Suggest a upgrade canon 40d

[gothgirl]

I found the 50 1.8 slow and noisy, but image quality wise it's as good as the 1.4. I only upgraded to the 1.4 for the wider aperture, faster af and better build quality.

Here's a comparison between the 50 f1.8 and f1.4 models.
Canon Nifty 50 f1.8 vs f1.4 @ f1.8 by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

See that's a question I wondered
Would the 1.4 canon at f1.8
be equal or better
than the 1.8 at f1.8

 

[tijuana taxi]

Unfortunately you don't get champagne for lemonade money, what exactly is wrong with your photos that you want to change?

My advice is get a better lens to replace the 18-55, tamron 17-50 vc or even better canon 17-55is, both would make a world of difference

I had two 40d's and the 17-55is, very nice combo, also had a 7d which was not much improvement, have to get exposure spot on with the latter for best results

 

[odd jim]

Maybe I just have a bad one ?
I have the plastic fantastic canon one and find it to be soft, noisy and slow

They're definitely not soft, it's a very sharp lens indeed. Don't forget, if you're shooting at f/1.8 your depth of field will be *very* narrow so accurate focus is essential.

 

[odd jim]

See that's a question I wondered
Would the 1.4 canon at f1.8
be equal or better
than the 1.8 at f1.8

In my experience, worse. My f/1.8 has always been spot on wide open. I couldn't get a sharp image from the 1.4 until I stopped down to about f/2.8.

But why do you ask? It's not going to make your shutter speed much faster anyway, even at 1.4?

 

[odd jim]

.

 

[odd jim]

If you are looking at Sigma lenses, DG if for full frame digital, DC (digital crop) is for crop sensor cameras (ie 40D/60D).

If autofocus speed is what you want, then yes you'll need to go to a 70D to see an improvement (as it has a completely new AF system). (For AF, the 1Ds II has better AF and more AF points than the 5D classic.)
The 60D has lots of extra features over the 40D and 50D, the key ones being video and an LCD screen that flips out. Otherwise there is less in it image quality wise.
As suggested above, a 60D will probably be more of an upgrade than a 1Dd II.

The 1Ds II might have better AF and a faster burst rate, making ideal for sports, but it's much bigger and heavier than the 5D (1.2kg vs 800g).
Neither the 1Ds II or the 5D classic will give you live view (unlike the 40D/50D/60D/5D2) or do much better than ISO 1600.

As I suggested, stick with the 40D, but upgrade your kit lens, and then upgrade your zoom lens to one suitable for full frame, then after a little more saving, make the jump to FF.
The jump to FF is a big one, but there's nothing wrong with a crop sensor and for sports and wildlife it is actually an advantage, some pro sports shooters use a 7D or 7D2 because of the extra reach.

The 40d actually has a better burst rate than the 1ds2. The 1ds2 only shoots at 4fps then runs out of buffer at 11 shots :/

 

[gothgirl]

Tamrom 17-50mm F2.8 Di II Lens - Canon Fit?

40d producing noisy images in low light

 

[odd jim]

See that's a question I wondered
Would the 1.4 canon at f1.8
be equal or better
than the 1.8 at f1.8

In fact the best of the (non L / Sigma Art) 50's is the new Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM. Same optically as the mk2 but better built with a metal mount and faster, quieter STM focus. You can get these new for about £90. They say it's the only 50mm you'd ever need. I'll be getting one when / if my mk2 dies.

 

[gothgirl]

In my experience, worse. My f/1.8 has always been spot on wide open. I couldn't get a sharp image from the 1.4 until I stopped down to about f/2.8.

But why do you ask? It's not going to make your shutter speed much faster anyway, even at 1.4?

Just one of those random
Thoughts really , not relevant to thread.


I'll have to play with my 50 1.8 more , I've really not got on with it , I've nothing against primes but it's so slow and noisy

It's really hard to photograph animals with it

Try photographing a damn hedgehog that balls up every time you try to focus because of the noise the lens makes

 

[gothgirl]

In fact the best of the (non L / Sigma Art) 50's is the new Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM. Same optically as the mk2 but better built with a metal mount and faster, quieter STM focus. You can get these new for about £90. They say it's the only 50mm you'd ever need. I'll be getting one when / if my mk2 dies.

