Digital SLR advice

[EvanM]

I'm looking at replacing my 9 year old Canon 8MP point and shoot with something that can take a bit better of a picture. I've decided on going the SLR route instead of another p&s camera. A local store is having a sale on the Canon line of SLR's and I was looking for some advice.

The first bundle I was looking at was the Canon T5i with the 18-135mm lens and the accessory kit with spare battery for $899 cad, and the other is the same body and kit, but with an 18-55mm lens and a 55-250mm lens for $949 cad. What I'm hoping to find out is if the T5i is a decent camera, and what type of lens would be good. What is the difference in zoom, etc between the 18-55 a 15-135, and a 55-230 lens?

Thanks for the advice,
Evan

[swalker]

Hi Evan,

   I use a Canon T3i. I am no professional for sure, but love taking pictures...(Besides it helps me remember things now) lol. I have a 17-85mm lens that I use for an all around lens. I also use a 50mm lens for portraits, etc. I also use a 70-300mm lens I like. I guess it really depends on what you want to do with the camera. I have picked up some great lenses off eBay from camera stores too.

Good luck...

[GuzziKevin]

I have a Canon T3i and have been very happy with it. The T5i is the newer version although I don't know what has been changed. Mine came with the 18-55mm lens. The 18-55mm should be good for things like landscapes to portraits. The 55-230 lens will allow you to zoom in on far away objects. I ended up getting the 55-230, too, and while it was cool to be able to zoom in on far away objects I tended to get the most use out of the 18-55mm. The focus was a little slower on the 55-230 lens but it was still quite usable, just maybe not as good for action shots. I just didn't need that much reach.

It just depends on what you'll be taking pictures of the most. If you're taking pictures of dangerous wild animals then definitely get the 55-230mm. Otherwise, my opinion would be to go for the 18-55mm. There are other great camera out there but I've never regretted getting the T3i.

[rocker59]

What is the difference in zoom, etc between the 18-55 a 15-135, and a 55-230 lens?

Evan

What do you mean?  Those numbers are focal length in millimeters.  Multiply x 1.5 for 35mm equivalent.

If you're just wondering what the zoom factor is, then divide.  Those would be 3X, 9X, and 4.2X, but the 55-230 is the longest lens and will provide to most telephoto.

For full coverage from wide to telephoto, you'd need both the 18-55 and the 55-230.

Don't cheap out on lenses.  Personally, skip the kit.  Buy the body of your choice and pony up for a quality (expensive) lens.  A good all-arounder in the 18-200 range, if you don't want to continually switch lenses.

[fotoguzzi]

the glass in those kit lenses is on  the cheap side.. If your going to enlarge (11x14 or bigger) skip the kit lens and buy the very more expensive lens of your choice.

[Yukonica]

Silly first question: how much do you want to end up spending to get a better image? The camera body/sensor is far less important than the glass and the glass can get very, very expensive. The T5i is a decent little camera. If you are just looking for travel photos, family stuff and pictures of your bike... this camera will work fine.
All three lenses mentioned are basically kit lenses; produced with broader tolerances at less expense. Were these my only choices I'd pick the 15-135 as being most versatile.

[EvanM]

Thanks for the advice. The kit I am listing is basically spare battery,  case,  strap,  etc. The lenses are all canon efs lenses,  and from what I've read,  not too low end.

May end up picking it up today

[rocker59]

  The lenses are all canon efs lenses,  and from what I've read,  not too low end.
 

Compared to what?  You'll be able to capture decent images with the lenses you've listed, but they're definitely entry-level.

Money is a good indicator.  If the zoom lens is $199, $249, or $299 list price, it's an entry-level lens, and for a few hundred dollars more, you can really improve image quality.

Good luck with your purchase.  Sounds like you made the decision before you posted the question, so not sure what you were looking for in this thread.  At least two of the respondents in this thread have professional photography experience and would not steer you wrong.

[AJ Huff]

I have an 8 year old Rebel XTi. Great camera, I never plan on getting rid of it. But now it lives mostly in a drawer. Last year I bought a Canon 5D Mark I and a Canon 50D Mark I off ebay for $500 for both. Huge upgrade in my game without spending a lot of money. Both do everything I need and more.

