Upgrade from Canon 500D

[Ryan L]

You need new lenses not bodies, you are using kit lenses...even though the 55-250 isnt technically kit. Even the 28-135 IS is a big upgrade from the 55-250. The 50D is a great camera, I actually just bought one for a heck of a deal this week. I had an XSi and was using L glass on it with great results. Witht he 50D, the colors are much more vivid out of the camera, AF is far superior, and I love the fps compared to the XSi...getting off subject. I would highly suggest you get more glass before you even think of getting a new body. Your glass is what makes I would say 75% of the difference maybe more maybe less, but point is I would say glass not body.

 

[cfaulds]

Thanks for the advice!

Im now (excitedly) looking for 1 'prosumer' lens which I can use for general use, more wide angle than telephoto... Like a 'walk-around' lens.

I'm thinking either the:

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM = £820

or

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM = £280

Is the 24-105mm worth the extra £550? It is an L-series after all, but still, what do you think?

For me personally, I dont think im ready to spend that much for a lens as I dont quite have the skills to compensate it. Anyone had any experience with either of them?

Thanks!

Also, is the 28-135mm a prosumer lens? Would it provide better image quality than my current lens (signature)? - Do you think I need a lens of this focal length?

 

[Ryan L]

I use the 28-135mmm as a walkaround lens all the time. I really like it for the price, I think it's an great lens. On the other hand the 24-105 is an outstanding lens....but I would probably suggest the 28-135mm. You will know when you outgrow your equipment and it doesn't sound like your there yet.

 

[cfaulds]

Yeah I agree with you Ryan.

2 Questions:

1. Would the 28-135mm have better image quality than the 18-55mm kit lens?

2. Would the Canon 70-300mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM have better image quality than my current 55-250mm?

 

[Ryan L]

Yeah I agree with you Ryan.

2 Questions:

1. Would the 28-135mm have better image quality than the 18-55mm kit lens?

2. Would the Canon 70-300mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM have better image quality than my current 55-250mm?

1. Yes in my opinion the quality is much much better than the 18-55.

2. I can't comment on the 70-300 IS as I haven't had it. I have had the non IS version, and didn't like it at all. I would suggest looking at a few reviews. They usually offer comparisons, or google 55-250mm IS vs 75-300mm IS. I am sure there are some out there.

 

[subscuck]

Yeah I agree with you Ryan.


2. Would the Canon 70-300mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM have better image quality than my current 55-250mm?

They don't even compare. The 70-300 is the type of non L I was referring to. It's a very nice lens, about $550US. It would absolutely blow away the 55-250. It will, however, create a coverage gap between 55 and 70mm.

 

[sovietdoc]

I am excited to wait for 60D later this year. I hear interesting things about that cam.

 

[oldmacman]

I fretted about the 24-105 but it is a spectacular lens. Provides sharp images and controls CA very well. People are always selling these used because:
A) they couldn't decide on the 24-105 4L or the 24-70 2.8L
or
B) they overbought for their skill level
or
C) it came as part of a great kit deal on a higher end camera and they are looking to make a little back on the body price.