View Full Version : Canon 50d OR 40d Upgrade
Hi guys/girls
Just been reading some of the posts about the canon 50d. Some people seam to have some issues with them, but the new firmware seams to rectify a lot of issues.
I am looking to buy a 50d as an upgrade for my 400d. I will be buying the body only version as I have a good range of lenses for my 400d.
However I am in major dilema as to what to buy. The 40d or the 50d?
On the money side the 40d is £250+ cheaper and still a good camera, but on the feature side the 50d is more advanced and more up to date.
Can anyone help me make a disccision
Mike
a1ex2001
07-11-2008, 08:51
Looking at you sig If you really must have a body upgrade I'd buy a second hand 40D and put the saving towards better glass which will give you a far more noticeable improvement.
Chappers
07-11-2008, 08:53
Probably the best option is to list the features of both cameras side by side. Then tick those that are important to you now and maybe in the future. Some may seem great, but you may never use. Live view looks good, but I've never used it. However if you do macro work it may be an advantage.
Look at what you get and if the 50D comes out top the decide if it's worth the £250 extra.
puddleduck
07-11-2008, 08:53
Your lens sig. is a veritable parade of mediocre glass.
Put that £800 to improving your crappy lenses (no offense!)
I really only use 2 lenses most of the time
I have the canon 50mm and my Sigma 24-70.
I got the tamron 200mm as part of my 400d deal when I first bought it, and the kit lense came as standard.
I mainly do gig and portrait photography, so I like having both of these lens's in my bag.
Would there be others that you's would recomend.
As for the live view I am not to fussed for it. I was in playing with the 40 and the 50 in jessops at the weekend, and I liked the feel and screen quality of the 50d better. It also felt a lot more robust.
Mike
I made the decision recently from a 400d.
I hold reasonable glass Tokina 12-24, Canon 24-105 L, Canon 70-200mm.
On a purely financial basis my figures were these
Hope to sell 400d for roughly £300 including grip + some extras.
Can purchase my 40D cost 579.99 -5% discount i get -£60 cashback = 491
Can purchase 50D £850, i dont get discount for that and no cashback = 850
leaving only 191 to upgrade to 40D
leaving 550 to upgrade to 50D
Of course you are the only person who can make this choice, but for me it was too much money to spend on my hobby. I can only echo the other sentiments here, get good glass.
Good glass doesn't depriciate like camera bodies, in fact all my lenses currently sell for more than i paid for them and they will all work on pretty much any body i could plan to purchase (or rent) in any forseeable future.
CaptainPenguin
07-11-2008, 09:05
I am looking to upgrade from my 350D and without doubt for me the 40D gives much greater value for money,10 megapixel will be fine for my use and to my mind a lot of the "Extras" that the 50D has over the 40D are really little more than window dressing
CaptainPenguin
07-11-2008, 09:08
Your lens sig. is a veritable parade of mediocre glass.
Put that £800 to improving your crappy lenses (no offense!)
Do you really think there is such a thing as "Crappy" lens today,the likes of the 18-55 kit lenses may need extra care such as not using wide open but with care you can still get some excellent results.
Are you old enough to remember the old Domiplan 50mm f2.8 for the Praktica screw mount cameras,now that was a crappy lens.
MJ Stebbings
07-11-2008, 09:16
Go for the 40d and invest in some more lenses. Sell the 18-55 and the 55-200 and put all the cash together and get something like a 70-200 F2.8.
Will give you a bit of variation when shooting your live music.
The 40d is an amazing camera as it stands, and at a price thats so amazing at the moment.
Either that or get a second hand 30d and buy even more lenses.
puddleduck
07-11-2008, 09:18
Do you really think there is such a thing as "Crappy" lens today.
Absolutely.
a1ex2001
07-11-2008, 09:29
Do you really think there is such a thing as "Crappy" lens today,the likes of the 18-55 kit lenses may need extra care such as not using wide open but with care you can still get some excellent results.
Yes of course there is, you've just described one! Who wants to use with care I want to get good results wide open and handheld!
Canon Bob
07-11-2008, 09:35
..... I was in playing with the 40 and the 50 in jessops at the weekend, and I liked the feel and screen quality of the 50d better. It also felt a lot more robust.
