# 350D/Rebel XT Upgrade Thoughts



## Alexandros (Apr 11, 2012)

Hello there!

I am a very happy owner of a 350d/RebelXT since 2005 and I think the time has come for me to upgrade. The Rebel was a wonderful companion to my photographic journeys all these years but I think it has nothing more to offer. It is about to physically tear apart anyway so...

I would like to share my thoughts with you, as I am troubling my mind sometime now without any decision and of course ask for your opinion, thoughts and why not some guidance from any experienced users out there.

To start I will present you all (?) the alternatives I have as of now:
a)Buy the 7D now
b)Buy the 5D II now
c)Buy the 5D3 now
d)Wait for a 7D II (70D or 7D replacement anyway)
e)Sell all my glass and jump over the D800 train to start over (ouch!)
f)Wait for ... whatever

Before start talking about each one of my alternatives a couple of words regarding my equipment and my shooting preferences:

I own the EF 24-105 F4/L IS USM, EF 50mm F/1.4 USM, EF 70-200 F/4 L USM, EF 100mm F/2.8 L IS USM Macro and the crappy kit lens EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 USM II.

What I mostly shoot? Landscapes, Macro and closeups, Portraits and head-shots,
still life and I really love indoors and shooting in available light.

Some random thoughts now...
As I am about to step up I ve better go full frame 'cause I love having top IQ, right?
but...
That means that I am willing to pay 2k in the mid 2012 for an outdated product with crappy AF (5DII) or pay 3,5k for a negligible product with top notch AF but not much IQ improvement over 5DII (5DIII) or sell everything and change brand (D800)...

So for each of the alternatives my thoughts.

a)Very good camera with tempting price and relatively good IQ.
My concerns: not a full frame camera so not a true step up and the fact that it approaches the end of it's life cycle sometime soon. I don't like buying a product only to be replaced in a couple of months.

b)Superb IQ and FF. Otherwise outdated and poor poor AF. Could easily have been discontinued but Canon thought it would be a good idea to keep it in the lineup.

c)Superb IQ, top AF but really no other improvements over the 5DII. Even in the high ISOs it's power is in the Noise Reduction and not in really good sensor performance. So why bother over the Mark II? Other than that it is rather pricy but let's pretend this is not an issue.

d)That would be interesting if only I was certain that a new one was coming sometime in Summer. My only concern that I wouldn't go Full Frame.

e)I cannot tell they I am not tempted! If I could find a way to use my lenses in the D800 that would be a no-brainer for me! But I can't. So selling everything and starting over costs a lot. But that is the 5d markIII that I've been waiting for...

f) Well ... I don't know !

That was it ! waiting your thoughts !!!!
Thanks a lot guys !


----------



## JerryKnight (Apr 12, 2012)

Wow, that's quite a lot to get through. 

I applaud you for investing in your glass first, but it's definitely time to give the body some attention. I don't mean to bad-mouth the Rebel series. My original Rebel 300D was downright respectable for a long time. But of the various components to photography, you will benefit most from a new body.

Given your shooting interests, I think a full frame will suit you best. Wide angle, available light.. these scream FF, but the downside, if you can call it that, is that it will open up new lens "needs".  24mm/1.4L, 35mm/1.4L, 24-70mm/2.8L II, the list of lenses that would help you goes on...

The 7D is a fantastic camera, but unless you're specifically shooting wildlife or sports (or something else where you would benefit from extra reach with your long lenses) the benefits of a FF sensor outweigh the 7D's strengths.

You can call the 5D2's autofocus crappy, but it's worked for many photographers. You simply become good at focus-and-recompose, since you only use the center focus point. It's going to take me some time to get used to trusting the 5D3's other focus points.

It really comes down to budget. Honestly, I would either go used 5D2 (in top condition) or new 5D3. Either would serve you well.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 12, 2012)

Even a 600D sounds good


----------



## Alexandros (Apr 12, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Even a 600D sounds good



Thanks but this is not an option. I prefer to stay with my 350d instead...


----------



## RAKAMRAK (Apr 12, 2012)

Alexandros said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Even a 600D sounds good
> ...



From your two posts these are the points that i discerned:
1. You have a budget of around 4000US$
2. You shoot landscape and frame fitting object photos (headshot, macro etc all come in this group).
3. Not tied to EF-S due to investment in lenses.
4. No more rebels.

So, you do not need the AF of 7D/1DX/5DIII.


