Camera advice

Hullo.

I want to buy my first digital SLR and I was planning on getting the Nikon D80 but the price is too expensive. I've found the Canon EOS 400D for under $1000aud and it comes with two lenses http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod4230.htm - I'm no photo pro, do you think this is a good camera and lens package?

I've read some reviews and it appears to have all the things I want.

Your advice?

First of all, yes that is a great DSLR! It's tough to say whether that's a great deal or not because you could probably shop around and buy all of the parts separately for a little under $950 (although I'm thinking in U.S. Dollars - but the USD is worth just slightly more than the AUD). Just doing a quick product search on google you can find the two camera body for around 490-600$ and the two lenses for about 250$

Although when you count in the currency difference it's probably right around 950$, plus you would be getting it all from one place with a 12 month warranty. So I think if you were really concerned about the price then you could probably find it cheaper by buying the parts separately but at only a minimal advantage.

I think you're better off going with the package deal that you found because it comes with the two lenses and the warranty.

Hope that helps.

Thanks Merlyn,

The thing I liked about this place was they have two physical stores as well as sell online and I have spoken to people on the phone from both stores and both very helpful. I also like that it comes with the battery and charger which is helpful.

I don't mind that the camera is a few years old now, the reviews I read say it fixes a lot of things from the previous version and although the newer version no doubt fixes more from that one, it still appears to be a good camera.

I want to take a range of photos, landscapes which I'm told the 18mm will come in handy for and the other lens for taking photos from further away and action shots.

One thing I'm not sure on though is whether I would be able to still use those lens if I upgraded to a better camera in the future (same brand but higher spec).

I think as long as you stick with the 'EOS' line your lenses will be compatible with a newer model.

But should be probably get a second opinion on that.

Yeah even though it's a few years old it's still a great camera. I mean I have a Canon Rebel XT and it still takes excellent photos I think.

The 400D is a cropped sensor camera, meaning it can utilize EF and EF-S lenses. While the kit lens is an EF-S (small), the 75-300 is a regular EF - if you ever decide to upgrade your body to the single digits, your EF-S lenses will no longer work. EF lenses are universal on the EOS line, however.
For clarification, "1 digit" meant things such as the 5D, 1Ds MKIII and 1D etc.

If you do alot of outdoor shooting the 75-300 might be worth it if you can save some money by purchasing the package, but otherwise it's not that extraordinary a lens. I worked at a large national electronics chain selling cameras for a while, and the best advice I can give to you is this:

If you can hold off for now, just buy the kit lens. Once you have used this for a while, you will start to notice what you're lacking and what you wish you had more of. If you find yourself wishing you had alot more telephoto capabilities, by a longer zoom. If you need wider, buy a wider-angled lens. If you need more versatility, consider upgrading to the 17-85 IS.

All in all, the 75-300 is a very low-end consumer grade lens. If you're serious about photography, save the ~$2-300 on that lens and put it towards paying for half (or at least a chunk) of a lens that will get used alot more often.

Actually, after viewing over the companies webpage, you may want to consider this package. The lens you're getting is a huge upgrade in picture quality, not to mention it's got built in IS (Image stabilization). Granted you're losing a bit of aperture on the wide end, you'd be hard pressed to find somebody that would take the 18-55 over the 17-85.

Then again, I know what it's like to not have the extra money to put towards it

This would be a great started package for you.

neksus, I really really appreciate you taking the time to answer

Realistically, the kind of pics I want to take are landscapes and people pics, people doing things photos. Later on I can always buy other lens.

While I want to maintain things around the $1000 aud mark, I don't want to buy something crappy or something that I can't use later if I wanted to upgrade the body.

The link you posted is still too far out of my budget (only because i've got some more of my trip to africa to pay for and spending money)

I'm not sure which one to go for now.

I am glad you've decided to go for Canon. I guess one of the main things i've loved about Canons is not only ease of use but the fact on the EOS range you can pretty much use the same lens on each of the cameras. Neksus mentioned a few good points with regards to that though.