Figure out what you really need. I didn't need video. I didn't need an LCD view screen. I would take a strong look at the mirrorless cameras. They are about 95% the quality of DSLR in a more compact size. Sadly that means not Canon. If you rule that out, I'd look at an older used DSLR that meets your needs. I bought two bodies and two EF mount lenses for what you are looking at spending.

 Good luck!

-AJ

[Gliderjohn]

Concerning zoom, this shot was taken with an entry level Sony DSLR and 300mm lens form about 25 yards.



GliderJohn

[NCAmother]

Just be aware, the camera is an APS sensor which is smaller than the 7D.  The kit lenses I believe are proprietary only to APS canon cameras.  I like the 7D, mainly because the viewfinder is normal sized unlike the rebels.
Pro-sumer cameras like the 5D, 6D, and 7D have a sensor similar in size to 35mm negative.  Larger sensor cameras tend to have more tonal range and less noise, which might not matter if you just want a hobby camera.
Nate

[rocker59]

DX and FX digital camera formats.  All of the entry and mid-level digital cameras will be DX format.  FX is the 35mm equivalent and is usually seen on bodies starting around $1500 and up.  There are also DX and FX lenses to match.

A few months ago, I bought a Nikon D7100 body new for $999.  Then, I picked up a 17-55 f2.8 pro lens used for $749 (for about half of new).  D7100 was the top of the line Nikon DX format DSLR at the time.  Just after I bought it, they introduced the D7200.

I wanted to go FX format, but didn't want to pony up for a D610 or D750.  Just too much more money for the little advantage I'd gain, since I don't shoot for money anymore.

I also use a couple of high-end Nikon point & shoot cameras that work really well for most snapshot photography.

Anyway, if you're wanting quality images, spending money on the glass is the best place to start.

It's amazing what can be done with these things.  The latest DSLRs have fantastic high ISO / low-light abilities, which is always a big help for me.  And, the newest lenses have vibration reduction and coatings on the elements that really help with image quality.

[rodekyll]

To summarize --

Canon is a good brand.

Bodies are available in DX and FX frame sizes -- FX is closer to the old 35mm format.

As rules of thumb -- lenses that come bundled with a new camera are crap -- fake glass and high f-stops.  Lenses with more than 3x zoom are crap.  Zoom lenses are lesser quality than fixed-length.

Lenses come in DX and FX sizes as well.  DX lenses are generally lesser quality than FX lenses.  FX lenses cover a DX sensor but DX lenses don't cover FX sensors -- too small.  So if you can imagine yourself in a FX-frame body someday, put your $$$$ in good, full-frame glass.

Dx, since it is smaller, uses less of the 'circle' thrown by a given focal length lens.  So at say-- 50mm, you get less in the picture with DX (crop effect) than you would with FX.

I agree with the folks saying to skip the bundle and buy a bare body/cap/charger/battery.  At least get the specs on the lenses and check ebay for the going price of the glass.  I think that will tell you how much you're really paying for the camera.  The lenses offered in bundles are embarrassing.  Don't believe the 'savings' or 'value' claims of the bundles.  The savings is not there.

Don't be afraid to look at Tameron, Sigma and Tokina lenses.  They are a fair tradeoff of price and quality.  Don't be afraid to invest in really good FX glass even if you must buy a DX body at first.  Camera bodies come and go.  Glass is forever.  I shoot my modern digital through lenses over 100 years old.  It doesn't work the other way 'round.

$0.02

[Carlo DeSantis]

Were I you, I'd opt for the camera and the 18-55 zoom and see how that works for you.

I'll bet that you will be astounded by the quality you get and find that 95% of your lens needs are covered by that zoom.  Remember you can always zoom with your feet (getting in closer or out farther away).  IF you have a special need for a longer zoom, then opt for it later on.

As for lens quality, there's no doubt that the pro-level lenses are better -- BUT will they make a difference in YOUR photography?  Usually the kit lenses will fail mechanically before they give you optical problems.

As for me, I have been shooting Nikon FF for years and mostly use prime (non-zoom) lenses.  I have a clutch of them, and they are pro quality.  However, when I just want to do some walking-around shooting I really, really like my consumer-grade 24-85 zoom.  The truth of the matter is that if you are hand-holding your camera, operator-induced camera shake will be more of a factor than the quality of the lens in most cases.