Mike
I'm really surprised that you think that the two bodies "feel" different and that the 50D is "more robust". Granted, the screen is much better.
Do you really think there is such a thing as "Crappy" lens today....
As long as the EF75-300 is still being produced, then yes, there is.
Bob
for gig photography i use fast primes 50mm 85mm and 150mm, this depends on how close i am to the stage etc. I am currently using them on a 400D. I am getting my 50D at the end of this month. the main reason is the lower noise at high ISO.
another lens that has a bit of reach would be 70-200 2.8 but it carries a nice price tag too
The 40D is the best camera Canon have ever produced at that price point, and it's a bargain at current prices.
The major advantage of the 50D is that it has 50% more pixels than the 40D and sets a new benchmark for pixel count on a crop sensor. Whether you'll really see the benefit of all those pixels depends very much on what sort of photography you do. If you do mainly gig and portrait work the advantages of the 50D may not be so obvious to you as they would be to a wildlife photographer who needs all the reach he can get. On the other hand, if you submit stock library images, the 50D puts out 43mb tiff files (from RAW) which is only 5mb short of Alamy minimum file size, so images need very little upsizing to reach that standard and it would make life a lot easier. The 50D will be very unforgiving of all but the best glass though.
If you're not seeing any of these benefits being much use to you, you probably would be better investing in glass. New bodies come and go at an alarming rate these days, good glass is a far better investment even in the short term the way things are going.
for gig photography i use fast primes 50mm 85mm and 150mm, this depends on how close i am to the stage etc. I am currently using them on a 400D. I am getting my 50D at the end of this month. the main reason is the lower noise at high ISO.
another lens that has a bit of reach would be 70-200 2.8 but it carries a nice price tag too
I'd have a rethink about that.
The 50D is not too clever with high iso due to cramming too many pixels on an APS-C sensor.
In fact the 40D may be the better camera of the two for high iso.
Well the plan is for a camera with a better High ISO images. When doing low light shots there is sometimes the need to bump up the ISO.
On the 400d when you bump it up to 800 it get a bit grainey, and when u get up to 1600 it can sometimes look like a mosaic picture.
I am interested in the 40d, and I wish I had bought one instead of my 400d. They were both in jessops at the time of my purchase and I decided that it was to much money to spend on my first real DSLR.
I am now at a stage where I get some regular jobs, 3-6 a month to do parties, portrait and gig work. I wanted a camera that has lots of future proofing as well as producting outstanding images.
I see your reason by saying go for the 40d body only and getting a nice 70-200 f2.8 lense. That was my first thoughts. But the more I see and read reviews on the 50d the more I think it would provide a longer lasting life.
Here is one question, If the 50d was never launched. What would be a good natural progression from the 400d for a high end amature-what ever the next step is in togging.
Mike
I'd have a rethink about that.
The 50D is not too clever with high iso due to cramming too many pixels on an APS-C sensor.
In fact the 40D may be the better camera of the two for high iso.
I keep hearing this Cameron - in fact if I'd have believed it, I wouldn't have bought a 50D. ;)
Both these shots were taken in the last few minutes, both at 700mm, both full frame, and no processing other than the usual sharpening for downsizing. No noise reduction has been run on these and the NR options in the camera are off.
1600 ISO
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3269/3009454511_0d92e8dde6_o.jpg
3200 ISO
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3035/3010290334_6f39cc3a4d_o.jpg
My initial impressions are that noise is at least as good as the 40D, and I'd be more than happy with that given the pixel count - that alone would be a major achievement by Canon.
its really just ISO 1600 that i am looking at! I get decent speeds at that ISO on the 400D but the noise is too much. i dont want to go to 3200+ ISO really if i dont have to. I have seen CT's Results at this ISO and they are just brillaint compared to the 400D
This guy knows a thing or two when it comes to reviewing a camera.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp
Look at the cons.
I can understand the reasoning behind it ...... smaller photosites, more heat etc.
No experience with the 50D myself and so if it does the job .... well. :thumbs:
LOL. I do look at the cons, I just don't necessarily take it as gospel. That review is actually at odds with a lot of other reviews of the camera. The other problem with most of these reviews is that they concentrate on the noise issue almost to the exclusion of all else, rendering the review of not much use to the market segment who are most likely to be interested in it - wildlife photographers who will see a huge benefit in reach and resolution with the 50D. In other words rather than looking at the benefits of 15 million pixels which are very real, they concentrate on what admittedly previously has been the downside of that pixel count.
