# DSLR and zoom lens for ~$1,000.00 USD?



## danski0224 (Aug 28, 2012)

Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?

If that budget could be stretched to $1.5k (max, no more), what changes?

Looking for "ease of use" (amateur, no prior DSLR experience) and a zoom lens.

I am initially drawn to the T4i with the 18-135 IS STM lens kit and possibly the 40 shorty.

PowerShot? 

Thanks.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 28, 2012)

With a limited budget, I'd definitely consider a refurb camera body from Canon. You can trade in a broken film SLR or Powershot using the Canon CLP program and get an additional 20% off. 
If you must have new, Get a low cost camera and put your money where it counts most, in a good lens. 
Money spent on a good lens is going to be the best bang for the buck.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 28, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?
> 
> If that budget could be stretched to $1.5k (max, no more), what changes?
> 
> I am initially drawn to the T4i with the 18-135 IS STM lens kit and possibly the 40 shorty.



I'm going to be completely unhelpful because I have changed my opinion on new v. used v. refurbished. I used to only be willing to buy new, but with lenses, they don't have many problems and most of the refurbs with Canon are basically new. I'm also going to assume that you would wait for a 15 or 20% off sale canon periodically has. Also, when you buy used/refurbished, your resell price of the lens is about what you paid for it to begin with. So it is like a really cheap rental period of 1 or 2 years. 

My first choice would be for the body: 
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_267071_-1
$383 with 20% off plus whatever tax you might have to pay. It is a good camera with video options and has the same sensor as the t3i and the 60D. It has good low light performance and while I have a 60D, I think the t2i is a really good camera for the money. And Canon refurbs are usually returns and sometimes new because of overstock. So you might get a camera with zero clicks or less than 100.

Next would be your walk around zoom lens:
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_269486_-1
$512 - The 15-85 offers good performance (near tack sharp at certain focal lengths) and while it's aperture is variable, I would suggest getting a speedlite flash. Bounce light off walls and ceilings and you will be pleased with your shots. 

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_204273_-1
$192 - Here's the 430ex ii speedlite. It's good, I have it. You can get it around 200 or so which isn't bad. 

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_269492_-1
$454 - The 55-250 is a very good performer and you can get that for around $150 lately. But I really like the L series lenses and if you have the extra money, this is a very good option. 

Total for the above is 1541 plus sales tax unless you live in NH, DE, or OR. 

If you don't think you need the L lense, I'd suggest getting the 55-250 plus the 50mm f/1.8 which would cost you $1341 ish.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 28, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?
> 
> If that budget could be stretched to $1.5k (max, no more), what changes?
> 
> ...



5Dc

28-135mm + 50mm 1.8.

Done. 8)


----------



## tiger82 (Aug 29, 2012)

For a newbie, a T3i or T4i kits with 18-135 is a good starter kit. At least if you don't do much with it, it is not a big investment. As you get more involved, get some nice glass then think about a pro or prosumer body.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 29, 2012)

+1 on the T3i/18-135 kit. Great walk around range in a single lens, and much better IQ than a P&S. I'd get that, and then see what focal range you like to shoot in. Add a nice prime that you can use for more formal shots, maybe a 35 F2, shorty 40, 50 1.8 or 85 1.8, depending on what you end up liking. 

-Brian


----------



## sjp010 (Aug 29, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> 5Dc
> 
> 28-135mm + 50mm 1.8.
> 
> Done. 8)



That would be my advice as well (would possibly swap in 40/2.8 for 50/1.8 ), except that the OP said it has to be new. 

I like the advice of a refurbished (effectively new) T2i and 15-85. That will be around $1000 and will be a very nice beginner setup.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 29, 2012)

sjp010 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > 5Dc
> ...



Yep, there is alot of gently used 5Dc on eBay and Craig'slist. If I had to start all over again, I'd never buy a crop rebel for 799$ when I can get a FF body again. 

Then again, I bought my first camera used in a pawn shop and knew nothing about photography then. I ran that rebel into the ground until its shutter died, but that's just me.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 29, 2012)

In regards to image quality, the 18-55 = 18-135 = 18-200. So mediocre. Not awful, but mediocre. So any kit lens that you have to begin with isn't a good use of funds. 

