Absolute beginner!

C

cameras

Suspended / Banned
Messages
12
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all!

Thanks for having me on what I get the impression is a very friendly and helpful forum :)

I have a budget of around £400 - £500 in order to buy a dslr. I'd be VERY :) happy to pay less if, for what I need it for, the camera does the job.

I dont have any particular area of interest at the moment so will just be going around London on weekends and shooting everything in site :)

My friend just bought a Canon 550D for similar purposes - do you think I could better him for around £450 - £500 on the second hand market?

I've been looking at some other threads and I notice the 40D comes up a lot for a similar budget. Why would this be recommended more than the 550D do you think? Wonder if I could go lower and get something like the 30D, a nice lens and still have some money in my pocket?

Any advice really would be much appreciated. I'm super excited to get stuck in and just want to make sure I'm happy with my choice. Think getting advice from you guys is the best way to ensure that :)

Thanks
 
Depends what you want to shoot.

40D, a Sigma lens and a 50mm 1.8 would be my wishlist, might struggle just to fit that in budget though.

400/450d with the abvoe lenses would be fine too. Look at something like a Sigma 17-50 2.8 or 17-70mm, decent value for money.
 
You don't need to better the camera really, just better his lens :p

But with £500 max budget, you might be able to get a 40D with one of the lenses Shabb suggested.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies guys! Really appreciate the advice :)

I have been on a comparison website which seems to favour the 550D over the 40D. I notice on this website the 40D is mentioned a lot more frequently. Can someone explain why this is please?

I also notice the 550D has a much higher mega pixel count than the 40D - is that significant?

I know i mentioned up to £500 at the start of the thread but if i could get together a kit for under £400 would be great as funds are quite tight. Do you think the 30D could be a good alternative to the 40D or would i be better off with say the 400/450D?

Thanks again for all the help with this. Sorry i cant be more specific as to what i'll be shooting but suppose a good all rounder (if that makes sense) would be best for now.
 
I was in the same boat 2 years ago, but for me it was the 400D vs a second hand 40D, with the 40d being more expensive at the time. I went 400D. Given the choice again I'd go 40D.

The 550 is obviously an updated version of the 400D, but I haven't had hands on so I can't say how much better. The extra megapixels are irrelevent unless you're planning on making huge prints.
 
I went from 350D to 40D, main benefits beside the image quality was the feel & handling, the 40D feels bigger/more proper/solid. Also once you are skilled the controls are alot better, having the dial wheel on the back is great, espcially when shooting in full manual or AV.

IMO 550D better for the casual user, 40D better for someone who knows the settings/what they are doing.

40D is good enough to cover most situations perfevtly well with the right lenses.
 
Guys, thats a great help. So if i shell out around £500 its looking like the 40D with a decent lens!

BUT!! Sorry to jump around like this - I hope you can relate to this analysis paralysis when trying to choose the right set up!!

I have just been to my local camera shop and they have a Nikon D3100 in there. They say its one that was sent back to QVC with less than 100 clicks and then sold to them. They are selling it for £360! Thought that was great value.

Do you think maybe get this (while saving a bit of cash), get snapping, then upgrade once I have moved along a bit?

The people in the shop seemed genuine and said I'd struggle to get a better second hand set up for that sort of price.

What do you guys think?

Thank you - and promise my next reply wont have details of yet another choice i have thought of :)
 
Can't comment on the Nikon front, other than that they are the work of the devil.

However, regarding upgrading, I'd say go for the "upgrade" now. If you wait 6 months then decide to upgrade you will end up losing money through depreciation of your current kit. Get better kit now, then upgrade 1-2 years down the line to much better gear if you've really got the bug, or stick with your good gear that you bought in the first place.