Plus if I get a 60d that also does video the stm are better right ?

Just trying to take it all in .

I'll definetly put that on the list to do trade up to STM

In theory the 50 1.8 is a great lens for what I do , but I've. Just not got on with mine.

 

[Byker28i]

I wouldn't go for the f/1.4 personally, they're pretty soft until f2.8 in my experience. The 50mm f/1.8 is actually a stunning little lens for the money, I use it a lot on my 6d.

Yeah that's just not true. The 50 f1.8 is good because of the price, for £50-60 you accept the build quality and the image is acceptable because of the price. The 1.4 is actually a much better lens, and yes I have both.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Tamrom 17-50mm F2.8 Di II Lens - Canon Fit?

That's the one, if its followed by VC it means its stabilised, your choice, but being a constant f/2.8 it would produce better results
Just a better lens, keep the longer zoom, have to spend quite a bit to see much improvement over that.

Get that and see how it goes, sure you will be satisfied though

 

[gothgirl]

That's the one, if its followed by VC it means its stabilised, your choice, but being a constant f/2.8 it would produce better results
Just a better lens, keep the longer zoom, have to spend quite a bit to see much improvement over that.

Get that and see how it goes, sure you will be satisfied though

Might get that and the 60d

Keep my 55-250

Boot the kit lens

And upgrade the 50mm 1.8 to the 50mm STM

One I've seen is not stabilised... But would it be necessary at that length ?

Then every time I've got a bit of cash invest in a fast prime until I've got the set , that way I'm safe if I do move to full frame too

 

[odd jim]

Yeah that's just not true. The 50 f1.8 is good because of the price, for £50-60 you accept the build quality and the image is acceptable because of the price. The 1.4 is actually a much better lens, and yes I have both.

I'm not saying it's not the better lens, it better built, has better focusing and bokeh.

It just wasn't as sharp as my f1.8, which is why one went and the other stayed

Of course, there will always be sample variations but I've heard from others who experienced issues with the 1.4 wide open.

The images from the 1.8 aren't just "acceptable", they're beautiful!

 

[ABTog]

Might get that and the 60d

Keep my 55-250

Boot the kit lens

And upgrade the 50mm 1.8 to the 50mm STM

One I've seen is not stabilised... But would it be necessary at that length ?

Then every time I've got a bit of cash invest in a fast prime until I've got the set , that way I'm safe if I do move to full frame too

That's a better plan. The 50 STM is quieter and faster at AF.

The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is the equivalent to the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 I recommended. The sigma 18-50 is the older model, the newer Sigma 17-50 f2.8 has image stabilisation and costs more.

Upgrading primes as funds allow is a good idea too, although the 24mm f2.8 pancake is not full frame compatible.

 

[gothgirl]

@tijuana taxi

Have you any experience of the

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro, Canon EF Fit

As 28-75 would be a better range for me and what I do if the lens is any good

Also seen this which might be better...

Sigma-AF-18-50mm-F28-EX-DC

Not FF compatible but plan to be with the D60 at least a year , hopefully longer

 

[gothgirl]

So....

1. trade in the 40d for 60d

2. Boot the kit lens and get some form of sigma or Tamrom 2.8 to replace it

3. Keep the 55-250 (yay)

4. When funds allow Replace the 50 1.8 with stm version

( I also have a m42 converter with a old chinon 35mm 2.8 prime for MF fun)


5. Invest in a collection of fast primes when cash is available

Do primes have to be canon or are the sigma and tamrom ones just as good?

 

[Byker28i]

Theres two versions of the F1.8, the metal mount and plastic mount. The plastic mount one is cheap, nasty, slow to focus, produces acceptable images. The earlier metal mount one is much better, but still not a patch on the F1.4 if used correctly. The depth of field at f1.4 is tiny, but I've used it extensively close up to the stage for gig photography at f1.4 without issues and in the studio with great lighting, things like close ups of babies feet and hands.. Quick to focus, sharp, many more keepers than the 1.8. Just looked at Lightroom with the metadata search and I've over 2500 images taken this way, most with a 50D, is01600

f1.8 for me worked best at f2.8 and above, I've some great portraits with it at f9 on a 40D and 50D

Switch to the 5Dmk3 and the difference is really noticeable between the two lenses.

