cheap dslr, worth it?

N

newbie123456789

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17
Edit My Images
Yes
after reading a few responses and threads elsewhere i now get that a great quality picture is mostly lens as opposed to camera body. so, would it be worth gettin a cheaper dslr like a canon 350D, which ive seen body only for under £100, and with a kit lens for under £150? and spend more on the lenses? thanks
 
How much do you have to spend in total. The 350D might be a bit too old and you can get a much better camera for only a little more. If your plan is to spend more on the lenses then buy body only, the kit is not worth the extra 50£ ...
 
I read on a review site somewhere that (they thought that...) the 350D was the sharpest DSLR Canon have made... praise indeed. However, my concern would be that they're getting old now and shutters don't last forever but having said that for under £100 one would surely be worth the gamble?

I wouldn't bother with the kit lens either but at £50 at least it'd get you going.
 
Last edited:
that is good praise! good point about the age and durabilty though..ideally its something to last me for at least 3 years while i do my degree so..
im not exactly affluent either so i cant afford to be gambling anything, i was more interested in what results would be if you were to use mid price decent lenses on a low price dslr.
but if the camera bodys not going to last then may be pointless...!

what about a canon eos 400D, ive seen an ad on gumtree with the kit lens for £210...
 
I haven't upgraded my 350D yet, though hope to this year, and still happy with the photos it produces. I think its worst problem is noise if you use an ISO over 200, and limited focus points, but I'll still keep it when I get a newer body.
 
While it is true that the lens is a very important factor in the quality of the image, it is the body that lets you use that lens to get the image.

As you move up from entry level to more advanced cameras you gain things like;
PentaPrism viewfinders (rather than PentaMirror) - these are larger and brighter, so framing and focusing are easier.
Dual control wheels - so you can adjust aperture and shutter, or aperture/shutter and compensation without holding an additional button to change wheel functions.
Better AF systems - more cross point sensors.

None of the above directly affect the image quality, but all make getting a good image easier.

In the long term you will undoubtedly spend more on lenses than bodies - but you will tend to keep the lenses, and trade up the bodies.
 
vtecsilver said:
I haven't upgraded my 350D yet, though hope to this year, and still happy with the photos it produces. I think its worst problem is noise if you use an ISO over 200, and limited focus points, but I'll still keep it when I get a newer body.
Click to expand...

Jeez. I was happy enough with my 300D at ISO 1600, the 350D should be acceptable at waaaaaaaaaaaay beyond ISO 200.
 
Canon 350d IMO are legendary I would be more than happy to use one today..

is it from a single seller with no comeback or a 2nd hand place which offers a warranty? if you get any sort of warranty even just 3 months I would say its worth a punt at £100.. ask if you can test it and shoot a blue sky or white peice of paper at around f11-f16 and see how dirty the sensor is as its an old camera with no sensor shake and if it needs a good clean and you are not confident in doing it yourself thats another £45 you have to take into account..

if the lens is the older non IS version(which it might just be) I wouldnt say its worth £50, you can pick up a Sigma DC 18-50mm 3.5 for around that which is not the greatest but alot better than the older non IS Canon kit lenses.

its all about budget which will determine whether you go more modern, if someone was pushing a 350d under my nose for <£100 tho I don't think I could say no.
 
I purchased my 350D back in Sept. 2009 as a display model for $179.40 U.S..
Everything else including the 18-55MM EFS lens was in the original packaging. The silver colored body had a few very small scratches and nicks but that was about the extent of the signs of usage. The camera was never turned on and never had a lens mounted.
The 350D was one of the best investments I have made in a long time.
The viewing screen is small - however with the CHDK hack installed this Canon is quite a performer. It sits on a file cabinet behind me with a Tamron 18-200 lens ready to go.

Many of my 3rd party lens purchases get tested on the 350D before I use them on the 550D. Nikon, M42, Contax/Yashica, Tamron Adaptall 2, etc., all work fine on this camera with the proper adapters.
 
Last edited:
micloi said:
Also have a look at the 20D. Just a bit more expensive than the 350D and totally worth it.
Click to expand...

This is what I was thinking - the 20D is a very well put together camera and has remarkably good image quality.
 
The 20d is a great camera i have one plus you pick up a 55-250 which i also have for about £140.

Heres some images

Ediit2w.jpg


mitsi-lancer1.jpg


ignore the dust spot forgot to clone it
bOOST-COLOURS.jpg
[/URL]

Think its a cracking combination, only been using it for 7 months as im completely new to the digital slr.
 
that last shot is pretty impressive! so the 20d is definitely something im going to be looking out for now too. someone on the Student Room forum has also been making a good case for the 400d, and after searching flickr and seeing this amazing picture http://www.flickr.com/photos/66065736@N00/2716553461/ and many others taken with a kit lens the 400d also looks very appealing, but more expensive at £220-£300 + lens that i've seen on gumtree.

i was initally going to get a sony a200 because of the in body stablisiation and fact you could use cheaper minolta lenses...

may all depend if the price is right now! thanks for all your help and input!
 
newbie123456789 said:
that last shot is pretty impressive! so the 20d is definitely something im going to be looking out for now too. someone on the Student Room forum has also been making a good case for the 400d, and after searching flickr and seeing this amazing picture http://www.flickr.com/photos/66065736@N00/2716553461/ and many others taken with a kit lens the 400d also looks very appealing, but more expensive at £220-£300 + lens that i've seen on gumtree.

i was initally going to get a sony a200 because of the in body stablisiation and fact you could use cheaper minolta lenses...

may all depend if the price is right now! thanks for all your help and input!
Click to expand...

