommend to someone wanting to fulfill the requirements you stated. You would be able to take pics with that kit which would impress anyone if you apply the correct technique.

Are you looking for a feature that the 450D didn't have ? I have known people go from things like Nikon D80's to Pentax K20's because the latter is more rugged, or to an Olympus E30 because of the excellent dust reduction system, but these are somewhat shaky reasons in the scheme of things.

 

What do you mean by "beefier"? Are you speaking in terms of body size? If so, why not consider a grip for the 450D? It is a very capable camera and better yet you already own it. Spend the 2K on glass and get yourself a 45 or 90 TSE for product work and a nice UWA (i.e. Tokina 11-16) or a replacement for the kit lens (i.e. Tamron 17-50) for landscape and general usage.

 

Whoops, I forgot to mention one very important thing, and an area where the 450D falls short spectacularly - ISO speeds. 1600 ISO on the 450D is about as useful as a rocket-propelled wheelchair (read: looks nice on the spec-sheet but no more than that).

Basically, I'm looking for a camera that does high ISOs better than the 450D and a different (better) lens. The camera's already gone to my sister, so I need a new one. Have money, will spend sorta thing. My aunt's gifting me the EF 50mm f1.8 II so that's sort of thrown a spanner in the works as far as considering other brands goes.

I was doing a little digging and the 7D looks great but pricey. Is buying used/refurbished recommended? The 7D + 15-85 IS f.35-5.6 seems to fulfill pretty much all my needs (could be wrong, having never used either before) but comes up a little over $2.5K if you factor in the ridiculous CA taxes.

 

Ok, in that case, the 550D does 6400 iso and is superior to both the 450D and 500D. However, you say you want a different (better) lens than the 450 ? You can pretty much use any lens you fancy ???? Don't understand that. You could be getting better image quality with an EOS 1000 with a £4000 lens than a 7D with the kit lens.

 

Alright, so the 550D currently sounds good.

When I said better lens, I meant better than the 450D kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS). That's the part I'm having most trouble with, especially because of my product photography requirement, which means I'm looking at minimum focusing distances of ~25cm or less. If I can squeeze a zoom and a decent-ish macro into a $2K budget, I'd be more than happy.

 

For what you are calling 'Product' photography, if you mean taking pictures of consumer goods or whatever, I use a Pentax K20 with a rare Vivitar 55mm f2.8 1:1. Of all the kit I have tried for that kind of stuff ( and believe me, its a lot) that combo does the job the best.



Unless you have to stick with Canon/Nikon like everyone else, have a look at this :

http://www.streetprices.com/Cameras...4_Megapixel/Pentax-K20D-19411-SP24007612.html

After a 450D you would be seriously blown away by the K20, I think. In fact, if you were to go to store and handle a K20, you would see it makes anything like like the 500D or Nikon D90 feel like cheap toys, no exaggeration.

 

Hm. I'll definitely give it a try then, you make it sound so appealing Even the reviews are overwhelmingly positive

But the trouble is that I'm most familiar with Canons and I happen to be getting a sort-of decent lens for a Canon anyway. It's really hard to move away from that comfort zone.

 

I used to use Canon film cameras, and previously was using Konica, then when I got my first digital (an Olympus) I looked into then getting an early Canon D-SLR but didn't like it, so I was using a Fuji Pro (based on a Nikon body) D-SLR and then ended up with an Olympus, have two, an E3 and an E-420 (which is tiny), plus the Pentax K20. With a variety of lenses I can do just about everything I want now, which is nice.

 

Go with the 550D+grip then. High ISO performance is virtually identical to the 7D's but the AF system and ergonomics lag far behind. I'd say the 550+Tamron 17-50 or the 17-55IS will give you everything you've been missing, apart from UWA which may or may not be useful to you for landscape. The f/2.8 aperture of either of the two aforementioned lenses will benefit your low light work.

 

Never missed UWA on the 18-55 with the 450D so I doubt it'd be a problem with the 17-55. However a friend of mine shoots a 7D with the EF-S 15-85mm F3.5-5.6 lens. Is that worth considering for the extra zoom at the cost of the aperture of the 17-55?
I only ask because the 15-85 is a damn sight cheaper than the 17-55.

