Which DSLR

@jomeer,

 

I suggest you look for a used 'previous model' that was introduced 3-7 years ago. A few suggestions are:

entry level (APS): EOS 1200D (2014) or 1300D (2016)

mid-range: EOS 70D with APS sensor (2013) or for FF: 5D mk iii (2012) or 6D (2012)

Mike

Thanks Mike,

You have answered most of my issues. Interestingly, I was looking at the 40D and 70D. You have cleared up my pre-digital mind on FF vs crop sensors which was puzzling me. I will be doing some low light but i suspect the advantages of APS magnification will be more of a bonus to me with wildlife etc. Great that you so succinctly explained the difference in lenses:

'Lenses that are designed for FF cameras (EF lenses) will work on crop cameras too. The reverse is not true. Lenses that are specifically designed for crop cameras (usually the kit lens) won't work on a FF. If you have older lenses you want to use, you may need to buy a lens mount adapter.'

- I couldn't really get to grips easily with the differences using the Canon website.

I can see second hand EF lenses are readily available and if they fit the 40D (APS) or 70D without adaptors then that will suit me very well.

Going back to your previous comments:

'Having set up your basic preferences once, you can either choose to use menu options and LCD displays when shooting or not.

I am interested in the 'not' approach - Is this an easy procedure on all Canon DSLR ie. is it easy to initially set up with the menus (intuitive) plus then switch to manual? I saw a brief resume somewhere and it looked a little complex? Sorry if you do not have that info to hand - I can check myself.

My budget is around £100 for a body and similar for each lens (EF) I want a wide angle for everyday use (interior shots etc) and one long focus (not necessarily zoom) say 135mm or maybe a 200-250 for wildlife/ mid distance photo journalism etc. I want to keep the weight down(and camera shake). Are say 400mm now still so heavy that camera shake is a given?

Thanks for your help.

The OP asked about which Canon DSLR can reasonably be operated in manual with limited need to access the LCD. No Canon DSLRs have a traditional shutter speed dial and no EF lens has an aperture ring. In manual exposure mode, you would need to use 2 of the adjustment wheels and view the change in shutter speed and aperture settings in the viewfinder or top LCD screen. The the exposure indicator in the viewfinder (if you choose to use it), will indicate when those settings result in the recomended right exposure, like in the old match needle days. As described above, I would look only at cameras with 1 or 2 digits in their names in order to get a camera with 2 adjustment dials, since most of the entry level DSLRs (3/4 digits in the name) only have 1 adjustment dial and require a button push to switch between shutter and aperture adjustment.

Note that with Canon EOS, non EF lenses can only be used if the flange distance is less than 44mm, or the lens will not properly focus to infinity, which means that it would generally be impractical to use Canon FD lenses on an EOS Camera. Flange focal distance - Wikipedia

With any adapted non EOS lens, auto aperture functions would be lost. Also note that the standard focus screen that come with the a modern AF cameras are not optimized for focusing and do not have any focus aids.

Depending on what lenses you will use with the camera, you will need to determine if you want to go with a 1.6x crop (APSC sized sensor) camera, or full frame (same size sensor as 35mm film). If you want FF, I would look at a used 5D II or 6D. I would think that both of these option should be available for well under $1K. A 60D or 70D would be good options for APSC.

The OP asked about which Canon DSLR can reasonably be operated in manual with limited need to access the LCD. No Canon DSLRs have a traditional shutter speed dial and no EF lens has an aperture ring. In manual exposure mode, you would need to use 2 of the adjustment wheels and view the change in shutter speed and aperture settings in the viewfinder or top LCD screen. The the exposure indicator in the viewfinder (if you choose to use it), will indicate when those settings result in the recomended right exposure, like in the old match needle days. As described above, I would look only at cameras with 1 or 2 digits in their names in order to get a camera with 2 adjustment dials, since most of the entry level DSLRs (3/4 digits in the name) only have 1 adjustment dial and require a button push to switch between shutter and aperture adjustment.

 

Note that with Canon EOS, non EF lenses can only be used if the flange distance is less than 44mm, or the lens will not properly focus to infinity, which means that it would generally be impractical to use Canon FD lenses on an EOS Camera. Flange focal distance - Wikipedia

 

With any adapted non EOS lens, auto aperture functions would be lost. Also note that the standard focus screen that come with the a modern AF cameras are not optimized for focusing and do not have any focus aids.

