Four years ago, with help from this forum, I choose a Canon A710 compact camera and am happy with it .
However I think I am ready for "another step forward" and my girlfriend wants to have a DSLR so I will buy her one and when I need a high quality camera (as opposed to a small and light medium quality one), then I can use it as well.
She is pretty much a newbie. She wants to photograph landscapes and people and I off course also want to photograph airshows. I am thinking of spending up to 1000 Euros, preferably less.

* Does it make sense for me to specifically buy another Canon?
I downloaded the manual of an EOS and it seems I already know a lot of menus, modes, icons etc from my A710, so it seems to me the learning curve would not be as steep. Also I am always in a hurry and if I can concentrate my search on canon, that would obviously save time. But of course I am then locked into Canon as I can not reuse the lenses on other manufacturer's bodies.
* For the money, does it make sense to buy a good body plus a lens, a body plus a good lens or a body plus two lenses?
* Re lenses, I think for the airshows and also sometimes in the landscape I want a high telephoto range. I expect I will want a large zoom a) for things moving away or moving closer b) so I don't have to change the lens all the time (comments?). Even if I only buy one lens now, I should IMHO plan ahead to what I want in the medium term. It seems to me one lens with a moderate wideangle to normal angle and one with a normal angle to medium/high telephoto would make sense for my uses?
For example "ProMarkt" in Germany sells a Canon EOS 600D kit with:
18-55 mm & 55-250 mm IS
Sounds like a useful pair to me.

From my experience with the A710 I want:
- A large sensor for low light situations.
- A fast system. Both the time "from zero to picture" and "from one picture to the next" sometimes is too slow on the A710 for me.
- A better (higher res) video mode.
- HDR. Sometimes high contrast in a scene is an issue.

BTW, the main cameras I look at are, in no particular order:
Canon EOS 550D (aka EOS Rebel T2i aka EOS Kiss X4)
Canon EOS 500D (aka EOS Rebel T1i aka EOS Kiss X3)
Canon EOS 600D (aka EOS Rebel T3i aka EOS Kiss X5)
Canon EOS 60D (no aka?)
The first 3 seem very similar to me, all use the same sensor size, processor (Digic 4), similar speed (at least in Continuous drive ), features, video resolution, HDMI, size etc.

About accessories, I expect I want:
- A tripod.
- A carrying bag, if not included.
- One memory card, if not included.

I am not sure about:
- A second battery (or an adapter for standard batteries?).

I doubt I want:
- An external flash. I use the flash fairly seldomly and most often for stuff that is fairly near.
- Remote control



Any comment appreciated.

Hi Osram,

Picking out a DSLR is never easy, partly because there will almost always be some feature a different camera has that you'll wish you had, and partly because they're all pretty good these days, so it's tough to find a clear reason to get one over another in the same category (starter, midrange, pro, etc.).

Most major companies make good DSLRs, but I'd say Canon and Nikon are the top two. Your familiarity with Canon is probably as good a reason as any to go with them, but Nikon's cameras are certainly comparable.

All of them (both Canon and Nikon) will have roughly the same sized sensor, physically, so that means that higher MP will squeeze more pixels into the same space, adding more detail but potentially more noise (color graininess) in lower light, and higher ISO (more sensitive) situations.

Lenses have a big impact on image quality, so you may want to buy a cheaper lens for general use early on, but save up for a nicer lens later. My first lens was a 28-300mm lens that was relatively cheap, and while it wasn't a bad lens, it didn't work that well for air show photography. It didn't have enough reach, was slower to focus, and wasn't very sharp when fully zoomed. My go-to air show lens now is a 100-400mm lens, and it runs for over 1000 Euros by itself. You also might want to just get a relatively inexpensive lens first, see what you think would work best for what you're doing once you get more familiar with the camera, and then buying a lens that fills the need. It can be a never-ending money draw.

There are lots of other photographers here, who I'm sure can offer some great advice, so I'm sure you'll get lots of good info.

Hey Osram,
They're all great bodies, I've used Canon for quite a while now and love them. Coming from a point and shoot, I don't really see a need for you to jump into a 60D. I think it would be a bit more camera than you both need right now. Also, a lot of people are turned off by the weight (especially the significant others). There really isn't much difference features wise for a first time DSLR user between the 60D and T3i. Both have the swivel screen, both are 18 megapixel. The 60D is a tad faster burst rate and will probably handle low light a tad better, but again for a first time DSLR user I don't know if you will take advantage of the difference.
As for lenses, I think the stock lens (18-55) and the 55-250 are a GREAT starting combo (that's the combo that I started out with). You get your wide angle and your zoom and they won't break the bank. Sure there are better and faster lenses out there, but they cost a lot more $$$. As you get more experienced with it, you'll probably want to upgrade them to faster lenses, but to start out I think these two are fine.

