Canon Gear Help

I'm not a Canon user. But I've shot with both of those cameras. 60D is a great camera. Shutter speed is nice and the focusing is fast. I would go with that. After shooting with the 50mm lens for a few months, rent your next lens to see if you like it. I suggest maybe a 24-70mm to go with the 50mm or something on the wide end like a 10-22mm range.

Please note that the 40d is no longer made. The 60d is, but I wouldn't bet on it being around in production for long with Canon pushing the T series for the Rebel line. A 60d and lens at BH Photo and Video is around $1000. The 7d may soon be the sole crop frame camera in the EOS line of pro cameras.

Disclaimer: I have a 7d that replaced an XSI.

My main lens is a Tamron 24-75 f/2.8. It's. Great lens. Around 600 new.

The 60d may be sealed, but it's not really a sealed system unless the lens is sealed, too. Only the very best of the best Canon L lenses are weather sealed.

Dale

I would always say go with the better lens, but if you have the money, go with the 60D and get some nice glass later.

There's a more than likely chance that a 60D replacement will be on its way in 2013, possibly as early as in the next month or two. Canon may make an announcement at CES next week. You could wait and get the 60D replacement, or pick up the 60D when they discount it:

http://www.canonrumors.com/

mac26 said:

I am aware that the 40D is discontinued and I understand the x0D series has been neglected since the T2i/7D but I find them the perfect being more prosumer than the TXi series. I also can't afford a 7D and the package I have found is pretty much the only one that I can afford. Thanks for the help anyways

Edit: by the way by sealed I meant its in an unopened box

Click to expand...

Here's the DPreview write-up on the 60d.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos60D

I didn't mean to imply that it's not a good camera, it is.

Dale

If you can substitute the 50mm 1.4 for the 1.8 you'll have a much nicer lens, the build quality of the 1.4 is fantastic for the price.

I agree the lenses should be the determining factor, moreso than the body. Both of those are great choices.

I'd just add that while the 70-200mm is a brilliant lens I'd be tempted to wait and get the IS version. Also - bear in mind it attracts a lot of attention and if it was my only lens I would probably often end up taking a little point and shoot when taking the camera to social functions etc instead. You always seem to end talking with people about the camera rather than just taking pics .

I'm on a crop and my most used lens is the EF-S 17-55, although I'm really liking the new 40mm I've just got.

I would also suggest waiting a couple of months, I'm currently contemplating a new body - but as the others have said there's talk of the 70d very soon... (Which I might be tempted by or I might look for a better deal on one of existing models ).

I'd definitely up for the 70D and hope it comes along very soon. My 20D is really, really starting to show its age. I'll be getting mine in Japan (I hate looking at overpriced camera stuff in Britain), and following pricing trends, I won't get it until about six months after it's been released as that tends to be the period when prices drop and stabilise to a long term norm.

If you're looking to invest, the lenses retain more value over time than the bodies. If I had the 40D package, I can still use that 70-200 f4 lens 5,10 years down the line on a new body.

Case in point the new t4i was selling for $900 when it first came out just six months ago now I see deals in the $600 range, same as the clearance sales for t2i & t3i.

The IS version of the 70-200mm is nearly twice the price of the non-IS version, and well over the OP's budget. The 70-200 f4 is a great lens, and a bargain for a L lens. Mount your camera on a tripod, its manual IS.

Judging from your selection, get the 40D package with the 70-200 f4. The lens is the best part of that package. A brand new 70-200 f4 retail for $650, where as the 50mm f1.8 is $110. So, you're paying $640 for the 60D body, and $150 for the 40D body. You can't go wrong with either, but remember both bodies will become obsolete. You can later acquire the 50mm f1.8 either new or used. Heard reports about being fragile, so I suggest getting the 50mm f1.8 new.

Go for the 60D and 50 1.8 and save up for a used or refurb 15-85 as a next lens . There's nothing wrong with the 40D except it's getting a bit long in the tooth . 70-200 is an excellent lens , but maybe isn't the best for a first lens . It's pretty long to use as a walk around lens . The 50 is a whole lot better for a general purpose starter lens even though it equates to 80mm on full frame . If you could swing a 35/2 it might be better , but if you can't , the 50 will do. I'm assuming the 2 bodies/lenses are private sales in your areas , if you miss out on both , remember that the 50D is also a worthwhile body , its got the build of the 40D , 15MP , decent high iso capability , but no articulated screen or video

The OP says I will probably shoot portraits, landscapes, and maybe some nature shots

In all honesty as a beginner, you don't really need much beyond 80 or 100mm at most, in my opinion anyway. For portraits the magic number is around 70-75mm (if I remember correctly), and for landscapes you don't generally have to zoom in that much (in my experience). If anything, I like to go as wide as I can to fit as much of the landscape in as possible. I have an old 75-300mm IS (from my 35mm film days) which I only pick up to move out of the way nowadays. It's great for nature shots, but the OP says maybe he'll use it for this.

