Which Camera? **Please read OP first**

Splinters

Depends on the price difference too. As mentioned they are essentially the same camera but with the 600D having the flip out screen. If theres any real difference in price then go for the 550 and put the difference towards the best lens you can afford. The difference in those two camera bodys will give absolutely zero difference in picture quality, however the difference with a high end lens compared to something like the ****ty 17-55 kit lens is practically day and night.

5uspect

Literally, you might say.

roguey

Splinters wrote: »

however the difference with a high end lens compared to something like the ****ty 17-55 kit lens is practically day and night.

The kit lens is the 18-55mm, not 17-55mm which is a great lens for crop sensors. L series like quality.

maddog

600D ftw!

Jonnykitedude

roguey wrote: »

The kit lens is the 18-55mm, not 17-55mm which is a great lens for crop sensors. L series like quality.

Id have to completely disagree, I bought the 550 it came with 18-55, yes it was fine for starting out did me for 12 months until I used one of pullandbangs L lenses......completely pi**ed all over the 18-55.

I have bought some sigma lenses too and they haven't a patch on the canon L series.

OP i have the 550 and love it.

pconn062

Jonnykitedude wrote: »

Id have to completely disagree, I bought the 550 it came with 18-55, yes it was fine for starting out did me for 12 months until I used one of pullandbangs L lenses......completely pi**ed all over the 18-55.

I have bought some sigma lenses too and they haven't a patch on the canon L series.

OP i have the 550 and love it.

I think he's talking about the 17-55 2.8 lens, which is a quality bit of kit and costs a fair chunk of change.

Review here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The 18-55 is the standard kit lens that comes with most cameras.

calnand

I think the 18-55 is a really good lens, I got a 70-200 f/4 recently and from photos I've taken there hasn't been a massive difference in quality. Plus the 18-55 is image stabilised, comes in really handy when I can't hold the 70-200 steady enough.

pixbyjohn

Greystoner wrote: »

Does anyone have any advice on which camera is the better/difference between the 550 and 600 apart from the weight/price? Also, where is a good place to buy one-in Dublin/Wicklow area?

Thanks.

I would advie you to check out the following Dublin city camera shops for best price.
www.berminghamcameras.ie
www.connscameras.ie
and last but not least www.johngunn.ie
Harvey Norman sell cameras but are usually a lot more expensive than any of the above.
Good luck.

djgaillimh

I'm sorry but I think he'd be crazy to buy in a Dublin camera shop.

A 600D with the 18-55 kit lens is €799 in Berminghams and €850 in Camera Centre.

T-Dimension (where I bought mine) sell the same kit for €530

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/U3240-Canon-EOS-Kiss-X5-600D-Body-18-55mm-II-Lens-Kit-1Year-Warranty-/220999140620?pt=UK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN&hash=item337493450c#ht_4842wt_1185

You might get hit with VAT on the way in but even then you're saving over a hundred quid compared to Dublin prices - which you can put towards a new lens.

There's a 1 year warranty with it too.

For me, their free delivery from Hong Kong took 3 days (three!) using FedEx, and they even marked the value on the box down so I ended up paying only €50 VAT (I didn't even ask them to do this, they just did it of their own accord).

I also bought a 50mm from them. Again, had no issues.

km991148

Hey,

Have been considering getting a DSLR for a while now and was about to get a Nikon D7000. I know its probably more camera that I need now, but hoping that its good to start with and grow into..

However I am concerned about how much usage I will get from it. After trying out a couple of DSLRs (including a friends D90) I realise that its a fair bit of equipment to carry..!

That got me onto thinking about the new mirrorless cameras (I know.. DSLR vs "3rd Gen" is probably one of them topics for a photography forum..).

I reckon if I want mirrorless then I should hold off for a small while. Is this a fair assumption? What models would be recommended?

Or should I just 'man up' and get the D7k with all its bulk and be happy..?

I Appreciate any comments.. pointers for where to look etc

PCPhoto

its all relevant to what you want to shoot .... do you feel that a bridge camera would not suit ?

I cant comment on Nikon eqmt except to say that I'm a Canon person.

if you feel that a DSLR is essential then consider looking at the secondhand market - the latest camera may be great but a secondhand one could suit you perfectly also....and who knows you might be able to pick up a lens or two or even a flash or some accessories with the extra cash !!