You'll definitely want a bag to go with the body and lens(es), along with one or two SD cards. I would go with 8GB cards, but don't do super cheap because the cheaper they are, the slower and less reliable they can be. As for extra battery, it never hurts to have one. Nothing worse than whipping the camera out to get some shots only to find out you got no juice

I hope this helps give you some ideas, you're about to embark on an exciting transition!

Thanks guys! Ideas to think about .

Arthonon, I agree on the difficulties and on what you say about Canon versus Nikon.

Re lenses, you (IMHO) basically say I should not brood/speculate too much about the lenses we want in the end, but should look for ones that are good to learn and use for now and gain experience until we see more clearly what we want.
Makes sense!

For modern dSLRs (as in this and the last generation), sensor sizes, shutter lag and video functions are pretty well grounded, so when you first play with one it'll feel like night and day. If you REALLY want good video, stick to the most modern generation - it has taken a lot longer for video to get a good grounding in dSLR territory but it is getting there, and Canon have a better implementation (i.e. have done it better) than Nikon.

In terms of brand loyalty, knowing Canon menu systems is a bonus, but if I were you I would get a camera that fits your and her hands better - ergonomics, basically. Both Nikon and Canon are, technically, roughly comparable (even with video for the Nikon D3100 and especially D5100), with roughly similar lens choices (especially if you count third party lenses), but one thing you cannot change are the ergonomics within camera systems. Try to get to a camera store and play with each camera.

With what little I know about the Canon system, I would target something like a 600D or a 550D - 60D is most likely overkill at this time and price point. Don't discount the used or refurbished market as well, as long as it is from a reputable source.

A cheap kit and two lenses (wide zoom and telezoom) is the best way to start out. An 18-55mm is the usual "kit" wide zoom, which should be fine for landscapes (though look at reviews just to make sure). When it comes to telephoto lenses though, it gets complicated. I'd go down the route that TheBigDog mentioned (or something similar), but the airshow lens you'll want to save up for in the long term is the 100-400mm L that Arthonon and many other airshow photographers have - it is one of the best lenses for airshow photography. Even if it is a little old and a large amount of cash. There are other lenses, but that's the benchmark and as a Nikon shooter, I'm a little envious Oh, and make sure that any telezoom you get is stabilised (IS).

Finally, for accessories, I would recommend two memory cards (a pair of 8gb cards, for example, or 16gb if you shoot RAW) and an extra battery. You won't run out of juice shooting landscapes, but if you shoot airshows you'll probably run the battery dry and the card full if you get swept up in the action, and it's never nice to have to delete on the fly, or be forced to "sit and watch like everybody else" because you're out of juice. That said, this is secondary to getting a good camera+lenses combo.

Anyhoo, I'm done harping on now, so... good luck!

On the one hand probably the first is correct. OTOH low light situation and what I would call "overall speed" are things that are important to me.

For example, two weeks ago, I photographed an oldtimer rally. The cars drove by my position, with quite a gap (sometimes many minutes) between them.
In a worst case situation, when a car appeared round the corner, I would have to switch on the camera that had auto-shutdown, aim and zoom the correct amount, shoot a picture, wait till the display is usable again, zoom out as the car is very near now, maybe wait for a car on my side of the road to pass, and shoot again. I don't think that with any car I was able to make more than 2 pictures. I am sure I could improve by better training and also I could for example reduce resolution to speed up the camera. But I also think a faster camera that "boots up" faster and is ready for the next picture in a smaller time than my A710 would have helped. And the A710 is rated as fast (for a point and shoot, of course) in some reviews.

I don't think that the burst rate itself is actually that important for me, but the "overall speed of taking pictures" is. Can I use the burst rate as a measure for that? Or what would be a good measure?




Good. Did you do take pictures of aircraft in flight?



Why would I want two?


Yes, it happened to me a short while ago

On the camera startup speed, I haven't used the newer Canon XXXD/Rebel series in a while, but my understanding is that they all start up and wake up fairly quickly, so I would be surprised if that was an issue.

The 60D will provide faster multi-shot capabilities, and probably better focus tracking, as well as a few other features, but I'm not sure you'll really see much benefit from those.