 

Depending on what lenses you will use with the camera, you will need to determine if you want to go with a 1.6x crop (APSC sized sensor) camera, or full frame (same size sensor as 35mm film). If you want FF, I would look at a used 5D II or 6D. I would think that both of these option should be available for well under $1K. A 60D or 70D would be good options for APSC.

Thanks for the run through on manual exposure mode in Canon DSLR and particularly the difference between 1 and 2 digit and 3-4 digit models. Does the 40D have 2 adjustment dials?

Thanks for the clarification of your needs. Using EF lenses will save you a significant amount of potential anguish and frustration, and will more quickly lead to taking images instead of playing with the equipment.

At £100 for the camera body and each lens, you will likely be limited to a 40D (or perhaps a 50D). All Canon mid range cameras, like these, have 2 adjustment dials which will greatly enhance using it manual mode. There are a vast amount of Canon EF and third party compatible EF lenses around, though I would caution you about older Sigma lenses, which had compatibility issues with Canon cameras. Also there are many really good vintage lenses and lots of dogs, so choose carefully. Canon EF-S lense are specifically designed for crop sensor cameras, like a 40D, but are not compatible with Canon FF cameras. For £100 each, you should be able to pick up a Canon EF-S 18-55mm and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm. Many versions of those lense are out there, but you really want the IS (image stabilized) versions and if possible STM versions (STM focus motors), since these tend to have better optics, and image stabilization! Image Stabilization and high ISO performance makes a world of difference in shooting with long lenses. Both theses lenses are made cheaply, but represent good value and decent optics for the money.

Nikon has lots to offer, but I would look at a D5000 to start since it has 2 control dials. I don't know much about the Nikon APSC cameras so you would need to ask the Nikon guys if you want to explore that route.

FWIW, I fully agree with @Ken Katz. In the Canon range, look for a 40D (or even 50D). As he righly points out, these have separate dials for Aperture and Shutter in manual mode. The 'Rebel' series doesn't. You can also see these settings and the ISO setting in the viewfinder (and in a small LCD on the top of the camera). Good advice on lenses too. Like Ken, I don't know much about Nikon APCs. You might be able to pick up a 40D + kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm) as a set.

Thanks Mike and Ken (and others with sensible suggestions). You have saved me a lot of research work through your clear answers and I can get going on this with some confidence.

A couple of items that remain: Should I be worried about shutter counter numbers when buying a second hand body?

Also if I went for a 200mm lens is this effectively somewhere near 400mm because of the cropped frame 40D? or have I misunderstood that point? If this is incorrect would a 1.4 converter achieve the same goal - a longer lens? I am worried about weight and would like one lens to do most of the work - mid distance and long range.

With any adapted non EOS lens, auto aperture functions would be lost. Also note that the standard focus screen that come with the a modern AF cameras are not optimized for focusing and do not have any focus aids.

Just to make sure, does this mean that when I turn an EOS lens focus ring manually, in the viewfinder I will see the image go in and out of focus as in the old days.

Are say 400mm now still so heavy that camera shake is a given?

LOL! - Sorry, but at

My budget is around £100 for a body and similar for each lens

400mm are simply no topic! You could buy an old school manual focus aperture pre-select f6.4 one + an adapter on a DSLR for that money. But frankly: Don't do it!These lenses floated around through the 70s and 80s and still exist they are not really heavy (compared to other stuff), just (moderately) bulky. The camera shake issue should not be caused by the lens being too heavy to hold. (I am a nerd, not Conan myself!) It is caused by something called the optical lever; i.e. more focal length magnifying the shake that is always in your hands. - If you shoot film you probably know the rule of thumb about "1/*focal lengtht in mm* sec being maybe hopefully still kind off handholdable on a good day (if you won't print large)" and others suggesting to never shoot a 50mm at anything slower than 1/250 sec. for a 400mm these mean: absolutely no hope below 1/500 sec and 1/2000 sec should work. How much light is there? - For me here usually f8, 1/250 at ISO 200. A crop sensor camera is somewhat usable up to ISO 800 and the 1/2000 sec already wants ISO 1600.

