# Help - I have an EOS500D - Looking to upgrade



## SeanW (Feb 1, 2015)

I've had the EOS500D for a few years now and have accumulated some lenses:-
Sigma 150-500
Canon 50mm F1.8
Canon 85mm F1.8
Tamron 18-270 - Very tired now!
Samyang 800mm Mirror (Used for lunar photography)
Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro
Tamron 10-24

I'm just an enthusiastic amateur, mainly using the camera to photograph my daughter and her team cross country running, but also love macro and lunar photography, plus the obligatory pictures of my girls growing up and cat pictures of the kitten as she grows!

Possibly coming into some money (GBP), what would you do? EOS 70D or stretch it to the 7D MK2 or go full frame and trade some of the lenses?

Any advice, much appreciated.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Feb 1, 2015)

SeanW said:


> I've had the EOS500D for a few years now and have accumulated some lenses:-
> Sigma 150-500
> Canon 50mm F1.8
> Canon 85mm F1.8
> ...


I'd strech it to get the 7D2. Sensor is basically the same but AF is way better and noise performance is also better. I went to FF and sold some of my APS-C lenses to fund for the 5D3 and no regrets at all.


----------



## Andy_Hodapp (Feb 1, 2015)

I upgraded from my 500D/T1i to a 5D MKii. I haven't tried out the 70d or 7d mkii but I can only image the 5d still has the edge in overall image quality. The autofocus on the 5d isn't great but it can definitely still be used for sports. When I was out with an injury, I photographed my cross country team without much problem. At least for the courses we were on, I could get incredibly close and use my 17-40mm stopped way down for some motion blur.

Some example XC shots 



IMG_5009-2 by Andy Hodapp, on Flickr



IMG_4959 by Andy Hodapp, on Flickr

and a fun shot from track and field



IMG_6428 by Andy Hodapp, on Flickr


----------



## Khufu (Feb 1, 2015)

Love the Sports shots, Andy... The second one's brilliant!

Sean, looks like you're doing great with the 500D - I'm not sure if an APS-C upgrade would really be worth it at all.
You shoot prime lenses so I'm inclined to think for the very same reasons you appreciate the results from them you'll reeeally dig the additional benefits of shooting Full Frame!

As always, I recommend the 6D over a 5D II, it's a genuine upgrade with more modern features and capabilities, and the 5D III is even more so, though a fair bit chunkier and heavier than what you have now and than the 6D, too. The 5D III has a much more advanced Autofocus system though, which may be handy for the kids and cat(s)! 

I'll say it - I think the success of the 7D series of cameras are one of the greatest "waste of money" stories in modern technology... They absolutely have their uses but Canon have shifted so many of these pricey units to people who don't need them and would benefit much more from shooting a 6D or even a 500D with a ton of cash still in their pockets!

In short:
6D or 5DIII... or original 5D (5D II should really be at the bottom of any prioritised FF list, whether for penny saving or professionalism or anything between)

If you want to go APS-C I'd recommend a 60D or 70D for great features without wasting cash 

Wildcard: The EOS M is highly portable and that 22mm lens is great for shooting wide/close! I also love mine for Low Light, High ISO shooting in Black & White... and also for wee movie clips with an arty edge workout lugging a dSLR! It'd probably be great with the adapter on your 800mm for Lunar and Astro, too!


----------



## Khufu (Feb 1, 2015)

Also, also, also... Wait for this coming weekend's announcements!

750D, EOS M3!... Then maybe buy a 6D and an EOS M going cheap


----------



## rfdesigner (Feb 1, 2015)

A new camera will not help your luna images.. but a new camera may help in many other areas.

Here's one of my luna shots with my 8Mpix 30D.. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44641599/moon001.jpg

(clue.. it's the 12" scope that makes that shot work)


----------



## dak723 (Feb 1, 2015)

My question would be - what is it about your current camera that doesn't meet your needs? What would you like to have that you don't have now? I had a crop factor rebel for 9 years and then bought the FF 6D 1 1/2 years ago. In my opinion, go FF only if you need the following: much improved low light photography, custom settings, the need print large (over 24" approx.). Things I wasn't happy about with FF: less reach, too little depth of field for semi-macro shooting such as flowers, bigger, heavier camera. After getting the 6D, I ended up buying another crop (SL1) anyway!

Sounds like for the types of pics you take - general daylight stuff (aside from the lunar stuff) - your current camera may be plenty good enough. But this is only my opinion based on my upgrading experience. If possible, I would recommend renting the cameras you are interested in to see if they make a big difference.