I'm very impressed indeed with this camera in the couple of days I've had it.
puddleduck
07-11-2008, 11:02
The other problem with most of these reviews is that they concentrate on the noise issue almost to the exclusion of all else, rendering the review of not much use to the market segment who are most likely to be interested in it
DPReview are obsessed with noise. Its madness.
Here is one question, If the 50d was never launched. What would be a good natural progression from the 400d for a high end amature-what ever the next step is in togging.
Mike
Assuming you're sticking with the Canon range (and for what your stated uses are) I'd say it would still be the 40D unless you see a benefit in going full frame, in which case, you might want to consider the 5D or it's forthcoming replacement.
I really just posted because it seemed to be important for 33L to shoot at high iso (1600) and therefore worth drawing attention to some noise issues.
Personally I never shoot above iso 800 with my current gear.
The one thing I'm interested in is the micro tuning of individual lenses, available on the newer Canon bodies.
CT, you know how critical that can be with long telephoto lenses when the DOF is so shallow.
Have you set this up on your 500 f4 & 50D ?
MJ Stebbings
07-11-2008, 11:16
I see your reason by saying go for the 40d body only and getting a nice 70-200 f2.8 lense. That was my first thoughts. But the more I see and read reviews on the 50d the more I think it would provide a longer lasting life.
Just because the 50d has come out, doesnt mean it has a better life expectancy then a 40d. Seriously, when doing gig photography, when are you really going to need to blow images up to past A3 size? 10mp is more then what you will need, and it matches to 50d as far as noise goes for the high end ISO (800+) so really, why spend the extra cash on a 50d.
I got a little excited by the 50d and considered upgrading, then thought "hang on, do i really need the extra mp?" and the answer is simply no! So, time to get more glass and a new flash :)
Seriously, dont let the "newer is better" trend catch you, get a 40d and more glass for your cash!
I really just posted because it seemed to be important for 33L to shoot at high iso (1600) and therefore worth drawing attention to some noise issues.
Personally I never shoot above iso 800 with my current gear.
The one thing I'm interested in is the micro tuning of individual lenses, available on the newer Canon bodies.
CT, you know how critical that can be with long telephoto lenses when the DOF is so shallow.
Have you set this up on your 500 f4 & 50D ?
Cameron - I haven't, in fact I've only just found out how to do it this morning. :D
The manual does say it shouldn't normally be necessary, so I'm waiting till I see a problem before I mess with it. I do agree though, it's a very nice function to be able to make these minor focus adjustments yourself.
Just because the 50d has come out, doesnt mean it has a better life expectancy then a 40d. Seriously, when doing gig photography, when are you really going to need to blow images up to past A3 size? 10mp is more then what you will need, and it matches to 50d as far as noise goes for the high end ISO (800+) so really, why spend the extra cash on a 50d.
I got a little excited by the 50d and considered upgrading, then thought "hang on, do i really need the extra mp?" and the answer is simply no! So, time to get more glass and a new flash :)
Seriously, dont let the "newer is better" trend catch you, get a 40d and more glass for your cash!
That's a sensible post - there are so many sensor size and pixel count options open to us now you need to have a very firm handle on what you really need from a camera before parting with big wads of wonga. It must be a nightmare for newcomers, and I can understand why it causes them so much confusion.
ok cheers.
Ok here is another question
If I got a 40d would you notice a massive difference in picture quality between the 40 and 400d
Mike
ok cheers.
Ok here is another question
If I got a 40d would you notice a massive difference in picture quality between the 40 and 400d
Mike
big will
07-11-2008, 11:37
I am looking to upgrade from my 350D and without doubt for me the 40D gives much greater value for money,10 megapixel will be fine for my use and to my mind a lot of the "Extras" that the 50D has over the 40D are really little more than window dressing
I did exactly that, went from 350d to a second hand 40d, its a good jump, things I thought didn't matter to me really do, like the massive screen and live view I thought were gimicks but actually are useful.
dj_myk - In your circumstances I would stay with the 400d and get some higher quality lenses, I used my 350d with a 17-40mm F4 L and a 70-200mm F2.8 L for a good three years.
ok cheers.