I'm not too clued up on recent lenses, but I have a Sigma 18-50mm EX DC. With the x1.6 that's about 28-80mm 2.8. A fantastic lens and still going strong after seven years or so. As someone else mentioned, lenses keep their value and worth. I'm kind of hoping that the 70D doesn't have a full frame sensor as I don't want to deal with the hassle of buying new lenses and selling off the old ones.

EDIT: Thinking on it, I think 80mm is the magic number for portraits. That would explain why I have a 50mm lens!

I would go with the 60D + 50mm combo. I would then save up for the 17-55mm and 70-200mm that you mentioned. If, however, you plan on going full frame in the future, you would have to sell the 17-55mm since EF-S lenses are compatible with FF camera bodies.

There are workarounds for these 'deficiencies', but I'm not a fan of the 60D because it lacks a pc-sync port and the joystick controller.

The crop sensor body I would get in Canon's current lineup is the 7D.

ocabj said:

There are workarounds for these 'deficiencies', but I'm not a fan of the 60D because it lacks a pc-sync port and the joystick controller.

The crop sensor body I would get in Canon's current lineup is the 7D.

Click to expand...

It's out of the OPs budget of $800 for camera and lens. A used 7d body is $900.

Dale

To save heartache and dollars both, do not purchase EF-S lenses. Stay with EF lenses which will work with full frame bodies and crop frame bodies as well. I have a 20D, 1DIII, 5DII, and 5DIII along with a dozen Canon lenses. Canon, in my humble opinion, has the finest glass on the market. My AE-1, and A-1 and five Canon lenses convinced me of that long before Canon designed digital bodies.

http://imaginethatimages.zenfolio.com/

sounds like renting will be your best option to experiment.

So , here's my take on the 15-85 . I inherited mine , along with a 50D body 9-10 months back , maybe I've taken 700-1000 shots with it since , mostly landscape-streetscape sort of shots . When I got it my immediate point of comparison was to the 24-105L that I've used for several years on a 5D2 , and previously a 5D.
The 15-85 equates to 24-135 on full frame , so it's got wide to a short tele capability . Total length roughly 85mm contracted , around 122-123 extended , add another 35 or so with the hood . A bit smaller than the 24-105 , and you pick up another 35mm of reach on the long end . The end of the lens doesn't rotate when zooming so if you've got a polarizer on , the adjustment won't change with zooming .
The build quality is nearly equal to the 24-105 , except there's no weather sealing . The end of the lens barrel doesn't have a whole lot of slop in it when fully extended , nor does my copy creep when I'm carrying it .
Balances well on the 50D , might be nose heavy on a Rebel though . USM is fast , full time manual focusing , image stabilizer seems good for a solid 3 stops .
There's barrel distortion at 15mm , Photoshop ,DPP , PT Lens or similar will deal with it in post , but I'm not sure I'd use the lens for architectural
photography . If you zoom out a bit , say to 20mm or so, it goes away.
Maximum aperture goes from 3.5 at 15mm to 5.6 at 85mm . Never found this to be an issue as usually I'm shooting stopped down , f8-f11 or so, in daylight .After dark , or inside there's always the option of flash or bumping up the ISO some , or a tripod and remote release.
Image quality seems pretty close to the 24-105 . I don't examine pixels at 400% , it's just how the images appear to me on a 30"ACD .
If you're planning to keep whatever body you get for 4-5 years , these lenses look pretty good for use as a general purpose, walk around lens, especially if you can score a good used one, or a refurb . If you go full frame after that , you can always sell it off with the body.
PM me if you want some images to check out.

Howdy mac26, you asked my opinion over on photo of the day. I can't really add a huge amount here for you, there's so many good reviews of these items elsewhere, like at:

• dpreview.com
• photozone.de
• cameralabs.com

I can say that for me personally, the 60D is a lot better than my T3/1100D, and I couldn't warrant the extra price of the 7D either at this point. The 60D & 7D both have the same sensor and many of the same features. I've no need to connect it to any studio lights and I'm not shooting sports so there was no need to go to the 7D for me.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a full frame lens and a worthy addition considering the price.

My next lens? Well I had myself set for the 24-105 L, but that's changed! I want a wide lens for architecture, landscapes and interiors. Which to go for? Secondhand here in Australia the 17-40 L can be bought for $600, the 10-22 EF-S can be yours for $550. I know which one I'm leaning towards, especially as one day I'll go full frame!

mac26 said:

Thanks for your input and opinion, I really appreciate it!
Also I believe the 50mm f/1.8 is a EF-S lens so it isn't compatible with the EF mount on Full frame cameras.

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

According to Canon Australia it is EF. Mine says EF also.