Advice

Hey fellow site members,

I'm pretty much an amateur wanting to upgrade some things. I currently only have a Rebel XSI and a Canon 50mm, 55-250mm,and 24mm lens. My main question is should I upgrade to a better camera body as say a 6D, 7D, 80D, or even a 7D Mark ll or instead invest in better lenses? Also what usually determines say the choice of going Canon or Nikon? I appreciate any advice available. Thanks, Ron.

Hello. You really can't go wrong with either of the big 2 camera companies (or several others for that matter). Equipment is probably the best its ever been. I don't know the Canon line, but if you are at 24 MP on the sensor (some say less) and the autofocus is good enough for your subject matter, then good lenses are the order of the day. You have 24mm to 250 mm covered, with maybe a hole in the 28-45mm zone. The lenses will stay with you longer than most camera bodies, although "Last Camera Syndrome" may be a real thing. I am 5 years into my current camera body and have not really been tempted to get a new one. More time to travel, take pictures, and to post process them is higher on my list.

Thanks a lot for giving me your imput on this rconey.

Hey fellow site members,

I'm pretty much an amateur wanting to upgrade some things. I currently only have a Rebel XSI and a Canon 50mm, 55-250mm,and 24mm lens. .

What can't you achieve photographically that you want to achieve? <br><br>

WW

I agree with rconey regarding Canon vs Nikon. Seems to me it makes sense to stick with Canon since you already have lenses that can transfer to a new body. Your urge to upgrade also is impacted by two things: Budget and purpose. By "purpose" I mean, why do you want to upgrade? Do you want to improve image quality? Do you want to turn pro some day? Do you want to be able to take video? Of the camera body options you list, I like the 80D. If you want to jump to a full-frame sensor, the 5D Mark III is a great choice and is being discounted now due to the arrival of the 5D Mark IV.

Thanks David,

Yeah, I was leaning to keeping my Canon stuff. I was just curious about how people come to the conclusion on which to choose. I do want to improve my image quality and I know it all comes with practice and knowledge and I would imagine good equipment also. Eventually I do want to pick up a full frame also but not at the moment. I am also interested in video. I appreciate you taking the time to respond to this.

What can't you achieve photographically that you want to achieve? <br><br>

 

WW

Well one of the things I've struggled with is getting good action shots of wildlife and good Macro shots also. Maybe a faster lens for the action would help ? As I mentioned I'm pretty much an amateur so technically not too sure of himself at the present. I do have the patience and I think I have decent composition when it comes to framing objects .

If you have to ask don't upgrade. Keep using what you have.

Interesting answer, not sure if I agree with it, but interesting nevertheless.

I went through the decision between better glass and better body last August and came up with a compromise. I’d run into the limits of my Rebel T3i in terms of high-ISO noise, inability to crop as much as I wanted, lack of weather sealing, and difficulty of dialing in exposure compensation since there weren’t enough dedicated controls outside of menus. But I decided that I would go with better glass and work within the limitations that the camera imposed. Then I discovered that the lens I wanted to get was the one that came with the 80D, and the combined price was substantially lower than the sum of each separately. My compromise: I did both, and I haven’t regretted it for an instant. I guess the key point is that when I made the decision to get the 80D, I knew that it would solve the problems I’d been running up against with the T3i. What I didn’t know is that it would also solve some problems I didn’t know I’d been having.

Leslie,

Thank you so much for responding to my post. The answer to your dilemma is also something I have coincidentally, been tossing around in my head. It brought back a pleasant memory of many years ago when I had taken a daughter of a woman I was involved with to get her a birthday present. I had given the child the option of me suprising her or she picking her own gift out. She opted for picking her own gift. I watched for quite some time as she struggled between deciding between what appeared to be three Barbi dolls. I finally walked up and asked what was wrong? She said she couldn't make up her mind. I said..."It's easy, just get all three." Her face lit up and she said it was the best birthday she had ever had.

Thanks again, I may very well take the road you traveled on this decision.