Ok here is another question
If I got a 40d would you notice a massive difference in picture quality between the 40 and 400d
Mike
Well the 40D has the Digic 3 processor and 10 million pixels. Whether you yourself would see a huge difference in images, I don't know. All I can tell you is that quite a few people on the board got the 40D before I did and just looking at their wildlife images the leap in quality and colour rendition leaped out at me from the screen.
I think you're agonizing over this far too much tbh though - just get a 40D - it's a bargain, it produces great images, and the build quality is in another league compared to a 400D. You wont be doing anything wrong at all, and I don't see a better option for you without spending seriously more money. ;)
Just a thought - but for the price of a 50D you could get a 40D and probably a 50mm 1.4 or an 85mm 1.8. ;)
MJ Stebbings
07-11-2008, 12:09
Just looking at warehouse express prices here:
40d - 577.99 Body Only
50d - 873.00 Body Only
A saving of 295.01
Now if you look at it seriously, you could sell your two "crap" lenses and get the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 with the money made and saved plus a few quid more.
Mathimatically, and logically, you would be mad to get the 50d :lol:
I would agree on saving for glass you will find the lenses quoted probably sharper and better or low light use than what the op wants them for.
Just looking at warehouse express prices here:
40d - 577.99 Body Only
50d - 873.00 Body Only
A saving of 295.01
Now if you look at it seriously, you could sell your two "crap" lenses and get the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 with the money made and saved plus a few quid more.
Mathimatically, and logically, you would be mad to get the 50d :lol:
Don't forget the £60 cash back.
Now we're talking £355.
MJ Stebbings
07-11-2008, 12:28
Don't forget the £60 cash back.
Now we're talking £355.
Dont forget the penny
Now we're talking £355.01 :lol:
Seriously though, didnt know the cashback offer was still on.
See, madness NOT to get a 40d! :lol:
There might also be some good priced 40d's in the sale section on here!
Dont forget the penny
Now we're talking £355.01 :lol:
Seriously though, didnt know the cashback offer was still on.
See, madness NOT to get a 40d! :lol:
There might also be some good priced 40d's in the sale section on here!
I don't know why but it's more expensive now than it was when I bought it at the beginning of the year as a back up to my 1D MKII.
Back then it was £600 less £100 cash back ..... £500 ......... minus 1p. ;)
It's strange when the previous model goes up in price after the release of the newer model. :cuckoo::bang:
yeah I hear what you are saying.
Keeping the 400d and getting more lenses only solves the lens issue
One major feature of the 40/50d is the higher ISO values.
Think I have made up my mind on the 40d and a new lens. Possibily a 10-22 or something.
Mike
MJ Stebbings
07-11-2008, 13:25
Good man, you wont look back from the 40d!
CaptainPenguin
07-11-2008, 13:55
I did exactly that, went from 350d to a second hand 40d, its a good jump, things I thought didn't matter to me really do, like the massive screen and live view I thought were gimicks but actually are useful.
In your circumstances I would stay with the 400d and get some higher quality lenses, I used my 350d with a 17-40mm F4 L and a 70-200mm F2.8 L for a good three years.
Why invest in new glass 90% of my work is done on the Canon 24-85 and 70-210 lenses both of which give pin sharp results that I am happy with,yess a 24-105L and a 70-200 2.8 would be very nice but that is £1600 worth of glass money that I just don't have
big will
07-11-2008, 16:46
Why invest in new glass 90% of my work is done on the Canon 24-85 and 70-210 lenses both of which give pin sharp results that I am happy with,yess a 24-105L and a 70-200 2.8 would be very nice but that is £1600 worth of glass money that I just don't have
Sorry the second part of my message was aimed at dj_myk the post starter.
Can't beleive after just looking round at prices the best I found is JESSOPS on line £849 !!! and you can even walk in and pick up from store :thinking: amazing
yeah jessops prices for the 50d are pritty good. I was looking to use the buy now pay later option. I bought my 400d this way and it's awsum.
one other question, do jessops still price match. as warehouse express I am sure have the 40d at a cheeper price than jessops.
I am now 84% sure I am going to get the 40d and prolly the 10-20 sigma lense if jessops have it in stock, that will work out as the same price as the 50d.