 

[ABTog]

Theres two versions of the F1.8, the metal mount and plastic mount. ...

There are 3 versions.
Mk1 = metal mount
Mk2 = plastic fantastic
Mk3 = latest version with STM motor and metal mount.


Just to throw a spanner in the works, if you are happy sticking with the crop Canon for a bit, try the Sigma 30mm f1.4, this is wider than the 50mm lets in more light and is faster to focus than the nifty fifty. But it's crop sensor only. The older version (DC HSM, not the Art) is very good and can be had for £180ish.

 

[gothgirl]

There are 3 versions.
Mk1 = metal mount
Mk2 = plastic fantastic
Mk3 = latest version with STM motor and metal mount.


Just to throw a spanner in the works, if you are happy sticking with the crop Canon for a bit, try the Sigma 30mm f1.4, this is wider than the 50mm lets in more light and is faster to focus than the nifty fifty. But it's crop sensor only. The older version (DC HSM, not the Art) is very good and can be had for £180ish.

Like the sound of that

Will keep that in mind for when I have the cash after swapping the other stuff over

 

[odd jim]

Theres two versions of the F1.8, the metal mount and plastic mount. The plastic mount one is cheap, nasty, slow to focus, produces acceptable images. The earlier metal mount one is much better, but still not a patch on the F1.4 if used correctly. The depth of field at f1.4 is tiny, but I've used it extensively close up to the stage for gig photography at f1.4 without issues and in the studio with great lighting, things like close ups of babies feet and hands.. Quick to focus, sharp, many more keepers than the 1.8. Just looked at Lightroom with the metadata search and I've over 2500 images taken this way, most with a 50D, is01600

f1.8 for me worked best at f2.8 and above, I've some great portraits with it at f9 on a 40D and 50D

Switch to the 5Dmk3 and the difference is really noticeable between the two lenses.

Three versions of the f/1.8

 

[odd jim]

There are 3 versions.
Mk1 = metal mount
Mk2 = plastic fantastic
Mk3 = latest version with STM motor and metal mount.


Just to throw a spanner in the works, if you are happy sticking with the crop Canon for a bit, try the Sigma 30mm f1.4, this is wider than the 50mm lets in more light and is faster to focus than the nifty fifty. But it's crop sensor only. The older version (DC HSM, not the Art) is very good and can be had for £180ish.

Or try and find a used Canon 35mm f2 mk1. Lovely lens, pin sharp wide open and very useable on crop and FF. Used they can be had between £100 - £150.

 

[ABTog]

If you were to look at the 5D classic, Digital Rev did a 'review' of sorts comparing it to it's newer sibling:

View: https://youtu.be/JqVBWTVgr8Q

 

[saffronsnapper]

I agree with all of the suggestions about improving your lenses first. Just to be a little different, you may want to consider either the Canon or Sigma 50 f1.4, having owned the latter I found it a massive improvement over the Canon 50 f1.8.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Have you any experience of the

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro, Canon EF Fit

Sorry, no I haven't, older design lens and from what i've read its of variable quality, my daughter had the Tamron 17-50 VC and it was very good.

Just to confuse matters have a look at the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-f/4 if they are still made. I had one on a Pentax DSLR a few years ago and it was very decent indeed

 

[chris malcolm]

I did but you told me to buy a 70-200 lens ... Which will give me no help at all to my current predicament as 50 is too close on my 40d ...

Also my question being as someone has stated get a 60d... Well , I could afford a 60d but will it be a significant improvement over the 40d ? As it seems that for a long time people have been saying full frame is the holy grail

If your finances are limited stay away from full frame. APS-C sensors cameras are a natural sweet spot in the technology. Go bigger and it's diminishing returns, you pay a lot more for a little improvement. Plus you get economies in lens size weight and cost where APS-C equivalents of FF lenses exist. If you really must have the wonderful FF IQ of today just wait a few years and a couple of generations of improvement in sensor technology and you'll get today's FF sensor IQ in tomorrow's crop frame sensors.