Go for 5DII and get EF 16-35mm 2.8. Then,

1. you have IQ of FF.
2. Wide angle of 16-35.
3. Macro and Portrait ability of 100mm L.
4. walk around 24-105.
5. you can take the FULL benefit of 50mm with FF.

my 2 cents.


----------



## dawgfanjeff (Apr 12, 2012)

RAKAMRAK said:


> Alexandros said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



You just saved me a few mins. I agree entirely. If one does any shooting of kids/pets and such, you are a essentially a sports photographer. That would justify a 7D (like it did for me), or dropping the real coin on a 5Diii (like it will for me when the sticker shock wears off and I just buy the damn thing already  )


----------



## ricardo.sa (Apr 12, 2012)

Hi,
i also had a 350D since 2005 and like you i photograph mostly landscapes (where i do some croppings and always felt the need of more resolution), Macro, etc...
I missed full format since i went to digital and left my Canon 500N behind...
I see you have invested in some good lenses, in my case i had no L lenses so it was not much of a problem to "start over".
I evaluated all my pics in LR, what my needs are exactly, etc...
I ended up buying the D800 (and the 24-70 f2.8) due to the resolution and because i think the RAW files are damn good in details even in high ISOs. 
The 4fps pose no problem to me... i managed to catch good focused birds in flight with the 350D's 3fps...

I played with the 600D, 60D and 5DMK2 from several friends (none had a 7D). Of course when you come out of a 350D everything is a great improvement...
The 800D is just amazing.... for sure the Mark3 will be as amazing with your L lenses (i think it's better as a balanced all-rounder).

Now i'm a proud owner of both brands...
Cheers!


----------



## dooboo (Apr 12, 2012)

I also have upgraded my XT to...5DM2.
I wanted full frame, and that's what I got.
Coming from XT, 5DM2 have better auto focus...to me it feels way way better.

I don't know when you call it a "crappy AF" on 5DM2, is that from your experience of using the camera or is that something what people said on the various forum sites?
I too was waiting for the M3 to come out...but when the price tag was at $3500, and when I do this for hobby, not for a business, that was bit out of my price range...especially just for a body.

You will be happy with 5DM2, like I am.

Knowing what your equipment can and can't do is the half the battle. There are so many 5DM2 users out there still in the area that you use your camera for...and most importantly they are happy with what they have.

I picked up refurbed unit from Canon with shutter count @ 5. Yup, got lucky and practically new camera.

Good luck and no matter what you go with, you will be happy...


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 12, 2012)

RAKAMRAK said:


> From your two posts these are the points that i discerned:
> 1. You have a budget of around 4000US$
> 2. You shoot landscape and frame fitting object photos (headshot, macro etc all come in this group).
> 3. Not tied to EF-S due to investment in lenses.
> ...



+1. 5DII center AF is better than your Rebel and works fine for moving targets. Use mine for taking pictures of running kids and its not a problem. If you're OK with your Rebel's AF and FPS, then the 5DII should be good enough while delivering much better IQ and allowing you to shoot at higher ISOs for low light and moving objects. Getting the 16-35L II would also give you more options for landscape. It is much wider than your current kit with a crop body.


----------



## PhotoBadger (Apr 12, 2012)

I was in much the same boat about a year ago - upgrading from 400D with some L glass. I mulled it over for ages and ultimately went for the 7D - the combination of price, AF and reach (I do fair bit of sport / event stuff) swinging me away from the 5DmkII.

I love my 7D and no matter what gripes you hear about ISO & IQ, it's a zillion times better than the 400D gave me. 

BUT, and here's the killer, I'm still kind of kicking myself for not going full frame. From all you've said about what you shoot, the 5DmkII sounds ideal - especially if it leaves budget for more lenses. Maybe I'm odd but I found a new body wasn't nearly as exciting as a new lens.

That said, and with all respect to your 350, whatever you get is likely to make you go Wooo! Enjoy it.


----------



## AJ (Apr 12, 2012)

Another vote for 5D2


----------



## Aglet (Apr 12, 2012)

RAKAMRAK said:


> -clip-
> 
> So, you do not need the AF of 7D/1DX/5DIII.
> 
> ...



+1

5D2 is likely your better option

60D is worth considering too if you stay APS-C

7D is not a great landscape camera IMO (don't get me started) but is decent for action work or anything else if you don't expect to push shadows up. OTOH, it seems to meter a little low so you might get away with ETTR a bit more with it. 5D2 walks all over it for landscape IQ IMO.

