worth upgrading to 500d?

E

emboli

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5
Edit My Images
No
Hi, please forgive me if this post appears a little bit naive, that could be down to the fact I know little about photography.

My wife is in to photographing wildlife, in particular birds. However having to crop her photos to get a reasonable size image obviously degrades the quality. Now, most of the images are taken using a 400D with sigma 70-300mm (not sure which one). I've spoken to the shop that we usually buy her kit from and they just wanted to flog her a 500mm zoom of some sort. To say that I nearly fell of my seat when he told me the cost would be an understatement; and I though diving kit was expensive.

The other downside to a new lens other than cost is the weight and size. My wife is rather on the small side, and often walks a lot with a camera - rather than using a hide and tripod.

So, would she get an increase in detail to allow cropping if we upped the resolution? The 400D used currently is 12m pixels, if this was upped to the 15.1m offered by the 500D (25% increase) would that allow more detail at range, and therefore better detail when cropping. Or have I missed something fundamental?

I know the 500D body would cost nearly the same as a new lens, but at least the 400D body could be resold, or I could even get a housing and use it for diving ;)
 
I would personally go with the 50D. It is around the same price/a little cheaper and is a semi-professional body and is overall a better body, however if you are looking for the HD video, the 500D is for you.

In my opinion the HD video is not needed and all the cameras they are bringing out and it is getting a little annoying.
 
What you need is the birds to come closer, or buy a longer lens as suggested. Heavy cropping isn't really ideal.

p.s the 400d is 10mp
 
Thanks for the quick replies - told you i knew little about photography, didn't even get the resolution right.

I know the lens in the long run is probably the best option, but as a step in the right direction would a 50% increase in resolution help a lot, or just a little? would she get a similar imaged cropped with a 15m pix image taken on a 300mm, as a 10m pix image taken with a 400 / 500mm lens? I'm sure there are ways to work it out, but my physics knowledge around optics is rather poor.
 
Welcome to TP, emboli.

Your reasoning of the 15MP vs 10MP difference is sound. However there are a number of other factors to take into account.

Firstly, you have to be confident that your lens is capable of delivering that much detail to the sensor. Many consumer-grade lenses aren't. You don't know which lens your wife has, but it might not be capable of delivering 15MP to the sensor. There are ways to work this out, and people on TP who know how to do it. Let's hope one of them turns up here.

Secondly, you need to be aware that it's not a very big increase. From 10MP to 15MP sounds like an increase of 50%, but bearing in mind your image has 2 dimensions it's only an increase of 22% in each dimension. That's not a lot of increase for the kind of money you're talking about. By comparison, going from 300m to 400mm or 500mm focal length would be a 33% or 67% increase in each dimension.

Thirdly, money spent on camera bodies is much less of a good investment than money spent on quality lenses. Lenses hold their values very well if looked after. But there's always a continuous supply of newer-and-better bodies, so they don't hold their value so well.
 
StewartR said:
Welcome to TP, emboli.

Your reasoning of the 15MP vs 10MP difference is sound. However there are a number of other factors to take into account.

Firstly, you have to be confident that your lens is capable of delivering that much detail to the sensor. Many consumer-grade lenses aren't. You don't know which lens your wife has, but it might not be capable of delivering 15MP to the sensor. There are ways to work this out, and people on TP who know how to do it. Let's hope one of them turns up here.

Secondly, you need to be aware that it's not a very big increase. From 10MP to 15MP sounds like an increase of 50%, but bearing in mind your image has 2 dimensions it's only an increase of 22% in each dimension. That's not a lot of increase for the kind of money you're talking about. By comparison, going from 300m to 400mm or 500mm focal length would be a 33% or 67% increase in each dimension.

Thirdly, money spent on camera bodies is much less of a good investment than money spent on quality lenses. Lenses hold their values very well if looked after. But there's always a continuous supply of newer-and-better bodies, so they don't hold their value so well.
Click to expand...

Using a 15mp body myself I have to agree with this. One of my lenses is excellent and I'm surprised by the image quality even at 100%, but the other is less impressive, especially when heavily cropping an image.

If you can afford it I would get a longer lens, but bear in mind it will be heavier than your current 70-300.
 
I've just had a look at the site StewartR links to - lens hire. Just spoken to my wife and looks like she'll hire a couple of lenses to evaluate. Thanks for the comments.

So, really it looks like new lens - then new body, then underwater housing for the old 400D ;)
 
Unfortunately, you were given the right advice in the shop albeit they probably tried to sell you one of the most expensive 500mm lenses they had. I am, however, surprised they even got that bit right considering what we hear about most of the shops (Jessops for example!).

You may want to look into something like a Canon 100-400 L second hand, you could probably pick one up for about £750 or take a look at the Sigma options such these:

Sigma 120-400mm f4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM - only £597
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1025302

Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM - £727
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1025305

From what I've heard both of these lenses are well worth the asking price, I've seen some good results from the 150-500, especially for <£800!

However, weight wise your still talking a considerable difference between the 70-300 she has now, and these ~2kg lenses but the difference in focal length comes at a cost unfortunately.
 
Wow 2kg, now that&#8217;s heavy. She finds the current kit she has just about right which comes in at 1.1kg for both lens and body. With a big lens that would come in somewhere about 3gk - that&#8217;s a lot. So perhaps a good quality 70-300mm (or similar) and a 15mp body would give more detail, albeit needing cropping still?

Just had a look at the lens she currently uses - sigma APO DG 70-300mm 1:4-5.6. - what&#8217;s this like?
 
The 70-300mm APO is a great lens, for the money. It's at the cheaper end but is well thought of. I use a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX with a 1.4x extender (most of the time) for my wildlife shots and have some good results - although it is a reasonable weight at 1.4kg and costs around £800.

To get the best shots you need to invest considerable time in hunting down the birds you wish to shoot, even if this means enticing them with mealworm, setting up a hide or throwing a bit of scrim netting over yourself. I'm not convinced an increase in resolution will give you much better results.
 
emboli said:
I know the 500D body would cost nearly the same as a new lens, but at least the 400D body could be resold, or I could even get a housing and use it for diving ;)
Click to expand...

THe housing is probably more expensive than both a new body or a new lens.

You're usually looking about about £1,000-£1,200 for body, about £250-£300 for ports for different lenses, then you need strobes, trays, arms, synch cables, +4 doptre filters for zoom lenses.

Normally looking around the £3,000 for a decent set up with twin strobes
 
The housing is a bit of a pipe dream - and to be honest the compact cameras and housings i've used recently have been OK. Just need to sort out the options for my wife this year - may start looking at options for a camera setup for diving later in the year. Afterall, that for me :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top