 

...and for good reason. If you find yourself shooting indoors and or in low light you will see an enormous difference between f/2.8 and f/5.6. I also mentioned the Tamron 17-50 (non-VR), which is a good bit cheaper than both the aforementioned EF-S lenses. Granted it doesn't have the same AF performance as the 17-55 or 15-85, specifically in low light/low contrast, and it lacks IS BUT it does offer f/2.8 and excellent IQ across the entire range at a very affordable cost. The 15-85 is said to be a great lens, especially when considering its range and IQ, but it hits a wall when it comes to shooting without a flash in low light. I guess you need to ask yourself what, exactly, you expect of the lens. FWIW I feel the 17-55 covers a very good range, especially for a constant f/2.8 lens--IS is icing on the cake.

 

Thanks for the tips and time Vers. Looks like the Canon 17-55 is what I'll get. If funds are low, I'll grab the Tamron - IS is not that important at that level of zoom.

 

This.

 

what do think about GF-1 and 14-45?

 

Excellent camera, you can also use four thirds lenses with an adaptor if you wish.



However, by the looks (on this forum and many others) if its not Canon or Nikon its toss. This is what is sometimes referred to as 'Photo Mag' mentality. If you have a large collection of Canon fit Glass already, then going to a Pentax or something would be foolhardy, but otherwise, its a good idea to check other makes.

If you go to a store and look at a Canon 500D for £599 or whatever then an Olympus for £349, you would see immediately that the build of the Canon is completely crap in comparison. Olympus as an optics company also (usually) bundle superior quality kit lenses, but in favour of Nikon and Canon, lense choice is wider and less expensive, but for those who aren't going to be going on a lens extravanganza every month, they are worth checking out.

I would possibly buy a Nikon D5000 over a PE-1 or GF-1 though, unless I just needed the compactness.

 

Beefier body, dunno why no one has suggested a 40D + 17-50 Tamron im sure you can pick that up for way less then 2000 and have loose change left over.

the xxxD bodies are fine but if you want to improe it doesn't hurt to having something a little better to play with, the 40D has faster shoot rate, fatter body, top LCD, lacks in pixels but then are you going to print massive ? I would say it has better ISO performance i know its better then the 450D and 400D not sure compared to the 550D and 6400ISO is nothing to shout home about yeah it can do it but is it useable at such High ISO.

 

...but awesome. There just isn't enough Pentax love in here.

 

Probably cos nobody knows much about them, as everyone is just Nikon this, Canon that !

 

This is horseshit. There have been more plenty of times when alternate systems have been discussed and presented as options; I can't think of once -well, ok, once and I have long since change my opinion- where they were deemed toss. The fact that Nikon and Canon are market leaders and offer the largest variety of lenses, accessories, and 3rd party options is why they are recommended. That and the fact that most of us have first hand experience with those options. I see no point in offering a camera or lens as an option unless I have at least 5-10 minutes of hands on with it. And when someone has limited funds and already is into a system, telling them to buy another system is asinine.

We, collectively, have often offered m4/3s as an option (especially lately); based on what we have seen-not always first hand. Some of us have Pentax cameras, made before I was born (M42 screw mount anyone?). Some of us are even talking to Pentax dealers about scoring a 645D once they get past Japan.

So go back and actually read some of the 10,000 threads like this, and the rational given before making idiotic statements. 9/10 times the advice is sound, well thought out, well supported and discussed....*cough* primes *cough*.

Everyone that comes in here has a certain set if needs, if not the ability to use the search. We try to give them the best advice we can. Given the OPs familiarity with Canon, and the fact that he's getting a free lens, it makes sense to point him to a new entry or used body one step up. Telling your Aunt who wants to give you a free 50mm to **** off because some ****** on the internet says, "OMG, Olys are the best!" isn't thinking smart. Especially since you can give her a great portrait print and maybe score some lens money on a holiday. For someone with an expensive photography habit, a happy Aunt is worth more then a off beat camera system. Just something to think about.