There isn't much else i can say that hasn't been said already other than to back pretty much everything Neksus said and urge you to consider spending a couple more hundred $$'s if you can. I got the 17-85 lens with my new 40D and would swear by it. It's been a good lens so far, much much better than the bog standard one you get with the EOS 350, 400, and no doubt 450D cameras.

I was using a 350D camera up until the other day and it is incredibly easy to use. It's a great first SLR camera, and i know the 400 is just the same. To think they improved the 350D is on it's own right something that impresses me. How can you improve something that's already darn good? they did it though, or so people keep telling me. I've only ever used a 400D once or twice, so i'm not all that famliar with it, but if it's anything like the 350D or generally most of the EOS cameras then you cannot go wrong.

It's funny because i haven't considered buying any other camera since i got my first SLR camera (Canon EOS 300, film camera). Before i got that camera i was pretty keen on the Nikon D70 but it was out of my price range.

Let us all know what you end up deciding to do.

By the way, does this mean you'll be taking part in the Photography competitions now?

I just need to decide which camera lens to go for in the Canon 400D range I just can't stretch up to the better lens. Is this one any better quality than this one? It has that image stabilizing neksus mentioned.

I was going to get a Nikon D80 from America but it didn't work out, the websites advertise them but don't actually have them in stock! Weird! After waiting months and months I decided to just get a cheaper one from here.

Yep I hope to take a lot more time getting out and snapping pics so will have to get back into the comps again. One passion I have had for so many years is to take photographs of these amazing old gum trees I pass alot when I go downtown. I'd like to do a series of day and nighttime shots with them lit up. They'd just be an amazing subject.

The ones with IS are technically better lenses as they will compensate for shake if you're hand holding the camera. If you're on a tripod, there is essentially no difference in image quality between the lenses. They are all low end kit lenses, the one without IS has a little more zoom range, which you may or may not need.

The 55-250 in my opinion is much better than the 75-300 for two reasons; firstly, and most obviously, is the IS. IS is generally only helpful in low-light situations where you'd need a longer shutter speed (and thus a steadier camera) or when you're using a telephoto. When you're zoomed in quite far those little shakes are really noticeable! The second reason is that you're getting a better range; sure you can't zoom in as far, but you've got 55, which is quite a nice close range as opposed to the 75 (which both become 90mm and 120mm equivalent after the crop).

That said, however, I still think you should stick with the kit lens. If you really want a zoom lens for your trip, pick one up at a different store, and, depending how long your trip is, return it when you get back.

"People" shots is generally referred to a walk-around lens. This range is generally regarded as the 28-135mm range, which coincidentally is what the 17-85 IS turns into once you apply the 1.6x factor.

Many, many people prefer wide angle lenses for landscape photography; if you don't plan on upgrading your body to a 5D+ in the next few years, the lens you're looking for is probably the 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM EF-S (USM = ultrasonic motor - it's supposed to be an faster and quieter auto focus mechanism). Unfortunately, that will set you back $600-1000 CAD depending on where you buy it from. If you want to venture outside the Canon brand (specifically a Sigma, Tokina or Tamron) that's also up to you.

Lastly, see if you can't find a way to pick up this 50mm f/1.8. It's easily the best ~$120 you'll spend towards your photography needs. The bokeh is crisp and clean, the focal length works out to a nice ~80mm for good portraiture, and it's just overall a good lens, especially for the price.

OK thanks for the advice, I think for now I will get this one to start me off, then later I can buy other lens once I get more familiar and learn what I'm doing.

Tell me something please, this camera, it can do auto or manual settings for taking pics yeah? (The Nikon D60 I looked at also but I think it's only auto)

Each lens actually has it's own proprietary auto focus mechanism - as of right now, every Canon EF(-s) lens has autofocus. If you decide to purchase third party lenses, some will be manual only, and ones that require an adapter to mount it will lose auto focus features.