Hi Ron

I live in Brazil and I've had this doubt about photographic equipment more suited to my interest in photography. I congratulate you for owning a Canon Rebel XSI. I have a Canon 500D camera body which is a similar Canon Rebel XSI camera body. I recommend that you must use the function A-DEP. It is a very interesting function. Don't get bogged down with the capacity of the sensor. The good pictures require much inspiration, a good point of view and a very steady hand (or a good tripod). The capacity of the sensor is not important. The important thing is to have a good idea for shooting and a steady hand. The lenses you have are very good (24 mm, 50 mm and 55-250 mm). I have a 50 mm and a 55-250 mm. The 50-250 mm lens is very versatile and suitable for a Canon Rebel body. If you already have a 24 mm lens, I recommend that you invest in a wide angle lens (fish eye) 10-18 mm or 10-20 mm and a Canon 24-105 mm/4L lens that is, in my opinion, the most versatile Canon lens. There is a belief that the Canon 70-200 mm/2.8 L/II lens is very good too, but it's too heavy and very expensive. I have one, but I only use it with a heavy tripod. If you intend to upgrade Canon body, I recommend the Canon 6D body because it is the best cost/benefit ratio. The lowest price of the new Canon 6D body is 1500 USD. In Paraguay, a new Canon 6D body costs 1245 USD for foreign buyers. The Canon 6D body has a full frame sensor and built-in wi-fi. But it does not have flash on board and does not receive EF-S lenses that are the lenses that just has a white dot in the docking nozzle. This is one of the issues that you have to watch when you upgrade a camera body. If the body does not have flash on board, you will have to buy an external flash. If the body does not have the white dot, you will not be able to use lenses that only has white dot in the docking nozzle. The Canon 6D body must not accept your Canon 55-250 mm lens. I think that your Canon 55-250 mm lens has only white dot in the docking nozzle. I hope these Brazilians tips have been useful to you. Best regards. Roldao.

Roldao,

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond to my post. I very much appreciate it. You gave me some good information to think about. I do need a good tripod also . What do you recommend there? Have you ever read any of Ken Rockwell's reviews on lenses and cameras? If you have, what do you think of them? Do you like the full frame a lot more than the crop body?

Best regards,

Ron

. . . have a Rebel XSI and a Canon 50mm, 55-250mm,and 24mm lens . . . <b><i>one</i></b> of the things I've struggled with is getting good action shots of wildlife and good Macro shots also. Maybe a faster lens for the action would help? As I mentioned I'm pretty much an amateur so technically not too sure of himself at the present. I do have the patience and I think I have decent composition when it comes to framing objects.

Thanks for answering. <br><br>

Probably a good idea to make a list of ALL of the things with which you have struggled. Maybe you have already, but I think it is good to write these things down – on one side what I want to do better and on the other what changes will likely achieve those goals. Obviously (as you have already acknowledged, that’s good) part of doing things better is gaining more skills, experience and knowledge. <br><br>

Regarding doing things better and buying new equipment to achieve those goals – we can take two extremes: either “it is only what is behind the camera that counts” or “you need the latest and greatest gear”.<br><br>

One argument I often put forward for a middle of the road view, is that it is often easier/quicker to learn using a set of more/most suitable tools. <br><br>

From how you have written about your situation, I think there is merit in getting more modern gear (camera) and also some specialist gear (lenses and some other stuff) to suit the outcomes that you want to achieve. <br><br>

As two examples only (because you only listed two goals): <br><br>

> “good action shots of wildlife”: a faster lens (larger maximum aperture) would be more suitable than the 55 to 250 lens you have (I have used that lens extensively). But also a camera with better overall image quality and specifically better image quality at mid to high ISO would be more suitable than your 450D (We have a 400D, which not much different to your 450D). <br>

For example, any one of the four EF 70 to 200/2.8L lenses and a current model Canon APS-C Camera, comparing any shooting situation with your 450D and 55 to 250 - would allow the choices of: using an higher ISO; using a faster shutter speed; using a larger aperture and also cropping more severely. There would be other benefits too – arguably: faster AF; brighter viewfinder; ability to use Extender EF, etc. <br><br>