Best of luck with your purchase .... ps. you could also put the money into learning how to post process or expose properly...learn more about photography.

km991148

PCPhoto wrote: »

its all relevant to what you want to shoot .... do you feel that a bridge camera would not suit ?

I cant comment on Nikon eqmt except to say that I'm a Canon person.

if you feel that a DSLR is essential then consider looking at the secondhand market - the latest camera may be great but a secondhand one could suit you perfectly also....and who knows you might be able to pick up a lens or two or even a flash or some accessories with the extra cash !!

Best of luck with your purchase .... ps. you could also put the money into learning how to post process or expose properly...learn more about photography.

I reckon I want to initially shoot street and architecture (and general holiday/travel shots).

I feel reading about the mirrorless cameras that they are flawed in some way (some are slow to focus/ others have no viewfinder at all and need lcd etc) and that the market hasnt really settled - lots of existing photographers seem to be buying into them as 2nd cameras for out and about - but as a complete noob this doesnt apply to me.

Also I don't have a great understanding of the relationship between aperture/iso/shutter speed - only the theory from reading up on it.. so I wont have the experience when using a mirrorless.
I get the feeling that mirrorless isnt yet comparable to budget/mid dslrs (but will be getting there within a year or so) - maybe this is wrong?


Also - I realise that I have begun mentioning the latest Nikon for my budget (just about!) I dont want to be an Equipment Measurbator or Online Expert etc.. just want something decent for my budget to learn with (and also, hopefull not need to buy a new body for a good while - i.e. 5-10 years!)

Iancar29

Hi there... i finally got around to upgrading to an SLR and i got the D7000 . Have it since January and i love it. The lens i got with it is the 18-105. Then i also use my brother's 10-20m sigma. Wouldn't have any complaints about the camera .

I was originally going to go for the 5100 but my brother ( D200 owner) convinced me that id only have the 5100 for awhile and id already be wanting to upgrade. So ye delighted with the D7000 and theres still so much i want to do and learn.

Any questions about the camera feel free.

Heres a link to my flickr which is half D7000 and half iphone 4 .

Cheers.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/41948286@N02/

BengaLover

I upgraded to a DSLR and got the Sony A300 which is really really user friendly in that whatever settings you turn your dial too, you get an on screen message telling you what that setting does, great variety of lenses for it too.
Mine was originally 800e, reduced to 550e in Harvey Norman sale.
I am really glad I chose that one on the advice of the sales rep as I was going to go for a Nikon, but I am talking from an amateurs point of view, and I realise I dont need anything massive as I wouldnt justify the usage.

galwayjohn89

I am looking for a camera on a very low budget of around €80 to maybe €100.

I know thats not a lot at all but I would like one that will take decent pictures of aircraft when they come in to land.

Any recommendations?

PCPhoto

km991148 wrote: »

I reckon I want to initially shoot street and architecture (and general holiday/travel shots).

I feel reading about the mirrorless cameras that they are flawed in some way (some are slow to focus/ others have no viewfinder at all and need lcd etc) and that the market hasnt really settled - lots of existing photographers seem to be buying into them as 2nd cameras for out and about - but as a complete noob this doesnt apply to me.

Also I don't have a great understanding of the relationship between aperture/iso/shutter speed - only the theory from reading up on it.. so I wont have the experience when using a mirrorless.
I get the feeling that mirrorless isnt yet comparable to budget/mid dslrs (but will be getting there within a year or so) - maybe this is wrong?


Also - I realise that I have begun mentioning the latest Nikon for my budget (just about!) I dont want to be an Equipment Measurbator or Online Expert etc.. just want something decent for my budget to learn with (and also, hopefull not need to buy a new body for a good while - i.e. 5-10 years!)

small problem with this.... in todays world cameras are changing and technology advances quickly ..... so you'll get maybe 2/3years max.....lenses on the other hand seem to last a good number of years.

sineadw

I've had my 5D over 5 yrs, and still don't feel the need to replace it.

PCros

So I have had my 550D now for about 10 months and I'm looking to get a new lens as I just have the standard 18-55mm at the moment.