----------



## Tinky (Feb 1, 2015)

You haven't really told us where your 500D is letting you down.

I can think of a couple of areas where things have moved on:

- Better AF, now 9 cross point on the 700D and just gets better and better the more you spend. This would help your sports for sure.

- Less noise. The 15MP wasn't canons greatest, A lot of folk opted to hang onto their 40Ds rather than jump to the 50D, the 18MP sensor performs better in this regard, although you probably want to go for the most recent 20MP sensors if you can with digic 6, no point upgrading from 7 year old tech to 5 year old tech. But again, you don't mention noise as a problem.

- Better video. None of this 20fps nonsense or auto exposure, although, if that was important to you (again you don't say) then ML have a hack to improve the video a fair bit.

There is a school of thought that says if it works leave it alone.

I would wait until the t6i / 750D is launched.. And I would wait 2 months as the price usually drops and issues are highlighted.

It's always a good time to buy lenses.

You are going to need deep pockets if you want to upgrade your 800mm to anything better for lunar. Maybe a TC for the Sigma 150-500?

You have some loyalty to the APS-C system, theres no reason not to stick with it. 

It becomes a law of diminishing returns. The 6D isn't going to give you more keepers as a sports camera, so you are looking at a 5D3 as a minimum. A lot more money than a 70D or 7D2. How much extra worth is it going to give you?

Bear in mind that with the APS-C crop your 150-500 is actually behaving more like an 800mm would on 135 format...

So what lenses.

I hate travel zooms so I'm the wrong person to ask.

You seem to have all bases covered, the only thing I'm thinking is the staggers between where your tamron 24mm leaves off and your 50mm picks up.

I see a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 shaped hole perhaps? Coupled with the new 750D once it arrives and has been tested / reviewed well.


----------



## rfdesigner (Feb 1, 2015)

SeanW said:


> I've had the EOS500D for a few years now and have accumulated some lenses:-
> Sigma 150-500
> Canon 50mm F1.8
> Canon 85mm F1.8
> ...



additionally, find an image processing program with wavelets, I use IRIS (free) but others are available (I don't reccomend photoshop for this sharpening, it's not built to overcome atmospheric distortion), must be used on the raw linear image before compressing to jpeg. 

I had a quick play with your posted moon shot.. there's a lot more that could be done with the raw file.


----------



## Khufu (Feb 1, 2015)

dak723 said:


> In my opinion, go FF only if you need the following: much improved low light photography, custom settings, the need print large (over 24" approx.). Things I wasn't happy about with FF: less reach, too little depth of field for semi-macro shooting such as flowers, bigger, heavier camera. After getting the 6D, I ended up buying another crop (SL1) anyway!
> 
> Sounds like for the types of pics you take - general daylight stuff (aside from the lunar stuff) - your current camera may be plenty good enough.



The SL1/100D is a fantastic little camera - I've shifted my 70D and kept the SL1 as my only APS-C dSLR. (plus having the non SLR EOS M)

I've got to disagree with the above "only reasons" for going FF though... When you see an image and think "that FEELS professional, to observe" it's likely that it was captured on a larger-than-APSc image plane.
There are (otherwise) respectable contributors to this forum who will tell you that "identical" results can be achieved using any sensor size but they're wrong - our earth-physics does not allow for this and can be demonstrated by the following two experiments:

1) Stand still and look at something; anything. Let's use your thumbnail at arms length as an example... Move your head side to side slightly and observe whether the background shifts, moving different elements in and out of the path of obstruction of your thumb.
Now consider that the opposite corners of an imaging sensor (exposed film, plate etc) are looking out at the world and gathering focused or unfocused light from a subtle yet very different perspective than the other corners of the sensor. This distance is greater, obviously, with a larger sensor, thus is the perspective.

Point 1 is precisely why (particularly close-up, short focal length) Macro photography becomes more challenging with a larger image plane - each edge of the sensor is trying to capture the obscured, OPPOSITE side of that Bee's head!

2) The lame "adjusting aperture et al can give identical images" argument - that's b*llocks.
As stated above, the edges of the image plane are observing from further apart on FF than APS-C... and THIS explains why it looks like you're viewing from an Ant's PoV when you shoot P&S/Camera-Phone macro... because the "eye" we're peering out from is closer to the size of an ant's!
If we stop down lenses to the extent that everything is in sharp focus in front of FF, APS-C, M4/3 and sub-1/3" sensor types and shoot at "equivalent" focal lengths, you will NOT get identical images - and if you can figure from the above rant why this is, then great, my jawb is done!