Alternatives would be of course faster lenses that get heavy Or lenses with integrated optical stabilization. But even the less expensive zooms seem out of your budged. The Canon 100-400mm is a nice lens to have. (I might like one) but even the old push pull version is way above your budged, used.

I would simply stick away from (most) EF lenses, while building a kit on a budged around used crop bodies. Get your 18 or 16 to 50 or 55mm kit zoom. Add the long counterpart, but safe up so you can buy the EF-S IS(!) versions. This should work out. - I expect a used crop body with decent kit zooms to deliver acceptable 4K stills. Beyond that things get expensive. - You could safe up for outstanding glass or FF, preferably both...

Full frame EF lenses are more expensive in general and really expensive to be "great". There is very old, already on film unspectacular, stuff floating around. This includes the usually recommended fantastic plastic 50mm f1.8. I'd suspect those lenses to perform not overly well on a high resolving crop body. If you want to use them, get moderate pixel density FF but: This will blow your current budged.

I didn't buy into crop sensor EOS, so no personal hands on experience with that stuff. I own 2 copies of aperture pre select 400/6.3, one Beroflex one Mamiya and adapters on my crop SLRs I think I used those lenses 1 time in total. Trying to test them (from a tripod) revealed rather soft looking results that no way matched the sharpness gained by my 100mm macro. You'll probably soon find out what a bliss it is to have AF with a camera supporting manual focusing as poorly as the average DSLR with it's brightness optimized screen (in the optical finder, just to be clear!) DSLRs with pentamirrors are a notch worse than the (once) more expensive ones with prism finders. - Research specs on your own. - Both seem sufficiently shootable with AF and no fun with manual focus, at least to me. and manual focus gets nastier to achieve with long lenses.

Your manual controls dream: I think EOSes have a comparably nice UI. But: No it doesn't offer all the controls as you dreamed / listed in your initial post. I can talk about my 5D IV hands on.

• It has only 2 of 4 dials, for aperture, ISO, shutter speed and autoexposure compensation. - IMHO you need the latter even if you set the first 3 things by hand but are using for example a TTL flash
  
• None of these are marked (as known from mechanical cameras)
  
• You have to set up the AF characteristics via menu (or struggle with workarounds, like back button focusing). There is no switch for single / vs. continuous AF.
  

A classic camera UI with 3 marked wheels can be had from Leica, unfortunately only in the contemporary M10; the previous models omitted an ISO dial. Exception: There is an M (240) based retro camera without rear screen. I do shoot M8 and old Monochrom. I don't want to miss the rear screen for histogram chimping.

Sorry, as tempting as "getting the film (shooting) feeling into a digital world" sounds first; it doesn't work out that well. - Exposure characteristics and latitude will remain a little bit different.

What are you (or we?) really(!) after? - Seriously, think about it.

I have my in it's days decent DSLR or RF, go out, shoot RAWs, come home and spend time processing those to taste. That time can become a chore / nuisance / significant factor! So yes, I am interested in taking easy steps in the field, to minimize it. Of course we need to find the right balance here. In many cases it is much more convenient to go for a usable RAW than to spend ages deep in sub menus and a couple of test shots to get a perfect SOOC JPEG

I see no chance to be as cool as the other dude who is burning color negative film, according to maybe even sunny 16, dropping it at the lab and receiving an envelope full of bearable pictures. - I'll end tweaking my stuff.

To just click and enjoy there are other camera genres, working much better than DSLRs and RFs. - Fuji MILCs or even iPhones come to mind. They are optimized to provide nice JPEGs, straight out of camera.

Anyhow: An ability to check if you got your shot is a huge advantage. Without it wouldn't you triple shoot and bracket everything and the kitchen sink, just in case to be better safe than sorry?

I dabbled with first generation Fuji MILCs and am impressed by the JPEGs; I went on vacation and came home without an urge to manipulate any RAW file I shot on the side. I don't get that feeling from shooting Samsung, Pentax, Leica or even the EOS 5D IV. Camera UI wise you could maybe find your dream in a Fuji X-T3, that might even be sufficiently usable, AF performance wise. - I did not try it out. But no, it is not cheap enough, yet.