> “good Macro shots also”: You could consider using extension tubes and your 50mm Prime Lens. I have a set of Kenko Tubes, they are good. But “good” macro work usually requires a Macro Lens – depending upon what type of Subject(s) interest you, one main criterion is the WORKING DISTANCE and this is predicated on the Lens’s Focal Length – the longer the Focal length the greater the WD. I have two macro lenses the EF 50 F/2.5 and the EF 100 F/2.8, both have their purpose – the former usually for recording typically flat inanimate things, such as stamps, coins, documents etc and the latter for small animals and flowers and the like. I sue these two lenses on both APS-C and 5D Series cameras. There is an EF-S 60 F/2.8 Macro, I have not used this lens. <br><br>

Budget (or lack of it for everything you want) probably comes into the picture, if this is the case I would suggest that you do not compromise on buying the lens(es) that you decide will be useful for your purposes and so if you need to buy anything first, I cannot see any argument for not buying a quality lens as the first priority. In the meantime, whilst you save for a new camera, it is likely that a newer model will be rolled out, which is beneficial in two ways – a drop in price of the superseded model and new features to consider in the new model. <br><br>

The thought has obviously crossed your mind about “full frame” (135 Format) cameras. Do not fall into the trap of believing that moving from APS-C Format to 135 Format is of itself “an upgrade” – consider all the goals that you want to achieve and find the best tools for those goals<br><br>

Prima facie, the mention of “wildlife” without any other details, makes my thinking automatically default to APS-C Format because of the leverage of the narrower angle of view attained when using the very high quality yet expensive (but not exorbitant) L Series Zoom Telephoto and Telephoto Prime Lenses. For example a 7D MkII and the EF 100 to 400L MkII are a formidable kit for “wildlife” <br><br>

Also remember that peripheral stuff is important – for your “wildlife” a good quality Monopod arguably would be of great value; for your “Macro” a dedicated Hot Shoe Flash (or two) and an off camera cord arguably would also be of great value, as might be a quality Tripod and Head Assembly. <br><br>

In summary I do encourage you to make a list of your goals as the first step and then prioritize those goals and allocate appropriate tools to satisfy those goals. <br><br>

If you don’t have the budget for everything, (or at the least a Camera and a new lens), then I think you will probably conclude that a lens will be best bought before a camera – which is my direct answer to the question that you asked. <br><br>

WW

William,

Thank you for those in depth suggestions and advice. I realize I wasn't overly specific but you managed to answer a great many of my questions regardless. I do very much appreciate that. These decisions are the toughest I've made since I bought my last car. I know I lean towards the faster 7D Mkll and but at the same time I have been reading all the amazing reviews on the full frame 5D Mlll and I start to lean that way also. I know both at the same time are not feasible at the moment so I have a major upcoming decision on hand. On the one hand I love shooting wildlife in motion as well as insects of all kinds ( the macro I'm mainly interested in) and on the other I find myself blown away by the full frame landscapes, portraits and other photos taken with the Mklll. I do want to thank you again for your insight,

Ron

You are welcome.<br><br>

I am curious as to why you do not have an 18 to 88 kit lens?<br><br>

Also, (specifically) what 50 and what 24 do you have?<br><br>

Nice you mentioned the two cameras that tickle your fancy and even if you have only done part of your "list of goals" - what lens(es) is/are on the top of your hit list - and (importantly) WHY?<br><br>

WW

I'm not a Canon (or Nikon) user so I can't give any direct advice about equipment, but I'd just like to say how impressed I am with the quality and level-headedness of the advice here. The OP is apparently new to the game and could easily get the idea from this thread that photographers are a friendly, civilised group of people.

Unfortunately there are other internet forums where a thread like this would have descended to claws out and handbags swinging before we got this far. So well done photo.net.

And as my reply to the OP, provided you don't switch systems, lenses never get obsolete, so I would say it's better to put your money there at first.

I upgraded bodies a number of times over the years (shot Pentax) until I finally decided an all-in-one 'bridge' camera (the panasonic lumix fz1000) was suitable for my photo interests, and each time I upgraded bodies, nothing about my results changed significantly. However, if I bought a better lens, I'd usually see some improvement in results.

