Canon 110D vs 500D (or others)

[Englebert]

So i'm looking to get my first SLR and am wondering to go for the most basic available, or is it a false economy? Should i get a more established model or start off with the cheapest because i wouldn't get the most out of it?

I want to use a camera as much for HD movies as i do photos BTW...

Any thoughts would be useful before i commit thought to credit card!

 

[Revels]

It depends how much you're going to use and how good you are really.

But for 99% of people the limiting thing is them, not the camera.

I'd get something semi-good. Then spend the extra on lenses. Then just practice. Edit. Bin it all. Practice more.

 

[markhinton]

500D - good starter and you're not going to feel like you've wasted money. Then spend money buying new lenses, getting to grips with it and then upgrade the camera when you're more comfortable.

I have a 350D and I'm looking at either a 550 or 600d, but I'm really hankering over a 5d!

 

[Englebert]

My main uses are going to be car related stuff, both static shots and in-car filming. I will also use the camera at work, to film 'webinar' type presentations for the web.

Is there a decent lens guide out there?

 

[.Adam.]

I have a 500D mate. Had it just over a year now and was my first DSLR.

Really user friendly and sounds like it is ideal for your needs.

 

[Cup_Phil]

1100D is a good little camera - does everything including HD video well enough that it'll be a year before you out grow it
Also you can get some good lenses and then when you do upgrade the body the lenses will fit on whatever you get - so it's not money thrown away

The only thing I would say is try an 1100D - they are quite small if you have big hands - the 550D and 600D are bigger

 

[dunganick]

It depends how much you think you will get into it Rob.

The 550d would be a good place to start. (i can't see many differences between the 600d and 550d) But i don't know these cameras too well. So probably best to listen to others.

Lens wise. Definitely get a 50mm F1.8. Its not a stunning lens, but it will let you play with shallow depth of field for about £85. For that price you cannot go wrong.

What other lenses you go for depends entirely on how much you want to spend and what you're going to photograph.

The best value Canon fit lenses i think are:

50mm F1.8 £90
70-200 F4 L (Non IS) at £490
Sigma 10-20 at £380
55-250 IS II £200
85mm F1.8 £300

If you want to try any of the kit i've got then you're more than welcome.

 

[SamP]

550d is the best place to start in the canon range tbh. 500d is rubbish for movies as it only does 1080 at 20 frames a second. Shoot anything thats not stood still and it'll look shat.

Also, I hope you realise that you wont be able to record much more than than 11 minutes?

 

[JamesBryan]

550d is the best place to start in the canon range tbh. 500d is rubbish for movies as it only does 1080 at 20 frames a second. Shoot anything thats not stood still and it'll look shat.

Also, I hope you realise that you wont be able to record much more than than 11 minutes?

Per clip

So he could do 11 minutes, stop. Then do another 11 minutes.

Would need a decent memory card to hold that amount of footage though.

 

[Cup_Phil]

I thought the only limit to video length was the memory card?

 

[Joe#]

I got a 600d for Christmas and I'm loving it. (my first dslr)

 

[rankins]

Ive got the 1100d took it away with me and my new filters and 70-300mm telephoto lens and it handled everything I threw at it can't comment on the other cameras as not used them

Also search amazon for a class 10 sandisk extreme memory card, I went for the 16gb as it does 4 hours of gd video recording

 

[Andy.]

I thought the only limit to video length was the memory card?

No, the cards are formatted in FAT rather than NTFS, which limits a single file to 4GB. For normal use that's not much of a problem, but if you want to record a play or tracktime, then you will have to constantly start and stop it.

 

[Jay_A]

I bought a 600D just before xmas and love it. Its got a few tweaks over the 550D including built in wireless flash control.

 

[Cup_Phil]

No, the cards are formatted in FAT rather than NTFS, which limits a single file to 4GB. For normal use that's not much of a problem, but if you want to record a play or tracktime, then you will have to constantly start and stop it.

Doh!!

 

[SamP]

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=379407

350 quid for 550d including the kit lens, saves you £200 for a second hand 85 1.8 or add a bit more for a 50 1.4. I'd really avoid the 50 1.8, it's great value but it has a terrible build and the autofocus is tragic. But a prime is a great investment, forces you to really think about composition than just lazily zooming.

 

[Scott™]

Your first mistake was when you said Canon. If you look at Nikon I would offer my advice.

 

[dunganick]

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=379407

350 quid for 550d including the kit lens, saves you £200 for a second hand 85 1.8 or add a bit more for a 50 1.4. I'd really avoid the 50 1.8, it's great value but it has a terrible build and the autofocus is tragic. But a prime is a great investment, forces you to really think about composition than just lazily zooming.

Yes and no. Its certainly no L lens. But at F2.0 or 2.2 its pretty sharp (in the middle at least). I don't regret buying mine one bit. I use it as a lens cap half the time.

However the F1.4 is a good call, but it's price has been up and down like a yoyo lately. Jessops were selling them new for £185 last year, so prices crashed. Now they are £285 new.

