You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Looking for a decent DSLR for a friend, who used to use Canon film SLRs (EOS 5 and 3 I think), and has had a good few years out of photography but wants to get back into it. As a Nikon user, I haven't a clue about the relative merits of Canon DSLRs, but there are a few on here who use Canon gear. So what would be a good starting point, for someone used to high-end kit but who doesn't have much money at the moment? This will be a gift for him, so I'm thinking of around £250 for a simple 'starter' kit (he sold all his old kit off years ago, sadly) .
350 - small,light,fast.
I still reach for mine often even though though I have a 5 and a 7.
350D is quite an old camera, and won't be great in low-light. I'm looking for something a bit more recent really.
Works perfectly fine in low light. You quite obviously haven't used one or you'd know that.
If you're after low light capability along the scale of a 5/7D then you're going to need a body without a built in flash.
You're budget rules that out.
[b]Your[/b] budget rules that out.
I'm a Pentax user so have nothing to add to the discussion* other than pedantry.
*Unless he's sold everything including his lenses, in which case, why not take the opportunity to switch brands, either to Nikon so he can swap things with you, or Pentax because (IMO) you get more camera for the money and the controls in the right place.
I'm a nikon person but have a few Canon friends.
In general all the xxxD Canons are good so just pick what suits the budget the 650D was the first witha. Touchscreen, he doesnt sound like somebody who would use a touchscreen so maybe a 550D?
50mm f1.8 II is a good cheap lens. The only way to go cheaper would be to use an older manual focus lens with an adaptor.
Then you might have wnough money left for a memory card and/or a camera bag.
I would thoroughly recommend any of the Canon EOS series.
I've just put my EOS 40D up for sale on ebay, along with a 18-55mm lens.
The XXD series are a cut above the XXXD series.
It's pretty good in low light, especially when used with a wide aperture lens (I've also a 50mm F1.8 prime lens I'm selling which takes awesome portraits).
If interested drop me a PM, am happy to do a deal outside of ebay in case it's of interest
He did sell everything. He needed the money at the time. 🙁 I have tried suggesting he switch to Nikon, then he can borrow my kit, but he's a dedicated Canon fan and won't be swayed.
"Works perfectly fine in low light. You quite obviously haven't used one or you'd know that."
I have, several years ago actually. It wasn't very good in low light, compared to more current cameras. I use a full frame camera so my benchmark for low-light capability is very high. 😉
5D/7D would be nice, but a bit pricey. I'm looking at s/h prices, and wondering if a current new base model (1300D?) kit wouldn't be better value, as it would be superior in terms of image quality to a 5+ year old mid-range model? Some fantastic deals at Jessops etc at the moment.
It's about getting him back into photography. But giving him something reasonably versatile and capable.
If he's used to high end kit he'll likely fine the XXX or XXXX series feel small & cheaply built plus lacking things like seperate dedicated controls for aperture and shutter speed - the ones I looked at shared one for both with a "shift" button. I looked at upgrading the 40D to one and they just felt like toys in comparison.
Image quality will be superb on any of the the EOS range from the 300 or so onwards - all good enough for professional work.
I think that you would be better off with whatever xxxD model fits into your budget - IIRC when I looked at selling my 550D it would have gone for less than your budget on Ebay, so probably a 600/650D with kit lens.
The kit lens isn't bad, but it certainly far from great
I'm a big fan of 40d and 50d. the 50d was the last of the XXD to use a magnesium chassis - after that it was all polycarbonate EDIT - which isn't a bad thing per se, but the 50d does feel very well built.
They're good solid cameras.
Add a nifty fifty and you could get in on budget. I use a 30mm Sigma for daily walkabout- that's a nice lens, but you'll not get in budget 🙁
That's a good point re low-end models, markwsf. The 1300D doesn't have the rear command dial. Point take re build quality, but then, I've always found Canon inferior to Nikon in that regard anyway. 😉
Wex have some 7Ds for under £350 body only. I'm happy to spend a bit more for a significantly better camera.
cp - absolutely, they've got a beautiful solidity to them and fit in my (large) hand nicely. My favourite combination is still the 40D with the 50mm lens on it.