That's part of the reason I'd have taken the 40D over the 400D now if given the choice again. I sorta want to upgrade from the 400D, but the natural place to go is something like either the 40D or the 60D. But I figure I'll want a 7D or a 5D mk ii in a couple of years. The upgrade isn't quite worth it to me at the moment, so I'm sticking with the 400D, and I'd rather be sticking with a 40D

It's much like computers, lots of people buy a computer that has upgrade potential. How many actually upgrade in increments? Very few, they just go for something new a few years down the line.
 
The Nikon D3100 is £349 body only I think........? (look on camerapricebuster.co.uk)

cannot comment for Nikon as I'm a Canon guy, I gather Canon is generally better value though.
 
Yeah i think the nikon is generally around £350 body only but this is a cheap deal they have got on at the moment. Quite tempted i must say!

But definitely take the point re: the upgrades. Maybe it would be better to shell out a bit more and have a camera that would serve me well for some time as i improve.

The Canon 40D looks a great camera. I just wonder with buying a nice lens the price will start creeping up to near £550+. Hmm, decisions, decisions!!



Thanks
 
shabba said:
The Nikon D3100 is £349 body only I think........? (look on camerapricebuster.co.uk)

cannot comment for Nikon as I'm a Canon guy, I gather Canon is generally better value though.
Click to expand...

The lower price Nikon bodies do not have a focus motor (for the lens) you would be restricted to their AF-S lenses (with the motor in).

This can make life a touch more expensive down the line when you find that that bargain £80 50mm lens will not auto focus on your camera body.

Personally in your budget the advice regarding the Canon 40D is sound, it is a more than capable camera for your needs, and will produce cracking images.

Do not get caught up in the number of mega pixels 10mp - 12mp is plenty.
 
Yeah that makes sense - cheers. Ok, think I will push the boat and go for the 40D!

What lens do you guys think would be a good all rounder?

Shabba suggests a sigma lens (something like a Sigma 17-50 2.8 or 17-70mm) and a 50mm 1.8. If I had to get one of these or a similarly priced one to cover all bases for the time being what would you guys suggest?

Thanks
 
Nikon D40 + 50mm AF-S 1.8 or 35mm AF-S 1.8 and a Tamron 17-50 for me :)

One of those goes for 145 in the classifieds at the moment and they are cracking cameras for the price. If you find you really enjoy photography then you can get a s/h D90 which is a brilliant camera in far too many ways.

If I was you though I'd get a K20D :) I've been playing for the past week with one, while waiting for my K-5 with a 40mm Pentax lens and the camera is simply amazing.

In body stabilisation, great construction and buttons layout and the lens is simply excellent.
 
Thanks for that mate.

Do you know much about Canon lenses?

I have been looking around and think i may have found quite a good deal on the canon 40d so was looking for something compatible with that.
 
Sorry mate I am not much of a Canon guy at all, I prefer Nikon to Canon so have never looked into it. All I know is what I read/been told so there are a lot more people here that have actual knowledge of the system.
 
Sigma tend to be good value items that are probably nearly as good as the Canon equivelent but cheaper, generally that is where they are in the market.

I had the 17-70mm and it was a nice lens, for the money (£120-160 used) its good. The kit lens might just be fine while you learn though, that and a 50mm 1.8 (£60 used, total bargain, it doesnt zoom obviously so you have to move around, but its very sharp).

Hard to cover all bases, you can get a cheap Sigma 70-300 for under a £100 used if you want something for longer range, i.e sport/wildlife, or the Canon 50-250mm is £120 used and highly regarded at the price-point.

Maybe get the 40D and kit lens, learn your skills and see what you want from there.

I'd always buy used, you will not lose much money when selling on and cameras are very well made/last well.
 
All great advice - cheers! Ok, I think Im all set and hoping to get the 40d and sigma 17-70 for around 500. Might also get the one you mention too shabba- seems a great price!

One last thing - I have been speaking to a photographer mate briefly on the phone and he seems to think the 550d would be a better bet than the 40d. I'm guessing some of you guys would disagree. Can you let me know what you think please.
 
cameras said:
Hi all!