In regards to image quality and low light performance, the t2i = t3i = 60D = 7D. If you don't need an articulating screen or 5+ frames per second shooting, you will do just fine with the t2i. Off camera flash is nice and that is one of the biggest benefits to the t3i and above, but most people don't begin with that and by the time you are ready to do off camera flash, my guess is that you will be looking at an upgrade for the body.

When I first got into SLR photography, I had a 18-55 (medicore but not awful), a 75-300 (awful), and a 50mm f/1.8 (remarkably sharp when stopped down to 2.8). The only good lens out of those three was the 50mm so I kept it on my camera 90% of the time. I sold the 75-300 and got a 55-250 and the percentages were 5% for the 18-55, 50mm 70%, and the 55-250 for 25%. That's what I shot. Some people prefer wide angle photography, some prefer shallow depth of field portraits, some prefer telephoto zooms above 200mm focal length. If you don't know already, then you should figure out what type of photography you will gravitate to. But I think your best options are to have multiple lenses to cover a large focal area and then when you know what you like, then invest in upgraded lenses and sell the old. The 16-35 is excellent for full frame wide angle photography ($1300+) and the 10-22mm is a good option for crop sensor cameras ($600ish). If you shoot things at a distance, primes will get you excellent photo quality, or a 70-200mm f/4 IS is EXCELLENT at a $1000, or for indoor shooting, the 70-200 f/2.8L USM will suffice without tradining in your first born.

If you find that you are only doing portrait photography, a GREAT lens is the 135mm f/2. But again... all that will come in time and my initial suggestion of covering the range from 15-250 (or 200 with the L) is a good start. 

Keep in mind that camera bodies depreciate in value SO MUCH FASTER than lenses. So you can buy a $500 camera body that is worth $200 after 4 years whereas that lens you may $500 may actually increase in value during that same period of time. So there is greater risk associated with the purchase of a body than there is with a lens.


----------



## elflord (Aug 29, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?
> 
> If that budget could be stretched to $1.5k (max, no more), what changes?
> 
> ...



Would suggest a cheap body with good glass -- because that's the way to obtain good image quality. 

40D + Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non vc or maybe the 15-85mm canon lens. Add the 50mm f/1.8 or the 50mm f/1.4 if your budget allows it. 

Wider zoom range == lower image quality. The best zooms have a shorter zoom range. Pay attention to the aperture spec, not just the zoom range. For example there's a reason the 17-55mm f/2.8 is much more expensive than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. The reason is not the 1mm at the wide end, it's the faster (f/2.8) aperture on the 17-55mm lens. 

Would generally recommend against the "latest and greatest" bodies, especially the rebel bodies (e.g. the T4). The video features have improved substantially but in terms of image quality, advances have been incremental and consumer level bodies are released frequently (which means you often see three or more releases with little to no discernable change in image quality)

If you have more money to spend, consider either a decent flash (e.g. 430 EX or better) and an extra lens (e.g. one of the 70-200mm lenses or an ultra wide). The original 5D (often called the 5DC) also sounds like an interesting choice depending on what you photograph, but I haven't used one. The main advantage of that path is that it's full frame at a very affordable price.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 29, 2012)

elflord said:


> danski0224 said:
> 
> 
> > Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?
> ...



I'm not sure if the OP is an complete novice, but if he is, then he needs to know that a crop sensor has a 1.6 conversion factor. Which means that a 24-105 on a full frame shoots more like a 38-168 on a crop sensor. And Ef-s lenses aren't compatible with full frame cameras. So if he does opt for the 5dc (first time I ever heard it referred to that way), he can't get several nice lenses (e.g., 17-55 by canon, the 11-16 by tokina, the 55-250 by canon, or the 15-85 by canon). It's just something to be aware of.


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 29, 2012)

Whatever your budget is, whether it's $1k or $1.5k, don't blow it all up front before you actually USE the body and a lens first. See what you want. Many people end up buying something, and then almost immediately selling part of it based on what they really like and need vs. what sounded good in one up-front buying splurge!