On the memory card subject, you'll probably want several. First, you'll probably take more photos than you think. Second, you don't want all your eggs in one basket - if a card goes bad you're shut down for the day and you'll lose all your photos. Also, all of those cameras can shoot photos in RAW mode, which can give you more editing options later. RAW files are much, much larger than .jpeg, so you'll need more storage if you decide to shoot in RAW.

For most people who really get into photography, the investment goes into their lenses, and with the pace of technology changes, the camera body is more likely to be outdated and replaced. The quality of the glass, it's ability to focus quickly, etc., are not improved upon very often compared to the body, and the lenses will almost always work on future cameras, so you can keep them if you upgrade to newer technologies.

Canon has two lens systems - EF and EF-S. EF lenses were designed for their film cameras, and work on all their DSLRs. EF-S are designed for crop sensor cameras, like the XXXDs, the XXDs, and the 7D. They don't work on the higher-end and full-frame cameras. If you buy any EF-S lenses, you'll only be able to use them on the crop sensor cameras. I think right now, Canon only makes three non-crop sensor cameras - the 5D, the 1D and the 1Ds, so unless you plan on upgrading to those, it shouldn't be a problem. Of course, it's always possible that they will release a less expensive full-frame camera, and they probably wouldn't work for that.

Once you invest in a few expensive lenses, it's not as easy to switch camera types, so it's probably a good idea to factor that into your decision-making now.

As Ken mentioned, they're both going to be "Turn on" and ready to shoot within a second. As for sample shots with the 250mm, here are a couple:

These were shot with my old Rebel XT body:






This one was with my T1i before I went to the 7D, not flight related but still using the 55-250:


And last example, this was using the 250 to shoot through the screen on my 7D:

Interesting.
Somehow most of the time I shoot stills but often, for example with the oldtimer "rally", looking at the video afterwards is more fun as somehow it reminds you more of what it was like - the surroundings, the sounds etc. Even when of course the quality is worse than that of the stills.



Yes, we plan to go to a shop on wednesday or thursday and might even buy one straight away. Afterwards we do a small trip to Berlin (both buisines and pleasure) so it would be nice to play with the camera then.



Yes. For the wide angle it is not important? I saw that the Promarkt kit has a stabilized 55-250 mm and that the 18-55 is not stabilised.

Arthonon - ok - understood.



Sounds good, my A710 is at least double that.

Nice pictures, especially the eagle, it really shows a lot of detail.
With the planes in flight, I would hope for a bit more detail, for example in the markings, is that what an expensive lens would do better?

For the planes in flight, or with any photo really, there are a number of factors that could contribute to the detail and clarity. The lighting conditions, the colors of the subject, camera settings, the sensor's capabilities, etc., so a few photos will not give you the complete picture of what a given lens can do. (no pun intended)

You could probably get a lens with more zoom that was cheaper than the 55-250, and under certain circumstances it may give you more detail, but there are always trade-offs. I use a 100-400mm lens for almost all of my air show photography, and at 400mm, it will probably never be as sharp as a 400mm 2.8 prime. However, my lens is about 1/3 of the price, is smaller and lighter, and lets me drop back to 100mm if I need to get a wider view. I'm trading off image quality for cost savings, convenience, and flexibility.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are many factors in what will get you the image you want, and price is only one of them. What you'd want to do, and it appears are doing somewhat, is find lenses that generally have a good reputation for what you want, and see which ones you're willing to pay for. And don't expect that just because you've bought a more expensive lens that you'll automatically get the photos you want - there's more to factor in, and definitely a learning curve.

yeah I guess I should have prefaced those pictures with the fact that they were taken with an 8 megapixel body and they were my first airshow, so the results were not the best

To me, it just looked like they were backlit, and there's not much that can be done about that.

Good points on the backlight and the old body. Also, I have to say I would certainly be satisfied with those pictures. I just want to see where the difference between a "cheap" telezoom lens like the one I will probably buy and a 1000 Euro one are.
I looked at Ken's website and his photos are superb. But I am not sure I will ever invest the money, time and talent needed for that quality.

BTW I googled a bit more on "startup speed" and one reviewer writes that the camera is ready the moment your finger has moved from the "on" button to the next button and another one ( http://photo.net/equipment/canon/50D/review/ ) writes:


So, it seems that startup speed is no issue at all and also a big impovement on my A710 . Excellent, no more excuses when *I* am slow . I think both the much higher price of the DLSR and the four year that have passed since I bought the A710 make a big difference. BTW, Ken, you also wrote a very helpful post back then.

