1. I love my Canon 350D. It has a kit lens 18-55mm and I also have a 70-300mm zoom.
2. I battle to hold the camera still when I use the 300mm lens without a tripod. A friend has a stabilizer in his 300mm lens and I can't believe the difference it makes with camera shake.
3. I would like to buy a lens with a stabilizer but am considering a 18mm-200mm lens with stabilizer as I really would like a lens that goes from a wide angle to a fairly good zoom so I can leave the lens on without having to change lenses all the time.
This is especially important as we are going overseas in June and I'd prefer to take my Canon DSLR rather than my husband's little Nikon P60 (which BTW does take pretty good pics tho' and can zoom up to 300mm optical zoom). I hate travelling with a camera & having to change lenses all the time. (I have enough on my plate worrying about the kids without worrying about losing lenses too!)
4. I was offered an upgrade to a Canon 500D which has a Canon kit lens 18-200mm with a stabilizer. The same lens costs almost the same price as the camera body on its' own. OR I could buy a Sigma equivalent lens for a bit cheaper.
Oh my! That's a tough call - but I'd say it comes down to 2 questions: first, is 200mm long enough for you? Because 100mm is a big difference in lens length... And secondly, well - no, I guess that's the only question because obviously the newer body would kick butt. LOL >_> Unless I'm misunderstanding the question, I would say the first question I would have to debate with myself if I were in your shoes is the difference in the lens and the cost vs. the cost of getting a lens for your existing camera. If you're going to save money/pay the same and be happy with the lens you go with from the upgrade, I'd say that's a kick butt deal.
...of course you were offered an upgrade. That is a salespersons job. Sorry, I'm a bit of a cynic when it comes to that. People walk around with cameras they don't need, but are sold to believe they do. (I'm starting to sound like a reason that causes recessions!)
200mm glass with a non-full frame DSLR is equivalent to what, 350mm on a 35mm SLR. Uh,that's pretty good, if ya ask me. And you can always crop, if you leave yourself room. I do it all the time.
As far as the Sigma, it is naturally not as nice as a Canon. They tend to have more abberation around the edges. My guess is that 95% of anyone would never even notice though, unless they had a PhD in Astro Physics. I use a SIgma Ultra Wide. It was 50% cheaper than Nikon's Ultra Wide, and I love it to life.
They always say to spend the money on the glass,and not the camera, and I do agree. I feel that if it is going to be your "primary lens, then as this adage goes, you may want to spend for the Canon.
I agree with Chris... a body is as good as you want it to be, and when you outgrow your body, or need a body that is geared towards your type of photography, then you need to upgrade.
In your instance, your camera is perfectly matched to your style of photography. Your lens is what you think is letting you down, and I would have to agree.
Your best bet is to go for the IS lenses with Canon, or wait for the Sigma OS to come out on their new lenses announced yesterday.
Your budget is always going to be your biggest problem, so save up as much as you can for as long as you can, then buy the best you can.
Canon 18-200 IS with Canon 1.4 Teleconverter
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX APO OS HSM with 1.4 or 2x Teleconverter
Sigma 18-250 OS
Tamron 18-270 VC
It really depends on your lighting, the distance you want etc. The Tamron/Sigma longer reach 18-xxx lenses go to f6.3 which means you'll need good light to keep the shutter speed faster than 1/200 sec for a crisp shot.
The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS HSM has only just been announced, and once released, along with a 1.4 teleconverter will probably be the best to keep the 300mm and an f4 constant ap for great photos... and you have time to save :)
i am confused. are you trading it in ? or upgrading? meaning keeping the existing body and getting an additional body. i have two camera bodies and i keep two different lenses on them. that eliminates that changing the lens thing, but i shoot weddings. the only reason i would upgrade my camera body would be for the higher iso and how well it handles the noise.
but the glass makes an HOOOGE difference. unless you are a professional, the sigma/tamron is perfectly fine. the optics are better in the nikon, it is constructed better (if you drop it , you have a better chance of it still working) and the sigma/tamron can put a bit of cast in your photos - i have seen a little more red in images with the knock offs. but again, like Chris said, most people don't ever notice.
but after i upgraded my lenses to the 2.8 - my edit time is cut way down. big difference. and yes, i would NOT by any long lense without VR or IS i guess in canon, you will end up with more blurry photos without it. so spend the extra cash or you'll be sorry.
if you are shooting professionally or intend to in the future, you want a back up body, so keep the one you have now.
I think you also need to focus on what you're actually going to be using this for mostly. I would have loved to go the hilt when purchasing my camera but i've realised that what I really need is something that I can have for travel. Something (relatively) light weight, fairly versatile but is good enough in most situations.