Doing some research on your camera, it looks to be very well-reviewed, though it's practically ancient in terms of digital bodies. Looking at the specs, there are a few reasons that would have me looking for an upgrade in your situation. One, it apparently doesn't do video. Also, it looks to me like the auto-focus system is not as advanced as later offerings and the fps speed might be a little low for some action. And finally, the highest ISO is rather low, and it likely doesn't perform as well at the high ISO as some of the newer models. I don't know much about Canon, but simply looking over their selection of cameras at B&H, the Rebel T6i looks like it would offer pretty much anything you would use, though there is a later T7i waiting in the wings apparently.

So my purely amateur advice based on my own experience would be to upgrade the body to one you'd likely never need to upgrade again (and I think the T6i fits that bill), then start looking at additional lenses to suit your needs. There's always the used market, and Canon has tons of lenses out there.

Bodies loose their value twice as fast as lenses. - Considering the age of your current one upgrading to the just autdated generation of "better" might make sense and somebody else take the main loss. - Personally I like to have at least 2 bodies. Canon seem to be great in the shoestring budget & top notch field Nikon cover the middle pretty well and might have better sensors but less video / live view AF performance. 24mm seem far from wide on a Canon crop body, so I'd get a 2nd one with a kit zoom. or FF to use what you have on the wide end? - No clue what to suggest. - I am looking at a 5 or 1D but am wondering if I'd like to cope with it's bulk. - If you are into birds and wildlife a decent crop body might be a good idea.

Upgrading lenses: First of all: Figure out if you have to. - If you are shooting at desparately high ISO binning 75% of your pixels during denoising it is hard to see the merrits of outstanding glass. Print big, get a 4K screen and when you feel you are hitting a wall dive into DxO's reviews to figure out what you are saving for. But still: A gazillion of megapixels and great lenses are worthless if you are handholding 1/30 sec without IS in the dark.

You are welcome.<br><br>

 

I am curious as to why you do not have an 18 to 88 kit lens?<br><br>

 

Also, (specifically) what 50 and what 24 do you have?<br><br>

 

Nice you mentioned the two cameras that tickle your fancy and even if you have only done part of your "list of goals" - what lens(es) is/are on the top of your hit list - and (importantly) WHY?<br><br>

 

WW

William,

I do have the kit lens and the 50 is the "nifty fifty" as they call it. The 24 is the efs 24mm 2.8. A lens I have been seriously considering is the Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM. The reason i'm leaning towards this particular lens is because of all the reviews I have read of different lenses that I'm interested in this one easily has the best reviews. Most of the others will have a certain numbers of detractors even t

You are welcome.<br><br>

 

I am curious as to why you do not have an 18 to 88 kit lens?<br><br>

 

Also, (specifically) what 50 and what 24 do you have?<br><br>

 

Nice you mentioned the two cameras that tickle your fancy and even if you have only done part of your "list of goals" - what lens(es) is/are on the top of your hit list - and (importantly) WHY?<br><br>

 

William,

I do have the kit lens just neglected to mention it. My 50 is the so called "nifty fifty" and the 24mm is the 2.8. I'm looking at the 18-55mm Canon IS STM because from what I've read it looks like a good all purpose lens. I'm also looking at the Canon EF 35mm f2 IS USM for it's speed and for the fact that of all the lenses I've read about this one seems to have the most positive reviews from a great many people.

 

WW

I'm not a Canon (or Nikon) user so I can't give any direct advice about equipment, but I'd just like to say how impressed I am with the quality and level-headedness of the advice here. The OP is apparently new to the game and could easily get the idea from this thread that photographers are a friendly, civilised group of people.

Unfortunately there are other internet forums where a thread like this would have descended to claws out and handbags swinging before we got this far. So well done photo.net.

And as my reply to the OP, provided you don't switch systems, lenses never get obsolete, so I would say it's better to put your money there at first.

Brian,

Thanks for your input and I agree with you on your opinion of people on this site.

I upgraded bodies a number of times over the years (shot Pentax) until I finally decided an all-in-one 'bridge' camera (the panasonic lumix fz1000) was suitable for my photo interests, and each time I upgraded bodies, nothing about my results changed significantly. However, if I bought a better lens, I'd usually see some improvement in results.