Please DO:
-buy a tripod
-buy a flash

After 6 to 12 months with a body and a lens (depending on how much time you have had to actually TAKE PICTURES:
-consider other lenses
-consider STROBIST equipment (cheap manual flashes on light stands using shoot-thru umbrellas, etc.)


----------



## ctmike (Aug 29, 2012)

I'm in a similar position... probably looking to buy in the next month or so (want to hear what's coming at Photokina first). I did call up Canon yesterday, and through the Canon Loyalty Program, I was quoted $639.99 for the 60D (body only). I would love to pair it with the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, but that's rarely available via CLP, apparently. So my next option would likely be the EF-S 15-85... would have been out the door for approx $1200 all together.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 29, 2012)

ctmike said:


> I'm in a similar position... probably looking to buy in the next month or so (want to hear what's coming at Photokina first). I did call up Canon yesterday, and through the Canon Loyalty Program, I was quoted $639.99 for the 60D (body only). I would love to pair it with the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, but that's rarely available via CLP, apparently. So my next option would likely be the EF-S 15-85... would have been out the door for approx $1200 all together.



I had an xs and I seriously wanted to upgrade to the t2i, but it felt way too much like my XS... and in my mind I couldn't accept paying more for what felt so very similar. I picked up a 60D and I was very pleased with it. It has better ergonomics, I love the lcd screen at the top, I use the articulating screen more than I thought I would, and it's shots per second has come in handy. But what really swayed me was the cross auto focus points. I switch to the peripheral AF points all the time and I really wanted to the cross points. 

I haven't regretted my purchase yet... though I do think about upgrading to full frame... and I am also annoyed that they stripped some of the features from the 50D that I would like. But I accept that... I'm not over it... but I accept it.


----------



## danski0224 (Aug 29, 2012)

Thanks for the input.

I took a 7D and some lenses over to the person that originally proposed the question.

Considering that the 7D has the same sensor as many of the other APS-C format cameras, it seemed appropriate.

The lenses were brought to show "what they look like" to provide some reference.

I showed how to move the focus point and explained that most P&S cameras do not allow this.

Took some pictures to show exaples of depth of field.

The size of the camera was mentioned (I mentioned that the Rebel cameras are a bit smaller). Switching lenses was brought up (not a big deal once you know what you want to take pictures of). The number of buttons is also intimidating. 

I tried to convey that really nice and wide range zoom lenses are quite expensive (a big zoom lens was brought up a few times).

I also demonstrated the green square mode, which would be OK to use while the other stuff was messed with.

In the end, I'm not sure this person will make the transition from point and shoot to DSLR.

There is a lot of good info here for those that choose to read this thread. In some ways, I wish I bought a Rebel series instead of the 7D... would have left some $$$ over for a nicer lens (or, just $$$ left over).


----------



## tomscott (Aug 29, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> sjp010 said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



The 5DC might have good IQ but thats about it. No live view, no self cleaning system, slow 3fps, 2.5" low res screen, no movie mode, has no built in flash & max ISO of 3200. For an amateur FF is over the top and the XXXD/XXD offer more options. The 5DC is a very old camera. Not all the features are deal breakers but they are nice and feature packed for an amateur. Possibly for the purist the 5DC is better but all the tech is too old.

A 600D wipes the floor with it for everything but IQ and this is not going to be noticeable unless you print bigger than A4.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 29, 2012)

tomscott said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > sjp010 said:
> ...



All that stuff is just more fluff. I used a OM-1 for along time and got great photos because it was simple. FF is not remotely over the top, it's the way cameras should be period. 

Then again, this is my opinion, and I prefer simple cameras with good IQ over complex cameras with mediocre IQ.


----------



## danski0224 (Aug 29, 2012)

I also think the 5DC would be nice, but maybe not the choice for someone that has used only point and shoots with limited desire to move on from that.

Unfortunately, the point that the 5DC is old in tech terms is true, and convincing a newbie or rank amateur to spend a good amount of money on a used digital camera may be an uphill battle. I won't even suggest it to the person I am talking to.