So I was looking at the 55-250mm lens - can somebody tell me the difference between item 1 and item 4?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Delectronics&field-keywords=canon+lens

Also I was looking at the 75-300mm but it does not have the best reviews?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-75-300mm-4-0-5-6-III-Lens/dp/B00005K47Y/ref=sr_1_18?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1337595357&sr=1-18

If you were choosing which one would you go for in terms of all around quality? I cannot break the bank yet therefore I cannot look at any USM models on the same lenses.

Many thanks!

djgaillimh

PCros wrote: »

So I have had my 500D now for about 10 months and I'm looking to get a new lens as I just have the standard 18-55mm at the moment.

So I was looking at the 55-250mm lens - can somebody tell me the difference between item 1 and item 4?

In terms of optical quality, there seems to be no difference between the two lenses. Build quality was improved slightly on the MKII and I think they made some small improvements to its ability to handle glare.

If you're on a budget, get the MKI. It's available new for about €130 from these guys:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-CANON-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5-6-ZOOM-LENS-55-250-mm-/290714667743?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item43aff1cadf#ht_4293wt_1185

If you look back a couple of pages in this thread, another poster said he bought from them and had no issues.

edit: and by all accounts, the 55-250 is a better lens than the 75-300.

cnocbui

km991148 wrote: »

I reckon I want to initially shoot street and architecture (and general holiday/travel shots).

I feel reading about the mirrorless cameras that they are flawed in some way (some are slow to focus/ others have no viewfinder at all and need lcd etc) and that the market hasnt really settled - lots of existing photographers seem to be buying into them as 2nd cameras for out and about - but as a complete noob this doesnt apply to me.

Also I don't have a great understanding of the relationship between aperture/iso/shutter speed - only the theory from reading up on it.. so I wont have the experience when using a mirrorless.
I get the feeling that mirrorless isnt yet comparable to budget/mid dslrs (but will be getting there within a year or so) - maybe this is wrong?

A lot of your assumptions about mirrorless cameras and their systems are incorrect, in particular the M4/3 system.

They have well and truly come of age and their sales have overtaken those of conventional DSLRs in Japan and the trend is that will pertain to the rest of the world before long. Full frame DSLRs - those with a sensor of the same size as 35mm film will likely survive, sort of taking the place medium format did in the film ecosystem, but midrange DSLR's with smaller, mostly APS-C size, sensors seem set for extinction.

You need no more knowledge of Aperture, shutter speed ISO etc to use a mirrorless camera than you do to use any other kind.

While in the past, the image quality and functional aspects of mirrorless cameras may have lagged larger formats a bit, and some people used them as a second system, the just released Olympus OM-D EM-5 has changed that and judging by the posts on mirrorless forums, photographers are
busy dumping their DSLR kit in droves and switching entirely. The E-M5 has extremely fast autofocus, quicker than almost any DSLR. It also has a unique in body image stabilisation system which is highly effective. Dpreview gave the camera a gold rating in their recent review you can read here: http://forums.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/

A nice bonus with the E-M5 is that with it's kit lens, it is entirely weather sealed, which is a nice feature to have in this country.

Several mirrorless models have LCD based viewfinders that work well. The one in the E-M5 I find is very usable. For your intended uses, the E-M5 would be ideal, because the small form factor makes it unobtrusive and less threatening in street situations, while it's wonderfully quiet shutter would go unnoticed in most situations.

I would suggest you have a look at the Olympus E-M5 and the Panasonic GH2, which has pro-quality video capabilities as a nice extra, however, there is an expectation that it may be superseded by a new model in a few months.

PCPhoto

sineadw wrote: »

I've had my 5D over 5 yrs, and still don't feel the need to replace it.

do you still use it constantly ? or as much as you did when you got it ....or is it used as a second body now ?

I still have my 5D and have a 40D both purchased from around the same time - 40D was goven to another photographer recently as his gear was stolen, the 5D is currently being used for underwater only - and since I've purchased the 7D housing my 5D will most likely be sold with housing and strobes over the next few weeks/months.

djgaillimh

cnocbui wrote: »

Full frame DSLRs - those with a sensor of the same size as 35mm film will likely survive, sort of taking the place medium format did in the film ecosystem, but midrange DSLR's with smaller, mostly APS-C size, sensors seem set for extinction.

