I am getting back into photography -- Need your opinion!

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Hey folks!

I'm new to the forum, but thought I would introduce myself and get your advice on something.

My name is Alex, and I use to shoot digital photography all the time with my Canon Rebel XS. I then went off to college and found that I had little to no free time to shoot.. Therefore, I decided to sell off my equipment. I'm not ready to get back into it and I'm considering what body to purchase. I was thinking I would pick up a body that is very slightly used with low shutter count (around 8,000 -- is this a good number?) so that I'm not breaking the bank, but I am able to get back into photography.. Then, if I got to the point that I felt I out grew the camera, I could upgrade.

So I'm thinking about picking up a used Canon 40D or 50D with around 8,000 shutter clicks.. Do you all think this is a good idea? Which do recommend more? I can get a 40D in perfect shape for $420 and a 50D body for about $650. I figure this type of setup will get me back in the game, get some experience back under my belt, and then I can reevaluate my setup in a year or so..

Thanks in advance for your help! I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

Thank you,
Alex

eszostak · Nov 14, 2011

I picked up my 50D brand new on Ebay for that price... If you can wait til the end of next month, right after Christmas is a good time to look as people are often selling off Christmas presents they can't return but don't necessarily love. I'm not in love with 50D though. I pretty much always find I wish I would have just invested the extra money in the 5D to begin with. Have you considered whether or not full frame matters to you? Which lenses are you planning to get? I find with the cropped sensor I have a hard time getting wide enough without owning a 10-22mm. Sorry if that's a bit OT but the one thing I keep learning with gear is that it's better off to just buy the good stuff in the first place, as you will eventually end up spending money on it anyway in the long run.

Big Mike · Nov 14, 2011

Welcome to the forum.

Either the 40D or 50D are great cameras. At those prices, I'd recommend that 40D at $420....the 50D looks to be a little overpriced IMO. If you can buy the cheaper one, and put the money into a lens or lenses, that might be a good idea.

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

eszostak said:
I picked up my 50D brand new on Ebay for that price... If you can wait til the end of next month, right after Christmas is a good time to look as people are often selling off Christmas presents they can't return but don't necessarily love. I'm not in love with 50D though. I pretty much always find I wish I would have just invested the extra money in the 5D to begin with. Have you considered whether or not full frame matters to you? Which lenses are you planning to get? I find with the cropped sensor I have a hard time getting wide enough without owning a 10-22mm. Sorry if that's a bit OT but the one thing I keep learning with gear is that it's better off to just buy the good stuff in the first place, as you will eventually end up spending money on it anyway in the long run.

Thank you so much for your reply! I wouldn't mind waiting until after Christmas except for the fact that I was hoping to actually pick up a camera before the Christmas season so I can capture some memories when I travel to be with family over the upcoming Christmas holidays.

The full frame doesn't really matter to me at this point in the game... That's a great point though!

Thanks again for your help!

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Big Mike said:
Welcome to the forum.

Either the 40D or 50D are great cameras. At those prices, I'd recommend that 40D at $420....the 50D looks to be a little overpriced IMO. If you can buy the cheaper one, and put the money into a lens or lenses, that might be a good idea.

Big Mike,

Thanks for the warm welcome to the forum!

So you're thinking I should go with the 40D? Your thinking is right in line with mine. I had thought that if I went with the 40D, I could throw a little extra money to some nice glass.

Something I found interesting.. When looking up prices of the 40D and 50D, they are more expensive when purchased new, then the new 60D! I'm assuming this is because of the way they were built, etc..?

So I think I'll move forward with the 40D.. Unless you think I should try to find a 50D at a certain price point?

Thanks for all your help, and I look forward to your reply!

Best regards,
Alex

Derrel · Nov 14, 2011

I would go with the 40D...the 50D is over-priced for what it brings--you would be better off with a new Rebel for roughly the same cash outlay as the 50D.

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Derrel said:
I would go with the 40D...the 50D is over-priced for what it brings--you would be better off with a new Rebel for roughly the same cash outlay as the 50D.

Thanks Derrel!

That's where my hesitation as been.. I couldn't really justify getting the 50D, as I felt like it's still over priced for what it brings to the table compared to the 40D. I feel like the 40D is PLENTY of camera for me, and will keep me busy for a long time. It will allow me to throw some extra money towards glass and other acessories (flash, etc..) that will able to interchangeable when I do upgrade to a different body later down the road.

Thanks again for your input Derrel!

Best regards,
Alex

Big Mike · Nov 14, 2011

So I think I'll move forward with the 40D.. Unless you think I should try to find a 50D at a certain price point?

I'm thinking that I would only pay around $50 more for a 50D over a 40D...all else being equal.

I know a very good professional photographer who prefers the 40D over the 50D, having owned both. He even prefers his 40D over his 1Ds MK III for a lot of shooting.

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Big Mike said:
So I think I'll move forward with the 40D.. Unless you think I should try to find a 50D at a certain price point?

Click to expand...

I'm thinking that I would only pay around $50 more for a 50D over a 40D...all else being equal.

I know a very good professional photographer who prefers the 40D over the 50D, having owned both. He even prefers his 40D over his 1Ds MK III for a lot of shooting.

Big Mike, that's awesome! Thanks so much for sharing! I was talking with a guy at a local shop this weekend that has been shooting for over 40 years, and he currently owns 4 different Canon DSLR cameras and still prefers his 40D over any of them..

