When to upgrade

RevLinePhoto

Ive been wanting to get a new camera for a while now but I was wondering when you know its time to upgrade. I have a Digital reble (300d) with kit lens and a 75-300 USM lens. Iv noticed I have been having trouble with a good DOF and shading. Im just starting the New York Instatute of Photography coarse on profesional photography to try and get better at planing out my shots. Iv realy been looking at a 30d with kit IS lens and a 75-200 2.5L lens but the $3000 price tag for both is kind of killing me on the pocket book. I was wondering if I should get farther in the coarse and see what I have learned or if I should try and upgrade now and if you think my curren camera is holding me back.

Thanks for any help,
Ryan

ziggy53

Papy wrote:

Ive been wanting to get a new camera for a while now but I was wondering when you know its time to upgrade. I have a Digital reble (300d) with kit lens and a 75-300 USM lens. Iv noticed I have been having trouble with a good DOF and shading. Im just starting the New York Instatute of Photography coarse on profesional photography to try and get better at planing out my shots. Iv realy been looking at a 30d with kit IS lens and a 75-200 2.5L lens but the $3000 price tag for both is kind of killing me on the pocket book. I was wondering if I should get farther in the coarse and see what I have learned or if I should try and upgrade now and if you think my curren camera is holding me back.

Thanks for any help,
Ryan

Hi Ryan,

The 30D is a great camera, but your photography class will probably have you shooting manual "everything" for a while, so the Rebel/300D is still viable as a camera.

If you upgrade lenses now, they will still work on the 30D later.

If by "kit" lens you mean the Canon EF-S 17-85mm, f/4-5.6 USM IS, it is very versatile in range, but somewhat lacking in speed and sharpness.

I suggest you would do well with a Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Aspherical, or the newer macro version, or the Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical. These lenses are constant aperture and very high quality, and by f4 they rival Canon "L" lenses.

Couple this with the Canon EF 70-200mm "L" in any of its varieties, and you have a pretty good 2 lens system.

I would also recommend the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II for low light and some portraiture, and you have some serious shooting versatility in 3 lenses.

You can get it done for less than $1000 if you go with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM as your long zoom.

Nikolai

Ryan,
For the school you can not beat EF 50mm f/1.8.
It costs less than a $100, but it's WAY better than 18-55 "kit" (the latter I suggest to avoid like a plague )

HTH

RevLinePhoto

Thanks for the help guys. I gues I could just upgrade my lenses now and body latter.

Thanks again,
Ryan

Terrence

Excellent quality lenses on any decent body will produce quality images (technical quality that is). The whole Canon and Nikon lineup is excellent quality. Remember that at one point in time your Rebel, the 10D, the 20D, etc. were best in class. Just because upgrades have come out for those bodies, the quality in them has not diminished.

When it comes to where your hard earned is going, listen to Ziggy, Nikolai and the others here and make some solid lens choices. These guys know their stuff cold from what I see and have helped me a lot.

Unless your passion is fast action sports or fast action nature, the Rebel will serve you well. IMHO, the big advantages in the better bodies is the increased frames per second and the better auto focus systems. None of the technical advances will help you if you have an underdeveloped talent for the art, so focus on that and don't worry about having the coolest or best body on the block.

My personal experience is that I am mediocre photographer right now and working to improve my vision and technique. I have a Rebel XT and just got a 30D off a deal that was simply too good not to take. My pictures are just as good technically with either camera and just as bad creatively.

I'm really interested to hear about your experience with NYIP. I'm thinking about joining too and would love to read some insider views.

Best of luck and keep on shooting.

sit

Terrence wrote:

IMHO, the big advantages in the better bodies is the increased frames per second and the better auto focus systems. None of the technical advances will help you if you have an underdeveloped talent for the art, so focus on that and don't worry about having the coolest or best body on the block.

FWIW, I upgraded from a 300D to a 30D and am quite happy. I think the big advantage of this particular upgrade are not frames per second or AF; what I noticed most about the 30D is the instant start-up (vs 3 seconds) and how much easier it was to shoot manual with the rear command dial (instead of having to hold a button and then use the main dial). Having in-camera flash exposure compensation and the bigger buffer for RAW has been nice too.

Would I have been just as happy if I'd waited for 400D? Maybe. It's got the start-up time and better buffer, but not the rear command dial. I've never handled it but I did not like the 350D's small grip. It is cheaper than the 30D almost by the price of a 70-200/4L though. :-)

However, if the OP's main problem is DOF, then the 50/1.8 is totally the way to go! The 300D certainly produced great images for me with that lens.

snapapple

sit wrote:

FWIW, I upgraded from a 300D to a 30D and am quite happy.

However, if the OP's main problem is DOF, then the 50/1.8 is totally the way to go! The 300D certainly produced great images for me with that lens.

I'm thinking of getting a 50mm lens for portraits and low light candids on the street etc. Can you tell me if it's worth the money to get the EF 50mm f/1.4 at $315 instead of the 50/1.8 II at $80?

ziggy53

snapapple wrote:

I'm thinking of getting a 50mm lens for portraits and low light candids on the street etc. Can you tell me if it's worth the money to get the EF 50mm f/1.4 at $315 instead of the 50/1.8 II at $80?

If you are looking for better resolution, faster speed, much better bokeh (larger aperture, more aperture blades and curved aperture blades) and if the price is not too much, it is highly recommended. If I didn't already have a Pentax 50mm, f1.4 SMC, I would have gotten the Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 long ago.

RevLinePhoto

Ok so I have taken your guyses advice and decided to go with lenses first. I picked up the 50mm 1.8 and wow I am impresed. I was wondering if you guys thought I could use the quality of say a 75-200L series lense or would it be a lost cause. So Im probly going to pick up a mid range lense such as above Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Aspherical or Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical. Just wondering wich one would you sugjest. I would say $700 is about my budget. Hopfully with my schooling I will be able to put together some great images and increase my skill in choosing what and how to shoot.

Thanks again,
Ryan

ziggy53

Papy wrote:

Ok so I have taken your guyses advice and decided to go with lenses first. I picked up the 50mm 1.8 and wow I am impresed. I was wondering if you guys thought I could use the quality of say a 75-200L series lense or would it be a lost cause. So Im probly going to pick up a mid range lense such as above Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Aspherical or Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical. Just wondering wich one would you sugjest. I would say $700 is about my budget. Hopfully with my schooling I will be able to put together some great images and increase my skill in choosing what and how to shoot.

Thanks again,
Ryan

Ryan,

I have the Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Aspherical. If you can still find a good one (quality control was an issue), it's a great lens for the money.

Review:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1850_28/index.htm

Sigma has since brought out a "Macro" version which doesn't seem to have as many complaints from users. It has closer focussing than the version I have, but optically appears to be very similar to the original otherwise.

The Tamron also gets good reviews:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28/index.htm

I don't think you would go too wrong with either.

The Canon EF 70-200mm "L" lenses are very pricey, so even the least (f4L) will consume your budget. It is worth waiting for, so save until you can afford at least that or the Sigma AF 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO HSM. I have the Canon EF 70-200mm, f2.8L, and it is extremely nice.