I used a 350D for a year+, great little camera, very decent IQ. Could push its raw files quite a bit before they got ugly. Even used one on a wedding job a few years ago, all keepers. Could pixel-peep all I wanted and it still looked good. Would've kept it but sold everything that didn't provide live-view and dust-mapping.

OTOH, going to the D800 is a viable option too. It's a hassle to sell off everything but Canon glass holds its value very well. Finding equivalent Nik' glass to fill those spots will be a bit more of a challenge.


----------



## Enrico (Apr 12, 2012)

Got my 350D in 2005 as well and decided to upgraded quite recently.

Borrowed a 7D for a few weeks and it was (of course) a major lift from the 350D. However, since I shoot mainly pretty much the same things as you do I went with the 5D2. There is a significant change in IQ and especially in DOF. f2.8 on crop is the same as a "f 4.48" on FF. If you go FF you will see that your f4 lenses gives alot more DOF than before 

When I made my choice the 5D3 was just a rumour. I have never used one so I can't really say anything. But from what I read (regarding IQ vs 5D2 etc etc) I am surprised that there hasn't been more discussions regarding which combo gives most bang for the buck.

Like 
5D3 + 24-105/4 for 4500 $ 

vs. 
5D2 + 24-105/4L + 35/1.4 + 135/2 for ~ 4500 $

Finally.
Depending on how you are as a person you might regret that, even if the 5d2 is enough for your needs, you didn't go for the latest version...


----------



## akiskev (Apr 12, 2012)

Welcome Alexandre! 
If I were you, I'd opt for b) or c). I think ff is the way to go (you will feel like you got new glass, trust me!). If you are not shooting sports you should not be concerned about 5d2's AF capabilities.
Cheers


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 12, 2012)

Alexandros said:


> To start I will present you all (?) the alternatives I have as of now:
> a)Buy the 7D now
> b)Buy the 5D II now
> c)Buy the 5D3 now
> ...



g) used 1D4 - all the extra function, none of the problems


----------



## Alexandros (Apr 12, 2012)

Enrico said:


> Depending on how you are as a person you might regret that, even if the 5d2 is enough for your needs, you didn't go for the latest version...



Ok I am convinced! I ll go for the full frame of course! And I think a 5dII is what I really need. But this phrase from Enrico really is how I think ! You got me Enrico... ;D 
I think I will regret for getting a MK2 and not the MK3 thats why I am so skeptical.
If the MK2 had 1/2 of the money of the MK3 I would have gone for the MK2 no mater what...
now I am borderlining...


----------



## elflord (Apr 12, 2012)

Alexandros said:


> Enrico said:
> 
> 
> > Depending on how you are as a person you might regret that, even if the 5d2 is enough for your needs, you didn't go for the latest version...
> ...



Just my $0.02 -- I got the 5DII and haven't looked back. I use it primarily for taking family photos. I only use the center AF point. When I am working with shallow dof, I don't want the camera choosing what to focus on. My impression based on what I've read here is that the 5DIII isn't going to be a whole lot better if you're using 1 shot AF with the center point.

You do have a respectable collection of glass, but there's no such thing as too much. If you picked up a 5DII, you could pick up an extra lens for your landscapes and/or a decent flash.


----------



## pj1974 (Apr 12, 2012)

Hi Alexandros

I also bought a Canon 350D / Rebel XT in 2005, and have used that for over 80,000 photos. It's still working... despite being displaying a little 'wear and tear'!  The main genres of photography that I do include: landscape, wildlife, macro, 'camps' (eg children activities). So for me, the 350D let me down at times with its speed and focus (only dared to use centre AF point for reliability), but I still have many many great photos from it - across many countries too.

In 2009 I bought a 7D, and haven't looked back. For me, the biggest improvements included: much better AF, quality handling, live view (for macros, etc), higher ISO possibilities. I have been very happy with the crop sensor equivalent ultra-wide zooms (I have a Sigma 10-20mm, and have used a Canon 10-22mm - both very good lenses!) My Sigma 10-20mm is sharp corner to corner (just one stop from wide open), which some full frame ultra wide zooms can't seem to replicate! :

I was considering the 5D and 5DmkII, and for sure I would have better image quality (particulalry noticeable if one is a pixel-peeper, which I'm not) but I decided to go with the 7D for it's better AF, APS-C (1.6x crop) reach, and imho, superior handling.