My entire setup :
Canon 450D
Canon 24-105mm f / 4 L
Canon 50mm f / 1.8
Lowerpro slingshot 100
When travelling I rarely swap to the 50mm and find that the 24-105 does me for 99.9% of cases. The slingshot takes up maybe half my carry on backpack space and I can fit enough clothes to last 3-5 days in the other half. The whole thing is a tiny bit heavy to start but you get used to it.
one other point i might make too about selecting a camera body...i had someone who wanted to assist me on a wedding - now i shoot nikon, i know nothing about canon - she had a canon something or other...well whatever model it was, it took too many steps to change settings - meaning if you shoot manual, being able to quickly adjust iso, shutter speed, and aperature, etc without going thru a bunch of screens. all of those controls should be located somewhere on the body that is comfortable and can be quickly changed.
but i totally agree with everyone about the lens - and get the anti-shake :) let us know what you do !
Rochele
I think she just didn't know her camera.
Every setting that you could need to change (ISO,WB, AP, etc) is a matter of a click away on the Canon bodies.
That said, I wish that Canon would select one place and make it consistent from body to body
agree with Kevin, my 450D:
change shutter speed : wheel on the top near the trigger
change aperture : push a button near the screen with your thumb and use the wheel as above
change iso : push the iso button near the trigger and then use the wheel to move up or down in selection.
On full manual mode or aperture priority i found it very simple and a matter of seconds to modify
It's amazing how much can be learned by some else's question. Seems like some of these things takes a collage education just to get to use them. I still like my slr and my Brownie box camera
Ahhh, Richard. A Brownie! I have an Old Agfa Box camera, and a Kodak Six Twenty. Would love to find a place that actually had 620 film! Otherwise, these are just display items!
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
200mm glass with a non-full frame DSLR is equivalent to what, 350mm on a 35mm SLR. Uh,that's pretty good, if ya ask me. And you can always crop, if you leave yourself room. I do it all the time.
As far as the Sigma, it is naturally not as nice as a Canon. They tend to have more abberation around the edges. My guess is that 95% of anyone would never even notice though, unless they had a PhD in Astro Physics. I use a SIgma Ultra Wide. It was 50% cheaper than Nikon's Ultra Wide, and I love it to life.
They always say to spend the money on the glass,and not the camera, and I do agree. I feel that if it is going to be your "primary lens, then as this adage goes, you may want to spend for the Canon.
Stay well!
In your instance, your camera is perfectly matched to your style of photography. Your lens is what you think is letting you down, and I would have to agree.
Your best bet is to go for the IS lenses with Canon, or wait for the Sigma OS to come out on their new lenses announced yesterday.
Your budget is always going to be your biggest problem, so save up as much as you can for as long as you can, then buy the best you can.
Canon 18-200 IS with Canon 1.4 Teleconverter
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX APO OS HSM with 1.4 or 2x Teleconverter
Sigma 18-250 OS
Tamron 18-270 VC
It really depends on your lighting, the distance you want etc. The Tamron/Sigma longer reach 18-xxx lenses go to f6.3 which means you'll need good light to keep the shutter speed faster than 1/200 sec for a crisp shot.
The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS HSM has only just been announced, and once released, along with a 1.4 teleconverter will probably be the best to keep the 300mm and an f4 constant ap for great photos... and you have time to save :)
Just my 2c and my own opinion :)
Good luck
Andrew
but the glass makes an HOOOGE difference. unless you are a professional, the sigma/tamron is perfectly fine. the optics are better in the nikon, it is constructed better (if you drop it , you have a better chance of it still working) and the sigma/tamron can put a bit of cast in your photos - i have seen a little more red in images with the knock offs. but again, like Chris said, most people don't ever notice.
but after i upgraded my lenses to the 2.8 - my edit time is cut way down. big difference. and yes, i would NOT by any long lense without VR or IS i guess in canon, you will end up with more blurry photos without it. so spend the extra cash or you'll be sorry.
if you are shooting professionally or intend to in the future, you want a back up body, so keep the one you have now.
ok - good luck!!
If the size of the images produced on your camera now are sufficient for you, I would definitely go with the lens upgrade as well.
That will have a bigger impact on your images than a a new body.
With the 500D, I think you can shoot videos...
Anyway, I´d definetly buy only the lenses...
My entire setup :
Canon 450D
Canon 24-105mm f / 4 L
Canon 50mm f / 1.8
Lowerpro slingshot 100
When travelling I rarely swap to the 50mm and find that the 24-105 does me for 99.9% of cases. The slingshot takes up maybe half my carry on backpack space and I can fit enough clothes to last 3-5 days in the other half. The whole thing is a tiny bit heavy to start but you get used to it.
but i totally agree with everyone about the lens - and get the anti-shake :) let us know what you do !
I think she just didn't know her camera.
Every setting that you could need to change (ISO,WB, AP, etc) is a matter of a click away on the Canon bodies.
That said, I wish that Canon would select one place and make it consistent from body to body
change shutter speed : wheel on the top near the trigger
change aperture : push a button near the screen with your thumb and use the wheel as above
change iso : push the iso button near the trigger and then use the wheel to move up or down in selection.
On full manual mode or aperture priority i found it very simple and a matter of seconds to modify