Digital SLR cameras. Canon 450D good?
Community Forums/General Help/Digital SLR cameras. Canon 450D good?
| ||
| I would love to get into digital photography at some point with a mid-priced camera but don't really know the ins and outs of it all One guy at work suggested the Canon 450D, 12.1 megapixel being a good enough camera I would like a camera easy enough to use at beginner level yet offer more pro control as needed What are your experiences? What matters the most? I imagine a really good lens is key Price range ... I am thinking £600 tops |
| ||
| I recently acquired a DMC-GF1. It's rather good. It was a toss-up between that or the Olympus Pen. |
| ||
| I'd recommend going for an EOS 1000D as you'll likely pick one up a fair bit cheaper than a 450D. You can always trade in the camera body later for a higher spec model and keep the lenses if you decide you want to. |
| ||
| Yep, the EOS 1000D is certainly cheaper (by £200) and you don't really lose out on spec from what I see: == comparison http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page2.asp == samples http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page35.asp == specs http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page3.asp Basically, 10MP and 2.5" display vs 12MP and 3" display. I can certainly live with that Are Canon & Nikon still the main players? Canon seem to have a crap-load of lens There again, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 has some really nice features such as higher ISO and 720p movie recording. The only snag is the much higher price == DMC-GF1 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmcgf1.asp == sample movies http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/page21.asp (BTW www.dpreview.com looks like a great website) |
| ||
| In amateur photography there are only two main camps; Canon and Nikon. The Nikon D60 is comparable to the EOS 1000D but which you choose largely comes down to going to a camera shop and asking for a close-up look to see which you prefer. I did the same (when I was broke, so I still have neither) and found the Canon felt much nicer than the Nikon but I think it comes down to personal preference. Just to go back to the lenses issue - be sure you choose the right brand for you as if you do get 'serious' you'll spend a fortune in lenses and accessories and the two brands are not compatible with each other. For your price range you should easily be able to find an EOS 1000D twin lens kit with 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses. This will be plenty to keep you happy for a while. |
| ||
| I considered also Canon 450D and other high quality cameras. And I ended up with Olympus SP-570 UZ with 20x optimal zoom. Nowdays there are even better ones like 590 with 26x optical zoom. I preferred the Olympus because it was a complete camera, while Canon 450D was just some small part of a camera and you had to buy all remaining parts seperately. High optical zoom is important if you want to make textures of far away objects at high quality. |
| ||
| I preferred the Olympus because it was a complete camera ...otherwise known as a "compact" while Canon 450D was just some small part of a camera and you had to buy all remaining parts seperately. That's the definition of an SLR camera. They are designed to have changeable lenses. All other "remaining parts" (external flash, battery grips, huge memory cards, remote shutter release etc) are largely optional. High optical zoom is important if you want to make textures of far away objects at high quality. On the other hand, using your camera's zoom just to save yourself a walk is bad practice #1 in photography. And if you do plan on using high zoom you will definitely need a tripod. |
| ||
| The XSi is a pretty decent camera for the price, although it has just been discontinued recently with the release of the EOS 550D / T2i. Many of the online stores no longer stock this camera, and new ones are no longer be manufactured. If you want to get one, you shouldn't wait to long or stocks may be depleted. There are two other cameras in Canon's beginner SLR series: the 500D / T1i, and the 550D / T2i. The 500D is the most similar to the XSi, they both have the same onboard DIGIC3 processor, but the 500D has a slightly higher resolution and can do basic HD video (at a low framerate) I got the 550D / T2i myself, which is based on the faster DIGIC4 processorir functionally almost identical to the much more expensive higher-end 7D. (the only real differences between the 550D and the 7D are that the 550D has a smaller body, plastic instead of metal, and a lower burst rate when taking multiple images) The kit lens that comes with the 500D / 550D is the canon 18-55mm IS, which is actually surprisingly good for a stock lens. It has hardware image stabilization built-in, which means that it is much esier to snap sharp pictures without using a tripod. Especially at higher zoom levels, without IS it's really easy to end up with blurry images due to minor camera movement. The basic lens is not going to give you any massive amount of zoom power though, it's more geared towards wide-angle than big close-up zoom. Two websites I'd suggest if you're looking into purchasing a SLR camera and/or lensen: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/XSI/XSIA.HTM (Nice thing about that one is that they have sample images of the same still life scene with countless cameras and lenses, so you can do a one-on-one comparison) http://slrgear.com (especially nice when comparing the sharpness of varying lenses) |