[...] judging by the posts on mirrorless forums, photographers are
busy dumping their DSLR kit in droves and switching entirely.

I respect this guy's enthusiasm for the format, but I would take these comments with a pinch of salt.

The DSLR is not going anywhere in the next five to ten years. Mirrorless probably is the future, but the big boys are yet to fully commit to it and until they do, and until we know what Canon in particular is bringing to market, I'd hold off on jumping in with both feet.

In the mean-time, I'd suggest a second hand Canon xx0D to help you get a grip on the basics of camera use. 450Ds are pretty easy to come by these days and won't break the bank.

jonas7

I'm trying to decide between two cameras and I'm hoping somone here could advise me.
I'm thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but need it more so for family pictures. The two cameras I'm looking at are the Canon 1100d and the canon sx40. The first is an entry level dslr and the second is a superzoom bridge camera. They are both similarly priced.
I like both but find it hard to decide and would appreciate other peoples opinion on them.

Tallon

If you can afford the dslr, get it!

It means you have better options of upgrading in the future should you want / need too

I started out with a bridge, and it was great, but i ended up just selling it as when I bought my dslr, I had no use for it

hbr

Tallon wrote: »

If you can afford the dslr, get it!

I agree with Tallon. The DSLR will be significantly better in tricky situations
like low light or fast action. It will cost more than you expect because you
will end up buying several lenses, regardless of whether you actually need
them or not

The most basic models from Canon and Nikon are missing a
few features compared to the more advanced models.

I would consider getting a low mileage used Canon 500D
or a new/used 550D instead of the 1100D. The 550D is a
very compelling choice because:

It has a bigger, better, higher resolution LCD screen.
This really makes a difference when reviewing shots
or composing live-view and macro shots.

It shoots full 1080 HD video.

It has an input for an external microphone. The lack of a
mic socket on the 1100D and the 500D makes them almost
useless for shooting video.

The 550D is virtually identical to the newer 600D. Both are
based around the same 18MP sensor array which is also
used in the 60D and 7D. The only significant differences between
the 550D and the 600D are the flip-out LCD and wireless flash
control.

km991148

Hey - been busy recently.. thanls for the replies and appologies for getting the wrong forum before!

Iancar29 wrote: »

Hi there... i finally got around to upgrading to an SLR and i got the D7000 . Have it since January and i love it. The lens i got with it is the 18-105. Then i also use my brother's 10-20m sigma. Wouldn't have any complaints about the camera .

I was originally going to go for the 5100 but my brother ( D200 owner) convinced me that id only have the 5100 for awhile and id already be wanting to upgrade. So ye delighted with the D7000 and theres still so much i want to do and learn.

Any questions about the camera feel free.

Heres a link to my flickr which is half D7000 and half iphone 4 .

Cheers.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/41948286@N02/

Before I was aware of the new formats this is what I was thinking. I have the budget now for D7k and a lens or 5100 with 1-2 lenses + flash.. but I can spend more further down the line.. The small extras on the d7k seem to be worth it (A little faster, more controls, sturdier body etc etc). How do you feel about the stock lens? Rockwell reckons that its better not bothering.. but he knows what he's doing with lenses.. and I dont!

PCPhoto wrote: »

small problem with this.... in todays world cameras are changing and technology advances quickly ..... so you'll get maybe 2/3years max.....lenses on the other hand seem to last a good number of years.

Unfortuately I know how quickly tech advances! But these days I just let that happen. Before I would need to keep up with the latest and greatest.. but right now I beleive that if I am happy with what I buy now then it will last me a good bit of time.

cnocbui wrote: »

A lot of your assumptions about mirrorless cameras and their systems are incorrect, in particular the M4/3 system.

They have well and truly come of age and their sales have overtaken those of conventional DSLRs in Japan and the trend is that will pertain to the rest of the world before long. Full frame DSLRs - those with a sensor of the same size as 35mm film will likely survive, sort of taking the place medium format did in the film ecosystem, but midrange DSLR's with smaller, mostly APS-C size, sensors seem set for extinction.

You need no more knowledge of Aperture, shutter speed ISO etc to use a mirrorless camera than you do to use any other kind.