Get your feet wet with the camera and shorter zoom; you will be in a better position to answer your own question after a bit of experience.

Best,

Carlo

PS: I don't know the Canon line but honestly it's hard to find a bad camera these days.  The dogs have left the pound for the most part, so to speak.  Lately I've been shooting more and more with the Fuji X line and am gob-smacked at the quality these APS-C sensors are capturing.

[zedXmick]

I have an older Canon Rebel XTI  with a pro spec lens. I have been very happy with the Lens. Spend the money and get the upgraded glass.



Just a couple of shots:

[rboe]

Chech out the Pentax line. For a reasonable price you get weather sealing, best optical kit lens and shake reduction in the camera, not the lens. Like Nikon, all older Pentax lenses will fit it.

Image quality wise, like it was said earlier, it's the glass and good glass is not cheap.

[steven c]

 Be honest with you self before spending big money on hi price len's,what are you doing with your photos mainly the internet? A good PS will do 28x36 prints spend the cash but even cheap len's the's days are very good around F8 F11 F16.
 Ken Rockwell gives a good honest reviews.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm

[boatdetective]

Some good advice here- I side with Rocker and RK.

First of all- this is a big step: so DON'T RUSH the decision. Do NOT buy today.

Secondly- you need to figure out realistically what you are shooting (don't say a little bit of everything- put a little thought into it.  Lanscape? People/street scenes? Family/kids? Pets? product/work/still life? Macro? They all will require different gear.

Great gear does not make great photographers. You need to think and decide on the best tool.

The advice RE kit lenses is generally correct. the Canon 18-55 is generally a dog. You can do a search on photozone.de or slrgear.com to get an idea of lens quality.

What will you do with the pix? If you are blowing things up and printing art size photos- larger sensor size may be critical (full frame format). Otherwise, DX format cameras still produce stunning images.

Don't fall into the hype that you need ten pounds hanging around your neck to take great pix. Yes- if you want Ansel Adams quality landscapes, long distance Audobon quality bird shots, or sports/ action- then the best of the best is better. However, I switched to micro 4/3 format some years back and my gear is half the weight of a comparable SLR- and my photos are killer.

You can't go wrong with any of the Canon or Nikon DX bodies. They are all excellent. I shoot Olympus m4/3 and it is a fine system. Once again- do a little research and you'll find that competition has left the consumer with some fabulous choices.

Buy the best glass you can. I might recommend buying a factory refurb lens- they literally are as good as new and have a warranty.

The best deals are always the bodies that are just about to be superceded. You will see a huge drop in price.

[Xlratr]

The argument that kit lenses are usually mediocre is frequently true. But not always! You may want to consider a mirror less interchangeable lens camera like this:

http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Digital-Compact-M-Zuiko-12-40mm/dp/B00I3D8LEI/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1432152823&sr=8-6&keywords=olympus+om-d+12-40

I should say here that I'm associated with the brand, so you might say I'm biased. But on the other hand, I know what I'm talking about. The quality of this lens is remarkable, with a constant f2.8 aperture at all focal lengths. (12-40 in this format is equivalent to a 24-80mm lens in old film format language, which is a great working range). It's a beautiful but compact package, much less cumbersome than a big "conventional" SLR. Have a look at one!

John



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rboe]

More and more folks are ditching (or cutting their kit to the bare bones) and going to a mirrorless camera system. We want something better than a point and shoot or phone, but don't want to haul around a big heavy DSLR any more.

Choices are more limited in that market, but improving. Something to consider.

[Guzzistajohn]

Thanks guys,I just ordered a Tameron 18-200 (refurbed) $155.00.

[rodekyll]

They make a few classes of that lens.  I have one for my 'sacrificial shooter'.  What is the f-range?

[LowRyter]

actually, for a Canon the crop factor is 1.6 times the lens focal length, the 1.5 works for Nikon (and Sony and Pentax).

You can do some checking on the net regarding the quality of lenses. 

