Advice on buying digital SLR
Advice on buying digital SLR
Author
Discussion

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
I have been offered a Canon EOS-1 D for £350 (no lens) which I think is a good price, however I currently have an entry level EOS 400D which does not produce good pictures with the stock EFS 18-55 lens.
What advice could you offer me, should I purchase the 1-D and invest in a lens, or could I get similar results if I purchase a good quality lens for my 400D.
I have also looked at an EOS 600D incl 18-55 lens which I understand is a new model at around £626
What ever way I go on this, the camera is only going to be used for pleasure. But I really would like to achieve the best possible results with the least possible effort.
Thanks in anticipation of the wealth of knowledge available hear.
(doorman is NOT A BOUNCER but a garage door supplier lol)

AndyFoo

1,432 posts

204 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
£350 for a 1-D! That's a damn good deal if it's all in working order.

Ultimately though, I believe the investment is in the lens and time invested in getting the 'best shot'. I run a 400D and would love a 'pro' range camera, but with what lenses I have, there wouldn't be any advantage I don't think.

Unless you're eager of an upgrade or a spare camera, put the £350 in a pot for an L series lens. (In my opinion wink )

miniman

30,042 posts

291 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
Why doesn't the 400D produce good photos with the kit lens? My 350D produced perfectly good shots with the kit lens - the biggest improvement was gained by adding better lenses rather than a better body.

nellyleelephant

2,711 posts

263 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
I'm guessing it's the Mark 1 for that money?

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
AndyFoo said:
£350 for a 1-D! That's a damn good deal if it's all in working order.

Ultimately though, I believe the investment is in the lens and time invested in getting the 'best shot'. I run a 400D and would love a 'pro' range camera, but with what lenses I have, there wouldn't be any advantage I don't think.

Unless you're eager of an upgrade or a spare camera, put the £350 in a pot for an L series lens. (In my opinion wink )
OK thanks for that, just looked at Canon EF 17-40mm f4 L USM Lens +£600!!!

markmullen

15,877 posts

263 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
The 1D is still capable of very good results but don't forget:

A) It won't take your EF-S 18-55 lens
B) It is an old body and the menus etc take some getting used to.

What in particular don't you like about the shots you get out of the 400D?

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
miniman said:
Why doesn't the 400D produce good photos with the kit lens? My 350D produced perfectly good shots with the kit lens - the biggest improvement was gained by adding better lenses rather than a better body.
I'm comparing it with my Sony DSC-W170 which takes superior pictures

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
markmullen said:
The 1D is still capable of very good results but don't forget:

A) It won't take your EF-S 18-55 lens
B) It is an old body and the menus etc take some getting used to.

What in particular don't you like about the shots you get out of the 400D?
See my last post re Sony, but I am already getting vibes that I should stick with the 400D and invest in a good lens?

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
nellyleelephant said:
I'm guessing it's the Mark 1 for that money?
Correct

miniman

30,042 posts

291 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
doorman said:
miniman said:
Why doesn't the 400D produce good photos with the kit lens? My 350D produced perfectly good shots with the kit lens - the biggest improvement was gained by adding better lenses rather than a better body.
I'm comparing it with my Sony DSC-W170 which takes superior pictures
Completely different animals, though. What mode are you using on the 400D? If it's set on Auto, then I wouldn't be surprised if the results are "worse" than the Sony. For example, Canon DSLRs are fairly well known for over exposing - I always underexpose by 1/3 of a stop to get better results.

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
miniman said:
doorman said:
miniman said:
Why doesn't the 400D produce good photos with the kit lens? My 350D produced perfectly good shots with the kit lens - the biggest improvement was gained by adding better lenses rather than a better body.
I'm comparing it with my Sony DSC-W170 which takes superior pictures
Completely different animals, though. What mode are you using on the 400D? If it's set on Auto, then I wouldn't be surprised if the results are "worse" than the Sony. For example, Canon DSLRs are fairly well known for over exposing - I always underexpose by 1/3 of a stop to get better results.
In layman's terms, what settings should I be dialling up?

LurntWubber

33 posts

194 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
I had a 400d, and I think i know what you are talking about.

My 300d took superior pictures to my 400d, No proven technical reason but it was a hell of alot easier to get the shots i was after with the 300. They both had 18-55mm kit lenses. I bought a 450d shortly after the 400d and that was a breath of fresh air, much faster processor and the addition of liveview.

You might not need to go as far as a 1d to get the shots your after i guess is what im saying. Saying that - I just got a 7d biggrin (mostly for the video).

I did handle a 600d testing a lense in my local LCE but wasn't keen on the feel of the controls.

Best bet is to head to your local LCE (london camera exchange) or trusting camera shop and ask to test drive... And set a budget (and maybe a bit extra for that extra shiney bargain).

miniman

30,042 posts

291 months

Sunday 29th May 2011
quotequote all
Well, to underexpose by 1/3 stop, put it in P mode, half-press the shutter (as if to focus), press AV+/- and then turn the dial anti-clockwise one click.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

283 months

Monday 30th May 2011
quotequote all
Theres a lot to getting a good shot out of an SLR, especially straight out of camera, usually the (canons) defaults are quite subtle, not so much contrast or sharpening etc, this is a good thing but you can always tweak them higher.

Also depends on if you shoot raw, as that needs some processing before it will look good but you can get an amazing amount out of it.

The 1D is a superb camera but will hold your hand a lot less than the 400d will. No auto modes and I'm guessing not great jpg processing either?

doorman

Original Poster:

1,545 posts

220 months

Monday 30th May 2011
quotequote all
OK folks, thank you all very much for your feed back & advice, I knew you would not disappoint.
Decision made, I am keeping the 400D and visited LCE today and purchased an EF 17-40mm f/4L USM along with a Hoya HMC filter to protect my investment. All I have to do now is learn how to use it lol
Thanks again
David
cool

miniman

30,042 posts

291 months

Monday 30th May 2011
quotequote all
Nice choice.