BTW I watched an interview with the Canon designers and they said most new features are based on the speed of the Digic 4, as otherwise the new features would lead to too slow operation. They said the processing going on with one picture in the Digic 4 would take 10 minutes on a general purpose PC !

There is a fast rule of thumb from earlier days which goes along the lines that to have a chance of a good shot, your shutter speed should be the reciprocal of the (effective) focal length - so, if you're shooting at 1/300 on a Canon crop sensor (1.6x), your shutter speed should be at least 1/480s. The reason for the focal length dependence is that the amount of "wobble" you have while hand holding (or equally shaking around on a tripod) imparts aiming errors, which have much larger on the picture the further you zoom in. Wide angle lenses, with their large angle of view, means that a little shake doesn't affect the detail as much as it would at, say, 500mm.

Stabilisation goes against this old rule of thumb because it compensates the shakes by moving some of the lens elements inside the lens. The upshot of this is that it is possible to get a clean shot of a static object at 300mm with a 1/60s shutter speed. Basically, it makes your life easier. Purists will argue that IS (VR in Nikon parlance) has image quality issues, but these are generally negligible, and is a story for another day.

With regards to detail, getting an expensive lens is only half the battle. If you want to get really crisp shots, you really need to get closer - something that's hard to do in an airshow, unless you know the pilot...

Nice shots, TBD - the canopy on that spitfire is marvelous.

Thanks, that post made me realise that the size of an "artefact" on a picture due to handshake is proportional to the focal length, so that explains why one lens has IS and the other does not.

The new Sony SLT-A77 will be announced Wednesday. You might want to take a look at it. Nikon uses Sony sensors in their cams. I'm selling my A33 and getting the A77.

I bought a T3i/18-55 two weeks ago this Thursday and picked up the 55-250mm on Saturday. It's my first DSLR (I'm coming from an Ollllld S1IS) and I love it. The S1IS taught me enough that the T3i has been a smooth transition. We have an air show this weekend so I'll be able to test the 55-250 there. I pretty much only shoot airplanes or trains.

You really need to go to the Cannon photography forum and read, read, read. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php

My dream camera would be the 5D MkII. They have used it in making theatrical movies, it is that good. I have the best point and shot at the moment, the Cannon G9 but I, like you, feel the need to find out what a real camera can do.

My advice is to buy a used 30d (read the 20d/30d forum at the link provided above). You can buy the body used for 250 to 300 bucks, then buy the best lens you can not afford. Glass is everything right after sensor so spend most of your money on good glass and buy a used older body and the 30d is an EOS body and they are all basically the same layout.

I am back. Just before we went to Berlin, we bought a 550D .

I will probably write some questions on SLR procedures in the next few days, but want to keep this thread on subject (choosing a DSLR) for others that will buy one.
The reasons for the 550 were:
The Canon EOS 500D is older, only has mono audio and video FPS is lower.
The Canon EOS 600D is more expensive for the swivel LCD + feature guide + different material. Nothing important *in my opinion*, so not worth it to me.
The Canon EOS 60D is larger, heavier, and as has been said in the thread, "overkill". It is faster in continuous shooting. But other operations like switching the camera on is "fast enough" on all these cameras, so probably the 60D speed advantage is noticable only seldom.

We bought these accessories:
* 2nd battery, a must-have as I already realised in the few days I am using it.
* In the shop I had to decide between a "carry in front of you" bag and a Rucksack. While it takes a bit of time to get the camera out of the Rucksack and ready to shoot, we liked it instantly and bought it. It is very nice, the compartments fit exactly the camera with either lens,
the other lens and all the "accessories" (caps, 2nd battery, handbook etc). Still it is small enough that when my girlfriend carries it, it looks like she wears the bag and not vice versa .
If needed one can adjust the compartments using velcroed "walls".
* One UV filter for each lens. The shop guy recommended them warmly, partly as a protection for the lenses. As the lens diameters are different, we needed two.
* One SD card. I would guess their price is falling rapidly, when I need the 2nd one, I will buy it.
* A HDMI cable so I can connect to my computer monitor.
* He put some plastic on top of the LCD screen, similar to what I did on my PDA. 5 Euros, so probably worth it.
* A USB2 card reader. I wasn't sure at all I need one and don't think so now, but, again it was 5 Euros, so no biggie.

All in all, with a very cheap telelens, it was 1015 Euros. I went with the advice to get a lens to learn.