Mike
Jessops usually price match only wthin a 50 mile radius.
oh that is crap. That means my only other shop is Caulmet and they are just as expensive.
Ignore that I'm an eejit!
Warehouse Express do a 12 month 0% finance option
yeah i know, but means having to wait for delivery, rather than going into the store and picking it up :)
plus for items such as this I actually prefer going into a shop to get these items, As if I have an issue I can go back to the store and moan like hell. doing things over the phone take time and usually take a few days.
I will give jessops a call tomorrow and see what they say. My options just now are 40d body + battery + a lens OR Body + Grip and lens to follow later.
I have found another lense I am interested in, but pritty sure my mate has it and will borrow his for a feild test before buying. and there is another lense I have seen on Lenses for Hire that I will rent for a week to try it out.
Mike
Wait for delivery ?
You order it one day and get it the next.
I ordered a 500 f4 from WE and it arrived with a lens hood fault.
They replaced it the very next day.
They replaced the whole kit and caboodle, not just the hood.
Mind you the lens hood itself costs about £300.
I mean come on, a flower pot without a bottom costs £300. :bonk:
I mean come on, a flower pot without a bottom costs £300. :bonk:
LOL. It's true!
ok just back from
Jessops
Just bought a 40d, sigma 20mm f1.8 and a sandisk extream 3 8gb
Think I have made a good choice.
Mike
Have a lot of fun with it :D
MJ Stebbings
10-11-2008, 20:23
You're gunna love it!
one problem I have just found is this
The only camera that jessops had was the display one
It's in good condition and no marks etc
But on looking at the file numbers the shutter has been used 8000 plus times
Should I return it and get a new one
Mike
you didn't buy the memory card from Jessups did you :-o
They're normally 8x the price of decent memory retailers. £36.99 from play.com
I only bought one 8 gb card to take it up to the ammount so I could qualify for the 12 month interest free
Any idea about the 8000 plus shutter clicks on the body :s
Mike
Up to you. I'd expect a camera with 8000 clicks on it to be sold with a reasonable discount and not as-new. If you've paid full price, take it back and ask for another in a sealed box (or some cashback)
MJ Stebbings
10-11-2008, 21:54
Yeah, i hope you got a discount on that!
Nope but they are getting called tomorrow
Mike
8000 shutter actuations is 8% of its expected life :thumbsdown: Sounds to me like the staff and customers have been playing with it big time :lol: Take it back and as others have said swap it for a sealed box unit or ask for half your money back and then you've got a bargain :D
In order to compete in the ever increasing pixel race, Canon increased the pixels of the 50D. Did they increase it to a point of diminishing returns? Some reviewers state "possibly yes"
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp
"It appears that Canon has reached the limit of what is sensible, in terms of megapixels on an APS-C sensor. At a pixel density of 4.5 MP/cm² (40D: 3.1 MP/cm², 1Ds MkIII: 2.4 MP/cm²) the lens becomes the limiting factor. Even the sharpest primes at optimal apertures cannot (at least away from the center of the frame) satisfy the 15.1 megapixel sensors hunger for resolution. Considering the disadvantages that come with higher pixel densities such as diffraction issues, increased sensitivity towards camera shake, reduced dynamic range, reduced high ISO performance and the need to store, move and process larger amounts of data, one could be forgiven for coming to the conclusion that at this point the megapixel race should probably stop. One consequence of this is that the 50% increase in pixel count over the 40D results in only a marginal amount of extra detail.
We're by no means saying the 50Ds image quality is bad but it's simply not significantly better than the ten megapixel 40D. In some areas such as dynamic range and high ISO performance it's actually worse and that simply makes you wonder if the EOS 50D could have been an (even) better camera if its sensor had a slightly more moderate resolution."
I am not really cognizant regarding U.K. prices, but I think that you could likely buy a 40D and keep your present 400D as a back-up for the price you might pay for the 50D after selling your 400D.
A back-up camera is not just an investment; it is an insurance policy against your camera failing and thus losing out on any photography of an event. (Cameras fail in a direct relationship to the importance of the subject being photographed and in seemingly an inverse relationship to the availability of backup gear). It is also nice to work with two cameras, each wearing a different focal length lens.
