60D or L Lens?
ForceGhost
Registered Users Posts: 81 Big grins
Hey guys! Payday is coming up and i said i'd buy myself an upgrade of some kind so i've come to a decision i really need some help making.
I currently have the EOD 1100D with the 18-55 Kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 prime (Loving the 50mm DOF and the whole prime thing) and have had it for a little while but the AF accuracy pisses me off sometimes.
I was wondering if you were in my shoes would you buy a body upgrade (To the 60D) or a lens upgrade (To a similarly prices L lens, Haven't decided to focal length but am open to suggestions), what would give me more quality and what would fix my annoying focus problems?
Cheers,
JB
I currently have the EOD 1100D with the 18-55 Kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 prime (Loving the 50mm DOF and the whole prime thing) and have had it for a little while but the AF accuracy pisses me off sometimes.
I was wondering if you were in my shoes would you buy a body upgrade (To the 60D) or a lens upgrade (To a similarly prices L lens, Haven't decided to focal length but am open to suggestions), what would give me more quality and what would fix my annoying focus problems?
Cheers,
JB
0
Comments
"Annoying focus problems". What exactly are the problems you are trying to solve? Are you certain it's the gear?
And to at least float a suggestion your way, here is what I would do if I were in your positions and was aching to upgrade. If you're content with the 18-55 focal length, I would buy a used 40D, these are excellent cameras, and can be found for around $400 used. Then for a lens, I would buy a 17-40 f/4 L.
A camera and new lens for the same price as a new 60D.
Best of luck!
Jordon.
My website
That 50 you have is known to give some trouble trying to focus in low light situations. I am not familiar enough with your Cam body to comment intelligently on it. So it sounds like your AF probs are only with the 50mm?
Please don't take offense, but I think you have this backwards. The first question should be what you want to do that your current equipment won't do well. Everything else follows from that. Depending on the FL that you need (if a lens is what you need), an L may or may not be worth it, compared to less expensive alternatives that would leave you cash for other things. There are lots of very, very good lenses that are not L. For example, I shoot macro with two lenses, the 100mm L and the EF-S 60mm. I can't see any practical difference in image quality.
Thank you! I just read on a couple of boards about the 50 and it describes the exact issues im having!
Jordon.
My website
SO sounds like a better lens might well be in your sights! Camera bodies do help some, improved AF functions and so on, but lenses are typically an investment and they also tend to hold their prices better than Camera bodies should selling down the road be desired. A good lens will most often improve your imagery via simple resolution of the image. Better lenses also tend to work in lower light.
But keep that 50 too, cause it's cheap. Once you know it's limitations, it can be worked around and truly, that lens stopped down can produce some decent imagery. I have one and still use it for Video @ f/8.
The 40D body that user "supermarvin76" mentioned was the first body in the xxD series Canon bodies where "all" of the AF points are cross type. It's a very worthwhile upgrade and that AF system also appears to be in the 50D and 60D, so buying a 40D will at least get you current AF technology in that series bodies.
The center AF dot of those bodies is also more sensitive than that of the dRebel series, so it will autofocus in lower light.
If you also replace the Canon 50mm, f1.8 with a Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 micromotor-USM that will also improve autofocus reliability. (Either micromotor-USM or ring-USM AF motor technology will AF more consistently than the micromotor AF of the 50mm, f1.8.)
Indoors or in low-light outdoors, a flash with a patterned focus-assist lamp will also improve AF speed and AF accuracy.
Finally, if you do use the center AF dot, do not focus-and-recompose, for the following reasons:
http://digital-photography-school.com/the-problem-with-the-focus-recompose-method
http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm
So there you have it, the four things that you can do to improve your AF success rate:
1) Improved body, with the 40D as the least expensive option.
2) Better lens, with the EF 50mm, f1.4 USM as the least expensive option if the 50mm focal length is otherwise appropriate.
3) Flash (or other device) with an AF Assist light. Sigma EF 530 DG Super* or Sigma EF 610 DG Super* are extremely competent flashes and reasonably priced. (*In a Canon mount.)
4) Do not focus-and-recompose. This is free and a simple change in technique that works.
What I would recommend is the lens upgrade and flash first, along with careful technique. This will give you very good results even with the body that you own. The lens you can often find used on KEH and the flash you can find new at Adorama or B&H.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I also think, especially on forums, there is too much importance placed on proving one is adequately equipped in the manhood department through compensating through equipment.
I gaurantee I have more gear than most here and a bunch of L lenses but right now I am enjoying my little toy 650D and my 28-135 far more than everything else.
