Want to give Canon a go...

W

WannaTakePix

Suspended / Banned
Messages
91
Edit My Images
No
Hi All,

I decided to have a dabble at Photography about a year ago.
Ummed & aahhhed about what camera to get...D7000, Canon 60D, D90 & Canon 7D !

In the end I went used to get a feel to see if I liked the whole shooting images thing.

I bought a D70 with a 18-105m & added a 1.8 35mm prime a little later.

Love the feel of the Nikon in my hand and its served me well for its age.

As I've tried to learn more (obviously LOADS left) I've taken a fancy to Canon images...I know I've been told I can get the same by changing the settings in a Nikon but the colours of Canons straight out the box do appeal.

Hence now I am looking to buy another used camera to see how green the grass is on the other side first hand.

I've been looking at some of the older Canon Semi-Pro bodies :
20D, 30D, 40D & 50D.

Was wondering what people would reccomend for a relatively still wet behind the ears NooB.

The question of budget probably comes to mind.
Upto £400 for a body is acceptable but a bit of a push tbh, but I'm really trying to rack the Canon EXPERTS brains on which to go for & why.

& while were here what reasonably priced walkabout lens would you suggest to go with the body?

Which I guess begs the question what do I want to shoot?
A bit of everything, from portraits to action shots / sports to macro & landscapes.

Looking forward to your learned replies.

Many Thanks in advance,

WTP
 
I had a 20D for a little over seven years and IMVHO to get the best out of it I had to shoot RAW and process the images myself. I'd expect the same to be true of the 30D which AFAIK uses the same chip.

From what I've read newer cameras have much punchier straight out of the camera JPEG's than those from the older models. I think that years ago the thinking was that DSLR users would process their own images and JPEG output was therefore a little muted. Certainly my 300D, 10D and 20D JPEG images looked rather flat. There were in camera tweaks but IMVHO RAW still beat the camera JPEG's every time.

Perhaps you could think about shooting RAW and processing the images yourself to get the look you want? To me that seems a better approach than switching sytems.

PS. Walkabout... Zoom... 17-50mm f2.8. Prime... you have a nice one :)
 
Last edited:
WoooooW it pains me to say this but a Nokin will capture an image just as well as a Canon, your a bit disillusioned to say Canon images, seem better, to be honest its the photographer and his seeing eye that makes the difference, not the camera OK a good spec camera does help, but to swap just because you think their better SOC, theres a lot of variables your not taking into consideration,
 
If you really want to try / swap, then for your budget, then you should be able to get a good 40D with lens to get you going...


I must say, though, I do tend to agree with Dave and feel you'd be disappointed - I would recommend you check you settings in camera - can you alter anything to bring your shots up ? Have you altered any settings in camera and is this causing your problem - might be worth a factory reset and start again ?

Check and review your shots and ask questions / search out the photos you like and ask why is it like this, how did they get it, what settings did they use, have the processed it at all etc etc

Hope this is of some help...
 
This is a processing issue not a manufacturing issue. As noted you are probably shooting JPEG and don't realise the camera is processing for you. If you want a particular look post a link and someone will give you an idea how to set up your camera the same.
 
Are all Raw files created equal?. I notice fairly often that people compare colours and overall feel of image between Canon, Nikon, other but are they always referring to JPEGs?

Presumably with different Sensors the Raw files will also be different but being Raw they can pretty much be processed to create very similar JPEGs?
 
Thanks for your replies & forgive my ignorance.

Let's tackle it a different way, considering I just want to "have a go" with some Canon gear and see for myself.
As a brand new shooter what used Canon cameras would you recommend and why out of:
20D, 30D, 40D, 50D?

***takes cover from impending replies***
 
If you're shooting JPEG's you'll be wasting your time and money going for an older camera as the straight out of camera JPEG's are more likely to look a bit flat. Actually, you're probably wasting your time going for a mid range model, maybe you should go for an entry level model as it's more likely to produce punchy straight out of the camera JPEG's.

Actually, I think you'd be even better accepting that a DSLR picture can be processed to look restrained, arty, high tone / low tone or even like they were taken with a compact bought from ASDA for £30.

Please look into shooting RAW and processing the images yourself to get the look that you want.

I personally can see only a very few limited situation where JPEG is best and they'd include things like professional shooting when there simply isn't time to process images. Photojournalism and stuff like that maybe.
 
Totally agree (see, I had to come round one day Alan :) )

Be better spending time on getting used to processing Raw files and buying the best software to suit. Most of the software can be setup to automatically apply changes in batches to bring the images up to the desired level once you have that 'programmed' in.

However, it seems to me you may just be looking for an excuse to change. Nothing wrong with changing if that is what you want to do and seem like you want a nnD model so just look at the specs to see which best matches your needs (not much help but I don't know which of the differences between a 20D and a 50D are required by you)
 
Last edited:
Me, me, me! I'm one of the togs Dave knows with a 40d! Brilliant camera, if you want to see what It is REALLY capable of have a look at ' JIMMY LEMON' s images, he's a Mod on here. He has got the 40d singing.
 
fancy to Canon images.
Click to expand...
any particular images you have seen, maybe a link -i just wonder if you have seen some images with some of the top rated canon glass - so you comparing images from primes & Zooms at around £600+
images taken with the 70-200L look great but at £2k a lens
 
The colour can differ between the cameras even when processing RAW. That's because the software is using camera specific profiles. My 1Ds II produces lovely colours and 1D III gives somewhat different results of the same scene.
Digic II produces better colour than III in my opinion, but then I didn't have a chance to use 1Ds mkiii.

between the xxD, 40D is probably the best compromise, as 50D just added more pixels with more noise. But given the current prices I would certainly look at 5D or 1DIIN instead.
 
Picked up a 40D, should be here by the end of the week.

Was thinking about going for :
18-55mm
55-250mm
For starters...heard good things about both even though they are "kit" lenses...

Any input folks ?
 
sounds like a good plan, how bout the 50mm f/1.8 and you have a fab set up
 
WannaTakePix said:
Picked up a 40D, should be here by the end of the week.

Was thinking about going for :
18-55mm
55-250mm
For starters...heard good things about both even though they are "kit" lenses...

Any input folks ?
Click to expand...

Would go for the 18-55IS if you are going this route as its a better lens than the mon IS version.
The 17-85 IS was sold as a kit lens with the 40D

The 55-250IS for the price is a cracking lens, my daughter has one and gets greats results with it.
 
andyred said:
Would go for the 18-55IS if you are going this route as its a better lens than the mon IS version.
The 17-85 IS was sold as a kit lens with the 40D

The 55-250IS for the price is a cracking lens, my daughter has one and gets greats results with it.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Should I be going for the IS II versions of both of these ?

I've heard some very good things about both of the relatively (one of Canons cheapest) lenses, regarding IQ rather than Build Quality...another question about them, will they be suitable for plpolarising filters?

Was thinking about getting a 430 EX Flash too...
Ifv I got the Nifty Fifty too it would be all I need for the time being.
 
WannaTakePix said:
Hi,

Should I be going for the IS II versions of both of these ?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, buy whatever is cheaper. On the whole, the main changes are cosmetic.


I've heard some very good things about both of the relatively (one of Canons cheapest) lenses, regarding IQ rather than Build Quality...another question about them, will they be suitable for plpolarising filters?
Click to expand...

CPL polarisers will work fine.
 
Hi

As Dave says the difference between the mkI &II is cosmetic, so purchase whichever you can get at best price.

The CPL will work okay, just be aware the front element rotates when focusing, so you need to readjust the CPL if you refocus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top