Some people praise EOS JPEG colors, others stick to shooting RAW, even with EOS. I recommend the latter and am just reminding: Post processing will take time.

get a film scanner

I think scanning the heck out of 35mm color takes about 15 minutes per frame, with my Minolta 5400 with ICE dust removal activated. + time for spotting, manual corrections etc. TBH: I consider it harder to tweak a so so scan of a negative, than to adjust a RAW file. Whats the benefit of a hybrid workflow? Especially when a 200-400€ (used) DSLR kit provides comparable results faster and cheaper? - I think 50K frames seem doable with a lot of used DSLRs. How much are 1389 rolls of film with processing? - HP5+ (unprocessed!) is about 7K5€, that would buy body and glass ready to blow film out of the water.

Summarizing

• A used crop body above 8 megapixels should get you far; i.e. 4K stills. - I don't see much sense in more than 16MP, since affordable lenses don't resolve that well.
  
• Don't skip the kit zoom! You are very unlikely to find a superior alternative, on the wide end within your budged.
  

I doubt you can go wrong with EOS, if "no money" is your primary problem. Nikon might have made slightly better stills cameras, that cost a tad more. If I wanted an endless tourist zoom (18-140 crop; 24-120 FF) and / or a birding zoom (200-500), I'd go Nikon and bite myself through the UI but that stuff is not dirt cheap. To my understanding the "endless" and the "kit" zooms are a wash, through their shared range. Shooting 2nd hand bodies I can afford bringing two for two zooms, which lets me bring something home and is cheaper to replace when one lens is worn out / falling apart.

I don't recommend Pentax, although I stocked up with that system. You can hit the limitations of their AF easily and good glass seems hard (& more expensive...) to get, if at all. - OTOH: you can find pre-owned consumer kits for cheap. It those(!) are all you might want; go for them. - Pentax / Samsung advantage, if you really plan to use old lenses: They have IBIS. - I'd rather adapt on a (Sony?) MILC though, hoping to be able to nail focus with it.

Side note on batteries: I don't recommend AAs eating cameras. Yes I have some.... They are first of all quite picky; i.e. likely to refuse to run on "not entirely bad NiCds" The next issue: DSLRs I know take 4 AAs so you need an expensive charger to figure out which individual cell in various sets you have is bad. The lithium batteries of more recent cameras seem to last longer are more compact and reliable. Needing chargers is an easy to fix issue: Get 3rd party ones to end in your car or at an USB port on your work PC and everywhere reasonable.

Getting a lot of AAs checked and or charged before a big shooting is way more hassle. - I ended owning about 3 or 4 higher end chargers for 4 cells to prepare 2 AAs eating bodies, and two or more flashes + spare battery packs.

Digital cameras might be different than our personal dream / vision of them but a lot of them seem worth adapting to.

Since the desire for knobs to control settings keeps getting metioned, I'm going to suggest something that's not even a DSLR as a possible option-a Fuji XT-1 or similar Fuji mirrorless camera.

These are NOT SLRs-they are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. Some models look a lot like a rangefinder, while others feel and handle a lot like something like an Olympus OM-1. They have an APS-C sized sensor, and some pretty good native lenses to go with them. Shutter speed and ISO get set by knobs on the top, while aperture can be set by a ring on the lens.

There have been a few other cameras with knobs to control them-the Nikon Df comes to mind(it's a full frame DSLR with the super sensor from the D4 that looks and handles something like an FM2 or FE2, although it does have some quirks) and also has a broader range of lens compatibility-all the way back to 1959(without modification to the lens) than any other Nikon DSLR.

Otherwise, with other DSLRs, get used making settings from multi-function control dials. The better models from both makes have both a "front" and "rear" dial allow setting shutter speed and aperture in manual mode, but for many other settings the paradigm is "hold a button and spin the dial." Canon has been doing things this way since the T90 in the 1980s(and Nikon not much later, starting with the N8008), and it honestly starts to become second nature once you've used the cameras a bit. I bought a Canon T90 back in the mid-2000s, before I'd ever even used a DSLR, and found it not too terrible to adapt to. I switched to Nikon pretty much across the board for small format film and digital use(the cameras I use span Nikon Fs from very early in production to the D800 introduced in 2012, and which I still consider a pretty up to date and current camera despite being ~7 years old) and it didn't take me that long to adapt to Nikon's control philosophy.

