Help with final decision needed!

F

Ferj

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,655
Edit My Images
No
I've posted a couple of threads recently one about the 7D & 70D and another about wide prime lenses..

The situation is I have approx £1100 to play with I currently have 2x 40D an 85mm f1.8 & 50mm f1.8.

I was considering a body upgrade with a wide prime, but last night thought maybe I'm better extending my range & getting a 17-40 f4L & 70-200 f4L. I shoot people!

Benefit would be great glass that holds value, I already have some wide aperture lenses but downside would be using dated bodies, but would look to upgrade in the future..

So body & 28mm or similar, or 2x L zooms?

What are your thoughts, help as ever much appreciated!
 
In my opinion decent glass is better than decent bodies.

You could probably pick up a 17-55 2.8 over the 17-40 and the 70-200 F4. I have both as well as a recently added 85mm 1.8.
 
Basically it's part of a business start up package, if is spend over £1k I get half of whatever I spend back in a grant, so it makes good sense to invest. I find myself a little limited by the primes, I would like to go wider & I had a 70-200 previously and liked it a lot.
Zooms would give me more flexibility.

In a perfect world I would upgrade both bodies & by L lenses!

My thinking is that if I buy decent glass it will last & hold value & be good.

If I buy a new body & prime it will improve IQ but will need to buy batteries etc all my shoots are outdoors, I struggle on occasions with full length portraits & groups.
 
Can you get money back if you buy second hand or does it have to be new? You could save a lot by buying second hand.

Also not sure that a 17-40 makes sense on a crop body. You would be better off with a tamron 17-50mm f2.8.

Second hand you would be able to afford a 7d, the 70-200mm f4L and the tamron
 
I found the 7D a huge upgrade from the 40D.
not for noise, etc, which was okay...but for the focusing and speed of file handling.
if you miss the shot because of lack of good focus lock then the rest doesn't matter. going back to the focus on the 5Dii is painful for me but worth it because of the FF sensor.
The Tamron 70-200 is good, 17-55 is lovely on a cropped sensor. the primes you have sound amazing.
I would look for that f2.8 goodness for people shots Although f4 is nice of course.
 
40Ds are about £150
so you have £1400 ish.

what about a 5Dii with a 24-105L
then you have wide and portrait, L glass quality, F4, and then the lovely primes used to their fullest potential?
also it's light and versatile.
 
I wish I had that much, original plan was buy a body get the grant sell the 2x 40D but then I started thinking too much!

Maybe I need to just do that, the only downside is one camera rather than two & save up for lenses later.

Arghh! I have a meeting at 12 and need to decide by then!
 
I think I can buy second hand however with one sh body, if it goes down I'm screwed!

With a new one I have 12 months to save up for a backup which is completely doable!

I think I need to go realistic, upgrade body keep the primes sell the 40ds save up & buy new glass?

What do you think?
 
Last edited:
I'd still go for 17-55 2.8 over the 17-40 unless your full frame of course.

I'd still want two bodies if going professional, so with your budget it's wise yo keep the cameras and invest in versatile glass.
 
I don't think there's anything wrong with the 40D- could be considered long in the tooth from a technology point of view but from a can it take great photos and get the job done perspective then it absolutely still fits that criteria.

I would forget about bodies and get lenses and a flash/ stand/ triggers which are often useful outside. See how you get on and wait and see what happens this year with Canon- bodies are replaced all the time which gives an option of new tech but also pushes prices down on the bodies that have then become unfashionable.

Surely the start up grant is against the cost to start up- web site dev/hosting, marketing etc etc and not just camera equipment?
 
I'd go for the tamron 17-50 over canon 17-55. I don't think the Canon is worth over double the price.

In fact you could have bought mine for £160 that I had on here, but now sold it elsewhere so no interest.

The tamron really is a bargain at that price.
 
Last edited:
id favour lenses, and camera grips (so u look pro :D )
and just cover up the model number
 
As long as you are happy that with the 2x 40D's you can still achieve what you are after then go for the new lenses
 
mike_6480 said:
I'd go for the tamron 17-50 over canon 17-55. I don't think the Canon is worth over double the price.

In fact you could have bought mine for £160 that I had on here, but now sold it elsewhere so no interest.

The tamron really is a bargain at that price.
Click to expand...
The Tamron is great vfm, but the Canon is worth twice the price to lots of people. Because that focus motor is 100% perfect.
 
Phil V said:
The Tamron is great vfm, but the Canon is worth twice the price to lots of people. Because that focus motor is 100% perfect.
Click to expand...
Good point. I upgraded to the Canon after the tamron missed a few key shots. Gutted. I had the older non vc tamron
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top