| ||
| i migrated from an APS 20-80 & 80-200 lense set up to a panasonic 12x zoom 4 or so years ago, it listed the lense lenth like old cameras as well so i ended up with a 400 lense cant remember the mega pixel, but zoom and pixel are the big selling points, mine was a bridge or prosumer model, that is it only had one lense, but its better than a compact and cheaper than a digital SLR never use digital zoom though, its better to just crop it in your program of choice, i tried digital zoom once and on the screen it looked ok, but on the pc it was honeycombed, i could have got the same shot using just the normal zoom and cropped in with better results, the same size using propper zoom filters if i wanted. my dad used to have oodles of cannon and nikon slrs, he normally bought a new kit, tried it out, boxed it down and within a year sold it for more than he originally paid for. and he was looking forwards to this "digital film" which was basically a CCD in a 35mm canister. someone bought out the technology and shelved it, why let someone breath digital life into old cameras large and small when you can get em to buy a brand new set up |
| ||
| Have a look at www.dpreview.com it has reviews of all camera. Normally the lenses cost more than the camera. :-) Jim |
| ||
| I have used a Canon 350D for several years and would recommend any of the EOS range for quality and features. |
| ||
| The 450D is an excellent camera. Fits my hand perfectly, there's alot of tinkering you can do. Comes with a FREE raw image program, that lets you edit tons of settings, before converting to a lesser picture format, like picture style etc etc. Great application. while Canon 450D was just some small part of a camera and you had to buy all remaining parts seperately I got mine for £450, that included the lens (very good lens btw), the built flash. The only thing i needed was a memory card. My 4 GB one keeps plenty of photos. Just remember and check the sensor size. The point and click cameras have alot smaller sensor size, and they cram it with too many pixels. 12 MP for instance is somewhat detrimental to image quality. Anyway, i would highly recommend the 450D. |
| ||
| The point and click cameras have alot smaller sensor size, and they cram it with too many pixels. 12 MP for instance is somewhat detrimental to image quality. Very true -- the more megapixels isn't always better. you can only get so many megapixels per square inch of sensor. Going beyond that threshold, and you'll only be adding noise and no detail. Many of the lower end cameras advertise high megapixels because if joe consumer sees a 7 megapixel and a 10 megapixel camera for the same price, most people will just reach for the 10 megapixel one without questioning it. But depending on the sensor size, with all other components and features being identical, the 7 megapixel camera may very well create superior images compared to the 10 megapixel one. It really pays to take a close look at some of the online camera comparison sites and actually *look* at the images created with the various models. You may be surprised. |
| ||
| Good responses all. Great information Would you say 10MP is about the maximum to aim for? That's still a pretty massive image Should I aim for a lens with "IS" (which I assume means Image Stabilization) What exactly does it mean when you read things like "18-55mm" , "55-200mm" Are they suited to particular tasks? |
| ||
| What exactly does it mean when you read things like "18-55mm" , "55-200mm" Are they suited to particular tasks? old SLR's didnt have nX zoom, these state how far along the lense the zoom lense has moved, the lower the number the closer the subject i used my 80-200 lense for festivals, mostly staying in the 200 area 18 and similar are best suited for portraits. some have macro modes which are for detailed images like flowers at one point, some telescopes used to have a nikon or cannon compatible 2nd view finder, so you could attatch your SLR to your telescope and take pictures of the stars, or that girl down the road. and yes image stabilizer (or a tripod) is a must the further up the lense* the more the wobble is without either *although mine the CCD pulls back when you zoom out but either way its the same result |
| ||
| In laymens terms it pertains to the camera focal length/zoom. On the basis that a picture says a thousand words: http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/EFLenses101/focal_length.html |
| ||
| Have a look at the canon 40D second hand. It is 10Mp without video, but does shoot 6.3fps and so is good for sport. It's a nice size and still is highly regarded. Canon did bring out the 50D, but they ruined it by upping the MP to 15, just adding more noise. Jim |
| ||