Some final thought:

It is always better to get a used camera with a low shutter count, but special software is needed to get an accurate count (try googling this question). A clean copy of any camera is generally a reasonable test of how hard it has been used, and a reputable reseller should also provide comfort.

A 250mm lens on a 40D or 50D will have a field of view equivalent to 400mm on a full frame camera (1.6x crop factor). Teleconverters are useful for professional zooms and prime lenses, and a Canon 1.4x will not fit an 55-250mm lens and will cost much more than that lens. That lense weighs about 400g, so it should not be a burden to carry. With image stabilization, I have been successful using long lenses (200mm to 600mm equivalent field of view) at far lower shutter speeds than 1/500th, and Canon IS is very effective. A 40D will be usable above 800 ISO, especially in natural light, though it may need a touch of noise reduction (in processing). New cameras have better high ISO performance but at a higher cost.

You can switch off AF on any Canon lens and focus manually, since its still an SLR mechanically and optically. Not sure why you would want to do so given the AF capability of a 40D or 50D. Also note that like every other DSLR, the 40D/50D uses a specific rechargeable lithium battery, which will be available (for cheap) by many third party providers. I have never used more than 2 batteries in a day, even with mirrorless, so it's really not an issue.

To other folks who answer here, it may be helpful to remember that the OP is looking to spend a total of £300 for a body and 2 lenses, and wants to minimize the amount of electronics and automation they use.

Thanks - really sound advice from contributors. It looks as though I will go for 40 D body (budget limits me on this), a 55-250mm to in effect give me 80- 400mm approx.

On wide angle I can see from reviews the 17-55 EF-S lens produces a better image than the 18-55mm (at a price), but if I want a true wide angle would I need to go for the 10-22mm? The crop (x1.6) effect seems to make a wide angle more of an old fashioned standard lens (55mm) at this end of the lens range? I may have this wrong.

Yes it does.

Just to make sure, does this mean that when I turn an EOS lens focus ring manually, in the viewfinder I will see the image go in and out of focus as in the old days.

@jomeer, I thought I'd post a few annotated pics of my 40D so that you'd perhaps get a clearer idea about how 'manual mode' would work on a DSLR.

Hope these help. Mike

1.Selecting Manual Mode on main dial:

2. Info on the top LCD (and through the viewfinder) with Shutter speed/ISO dial:

3. Back view and back dial

4. Manual Focus

5-1. Setting up digital image format: RAW/SRAW and/or JPG (+ JPG quality) (1)

5-2 Setting up digital image format: RAW/SRAW and/or JPG (+ JPG quality) (2)

6. Setting up some other basic preferences

On wide angle ... if I want a true wide angle would I need to go for the 10-22mm? The crop (x1.6) effect seems to make a wide angle more of an old fashioned standard lens (55mm) at this end of the lens range? I may have this wrong.

Dunno what we are talking about. Hammering 17 or 18 by 1.6 into my calculator, I get 27.5 and 28.8mm and would consider both "wide angle lenses" on 35mm. - IDK where others sort 24mm (equivalent); is it "wide" or "super wide"? - The equivalent would be 15mm.

Considering your budged I can't resist pointing at the 10-18mm IS lens which seems cheaper lighter and obviously stabilized while (according to some blogger) not price gap justifying worse than the 10-22.

Just to make sure, does this mean that when I turn an EOS lens focus ring manually, in the viewfinder I will see the image go in and out of focus as in the old days.

Maybe you can buy alternative screens and have them installed by a service technician (or let your inner watchmaker run wild).

FTR: My eye vision might not be always the crispest; so I could be more challenged to focus SLRs than others. I am also admittedly rangefinder spoiled; i.e. I appreciate a lot how boldly the better RFs display the difference between in and out of focus for mounted standard and wide lenses. Anyhow: There seems a consensus upon AF (D)SLR screens and manually focusing according to them, across the Internet. And this misery fuels the MILC hype among heritage lens adapting folks.

Should I be worried about shutter counter numbers when buying a second hand body?

No, you(!) should not.