In short - all things equal and with adequate skills and knowledge, you'll get much more beautiful shots with a larger sensor when shooting subjects of human & pet size, rather than shooting ants and bees. APS-C shots DO look like crops of larger format images in regard to perspective...

I hope, if you're already, or interested in becoming more, willing and able to shoot the most beautiful FEELING images possible of your children, pets and the world's wonderful offerings that you seriously consider the artistic and scientific benefits of shooting Full Frame over APS-C, Sean


----------



## Tinky (Feb 1, 2015)

Hahaha

Yeah man, don't do it for you.. Do it for your kids.


Khufu, I hate to be the one to point this out, but before the 1DmkIV the APS-H sensor of the 1D (non S) cameras was proving perfectly adequate for photo libraries newspapers and magazines the world over.

Whilst I agree that all other things being equal a 135 format DSLR will deliver better images than an APS-C or cropped sensor camera, there is the small (or not so small) issue of cost. For a lot of people the cost of a 5D3 over a 70D just isn't justifiable by artistic or scientific or emotional blackmail reasons.

And in this case it also means an upgrade of some lenses, to get equivalence... you want an 85mm x 1.6 fl, youre gonna need a 135mm etc etc.

Full Frame mafia strikes again.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Feb 1, 2015)

Skating out upon the thin ice. 

Upgrading - evaluate the variables for yourself - you didn't mention where your current body is letting you down.

"Next month" is always the best time to buy electronics. No matter what month it happens to be. 

On the verge of several announcements/recent announcements. So everything will be cheaper shortly - as always.

The 7dII would be a huge upgrade and probably worth the step over all the other options in the crop world. It will be the measure of the crop world for 3-5 years. You are accustomed to the crop form issues and it is reportedly built very well - (see lens rental blog on weather proofing). W/o regards to budget a 7dII w/ the sigma 18-35 1.8 does a lot of things. I would consolidate my lens arsenal as well at the same time. 

Full frame? The 5dIII price seems to be dropping like a stone lately, perhaps in the prep for the announcements of the uber mega pixel variants. I suspect you could pick a lightly used version for not a whole bunch of money.

I wouldn't be too concerned about a body w/ less than 20k frames.

Happy clicking.


----------



## Khufu (Feb 2, 2015)

Well Sean told us he's interested in shopping around 70D/7D II prices and voiced an interest in Full Frame...

Absolute cheapest Grey Market prices I can find, with passed on savings for bank transfer payments:

70D @ £615
6D @ £898.70
7D Mark II @ £1083
5D Mark III @ £1530.35

I'm no genius by definition but something's telling me there's a little price-territory mingling going on there between the APS-C and FF camps... and the 6D has clearly wandered way below the OP's projected budget limits!

Also, my earlier suggestions were what? 6D plus an EOS M? 70D if staying at APS-C because I consider the 7D series to be overkill and expensive? I'm hardly being irrational and unreasonable here 

What's that? a 5D can be had at around £300-500 these days off of eBay and a Brand New Sony A7 for £774.25 from Panamoz? 
I'll stop... I can only assume you've not checked out any prices recently, Tinky 

Regarding the lenses: we don't all think in terms of reach. I'm personally into, you know, composition and stuff... I brought 50mm and 100mm primes over to FF with me from shooting APS-C and they're still 2/4 of my primary line-up, alongside 24mm and 400mm. 
I don't see APS-C as reach, it's a crop. Relatively, FF is an expansion of that crop. Some of us see that, apparently others see it all as reach and miss the subtle yet brilliant expansion of an image plane with which to compose in three dimensions...

But, you know, each to their own. I guess I strive for what I feel creates more pleasing images. I feel a larger sensor usually beats twice as many crops shot in the same time with a pricier camera!


----------



## Tinky (Feb 2, 2015)

Khufu said:


> What's that? a 5D can be had at around £300-500 these days off of eBay and a Brand New Sony A7 for £774.25 from Panamoz?
> I'll stop... I can only assume you've not checked out any prices recently, Tinky
> 
> Regarding the lenses: we don't all think in terms of reach. I'm personally into, you know, composition and stuff... I brought 50mm and 100mm primes over to FF with me from shooting APS-C and they're still 2/4 of my primary line-up, alongside 24mm and 400mm.
> ...



ok, so you think they should 'upgrade' to an even older camera?