My heads spinning in circles and I'm very confused with the tamrom and sigma lenses as people saying they won't be as good with the crop factor and it all depends on if you get a "good one"

Every lens depends on whether you get a good one, and there are some camera maker's own lenses which are more variable in quality than poor examples from third party. Plus 2nd hand is inherently iffy with all lenses. But definitely worth while if you're on a budget.

So much conflicting advice! That's how it with asking advice from the armchair experts of the web. Some of us are genuinely mistaken, and some of us are just parroting the fashionable scare stories from the web and camera shop salesdroids. The only reliable way of finding out who knows what they're talking about is to try a few experiments with the gear you've got. Cross those who predicted differently from your experiences from your list of people worth listening to. Don't base any expensive purchases on unverified advice.

 

[gothgirl]

These are the 2.8 lenses I've seen

Thanks to a very kind member , who's offered me their old 50d

I'm going to be able to pool all my available funds into one good 2.8 lens as suggested to replace my kit lens , then down the line invest in primes

These are the ones I've seen, so need to decide which to go for



Now I'm upping to the 50d , and taken in what people have said about full frame
I'm in no rush to go full frame ,

I adore my 40d and think the 50d combined with a good bit of glass will last me a good While

So I don't mind if any of the lenses aren't full frame compatible

I'd appreciate any input from anyone who owns or has owned the above lenses

 

[corpy]

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro, Canon EF Fit

Very good lens for the money , google reviews and a full frame lens as well , some stuff on youtube comparisons ,reviews etc .....I have one and love it !

 

[odd jim]

If your finances are limited stay away from full frame. APS-C sensors cameras are a natural sweet spot in the technology. Go bigger and it's diminishing returns, you pay a lot more for a little improvement. Plus you get economies in lens size weight and cost where APS-C equivalents of FF lenses exist. If you really must have the wonderful FF IQ of today just wait a few years and a couple of generations of improvement in sensor technology and you'll get today's FF sensor IQ in tomorrow's crop frame sensors.

Every lens depends on whether you get a good one, and there are some camera maker's own lenses which are more variable in quality than poor examples from third party. Plus 2nd hand is inherently iffy with all lenses. But definitely worth while if you're on a budget.

So much conflicting advice! That's how it with asking advice from the armchair experts of the web. Some of us are genuinely mistaken, and some of us are just parroting the fashionable scare stories from the web and camera shop salesdroids. The only reliable way of finding out who knows what they're talking about is to try a few experiments with the gear you've got. Cross those who predicted differently from your experiences from your list of people worth listening to. Don't base any expensive purchases on unverified advice.

Unfortunately you can't bend the laws of physics - FF sensors will always have the edge as they can simply gather more light at a lower signal amplification, that will never change, so generation for generation they will always be better.

It simply depends how much you want to spend and whether the gains are worth it for you.

 

[gothgirl]

I'm going to go with the 50d and invest my money into some better / faster glass

 

[odd jim]

I'm going to go with the 50d and invest my money into some better / faster glass

TBH I still use my 50d to this day, it's a great camera, it produces great images.

I'd question the benefit you'll get already having the 40d, though it's bigger files mean more cropabilty but you might be better off still keeping the 40d and putting that towards the glass?

 

[gothgirl]

TBH I still use my 50d to this day, it's a great camera, it produces great images.

I'd question the benefit you'll get, it's bigger files mean more cropabilty but you might be better off still keeping the 40d and putting that towards the glass?

I'm still keeping beast (my 40d)

As I've said a very kind member has offered me their old 50d, which is greatly appreciated.

so I'm going to keep beast but use the 50d and pool thre money I saved into one good faster lens , see above post

 

[odd jim]

I'm still keeping beast (my 40d)

As I've said a very kind member has offered me their old 50d, which is greatly appreciated.

so I'm going to keep beast but use the 50d and pool thre money I saved into one good faster lens , see above post

Cool, I didn't realise you had been given the 50d

 

[gothgirl]

Cool, I didn't realise you had been given the 50d

Yes it's very kind of them

It's an improvement on beast , and means I can put a little more money towards getting one good lens to replace my kit lens

I'm really looking forward to it