Here is a random shot with my 50mm @ F1.8. Of a car that might be familiar to Rob. (yes its ever so slightly back focused) Personally i get lots of useable images from it - otherwise i would of got rid.

 

[Cup_Phil]

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=379407

350 quid for 550d including the kit lens, saves you £200 for a second hand 85 1.8 or add a bit more for a 50 1.4. I'd really avoid the 50 1.8, it's great value but it has a terrible build and the autofocus is tragic. But a prime is a great investment, forces you to really think about composition than just lazily zooming.

You're the first person I've EVER heard slagging off the 50mm f1.8

It's the best lens to start with - pin sharp, fast, cheap as hell

 

[SamP]

Value wise its amazing but come on, I've had better built toys in the middle of chocolate eggs ffs. If you can find a bit extra money a 35 f2/50 1.4 or 85 1.8 are much better investments.

 

[Cup_Phil]

It's not well built - but saying it's autofocus doesn't work is insane

Plus its 1/4 the price of any of the ones you're quoting. For beginners learning how aperture, iso, shutter speed actually affect the photo - it's perfect

 

[dunganick]

It's not well built - but saying it's autofocus doesn't work is insane

But accurate unfortunately.

 

[Jay_A]

Value wise its amazing but come on, I've had better built toys in the middle of chocolate eggs ffs. If you can find a bit extra money a 35 f2/50 1.4 or 85 1.8 are much better investments.

For the price, I disagree mate

 

[Ben]

For a person who has bought a DSLR for 'nice' images the 50mm 1.8 is great, produces great shots and is super cheap.

 

[SamP]

It's not well built - but saying it's autofocus doesn't work is insane

Plus its 1/4 the price of any of the ones you're quoting. For beginners learning how aperture, iso, shutter speed actually affect the photo - it's perfect

I never said the AF didnt work, just that it was tragic. Which lets be honest it is, want to track a subject in low light? LOL. Jog on. Bang per buck wise so to speak its fantastic, but if you can afford the 1.4 then just skip it as its not a lens you'll keep. Thats my opinion anyway, go through kerso and get a USM driven prime.

 

[Cup_Phil]

I never said the AF didnt work, just that it was tragic. Which lets be honest it is, want to track a subject in low light? LOL. Jog on. Bang per buck wise so to speak its fantastic, but if you can afford the 1.4 then just skip it as its not a lens you'll keep. Thats my opinion anyway, go through kerso and get a USM driven prime.

That could be said about nearly all lenses - and is usually a fault of the AF system in the camera rather than the lens itself. The only real problem with the f1.8 which makes autofocus a problem is the motor is stupidly slow.

However how many people buy a dslr and a 50mm f1.8 and then try to use autofocus in low light? I'd bet not many. If I try to use autofocus on my 17-40mm f4L in low light it's not much better

 

[SamP]

Everyone. Isn't that the point of buying nifty, something that's better when it starts to get dark?

 

[Cup_Phil]

Not really - that's what Iso is for

The nifty is a cheap low-DOF portrait lens - and it's f-ing brilliant for that

 

[.Adam.]

I got my 1.8 for Christmas and it is a great lens. For portraits/playing with DOF, I think it's spot on.

 

[dunganick]

That could be said about nearly all lenses - and is usually a fault of the AF system in the camera rather than the lens itself. The only real problem with the f1.8 which makes autofocus a problem is the motor is stupidly slow.

However how many people buy a dslr and a 50mm f1.8 and then try to use autofocus in low light? I'd bet not many. If I try to use autofocus on my 17-40mm f4L in low light it's not much better

There is something wrong with your 17-40 or you have an amazing 50 F1.8.

It seeks like no other lens i've used. The focus ring on MF doesnt even feel like it is connected to anything.

Anyway, i think we were meant to be helping Rob choose a camera, not bitching about a lens....

 

[Cup_Phil]

There is something wrong with your 17-40 or you have an amazing 50 F1.8.

It seeks like no other lens i've used. The focus ring on MF doesnt even feel like it is connected to anything.

Anyway, i think we were meant to be helping Rob choose a camera, not b**ching about a lens....

Maybe, perhaps, you've got a crap 1.8?

 

[Englebert]

Thanks for the advice guys, starting to go over my head!

Nick, i'll think i'll need some lessons in exchange for a couple of drinks Looks like the 550d is the way to go then as my first priority is HD video for work.

 

[Ay Ay Ron]

I've just picked up a 550d and I think it is a cracking little camera for the money. Not used it much but the picture quality looks really good. Need to try out the video soon but I need to download the software.

 

[Pete.M]

I have just bought a 500d, currently awaiting its arrival. Its my first DSLR so I am looking forward to getting stuck in.

 

[dunganick]

Thanks for the advice guys, starting to go over my head!

Nick, i'll think i'll need some lessons in exchange for a couple of drinks Looks like the 550d is the way to go then as my first priority is HD video for work.

Sounds good to me Rob