Thanks for having me on what I get the impression is a very friendly and helpful forum :)

I have a budget of around £400 - £500 in order to buy a dslr. I'd be VERY :) happy to pay less if, for what I need it for, the camera does the job.

I dont have any particular area of interest at the moment so will just be going around London on weekends and shooting everything in site :)

My friend just bought a Canon 550D for similar purposes - do you think I could better him for around £450 - £500 on the second hand market?

I've been looking at some other threads and I notice the 40D comes up a lot for a similar budget. Why would this be recommended more than the 550D do you think? Wonder if I could go lower and get something like the 30D, a nice lens and still have some money in my pocket?

Any advice really would be much appreciated. I'm super excited to get stuck in and just want to make sure I'm happy with my choice. Think getting advice from you guys is the best way to ensure that :)

Thanks
Click to expand...

I'm new to DSLR's aswell and just recently blew £500 .. ( like your budget )

I went for the 20D and i'm loving it. ( went for this because of faster shutter speeds and FPS for motorsport )

And lens i started off with a Canon 55-250mm + Kit lens.


One thing i'd say is don't forget all the other bits n bobs. The price adds up...

If you want a good bag, that's atleast £40. Good memory cards can be about £15 each so a couple would be £30, ( if you choose CF cards ). Batteries etc are quite cheap though.

Also, if you decide to go for CF cards, don't buy a cheap reader off ebay! ( mine broke within a day! ) I got a Sandisk reader which is brilliant :)

Good luck, and enjoy DLSR's!
 
My bag was £7 new, I love it, my CF cards were £5 for 4gb and are fine (I have a fast one for motorsport). Look out for deals on such things.
My reader broke, so I just use the camera directly now.

As I said, for me the 40D just handles alot better than the xxxD series. Ignore megapixel counts, above 10 it makes no difference really at this level (i.e non-pro) its more about quality glass.

£500 is just the start if you get into it though.........always want more-more-more!
 
Yeah can imagine the price does start to mount! Will definitely keep an eye out for some deals. Thanks guys

So, what i might be able to get today for £450 is:

Canon 40D
Sigma 17-70mm dc macro f2.8-4.5

Think this sounds good?

I was going to add to that with the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens for around £75 new.

Do you think this sounds like a good package?

Cheers
 
ps, would the Canon 40D with the sigma 17-70mm dc macro f2.8-4.5 be better than the 550D with the kit lens?

Have seen the latter on ebay new for around the same price (£450) from hong kong.

Thanks
 
Way better! Ive got the 500d and kit lens, upgraded the lens to a 28-105 lens for the better glass, it's not L glass, but will do me for now.

The 550 sports a better Af system and more mega pixels, that's it really,(maybe better at high iso). But trust us when we say it's not all about the camera, mostly about the quality if glass in the lens. You won't be disappointed with the 40D and the sigma 17-70 :)

I will say that even though the kit lens is an okay lens, it's made at a budget and mass produced.I was lucky to get a sharp(ish) one. But my fiancees wasnt that great. So don't care if your friend claims his cameras better cause of the mega pixels(like mines do 3 of them bought it when it first came out and try and tease me that the get better quality images,a load of rubbish when I done comparison tests, then it got blamed on me as ive learned photography at college) just challenge him to a contest like me :p
 
Thanks for all your help guys! Loads of great advice and now confident with my purchase.

Bought the 40D and a Tamron 17 - 50mm f/2.8 for £400.

Now to get started!!!
 
Squawk said:
The 550 is obviously an updated version of the 400D, but I haven't had hands on so I can't say how much better. The extra megapixels are irrelevent unless you're planning on making huge prints.
Click to expand...

I started out with a 450D and then upgraded to the 550D just over a year ago. The metering system on the 550D is much, much better than the one in the earlier cameras, particularly with problem shots such as photographing animals in the uppper branches of trees. My 450D delivered a washed out sky in these shots but the 550D handles it quite well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top