Just called jessops they are replacing it tomorrow
DONE :)
MIke
MJ Stebbings
11-11-2008, 10:00
Good job really! I cant believe they sold you one with 8000 clicks on it without offering discount. If its an ex display model then its second hand, so for them to sell it at the new price is an outrage, they are probably more expensive then most places anyway!
Glad you got it sorted mate and im sure you will love your 40d as much as i love mine :)
yeah welll I did not find it cheeper anywhere else on the net.
well the cheepest I did find it jessops would not price match, and they did not offer buy now, pay in 12 months time.
Yeah i was a bitty miffed when I got home to find 8000+ shutter clicks.
The body is in a+ condition so I did not expect it to be so used.
I'd get the 40D, why spend the extra money on the 50D just for mp?
Hi guys/girls
Just been reading some of the posts about the canon 50d. Some people seam to have some issues with them, but the new firmware seams to rectify a lot of issues.
I am looking to buy a 50d as an upgrade for my 400d. I will be buying the body only version as I have a good range of lenses for my 400d.
However I am in major dilema as to what to buy. The 40d or the 50d?
On the money side the 40d is £250+ cheaper and still a good camera, but on the feature side the 50d is more advanced and more up to date.
Can anyone help me make a disccision
Mike
I didn't notice huge difference between the 350D and 40D....with the glass I had at the time anyway.
however, the features of the 40D sold it to me.
for gig stuff, if no-one has mentioned it yet...if you can't reach the 70-200 L glass, then the sigma 50-150 f2.8 is pretty handy
Fortress
23-12-2008, 16:18
Hi everyone,
I'm new to this forum, but i've been reading this particular thread with great interest, long story short, I began my DSLR life with a Canon 300D and about 6 months ago i upgraded to a Canon 400D when I started to regularly goto BSB, and discovered my 300D had a mark on the sensor which was going to cost £175 to replace, after selling the 300D the cost of the 400D was equal to the 300D repair. As I'm mostly interested in motorbike racing i thought an IS lens would be a good idea, after looking alot at the £600 canon lens i found the EF-s 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS for £200, and within the last few days i've replace the 18-55 kit lens with the EF-s 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens.
I'm on quite a learning curve with the all this and i have a few questions as i've been looking at upgrading the 400D to 50D.
1. Would i see a big difference in the quality of my shot with a 50D
2. Would my 2 IS lens be considered crap glass, like a couple of people in the thread have stated it's better to buy good glass over an expensive body.
3. I've recently started to get into HDR photography and would the 50D be better than the 40D or 400D for this.
4. Am i making any sense as an amateur or should i sell the lot and buy a point and click.......:lol:
i jumped from a 400D to a 50D and was very impressed. but my range of glass are no slouches though. the 50D craves good glass to get the best from it.
I would get a 2nd hand 40D and get some sharp, fast glass. It will help in your line of photography.
i would say a 2nd hand 70-200f/4 L with a 40D might help but that is ofcourse if you can live with the reduced range!
Hi everyone,
1. Would i see a big difference in the quality of my shot with a 50D
A 50D would give you more fps (usefull for tracking crashes) and possibly faster AF.
I got this shot at Snetterton BSB this year with a 30D & Sigma 70-200. Just a slight crop and resize/sharpen for the web :
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/brian.pitblado/example/bike_snet.jpg
Fortress
23-12-2008, 17:13
Thats exactly the sort of shots i'm taking Mrgubby, so my other option would be the 40D with my IS lens and maybe upgrade to fast L glass at a later date?
Thanks guys
check out www.motofotouk.com for some very bad to rather poor shots
RichardC27
23-12-2008, 19:20
Thats exactly the sort of shots i'm taking Mrgubby, so my other option would be the 40D with my IS lens and maybe upgrade to fast L glass at a later date?
Thanks guys
check out www.motofotouk.com for some very bad to rather poor shots
Go for a 40D and faster glass. I've sold my 400D today, to be replaced with a 40D plus a new lens. The vast majority of my photography is motorsport stuff, and the quality of your glass is by far the biggest consideration, rather than megapixels etc.
I'v gone for a 40D as it's weather resistant, the AF should be much quicker than my 400D, and the high ISO performance is in another league. Don't discount other lens manufacturers either. I recently bought a Sigma 120-400mm lens with IS for under £500 brand new, and am more than happy with it.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.