Yes, of course there are professionally worn down cameras somewhere on the market. But I think they are unlikely to be in your segment. The majority of double digit bodies was / is pre-owned by not much shooting people; hobbyists, enthusiasts, consumers, average folks. Call them as you like (it is confusing anyhow! - Especially the "consumer" term if we have the "previous fondler" and "previous user"). - Back to math: Double digit bodies seem to come with 200K clicks rated shutters now and were unlikely to have just 100K rated ones in the past, but let's play safe and stick to that number. If a body had just 20K clicks remaining for you, it would be still a damn good deal at the current price point. - How long did it take you to shoot 500 rolls of film? Are you there at all? If not: Why worry?

The stuff I scooped up had less than 20K clicks done. - Digital might lead to a few extra frames taken, but it doesn't change people's mindset entirely. 350 frames per vacation week is what a co traveler with capable higher end Nikon (D750) took, although our environment and his family were quite good looking.

The camera generation we are looking at was capable but isn't as great as the very latest stuff that some folks believe to need, because they (or the Joneses next door) can afford it. If I assume a 2x heavier shooter than my co traveler, I'd end still with just 60K clicks over 12 years the camera was out. But that many are unlikely to rack up. - A lot of folks upgrade slowly but permanently and drag the old camera along as a 3rd body or keep it laying around until they finally reach a point of selling it, on a decluttering wave. Somebody shooting the same camera quite heavily for a 12 years period is unlikely to exist.

Dunno what we are talking about. Hammering 17 or 18 by 1.6 into my calculator, I get 27.5 and 28.8mm and would consider both "wide angle lenses" on 35mm. - IDK where others sort 24mm (equivalent); is it "wide" or "super wide"? - The equivalent would be 15mm.

 

...

No, you(!) should not.

Yes, of course there are professionally worn down cameras somewhere on the market. But I think they are unlikely to be in your segment. The majority of double digit bodies was / is pre-owned by not much shooting people; hobbyists, enthusiasts, consumers, average folks. Call them as you like (it is confusing anyhow! - Especially the "consumer" term if we have the "previous fondler" and "previous user"). - Back to math: Double digit bodies seem to come with 200K clicks rated shutters now and were unlikely to have just 100K rated ones in the past, but let's play safe and stick to that number. If a body had just 20K clicks remaining for you, it would be still a damn good deal at the current price point. - How long did it take you to shoot 500 rolls of film? Are you there at all? If not: Why worry?

The stuff I scooped up had less than 20K clicks done. - Digital might lead to a few extra frames taken, but it doesn't change people's mindset entirely. 350 frames per vacation week is what a co traveler with capable higher end Nikon (D750) took, although our environment and his family were quite good looking.

The camera generation we are looking at was capable but isn't as great as the very latest stuff that some folks believe to need, because they (or the Joneses next door) can afford it. If I assume a 2x heavier shooter than my co traveler, I'd end still with just 60K clicks over 12 years the camera was out. But that many are unlikely to rack up. - A lot of folks upgrade slowly but permanently and drag the old camera along as a 3rd body or keep it laying around until they finally reach a point of selling it, on a decluttering wave. Somebody shooting the same camera quite heavily for a 12 years period is unlikely to exist.

For some context, I've recently upgraded from a 40D to an M5 mirrorless, and as part of preparing the 40D for sale, I checked the shutter count. It only has 6511 actuations! That may be an extreme example since I mainly shoot film, but I bet there are plenty of cameras of that age out there that have shutters with lots of life left in them.

I bet there are plenty of cameras of that age out there that have shutters with lots of life left in them.

Agreed! - My 1st DSLR (Pentax' 10D alternative) isn't over 20K yet. - Upgrades with better low light capability or JPEG processing came and took it's regular place.

Thanks guys and especially Mike for the photos - very useful ( a picture says a thousand words - no joke intended). I have just had a brief look through the 40D manual online and with Mike's photos it all looks reasonably intelligible.

Do these cameras take normal SDHC cards- is there a limit to memory size? Is there any other way to take the images from the camera - maybe a USB or firewire slot? I can't see it in the handbook at first look.

Is there any other way to take the images from the camera - maybe a USB or firewire slot? I can't see it in the handbook at first look.

"Storage • Compact Flash Type I or II (inc. FAT32)

• Canon Original Data Security Kit supported ("Original Image Data")

• No CF card supplied"

CF cards were originally made to support huge sizes, no limit.