While in the past, the image quality and functional aspects of mirrorless cameras may have lagged larger formats a bit, and some people used them as a second system, the just released Olympus OM-D EM-5 has changed that and judging by the posts on mirrorless forums, photographers are
busy dumping their DSLR kit in droves and switching entirely. The E-M5 has extremely fast autofocus, quicker than almost any DSLR. It also has a unique in body image stabilisation system which is highly effective. Dpreview gave the camera a gold rating in their recent review you can read here: http://forums.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/

A nice bonus with the E-M5 is that with it's kit lens, it is entirely weather sealed, which is a nice feature to have in this country.

Several mirrorless models have LCD based viewfinders that work well. The one in the E-M5 I find is very usable. For your intended uses, the E-M5 would be ideal, because the small form factor makes it unobtrusive and less threatening in street situations, while it's wonderfully quiet shutter would go unnoticed in most situations.

I would suggest you have a look at the Olympus E-M5 and the Panasonic GH2, which has pro-quality video capabilities as a nice extra, however, there is an expectation that it may be superseded by a new model in a few months.

djgaillimh wrote: »

I respect this guy's enthusiasm for the format, but I would take these comments with a pinch of salt.

The DSLR is not going anywhere in the next five to ten years. Mirrorless probably is the future, but the big boys are yet to fully commit to it and until they do, and until we know what Canon in particular is bringing to market, I'd hold off on jumping in with both feet.

In the mean-time, I'd suggest a second hand Canon xx0D to help you get a grip on the basics of camera use. 450Ds are pretty easy to come by these days and won't break the bank.

I dont know enough about mirrorless.. and tbh.. i am more confused now than ever. I can really see the advantages in the mirrorless formats. But even reading the reviews for quoted olympus it still seem that there is a lot of uncertainty in the market. I want the advantages of mirrorless (APC DSLR Performance in more compact body) but really dont want to spend 1k+ of my hard earned on something that will be obssolete very soon (i.e. limited lenses or a huge drop in value as greater models will be out).

I am considering not buying at all now and see how this settles..

Chocolate Chip

I'm just starting out and would like to buy a camera. I'm just wondering if you experts could recommend one that you think would be a good buy.

Someone is offering me a Canon 400D, a kit lens, and some accessories for €300. Does that sound like a good deal? (Is it a good camera? I am a complete beginner)

Any advice greatly appreciated.

Kenny Logins

Chocolate Chip wrote: »

I'm just starting out and would like to buy a camera. I'm just wondering if you experts could recommend one that you think would be a good buy.

Someone is offering me a Canon 400D, a kit lens, and some accessories for €300. Does that sound like a good deal? (Is it a good camera? I am a complete beginner)

Any advice greatly appreciated.

There area few of them on adverts.ie for price comparison, and yes, I think it is a great camera for starting out with.

Chocolate Chip

Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.

cnocbui

km991148 wrote: »

I dont know enough about mirrorless.. and tbh.. i am more confused now than ever. I can really see the advantages in the mirrorless formats. But even reading the reviews for quoted olympus it still seem that there is a lot of uncertainty in the market. I want the advantages of mirrorless (APC DSLR Performance in more compact body) but really dont want to spend 1k+ of my hard earned on something that will be obssolete very soon (i.e. limited lenses or a huge drop in value as greater models will be out).

I am considering not buying at all now and see how this settles..

What uncertainty? I just bought a 4/3 camera and am not uncertain about the systems future in the slightest. The sensor in the Sony NEXs is too big to allow for really compact lenses and there are very few lenses available anyway. Nikon and Canon are late to the market and they wont be able to field a decent lens lineup for many years. The Fuji X cameras are too big, gimmicky can't focus and don't have many lenses available.

It's all about lenses. The M4/3 system is years ahead in terms of lens availability and that will be the case for years to come. Of interest to me is that almost all lenses with manual focus and aperture setting options can be used via adapters, giving the system probably the widest potential pool of available lenses of any system.

Buy a 35mm film camera. It won't become obsolete. All digital cameras become obsolete within 6 months of release.

I bought my camera on the basis of it's current capabilities and performance and how I perceived those would suit my needs. I know it will become 'obsolete' in market terms but it wont become obsolete in terms of what I want from it or how it performs.