By the way, the 7D (and any APS-C camera) CAN do great landscapes, I believe most photos are indistinguisable to 99% at the 'non-pixel peeping level'. I have received a lot of recognition, produced fund-raising images and won competitions with photos from both my 350D and 7D. 8)

If you're happy with the focus-recompose, as others have suggested, perhaps the 5DmkII sounds good, with an ultra wide zoom (eg 17-40mm or 16-35mm). Both those lenses improve (especially corners) when stopped down. However if I was in your shoes, I would also consider the 5DmkIII, for its superior AF and better handling (and buy an ultra wide zoom later). If I ever went full frame, that would probably be the Canon DSLR I would go for, as I do need a more powerful AF system than the 5DmkII offers - and yes, I've used one.

The options are out there... and you have some decent glass already. All the best with your decision and purchase. 

Paul


----------



## dooboo (Apr 13, 2012)

Crop or ff, they both take grat picture. However, even pj1974 said it..."for sure I would have better image quality..." this is from 7d user. 

They are for sure upgrade from xt...which my xt will be used by my 7 year old son...no matter which way you go. Just consider what type of picture you will take, which you mentioned, and go for the most bang for your bucks.

For me, IQ of 5dm2 won me over the crop sensor. Still I can take some great pictures using xt...


----------



## Enrico (Apr 13, 2012)

For a few of us happy amateurs/enthusiasts we simply want good (if not the best affordable) gear. The journey of searching for the optimal body and lens combination is a part of the hobby I guess.

But to be honest regarding the photos and how we (or at least myself) are using them... Well, once the 350D was worn out, a new 600D would probably been enough and other money wiser spent on good glass...

I produce family albums and a few larger prints each year. That's it. I have had the 5D2 for 5 months and although the IQ is superior - my best shots are still from the 350D and kit-lens! Simply because imho it's the moment that counts and not the gear you brought... but know I know that the IQ, ISO-capabilities has given me better probablity of capturing moments when they appear (and if the gear is with me...)

However, for me as a hobby photographer (spending too much time on this site) I can not dismiss the fact that the actual gear I buy and use makes a difference, and I know by now that the difference is in my mind and not in the images I shoot.

I decided to go for the 5d2 (couldn't wait any longer for the 5D3) and promised myself that if and when the 5D3 would be released I would get that if I wanted. Now when it's out there, I am not so sure anymore (even though I have saved the monies for it).

And here comes the catch.
I have saved money for the 5D3. I have promised myself to buy it - but now I am hestitant. ONLY because I still feel I should have waited a few more months...  

The same reasoning went behind the purchase of the 85/1.2L II or the Sigma 85/1.4.
I went for the Canon, knowing the Sigma would be more than sufficient for my needs. Now I have the Canon, I smile at it every time when I mount it (having been the Sigma I would always have thought of the Canon... and told myself... well, at least you saved xxx $)

Why do some (including me) buy shirts for 150$ when there are shirts for 30$ that would keep me warm and hide my upper body? The list of stupid-western-world-must-have items goes on...

Note! In areas where I consider myself a professional, or at least alot more than a hobby user, I never go for the new and expensive tools. In those cases I get what's good enough to get the job done. And this is how I think alot of people in this forum are reasoning. You are pros, and you will get the job done with the tools you find neccessary. Myself, well... I want to capture good images, sure. But in this hobby one factor has always been just knowing I have good gear (that I have read about the past 5 years on the internetz...).

Call me stupid, tell me I need a shrink  I am just being honest and hopefully I put some light on some feelings other fellow amateurs might share with me...


You ask for advice - and here it goes.

- Get the 5D3 and you will not regret it!

- Get the 5D2 and start practising a phrase to tell yourself, friends, other photo amateurs etc on how clever this purchase was every time that 5D3-regret pops into your mind.


----------



## untitled10 (Apr 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Alexandros said:
> 
> 
> > To start I will present you all (?) the alternatives I have as of now:
> ...



Nothing like a 1.3 times crop factor for landscapes....


----------



## Alexandros (Apr 17, 2012)

I couldn't agree more with what you say Enrico...
That's how I feel...


----------



## sandymandy (Apr 17, 2012)

elflord said:


> When I am working with shallow dof, I don't want the camera choosing what to focus on.



So go manual focus or chose a focus point manually and then only use that one for autofocus. I dont really understand the problem.


----------

