How much difference does a camera upgrade make really??

[MichelleP]

I have a low end DSLR ( Canon Rebel Xsi) and I will upgrade eventually, but I am just needing some opinions here.....How much difference in image quality is there between a camera like mine and a mid level dslr..... say a Nikon D90, Nikon D7000, or Canon 60D? I am just wondering about image quality here (clarilty, sharpness of the image, colors, ect.). Would I be able to get a lot better images from an upgrade or is the quality mostly in the lenses and camera user?

 

[Kerbouchard]

The differences come mostly in what type of photography you are going to be doing. If you plan on shooting in broad day light, there is almost no difference. If you want to shoot available light in an average living room, the difference is night and day.

Focus, high ISO performance, dynamic range, quick access to controls, etc all play a huge role in image quality and how easy it is to get the shot in the first place.

In perfect conditions, most viewers would be hard pressed to tell the difference between a top of the line DSLR and a cheap P&S. It is when conditions are less than perfect that the differences come out.

 

[flea77]

That depends on if the new cameras offer a feature that your current camera does not. For example, if you were shooting sports at night, the D7000 would provide substantially better images than the camera you currently have. If you are talking about using both cameras in daylight with the same or close to the same lenses, then the answer to your question is "not really".

Allan

 

[ladynikon]

For once I agree with kerouchbard ;-)

 

[MichelleP]

Thank you everyone! This helps a lot!

 

[Kbarredo]

Lenses usually are more important than the camera body itself when in comes to broad daylight photography. Most of the time pros get lenses worth much more than their camera.

 

[Big Mike]

Most of the time pros get lenses worth much more than their camera.

I'd guess that is more true of 'advanced amateurs' an hobbyists, as they tend to be ones who buy 'prosumer' level cameras and pro level lenses.

Actual professional photographers are more likely to use pro level bodies, which cost in the $2500-$8000 range.

 

[Patrice]

Almost all the current camera and lens offerings from Nikon (I don't know about Canon) are capable of excellent imagery in most situations. The advantages with the upper echelon bodies and lenses are in handling, speed, iso performance (the gap is closing on this one) and build quality. With upper end gear you see more buttons to control key functions without delving deeply into menus, larger buffers, more processing power, more compatibility, faster motors, faster and longer bursts, larger and brighter viewfinders, etc... However the upper end gear loose the nearly foolproof scenes. Good imagery takes a bit more operator skill with the pro bodies and there can be a fairly steep learning curve if you are new to that level equipment. However there is a big proviso with expensive high end professional quality equipment - the pictures don't magically get better!

 

[D-B-J]

Depends. I, for example, had a D200 up until about a month ago (had it for two years), and i loved it. It wasn't until about 5 or 6 months ago that i really started to feel the limitations of the sensor, mainly, ISO sensitivity. I have since upgraded to the D7000 and love it. Much better IQ (in less than perfect conditions), and much more user programmable. For example, i can alter the auto wb settings to be cooler or warmer (by selecting from a grid more green, red, blue, and a purple color). It was, for me, worth every penny. One shouldn't need to upgrade gear until you feel limited by it in some way, be it iso sensitivity, fps, weight, etc.

 

[MichelleP]

Helpful tips...thank you! I don't think I am at the point I need to upgrade yet, but my problem is that I would like to get a 50mm prime lens, but when I upgrade I want to switch to Nikon. :meh: I think for now I will wait on both unless i can find a used 50mm for my Canon. Thanks for the help!