I'm going to move forward with the 40D purchase! Soo... This leads me to my next question; what "everyday walk around" lens do you prefer I pick up to go with the 40D body?

Thanks so much!!

Best regards,
Alex

Big Mike · Nov 14, 2011

That's a tougher question to answer....plenty of choices though.

The usual 'kit' lens for these cameras is the EF-S 18-55mm. That is a good 'normal' range for these cameras, but that particular lens doesn't have a good reputation....mostly because it was designed to be small, light and cheap. It feels like a toy compared to better lenses. But for the $100 that it would cost you, it's not a terrible lens.
The 'current' version has IS, which is a nice feature.

Some might prefer more range for their 'walk around' lens. Maybe something like the 17-85mm F4-5.6 IS, or the 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS. There is a new one, the 15-85mm IS, but it's rather expensive for what you get.

There are the 'super zoom' lenses. 18-200mm etc. Personally, I think that with those lenses, there has been too much compromise to the image quality, in the name of continence. The best zoom lenses seldom exceed 3X; 17-50mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm etc.

Some people would prefer to have a lens with a larger maximum aperture. So for a zoom lens in the normal range, there is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS. Great lens but well over $1000. A similar lens with great value would be the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. It gives you the normal range and the wide aperture, plus really good image quality...and it's not too expensive. The do have a VC version (their version of Canon's IS) but it's a few hundred more.

Some would even prefer a larger maximum aperture, which will mean a prime (non zoom) lens. The 50mm F1.8 gets recommended quite a lot. Mostly because it's dirt cheap. It's $120 new (I think). It's a cheap, light lens with a cheap build quality....but the glass is pretty good, especially for the price.

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Big Mike said:
That's a tougher question to answer....plenty of choices though.

The usual 'kit' lens for these cameras is the EF-S 18-55mm. That is a good 'normal' range for these cameras, but that particular lens doesn't have a good reputation....mostly because it was designed to be small, light and cheap. It feels like a toy compared to better lenses. But for the $100 that it would cost you, it's not a terrible lens.
The 'current' version has IS, which is a nice feature.

Some might prefer more range for their 'walk around' lens. Maybe something like the 17-85mm F4-5.6 IS, or the 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS. There is a new one, the 15-85mm IS, but it's rather expensive for what you get.

There are the 'super zoom' lenses. 18-200mm etc. Personally, I think that with those lenses, there has been too much compromise to the image quality, in the name of continence. The best zoom lenses seldom exceed 3X; 17-50mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm etc.

Some people would prefer to have a lens with a larger maximum aperture. So for a zoom lens in the normal range, there is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS. Great lens but well over $1000. A similar lens with great value would be the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. It gives you the normal range and the wide aperture, plus really good image quality...and it's not too expensive. The do have a VC version (their version of Canon's IS) but it's a few hundred more.

Some would even prefer a larger maximum aperture, which will mean a prime (non zoom) lens. The 50mm F1.8 gets recommended quite a lot. Mostly because it's dirt cheap. It's $120 new (I think). It's a cheap, light lens with a cheap build quality....but the glass is pretty good, especially for the price.

Hey Big Mike!

I'm considering the Tamron 17-50MM F2.8 you were talking about.. I'm thinking about the VC version (Link to lens) do you think the VC is worth the extra money/investment?

Thanks so much for your help, you rock!!

Best regards,
Alex

MLeeK · Nov 14, 2011

I agree with the guys. While I LOVE my 50D, it's really not that much more than the 40D in terms of what you get for the $. It's an awesome and really capable camera. Check KEH for what they have used as well as Adorama.

I have taught my kids to shoot portraits so that if they do get to college for whatever (the remaining ones have no desire to be a photographer) they can make a little cash on the side with their cameras. Just make sure you are getting your legal ducks covered and it's a great way to help with mad money!

Big Mike · Nov 14, 2011

Hard to say, as with most issues in photography....it depends.

IS/VR/VC/OS (Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma)....is a great feature. It stabilizes the lens, allowing you to get sharper photos than you would normally get, when shooting with 'slower' shutter speeds when the camera is in motion (hand held). So if you are walking around and the light is less than great, the stabilization will likely help you get sharper shots of things that aren't moving.

However, these stabilization systems don't do anything to help freeze the motion of moving subjects. So if you are shooting photos of your kids, you still need a faster shutter speed to get sharp photos. So while the OS will be helpful, it won't get the job done....only a faster shutter speed will do that.

So while it's easy to say that having IS/VC is better than not having it...we have to look at the price difference. In this case, the VC version cost $200 more. That is almost a 50% increase over the non-VC version. Tough decision.

I've also heard rumors that the newer VC version, may not have as good test results for image quality, as the older version.

I own the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8, it's been a great lens for me. I also have the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS. I don't have any experience with the VC Tamron, so I can't speak with experience on that one.

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Thank you all for your replies!!

Big Mike,

Thanks for all the insight on the VC.. You're a wealth of knowledge! I'll do some more research and figure out if the VC is truly worth the money.. I am also considering the Canon EF 70-200MM f/4L ..

jablythe · Nov 14, 2011

Just curious.. The 40D I'm looking at is in flawless physical condition, and the shutter count is 9,290 -- that's not too high is it for a used 40D? Still have a lot of life left in it?

Thanks so much to everyone, look forward to your reply!

Best regards,
Alex