I highly recommend using a dedicated card reader for downloading. Using USB2 connectivity

• takes ages (if your computer has USB3...)
  
• drains camera battery
  
• puts camera at risk of dropping from your desk. (<- Mount at least some (climbing?) hook, to secure your camera strap, above the desk, if you insist on using it!)
  

on the Canon 100 D model I notice it has two dials

You noticed wrong - there's only one (command) dial.

1. Focal Length choice for lenses (ensure that you have a Field of View coverage to suit your needs)

. . . It looks as though I will go for 40 D body (budget limits me on this), a 55-250mm to in effect give me 80- 400mm approx. . . . if I want a true wide angle would I need to go for the 10-22mm? The crop (x1.6) effect seems to make a wide angle more of an old fashioned standard lens (55mm) at this end of the lens range? I may have this wrong.

You do have that wrong. A 10 to 22mm zoom lens on an EOS 40D will have a Field of View approximating that of a 16 to 35mm zoom lens on a '35mm film SLR'. Additionally a 55 to 250 equates approximately to a 90 to 400, (not 80 to 400). These two factors may be relevant.

I advise that you consider the FoV gap (effective equivalent to that of a 35mm to 90mm for 35mm SLR lenses),. Consider if that gap will restrict what and how you can Photograph. As broad and general statement, the 35mm to 90mm range (on 35mm SLR) would be the most often used Focal Length range for general photography.

***

2. Maximum Aperture, relative to Low Light performance of 40D (ensure you can get results to your standards considering the Apertures and ISO that you will have available)

Depending upon the TYPE of low light photography and the TYPE of wildlife photography that you will be doing, note that the maximum aperture of the zoom lenses that you are considering is quite slow. That might or might not be a concern to you. Obviously noted that you have a budget to be considered.

For example, if the interior low light photography is architecture then the slow lens and not so advanced technology of the 40D may be of no importance if you can use a tripod and a suitable (long) Shutter Speed. For example if the low light interior photography is of children that might be accomplished by using Flash. For example if the wildlife photography will be in relatively sunny conditions and the animals are not moving at rapid speeds then a relative slow lens and mid range ISO will certainly accommodate.

On the other hand, if you need to photograph moving people in low light environments and will not be using Flash, then the lenses and ISO capacity of these tools might be a limiting factor.

As a guide with accurate exposure and good Post Production skills (and depending upon the level of toleration of noise when using high ISO), my view is that a 40D can be used at ISO3200 and produce acceptable 5x7inch ~10x8inch print results.

WW

. . . I am not a beginner in photographic terms - but in digital camera terms [i am a beginner]. . . I am not a fan of [. . .] screens . . .

Considering the aversion to screens, have you considered how the Post Production of the images that you make will be accomplished?

WW

I advise that you consider the FoV gap (effective equivalent to that of a 35mm to 90mm for 35mm SLR lenses),. Consider if that gap will restrict what and how you can Photograph. As broad and general statement, the 35mm to 90mm range (on 35mm SLR) would be the most often used Focal Length range for general photography.

I have no problem agreeing with William here. OTOH: I think the bold part can be read in different ways: There were folks with just a 50mm for their camera. There were others who grabbed one body with a 35 the other with a 90mm mounted and felt ready(er), to face the world. Going for a gap between 35 and 90 seems a classic choice and I dare to say: Not the worst one ever. - Yes you'll stumble across the odd standard lens shot, once in a while. Back when I had C330 with 55 & 135mms in use, there were the odd moments, when I brought out the backup rangefinder with a fixed 75mm but the TLR got more use.

With digital I recommend getting kit zooms for 3 reasons: Nothing else is less expensive plus they are light compact and offering OIS. Even the most serious shooter has casual moments when having a tiny lens to take out can prevent the camera from staying at home! - Trust me, that is a ++serious problem! (And a reason why folks downsize from FF SLRs (or bigger) to stuff like MFT or start publishing Instagram sites and books showing their iPhone shots.)

Odds to find DSLR abandoning consumers selling the entire kit are pretty high.

Trying to hook @jomeer by his greed: Which add / story promises the better camera body?

1. Selling remaining D40, because my kit zoom fell apart
   
2. Selling D40 kit, because I never shot it, while transitioning from film to iPhone