My final kit dilema

To 40d, or 50d

  • 40d + £300 for lens

    Votes: 37 88.1%

  • 50d + £150 for lens

    Votes: 5 11.9%
  • Total voters
    42
JackMcIntyre

JackMcIntyre

Messages
560
Name
Jack McIntyre
Edit My Images
Yes
Right its upgrade time and I'm trying to decide whether to trade off all my kit and start fresh or to only trade the body for a low amount at a later date and pay more £££ for the upgrade.

Kit so far:

350d + grip
70-200 F4
18-55 kit

Self estimated value of around: £600

What I'm looking at getting as a replacement:

40d/50d
28-135 or similar

Self estimated value of around: £550 (40d) £700 (50d)

I realise that the 70-200 would pretty much be a perfect wedding/studio lens but is the quality really that much better than a good walkaround? Or more specifically would it be better than a fast 100mm-ish prime for people 'togging.

Which do you think is the better option - I'm favouring towards the 50d because its overall a better body in terms of specs, but it is an extra £150 that could be spent on a better piece of glass.

I've added a poll - please vote fairly!
 
Where's the poll?

I'd buy a 40D (I dont think the 50D is worth the extra - and I have a 50D, up from a 10D)
I'd keep the 70/200 f4 if its an L lens

Another lens? - depends on what its going to be used for, wedding togs tend to go wider than 28 (28/135) but especially in your case because of the crop factor. Most I have seen go for a wide lens on a FF body as a second option (they also tend to go for 70/200 2.8 but I doubt that's an option for you) so even 28 may not be wide enough on a 40D.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
Where's the poll?

I'd buy a 40D (I dont think the 50D is worth the extra - and I have a 50D, up from a 10D)
I'd keep the 70/200 f4 if its an L lens

Another lens? - depends on what its going to be used for, wedding togs tend to go wider than 28 (28/135) but especially in your case because of the crop factor. Most I have seen go for a wide lens on a FF body as a second option (they also tend to go for 70/200 2.8 but I doubt that's an option for you) so even 28 may not be wide enough on a 40D.

Matt
Click to expand...

Sorry was just adding the options and got side tracked - have added it now.

Maybe a straight trade from 350d - 40d would be a good idea. Although I'm finding myself lusting after the VGA screen on the 50d.
 
Go 40D your on a budget so the extra for the 50D isn't worth it.

Keep your 70-200 it's a stunner and you'll only wnat it back as soon as you've sold it!

Sell the kit lens and replace it with a decent crop body walk about not a 28-135 which is far too long on a crop. Personally I'd go for something around 17-50 with a 2.8 aperture.
 
I got a 40D a few months ago from a 400D, the screen is awesome so I haven't even thought about the flash 50D one, sure it is better, but you will not be disappointed from the upgrade! I'd keep the 70-200 as well, I'm fairly happy with my sigma 17-70, no IS, USM and not the sharpest in the world but got a very good range and I enjoy using my 10-22 and 70-300 more anyway!
 
a1ex2001 said:
Go 40D your on a budget so the extra for the 50D isn't worth it.

Keep your 70-200 it's a stunner and you'll only wnat it back as soon as you've sold it!

Sell the kit lens and replace it with a decent crop body walk about not a 28-135 which is far too long on a crop. Personally I'd go for something around 17-50 with a 2.8 aperture.
Click to expand...

The reason I was thinking along the lines of 28-135 was because I'm intending to get a 10-22 at some point.

david1701 said:
the screen is amazing on the 50, but I dont find my 1d3 to be apalling compared to my 5dII
Click to expand...

I'm slightly confused - Are you comparing the 5dII screen to the 50 and the 1d3 screen to the 40?

topcatproduction said:
I got a 40D a few months ago from a 400D, the screen is awesome so I haven't even thought about the flash 50D one, sure it is better, but you will not be disappointed from the upgrade! I'd keep the 70-200 as well, I'm fairly happy with my sigma 17-70, no IS, USM and not the sharpest in the world but got a very good range and I enjoy using my 10-22 and 70-300 more anyway!
Click to expand...

Is the 17-70 good enough quality for professional application though? If you can say that its not the sharpest in the world then there must be some undesirable quality about the images produced.
 
In general I reckon you should spend your money on glass before bodies, so go for the 40D and put the change towards glass
 
I would keep the 70-200 and get a 40d and a tamron or sigma 17-50. It won't cost too much more!
 
I can't believe you would get rid of 70-200mm. It is one of the sharpest zooms ever made.

If I were you I'd go for a used 1D mk2 instead, then throw in a cheap Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. 1D2 would at least focus properly.
 
JackMcIntyre said:
'm slightly confused - Are you comparing the 5dII screen to the 50 and the 1d3 screen to the 40?



Is the 17-70 good enough quality for professional application though? If you can say that its not the sharpest in the world then there must be some undesirable quality about the images produced.
Click to expand...

yes I was sorry, 40d screen is same gen as 1d3 screen so a bit crap and 50d screen is same gen as 5dII (AMAZING)

no the 17-70 isn't and tbh neither is the 40d/50d
 
I dont mean this in a rude way- but aren't you a bit ambitious hoping to jump straight into "professional photography" with a budget of >£600??

I doubt that would buy most professionals a single item, let alone a complete set up, I'm nowhere near professional (and no intention of being (but thats not the point)) but my basic kit (40D, 10-22, 17-70, 70-300, 430ex) adds up to just shy of £1500 USED value, and that doesn't include my tripod and head, other flashes, manual lenses, filters, cases etc etc

Sorry not having a dig or anything but I just think this needs more thought!
 
topcatproduction said:
I dont mean this in a rude way- but aren't you a bit ambitious hoping to jump straight into "professional photography" with a budget of >£600??

I doubt that would buy most professionals a single item, let alone a complete set up, I'm nowhere near professional (and no intention of being (but thats not the point)) but my basic kit (40D, 10-22, 17-70, 70-300, 430ex) adds up to just shy of £1500 USED value, and that doesn't include my tripod and head, other flashes, manual lenses, filters, cases etc etc

Sorry not having a dig or anything but I just think this needs more thought!
Click to expand...

This is my budget because its all I have - some of the best photos I've ever seen were taken on lower end models - I think quite a lot of professionals would agree that you don't need a camera bag stuffed with £10k's worth of equipment to be a professional - just once you've already made a living from it you can afford to have the best of the best gear. To me it would help - but its not essential.
 
Keep the 70-200 and get a 40D & Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top