I don't know why you would really want a 60 over the 650. It's an awesome little camera and the image quality is beautiful. I can't see any difference in the quality of the images from my 28-135 to my 50 1.4 to the 70-200's and everything beyond and in between. I did have an 18-55 and did think that was junk although in some cases it was adequate.
You don't need the priciest camera you can afford or the most exy lens. I could buy any damn camera or lens I wanted thanks to my latest good fortune with my business but I'm happy with the size of my manhood and I actually enjoy playing with the little camera and lens and taking great pics with something modest than needing the equipment placebo. Business wise, it also makes no sense to me to spend more on gear than required. I could buy a 1DX but why spend that when the 650 exceeds what I need anyway?
IMHO it is good to keep the cams relatively up to date as they are always improving and adding new features. With something as cheap as a 650, there aren't too many things you can't do with one of those so they don't need to be a once in 10 year purchase any more.
A good lens will see many camera's but good is reliant more on what you do than whether or not it has an L stamped on it.
I'm still shooting a 40D and I have five lenses (had six!). I use my 17 - 55 f/2.8 99% time. I don't mean to imply that this is the lens for you—though it could be—but I'm trying to say that multiple lenses isn't necessarily the answer. As others have said, buy the lens you need to do what you want to do. . . .
NEW Smugmug Site
No matter what, buying the newest gear is not the answer typically. It just doesn't make sense to spend a load of cash on a 60D or 24-70 2.8 or whatever. Check out older bodies (like the 40D...or even a 5D if you want to go full frame). If you know what you want to shoot, then you can talk more about lenses. As far as bodies go, they lose their value quickly, which is good if you are looking in the used market.
In a totally unrelated matter, I'd be more than happy to sell you my gripped 40D for a very reasonable price
EC
normally the advice is glass before body but the 1100D /T3 has a lot of limitations for action shots so if you shoot a lot of sports an upgrade in bodies could be a good choice. The 60D is good at $600 (in the CLP program), the Rebel line is better with higher FPS rate, buffer, AF, video features, etc.
Or if you don't have a good telephoto now may be the time, e.g 70-200, 100-400, etc.
I dont feel the 1100D is limiting me too much as i dont really need 10 FPS, it would be nice but feel a 70-200 L lens would be a better investment right now.
Jordon.
My website
The question is, if you're just starting out, what are you investing towards? What profits will a $1300 - $2200 70-200 - if you're going 2.8 - net you? If you just have money to throw at it for the hobby's sake, or see yourself using it enough to justify the huge expense, then yeah, go for it. Just my .02.
it's not only FPS rate but the buffer and AF points however a 70-200 2.8 L will certainly get you nice shots with any body
Think i'm settled on getting a lens. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM is only £529.99 right now!
Jordon.
My website
Gonna try my best
Jordon.
My website
My conversion £529.99 is 843USD, Where are you getting this deal?
No joke. No 70-200 2.8 sells for that legitimately...I've seen "for parts" 70-200s go for more.. What is your source for that price?
Jessops had a mis print in there catalogue. After a long argument with the manager he let me have it for the catalogue price! Result! They didn't have any in store so i have to wait 8 weeks!. I'm a little worried about putting it on the 1100D, Judging by the weight in store on the 1100D body feels like its going to snap right off.
Jordon.
My website
D800
16/2.8, f1.4G primes, f2.8 trio, 105/200 macro, SB900.
It never gets easier, you just get better.
I've had a 500mm, f4.5 lens on my dRebel with no problems for either damage or body flex. I do recommend using the tripod collar on the lens to mount the lens and camera onto a tripod/monopod. Also be careful not to bang the lens and camera against anything, and especially careful in very cold weather.
A new EF 70-200mm, f2.8L IS USM II for £529.99 is just amazing luck.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
the goods have more than one displayed price - 'contain multiple prices'; and
the supply takes place for a price that is not the lowest of the displayed prices.
A business who displays the same good with more than one price – ‘with multiple prices’ – must:
sell it for the lowest displayed price; or
withdraw the goods from sale until the price is corrected.
'Displayed price'
A ‘displayed price’ is a price, or any representation that may reasonably be inferred to be a representation of a price that is:
attached to or on:
the goods
anything connected or used with the goods
anything used to display the goods
published in a catalogue available to the public, when:
the deadline to buy at that price has not passed
the catalogue is not out-of-date
that price applies only to the goods at a specific location or in a specific region, or
that reasonably appears to apply to the goods, including a partly-obscured price.
Jordon.
My website