----------



## tomscott (Aug 29, 2012)

For someone not making regular prints or blowing up imagery, FF is not necessary. Nice but not necessary. APC is more than enough, if anything the IQ difference between the too will be pretty similar the 5Dc might only be 10% better.

The compromise is one totally worth it imo. We arent talking professional use. Just taking pics... without any need to pixel peep.

Holding a 5Dc compared to one of the newer cameras too... things have moved on substantially. For most people buying a newer camera with more options is always more desirable to buying an old one with minimal features. Which is why I said purists. 

A 5Dc as an upgrade from a point and shoot is not wise IMO. 

pros and cons 5Dc vs 600D

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-600d-vs-Canon_EOS_5D


----------



## CanNotYet (Aug 29, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> In the end, I'm not sure this person will make the transition from point and shoot to DSLR.



In this case, recommend your friend a SX40HS. It looks like an DSLR, handles much the same way, but no need to change lenses. It has a REALLY good "green mode", but also possibilities to mess with ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Movie mode is good. ZOOM is unbelievable! And all for under 400$

From what I can discern from your comments, this friend of yours wants to learn a little bit more before "taking the leap" to DSLR country. A SX40HS is a small investment, so he/she can get used to form factor etc. And if he/she don't want to take it further, the SX40HS is still a really nice camera.


----------



## sjp010 (Aug 29, 2012)

tomscott said:


> The 5DC might have good IQ but thats about it.
> 
> A 600D wipes the floor with it for everything but IQ



Call me crazy, but IQ matters the most to me, by a long shot. Everything else you list falls under the category of "nice to have." The sensor is the film, so why not buy the best sensor you can for the money you want to spend?

I'm not saying all the new bells and whistles aren't worth having - for sure I'd love to have a 5D3. But I don't have that kind of money, so my decision is either an APS-C camera or the 5Dc. For the way I shoot, 5Dc is way better.


----------



## danski0224 (Aug 29, 2012)

CanNotYet said:


> In this case, recommend your friend a SX40HS. It looks like an DSLR, handles much the same way, but no need to change lenses. It has a REALLY good "green mode", but also possibilities to mess with ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Movie mode is good. ZOOM is unbelievable! And all for under 400$
> 
> From what I can discern from your comments, this friend of yours wants to learn a little bit more before "taking the leap" to DSLR country. A SX40HS is a small investment, so he/she can get used to form factor etc. And if he/she don't want to take it further, the SX40HS is still a really nice camera.



Thanks. Passed the info along.


----------



## tomscott (Aug 29, 2012)

Your really not wrong. 
Thats not the argument but the thing is were not talking night and day in terms of IQ it is only slightly better. Night and day is a 600D VS a 5D MKIII. What we are comparing is a camera from 2005 to a 2011 camera. 

The difference in IQ between the 5DC and the 600D is not huge maybe 10%. Also the full frame sensor will mean you need to buy L glass to get good results because the sensor is bigger. So your talking £1000 just for one lens being a 24-105mm. Whereas the 600D you still need good glass but you can get away with using 15-85mm or a 17-85 which are a lot cheaper.

There is a lot more to think about. The 5Dc is not a modern camera with non of the newer useful features, which kind of makes the camera. Its like the argument with the 5DMKIII, it has lower res than the D800 but its features are much better which makes the camera. If IQ is your only concern then yes go ahead. But finding a good nick camera that is 7 years old and still paying in excess of £550 is a bit mad really.

If you want full frame its worth doing it properly and buying a modern camera. 

But think we are getting carried away here. The poster is after a camera, an amateur moving from a point and shoot! A 5Dc is a silly camera to advise someone to buy! No program modes... either auto or full or semi auto, no inbuilt flash! It was designed for the more professional scene! Not a beginner! 

My two cents anyway.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Aug 29, 2012)

Buying used bodies allows bigger savings than buying used lenses.

I bought my first DSLR two years ago: an used 5D classic and a new 24-105 F/4. 
Previously, I used a powershot S5 IS.

I would suggest an used 40D or 50D, or a 550D, plus a decent zoom: more than enough to start. A (cheap) prime and a tripod should follow.