 

Doing some research on your camera, it looks to be very well-reviewed, though it's practically ancient in terms of digital bodies. Looking at the specs, there are a few reasons that would have me looking for an upgrade in your situation. One, it apparently doesn't do video. Also, it looks to me like the auto-focus system is not as advanced as later offerings and the fps speed might be a little low for some action. And finally, the highest ISO is rather low, and it likely doesn't perform as well at the high ISO as some of the newer models. I don't know much about Canon, but simply looking over their selection of cameras at B&H, the Rebel T6i looks like it would offer pretty much anything you would use, though there is a later T7i waiting in the wings apparently.

 

So my purely amateur advice based on my own experience would be to upgrade the body to one you'd likely never need to upgrade again (and I think the T6i fits that bill), then start looking at additional lenses to suit your needs. There's always the used market, and Canon has tons of lenses out there.

Jordan,

Thanks for responding to my post. I agree with your assessment of my current camera. As for the camera you mentioned, I'll have to read up on it. Thanks

Bodies loose their value twice as fast as lenses. - Considering the age of your current one upgrading to the just autdated generation of "better" might make sense and somebody else take the main loss. - Personally I like to have at least 2 bodies. Canon seem to be great in the shoestring budget & top notch field Nikon cover the middle pretty well and might have better sensors but less video / live view AF performance. 24mm seem far from wide on a Canon crop body, so I'd get a 2nd one with a kit zoom. or FF to use what you have on the wide end? - No clue what to suggest. - I am looking at a 5 or 1D but am wondering if I'd like to cope with it's bulk. - If you are into birds and wildlife a decent crop body might be a good idea.

Upgrading lenses: First of all: Figure out if you have to. - If you are shooting at desparately high ISO binning 75% of your pixels during denoising it is hard to see the merrits of outstanding glass. Print big, get a 4K screen and when you feel you are hitting a wall dive into DxO's reviews to figure out what you are saving for. But still: A gazillion of megapixels and great lenses are worthless if you are handholding 1/30 sec without IS in the dark.

Jochen,

Thank you for your input. I'm getting a lot out of all the response to this post.

My recommendation is, unless you have a real valid NEED or use for the additional capabilities of the new camera, don't upgrade. Examples:

1 - After the film F2, I held off upgrading for decades (past the F3, F4 and F5), until the digital D70.

2 - I got the D70S, even though I had a D70. Because the D70S had a WIRED remote, which the D70 did not have. The wire remote was so much better for doing tripod work than the IR remote, that to me it was worth buying the same camera, just with the wired remote capability.

3 - I got a D7200 because my 11 year old D70S died. If the D70S had not died, I would be still using it. Yes it is obsolete, but it does everything that I want. I selected the D7200 figuring that I would be using it for the next 10+ years. IOW a long term camera.

As was said, lenses are LONG term gear. I have and use my 30+ year old film era lenses on my DLSR. They work for the purpose that I want, so I see no need to spend extra money to simply upgrade to current gear, when I get no practical functional gain. During that time I went from film Nikkormat FTn, to Nikon F2 (which I kept and used for decades), then went to digital D70 to D7200. Yes, it is tempting to upgrade, but when I look at my gear, I ask why, what gain to I get? The answer is usually little. The IS/VR lenses however do bring a significant capability to the new lenses, especially as I get older.

As for Canon vs. Nikon.

• Flip a coin.
   
  
• They are both GOOD cameras.
   
  
• It is the same marketing battle that has been going on since at least the 1970s.
   
  
• I went the Nikon line, to be able to swap gear with friends, who had Nikon and Nikkormat.
   
  
• If one camera has a specific feature or lens that you NEED, then that one factor may drive the selection.
  
  • But wait a while and the other brand may bring out a similar camera or lens. It goes back and forth between them.
    

  [*]Service and support is an important factor, primarily for the pros.

  [*]In the case of my Nikon lenses, I can use most of my Nikon film camera lenses on my D70 and D7200. That saves me money because I don't have to buy a full kit of lenses for the DSLR. And for some uses, the old manual lenses works just fine for me on the DSLR.

   

  [*]In my case, I've been shooting Nikon since the 1970s, and felt no need or desire to change brands.