[Joliet Jim]

Chech out the Pentax line. For a reasonable price you get weather sealing, best optical kit lens and shake reduction in the camera, not the lens. Like Nikon, all older Pentax lenses will fit it.

Image quality wise, like it was said earlier, it's the glass and good glass is not cheap.

:+1

[Guzzistajohn]

They make a few classes of that lens.  I have one for my 'sacrificial shooter'.  What is the f-range?

3.5 to 6.3 did I do OK?  I'm just upgrading from the one I got with my Cannon, It's a 18-55, I can't hold a candle to some of youz guys :-\  on $$ OR skill/experience but I do have fun!

[pyoungbl]

In the end, the very best camera is the one you actually have in your hands.  On my motorcycle (Guzzi content) trips I found that hauling a DSLR with lenses was just too much of a pain in the ass.  I missed lots of shots that I later regretted.  A camera phone...not enough quality.  Typical point and shoot...handy but just not enough options or quality.  I finally settled on a Fuji X-20.  It's larger than the typical P&S but small enough to actually grab from my tank bag and carry when I get off the bike.  I'm sure there are other, similar, options.  My photo skills won't rival any professionals.  I'm just capturing memories and trying to make them more memorable than a postcard.

Peter Y.

[Guzzistajohn]

In the end, the very best camera is the one you actually have in your hands.  On my motorcycle (Guzzi content) trips I found that hauling a DSLR with lenses was just too much of a pain in the ass.  I missed lots of shots that I later regretted.  A camera phone...not enough quality.  Typical point and shoot...handy but just not enough options or quality.  I finally settled on a Fuji X-20.  It's larger than the typical P&S but small enough to actually grab from my tank bag and carry when I get off the bike.  I'm sure there are other, similar, options.  My photo skills won't rival any professionals.  I'm just capturing memories and trying to make them more memorable than a postcard.

Peter Y.

Same here, I just have a BIG tank bag :D.

[rodekyll]

Yes, you did good.  It's a handy size for carrying and good enough glass for the focal range.

As you step up in lens quality, the zoom range and low f number go down and the bulk and weight go up.  It takes me 3 'good' zoom lenses to make up that spread.  Lower numbers are 2.8 on all of them, and two of them hold that number throughout the zoom range.  So for $150 you're covering ~$2200 of kit.  When I don't want to carry that much and/or the environment is a risk I use the same lens.

Here's a sample of what it can do at ~120mm, camera set auto and point-focus.  I set it up on a tripod and used a wireless remote to trigger it.

[Guzzistajohn]

Yes, you did good.  It's a handy size for carrying and good enough glass for the focal range.

As you step up in lens quality, the zoom range and low f number go down and the bulk and weight go up.  It takes me 3 'good' zoom lenses to make up that spread.  Lower numbers are 2.8 on all of them, and two of them hold that number throughout the zoom range.  So for $150 you're covering ~$2200 of kit.  When I don't want to carry that much and/or the environment is a risk I use the same lens.

Here's a sample of what it can do at ~120mm, camera set auto and point-focus.  I set it up on a tripod and used a wireless remote to trigger it.

Thank you for the learning experience RK, I bow to my sensi ;) My goal was to upgrade from my Cannon 18-55 and not have to pack and change to my big 'ol 70-300. (my tank bag ain't that big) Looks like I've done so for under $200.00 It's shipping from Illinois, maybe I can be shootin' by Friday   WOO HOO!!!

I took this shot in Montana last summer, good memories!

[Yukonica]

 

In the end, the very best camera is the one you actually have in your hands.  On my motorcycle (Guzzi content) trips I found that hauling a DSLR with lenses was just too much of a pain in the ass.  I missed lots of shots that I later regretted.  A camera phone...not enough quality.  Typical point and shoot...handy but just not enough options or quality.  I finally settled on a Fuji X-20.  It's larger than the typical P&S but small enough to actually grab from my tank bag and carry when I get off the bike.  I'm sure there are other, similar, options.  My photo skills won't rival any professionals.  I'm just capturing memories and trying to make them more memorable than a postcard.

Peter Y.

 ;-T   been trying to work out that one too. My kit is pretty broad, close to $15k, but I still can't pick a short set for touring by bike.
Mirrorless is on the radar.