Once someones starts, it is more important to try to _learn_ (read, switch to AV/TV/M, shoot, watch the results) .


----------



## sjp010 (Aug 29, 2012)

tomscott said:


> Your really not wrong.
> Thats not the argument but the thing is were not talking night and day in terms of IQ it is only slightly better. Night and day is a 600D VS a 5D MKIII. What we are comparing is a camera from 2005 to a 2011 camera.
> 
> The difference in IQ between the 5DC and the 600D is not huge maybe 10%. Also the full frame sensor will mean you need to buy L glass to get good results because the sensor is bigger. So your talking £1000 just for one lens being a 24-105mm. Whereas the 600D you still need good glass but you can get away with using 15-85mm or a 17-85 which are a lot cheaper.
> ...



I guess we need to agree to disagree. My perception of the 5Dc has more to do with my style of shooting - primes, available light, etc - for this style the 5Dc has many advantages and the downsides you point out (lack of flash, program modes, etc) are of minimal impact. 

Disagree that you have to buy L lenses to get good results. You have to buy GOOD lenses, and know how to use them best to get good results. Of course this is true of any camera and lens (even L), but you need to pay a bit more attention on a full frame camera. But the non-L USM primes (28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 ) on a 5Dc are a very powerful combo and that collection is in the same price range as a single L lens (and not that much more than the 17-55 EF-S!). 

I can concede that a typical beginner wouldn't be best served by a 5Dc. I just don't think they'd be badly served by it.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 29, 2012)

tomscott said:


> Your really not wrong.
> Thats not the argument but the thing is were not talking night and day in terms of IQ it is only slightly better. Night and day is a 600D VS a 5D MKIII. What we are comparing is a camera from 2005 to a 2011 camera.
> 
> The difference in IQ between the 5DC and the 600D is not huge maybe 10%. Also the full frame sensor will mean you need to buy L glass to get good results because the sensor is bigger. So your talking £1000 just for one lens being a 24-105mm. Whereas the 600D you still need good glass but you can get away with using 15-85mm or a 17-85 which are a lot cheaper.
> ...



5Dc > any canon crop camera period. You move up to a Dslr to learn photography. The 5Dc is a simple camera with nothing extra to confuse anyone. It just works. 

FF actually will make terrible lenses better because the pixels are spread out and bigger.


----------



## LSV (Aug 29, 2012)

Canon is having a 20% off sale plus free shipping for refurbished cameras. For example, $896 for 60D with 18-200mm (new at $1300). Hurry, sale ends 8/31.


----------



## atvinyard (Aug 29, 2012)

I think there are some misunderstandings about image quality floating around here. A current 18MP rebel is going to make a "better" large print than a 12 MP 5Dc because it has a higher resolution. The difference is in the better low light ability of a larger sensor, the larger pixels, and the greater depth of field. I have both and use both. The 5Dc has a better noise characteristic at ISO 1600 than the rebel and it's fabulous for blowing out backgrounds. It doesn't take kindly to underexposure though. It also has a nicer Viewfinder (No one mentioned that).

That being said, the 5Dc feels like a clunky old camera and the T2i feels much more solid and is much more responsive. 

Also, you don't need L lenses. That's some crapus. If it's your first dSLR the picture quality improvement with just about any lens is going to be amazing. The consumer primes do just fine on a full frame too, by the way. They're not as good as the L's but they're pretty close and if you don't know L, then you won't miss it. The Canon 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 both beat the corresponding L's in certain aspects, and beat them by a mile in terms of value.

I would recommend the rebel as a starter with a kit lens(there's a reason it comes that way), and then a fast 50 for low light and shallow depth of field. The 40/2.8 is pretty nice too. Oh and the 35/2.0 is great on a crop camera. $100, $200, $300 respecitively. All cheap(for a lens) and make nice photos.

Also, invest in Lightroom if you can. Post processing can make a big difference in final picture quality.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 30, 2012)

atvinyard said:


> Also, invest in Lightroom if you can. Post processing can make a big difference in final picture quality.



I have lightroom. I think I need to get a training video because I don't like it.


----------