All I'll say about looking at Sony due to the cheap Minolta lenses is - just take a look at the used 2nd hand lens market for Canon, I've picked up some bargains lately!
 
Ah I thought this thread was very similar to the one over at TSR!
 
I bought my 350D new about 6 years ago and it is still going strong - taken about 10'000 photos in the past 3 or 4 months (messing about doing time lapses) with no complaint. As said above, images don't look great with higher ISOs (I don't even like to leave 100) and the screen is so small (and colours pretty dull) that I only use it to check the histogram - I don't bother looking at my photos until I get home. Doesn't really sound like I'm selling it well, but I do think it's a great camera and I've felt no need to upgrade since I've bought it. The kit lens, however, is turd.
 
The 20D is pro body so its bigger, got more fps than a 350d, got a top plate so you can see all your settings without having to look at the tiny screen, the screen is small but its sufficient enough to see whether its in focus and you can always zoom in to see if its sharp, Handles high iso well, ive shot at 1600 and even though there noisey you still get good pictures, longer battery life as well i would think, shoot at higher shutter speeds.
I really dont see why you need to buy a 400d when it is more expensive and doesnt have the features shown above, plus you can buy one from mpbphotographic and they look new, just sligt scuff marks and a tiny bit of paint chipped of the top plate but the camera is 8 years old i think so abit of wear and tear is to be expected. They havent got one in stock but they are about £180 on there.
 
odd jim said:
All I'll say about looking at Sony due to the cheap Minolta lenses is - just take a look at the used 2nd hand lens market for Canon, I've picked up some bargains lately!
Click to expand...

but they won't all be stabilised as the Minoltas become ;)
 
I bought a Nikon D50 for £90, bolted a very 'cosmetically challenged' second hand Nikon 80-200 AF-S onto it (£450), went to the Festival of Speed and was contacted by two car manufacturers who wanted to use my pics/offer me work afterwards.

£540 and I had a magnificent set-up, sure the AF may not have been as quick as newer models, fps was slow, and the focus points were very few and all near the middle...but 3 years of motorsport practice with a bridge camera had put me in a good position to really get the most out of my 'new' equipment (and motorsport is supposed to be at the higher end of photography, cost wise)

I personally put it at 90% lens, 10% body, every client I've had isn't nearly as fussy to a pixel peeping level as the vast majority of forum dwellers, nobody ever complained at 6mp images (and horror of horrors, I shot JPEG)
 
Last edited:
ukaskew said:
I bought a Nikon D50 for £90, bolted a very 'cosmetically challenged' second hand Nikon 80-200 AF-S onto it (£450), went to the Festival of Speed and was contacted by two car manufacturers who wanted to use my pics/offer me work afterwards.

£540 and I had a magnificent set-up, sure the AF may not have been as quick as newer models, fps was slow, and the focus points were very few and all near the middle...but 3 years of motorsport practice with a bridge camera had put me in a good position to really get the most out of my 'new' equipment (and motorsport is supposed to be at the higher end of photography, cost wise)

I personally put it at 90% lens, 10% body, every client I've had isn't nearly as fussy to a pixel peeping level as the vast majority of forum dwellers, nobody ever complained at 6mp images (and horror of horrors, I shot JPEG)
Click to expand...

ahh thanks for that! defo going to go on the cheaper end of a camera body now with confidence, then look for a better-than-the-kit-crap lens.

my plan now is to buy a either Canon eos 20d or 350d >£150 body only then purchase a standard canon zoom IS lens and/or canon 50mm prime lens, for fashion and portraits..good plan? i had no clue before posting on these forums!

just spent a good while on your weblink too, LOVE the toy soldier/little people photos! creative set up!
 
I chose a used 350D, 18-55 IS, 50mm f/1.8 and a 55-250 for my first DSLR at the start of the year and I'm really happy with it so far. The entire setup cost me less than £300 which I think makes it great value for money.
 
Mandoo said:
I chose a used 350D, 18-55 IS, 50mm f/1.8 and a 55-250 for my first DSLR at the start of the year and I'm really happy with it so far. The entire setup cost me less than £300 which I think makes it great value for money.
Click to expand...

i'd consider that a bargain! any chance you could link me to your flickr or something? as thats the set up im currently looking for :)
 
newbie123456789 said:
i'd consider that a bargain! any chance you could link me to your flickr or something? as thats the set up im currently looking for :)
Click to expand...

I sold my 400d with shutter count of a few hundred with 8 gb CF, less than a month old 50mm 1.8 II and 18-55 IS for £350 on sunday lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top