No, sorry, you think they should upgrade to one that can't take their lenses?

ah right, got it now, you think they should upgrade to two cameras which between them have the most basic, or slowest af of any current eos camera despite a clear interest in sports?

The reach thing came from the ops comments about lunar photography, one application where reach is kind of useful, sorry for mentioning it. And although it's not all about reach I will stand by my point about equivalence. If the op likes the way his 85 handles on a 500d, he'll be a bit disapointed with the way it handles on a 135 format dslr. Worth considering. I don't recall advocating the aps-c crop in any other way.

"you know, composition and stuff..." Where did I give the impression I wasn't? You are fighting with a shadow matey peeps, and I don't think it's even mine.


----------



## Khufu (Feb 2, 2015)

: first off, your earlier reference to those APS-H sensors being used professionally... Yeah, dude, I said larger than APS-C, cheers for perfectly illustrating my point despite framing it as a counter-blow *slow clap*

Yes, the EOS M is obviously an upgrade for the lunar stuff with the added bonus of being relatively super-portable for other applications.

I recommended the 70D to begin with if Sean wishes to stick with APS-C.

Yes, the 5D is absolutely an upgrade from the 500D, outside of the naff 20fps video offering. Do you not agree?

Lots of people are happy shooting sports with a 6D, though depends on one's particular demands. The last guy I met with one and ecstatic to be using it was shooting at the Men's Flat Track Roller Derby World Cup. Some people seem happier than others with it. One comment on CR from a 6D user claimed the IQ of the images made it preferable to the more AF-reliable 7D to him.

I was obviously highlighting cost with that footnote regarding the A7 and 5D... And I was referring to my own enthusiasm towards composing with the broader FF perspective, which isn't an option when your sensor's cropped.. If anything was, that wasn't intended as an attack on you personally - perhaps explains why it doesn't feel like I'm fighting with your shadow or whatever there?!

I've just bought a Pentax Q to test for pixel-density/reach and Micro Photography... I might yet revoke my EOS M recommendation in favour of one of these things


----------



## Khufu (Feb 2, 2015)

Hjalmarg1 said:


> SeanW said:
> 
> 
> > I've had the EOS500D for a few years now and have accumulated some lenses:-
> ...



The 70D AF is pretty awesome, only complaint is that it doesn't have the smaller AF points that the 7D and 5D3 have which are good for things like nailing focus on the eyes of small birds at a distance, if that's you're thing, but if it's not I'd have to ask why else the 7D or 7D2 would be a better purchase worthy of having hundreds more thrown at it! Frame rate's certainly not bad on the 70D


----------



## wsmith96 (Feb 2, 2015)

I also upgraded from a 500D this year (mine's called the T1i though). I had invested in a pretty solid kit and I was looking for a faster frame rate for my kids' sporting events. I took more of a conservative approach and I purchased a refurb 60D from Canon direct. It's not the latest, but at the time it was $450 USD which was a steal for what it can do. I occasionally see them for under $400 on their website now. It's a pretty nice camera for the money. It will give you excellent image quality and video. Of course, the 70D is better, but I wanted to give you a different choice that may suit your needs. 

Later in the year I went backwards and purchased a 5D off of ebay. It's much older technology, but the image quality is pretty good and my EF lenses really shine. It allowed me to work with a FF camera on the cheap - came with a battery grip, 3 batteries, memory cards, and the AC/DC plug for again, $450 USD.

I guess I'm an odd duck - I'll spend money on lenses, but I hold off on the camera bodies. Your needs seem similar to mine. You may like the 60D and have money left over to add (or upgrade) an additional lens.

Good luck!


----------



## wsmith96 (Feb 2, 2015)

Here are some sports pics I've taken. Can you tell which is the T1i, 60D, or 5D? Some of the pics still have all of the EXIF data - no cheating


----------



## Tinky (Feb 2, 2015)

Khufu said:


> : first off, your earlier reference to those APS-H sensors being used professionally... Yeah, dude, I said larger than APS-C, cheers for perfectly illustrating my point despite framing it as a counter-blow *slow clap*
> 
> Yes, the EOS M is obviously an upgrade for the lunar stuff with the added bonus of being relatively super-portable for other applications.
> 
> ...



Awwww but those guys on aps-h are holding themselves back man, why not just go mf instead? You's need to buy new lenses for an a7, so why not just go for 645d then? Dont fink of it as reach think of it as cropping.. lol

Does the 5d do video? you might mean the 5d2? If you can show me a 5d2 that isn't a total wreck for £300-£500 or stolen, then I'll buy one today.


----------