| What exactly does it mean when you read things like "18-55mm", "55-200mm" In old-fashioned film photography, the piece of film that got exposed was 35mm in size. When you zoom in/out, the projected size of the image on the sensor changes, and you can compare these sizes with eachother to see how much of a zoom you have. Most digital SLR cameras use an APS-C sensor, which is smaller than a standard 35mm negative: You get a so-called crop factor of 1.6x. 35mm * 1.6 = 56mm, meaning that on those cameras a view at 55mm is roughly the 'real' size of an object: if you look through the camera, the objects appear about the same size as they appear to your other eye that's not looking through the camera. So... a 55mm lens on a camera with an APS-C sensor, gives you aproximately 'normal' vision, without magnification. A lens that has 55-200mm can therefore show you the world at 1x magnification all the way through ~4x magnification (200/55). 18-55mm will be a wide-angle lens where you can't magnify, but you can zoom *out* about 3 times, allowing you to get additional information in the shot. (The normal human eye wouldn't be able to see this from the same position. For example, at 18mm you could take a picture of the entire dashboard of your car sitting in the drivers seat, normally you would only see a portion of it) A fish-eye lens is an extreme example of a wide-angle lens, where you have a field of view that's larger than 180 degrees, and you can literally look over both your own shoulders at the same time. You also get extreme deformation of the image, though. If you want to be able to both zoom out AND zoom in, you'd need a lens like the 18-200mm ones. Most of the time those have worse image quality than the more dedicated lenses, but you have the benefit of not needing to switch lenses as frequently. Those kind of lenses are often referred to as 'vacation lenses' for the convenience... But again, they come at the price of reduced image quality. in general, wide-angle lenses are good for indoor photography (it's much easier to get a larger group of people or an entire room into the viewfinder if you can zoom out further. They are also great for landscape photography, since it's easier to record a sense of scale and wideness. Downside is that you typically get some barrel distortion at the lowest sizes, where straight lines start to curve. The 55-200mm would be a telephoto lens, and they are good for wildlife photography, picking up details far away from you, and things like sports photography where there is fast movement and you can't get close to the subject. If you want to see some samples of how the zoom lengths affect the image, check out this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view At the bottom, there are some sample images of the same scenes shot at different zoom levels. |
| ||
| The best help and information I must say. Thumbs up from me |
| ||
| Whatever you buy, don't buy from Currys, Dixons or PCWorld. They tend to have very old stock. Go for Jessops or Amazon or WarehouseExpress. http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ This is a great site. Jim |
| ||
| Nice site Jim There is a Jessops I can pop into back home but, I was wondering what would the difference be from buying say, a Canon 1000D from Curry's or the same product from Jessops? Does age affect any functionality of the camera? The site you linked shows Curry's having the lowest price for the Canon 1000D + Lens kit: http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod1020.html |
| ||
| Does age affect any functionality of the camera? It can -- an older camera may have an older firmware version, which may be slightly inferior (after all, there wouldn't be an update if the old version was better) More importantly, though, is the battery life: Lithium-Ion batteries start degrading as soon as they are manufactured, whether you use them or not. (Oxidation starts forming on the metal contacts inside the battery, reducing their effectiveness) If you have a 2-3 year old battery, then it's quite possible that you get less than half the charge than a 'new' battery would hold. |
| ||
| Jim, my wife has had her Canon 450D for a year and it is great for what she uses it professionally for wedding photography - however she would like to upgrade it for one which has HD video. Incidentally she got her camera from the warehouse express as opposed to Jessops. Here is a hyperlink of photography taken with a Canon450D. http://www.boudicaphotography.com Regards, BP. |
| ||
| My wife has the EOS 50D, it's a very good camera - we'll apart from the 5D (which she really wants). |
| ||
| My wife has the EOS 50D, it's a very good camera So it should be for nigh on two grand. |
| ||
| Indiepath, I just got my 5D it's very nice (don't tell the wife!). Had a Canon 40D then a Nikon D300 and now the 5D. It is expensive but worth it IMO. Jim |
| ||
| @JBR - Yes I reckon the 5D is a worthwhile buy, as is the 50D. Having used the 50D I would always recommend someone to save the money and buy something good - don't ever go cheap when it comes to cameras and make sure you buy some decent glass! (lenses). An old friend of mine has a 5D and is taking some magic shots: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imh/ Ian recommended the 50D. The DOF on the camera is just awesome with the right lens/settings! http://www.flickr.com/photos/imh/2608232615/ |
   |