It's too darned big to cart around on family days out with 3yr old twins otherwise I'd be keeping it.
What are they taking photos of?
As you will know, if low light photography is most important (think ambient light indoors stuff/weddings etc) then really it has to be full frame, so the 5d, of whatever age comes into the price point.
pair that with the 50mm f1.4 that is a really good for the money option with great low light capability.
There is a budget full frame option (6d?) but that gets a few mixed reviews depending on the purpose you mate will use it for.
Most of my photography is "sports" outdoors, and for that I have the 7d mkII, this is a great camera, with up to 10fps shot rate, and really good auto focus features. it really is pro level camera, without the price tag of full frame.
you can get the 7d MkI for not a lot on the second hand market, and stacks up really well.
obviously you sacrifice the low light of the full frame, and there is unlikely to be worlds of difference in low light performance as you go down the range or into older bodies, as long as you arnt going "very" old.
Image quality will be superb on any [s]of the the EOS range from the 300 or so onwards[/s][b]camera[/b] - all good enough for professional work.
I think what a lot of people forget is that photography didn't start yesterday with full frame DSLRs an image processing that could render noise free images at ISO 6400.
10 years ago the 350D was (probably, I guess, never used one for more than 5 minutes) brilliant, it's still exactly as good today (unless it's broken).
All cameras have limitations, even a 1DX Mk2 has limitations, no camera will shoot wide open, low ISO, fast shutter in the dark, once you've got composition sorted you still have to learn how to do the technical stuff with the camera. A 350D just has a slightly different set of constraints to a 1DX. Most will produce similar results most of the time (the 80% of the time when light levels, shutter speed and DoF aren't conflicting), dealing with the remaining 20% is where the technical side of photography comes in. All the more expensive camera does is make it a smaller percentage.
Wex also have some older 5D and 1D models. How would an original 5D stack up against a current base model? How would that same 5D compare to a 7D?
..honestly, Id go 7d over 5d, unless they "really" need the low light of full frame, or really want the wider field of vision.
Both great bodies that will be capable of great pictures, but once you go down the route of full frame lens cost go up a good step in price as well.
if your looking for performance bang for buck, you'll (IMHO) get a lot more with a 7d & 50mm1.4, 10-22f4 etc than you will with a a 5d & 85mmf1.2 16-35l etc.
It's quite a bit to think about. He used to use L-Series lenses a bit, and before EOS, used some very nice FD lenses (on an A1 I think). Camera will be used for all sorts of photography. Low-light capability is very important though. He is into sports, so I suppose a fast 'burst' rate is good. He isn't in a position to go out and spend thousands replicating his old gear, but then I think he'll find a cheapo camera a bit frustrating.
"I think what a lot of people forget is that photography didn't start yesterday with full frame DSLRs an image processing that could render noise free images at ISO 6400.10 years ago the 350D was (probably, I guess, never used one for more than 5 minutes) brilliant, it's still exactly as good today (unless it's broken)."
The 350D was excellent at what it did, back then. It wasn't very good at low light stuff. Not much was at that stage.
Bought a VGC 50D and 2 lenses privately off this forum 2 months ago for the OP's budget, and the seller threw in a few extras too!
Anyway, it's a far better camera than I am photographer. I bought it on a bit of a whim, but it's a fantastic bit of kit. I've used various 350/400d's and the 50d is a massive step up. I'm certainly glad I spent a little extra on it versus the few xxxd's I'd been looking at.
The problem is now that it's made me think about a decent compact camera, something I can take with me on rides and get some decent shots with! But I need to learn to use this properly first to be fair...
The 5D mk1 appears to have been going up in price recently so you would find it tricky to find something in budget.
The 40D / 50D can be a better for sports anyway, they have a much faster burst rate.
The 7D mk1 is surely well out of budget.
Typical Canon making things tricky with all their mk's, a quality manufacture sticks to changing the model number 😉
Clodhopper, I'm selling all my Canon DLSR inc bags, monopod and lenses for less than you want to spend as it's not getting used at the moment as I just tend to take my G7X with me now.
I've sent you an email Craigxxxl.