We didn't buy a tripod (we simply forgot :o ), so that's probably a purchase in the near future. There are very small and inexpensive ones.
Of course a drawback is you need a table or something to put it on. But if it can hold the EOS plus telelens, I will probably buy it. I can still buy a large one later.
For now, I need to reduce handshake.

I saw on the internet there are remote triggers for as little as 3 dollars, so I will probably buy one. Also I will probably buy an Android in the medium future and
if you buy one with the "USB host" feature, you can control your EOS with it. Also I guess a third option to avoid wobble due to pressing the trigger is the 2 second delay feature of the EOS.

To answer my own remaining questions from the first post:
Buying a Canon DSLR because I have a Canon point and shot is ok, but not that important, as there are many differences, not only due to it being a DSLR.
For example the "Q" button you need to change picture settings on the EOS. Still, knowing the terminology, icons and some concepts probably saves a few hours.
As video is important to me I might very well have chosen a Canon anyway.

As one use of the camera is to learn, I wanted a good and modern body (with many modern features).
For the same reason, I decided on two lenses and am happy, but already in the 3 days I used it there was a situation were I had the wrong lens mounted and was not fast enough in changing lenses to shoot a temporary situation.

TheBigDog was certainly correct when he said "you're about to embark on an exciting transition!"

Thanks again for all the suggestions. I will have a look at that Canon forum, looks like tons of info.

Osram: Another feature you can use to minimise wobble is mirror lock up, the first press on the remote locks up the mirror ... wait a few seconds for the rig to stabilise and then press again to open the curtain and take the picture. I do a lot of walkaround photography for my aircraft illustrations and I try to get the shots as sharp as possible. I may go a bit overboard on it a bit though as it is fun to try and get as sharp an image as possible.

Of course he did, they offer the biggest profit margin of any item in the shop

Good choice of camera, but as has been said, it's hard to go wrong these days with the high quality of entry-level DSLRs!

The next bit of fun is playing with the possibilities of the RAW image format. The software that comes with the camera should allow you to experiment, but if you need to edit and organise the thousands of photos you will take, I recommend Adobe Lightroom - you can also add old digital photos from other cameras and movies to the catalogue. It really is immensely useful.

Which filter brand did you get? Hoya?

You could give RawTherapee 3.0 a try, just to play around with RAW images. Hey, it's freeware.

Yep, that's what I use as well. It's not a total integrated solution like the others that you have to part money with, but for RAW processing it's okay. I use it in combination with Picasa to catalogue stuff. Mine is the freeware route though - if you're prepared to part with a couple hundred more bits, you can get something quite good.

I just use iPhoto that came with my MacBookPro for free, does everything I once did with lightroom. I did have to buy an awfully expensive laptop to get it but that is another story :-|

@Lieuwe: Thanks for the mirror lockup tip. So much I already learned and so much more to learn!
I agree that getting sharper pictures is a constant battle.

BTW, my SD card seems to be REALLY fast. In the manual Canon writes that using RAW + JPG you can only take 3 pictures continuously until the internal buffer is full and the frame rate drops from its maximum of 3.7 FPS. Using RAW you get 6 (double!), using JPG you get 26 (or was it 36?).
I found the doubling surprising and so measured it myself and got 3 with RAW+ JPG and 6 with RAW only, just as Canon writes. I measured 3.6 frames per second, again what Canon writes (inside the error of measurement). But with JPG I get "unlimited". In other words, my card is so fast, I can shoot at 3.7 pictures per second and the camera does not have to slow down for the card at all .

I am still very happy with the choice of the 550 based on my needs. BTW, its funny, all the stuff I knew the price for (boy, kit lens etc) was very cheap, the rest not quite so . Oh well, all in all it is still very good price for bying in a shop with assistance etc.

JAMF, I will need to lookup the brand.

Unfortunately the shop did not have the #1 accessory you need for DSLRs in stock, namely time . I am both learning theory and shooting quite a few pictures and gaining experience, but "deep" raw editing for now is outside of what I can afford time-wise. I did a bit of fiddling with the "Tonwertkurve" (output intensity versus input intensity) in the supplied program ("Digital Photo Professional"). That program seems to be good enough for me now.

Sounds like you're experimenting with this? :

http://fstoppers.com/understanding-dslr-color-shift-white-balance-and-color-profiles

If not, still an interesting informative video.

Excellent video, thanks.

BTW does anyone have a Canon color profile / picture style for airplanes and for birds (sea gulls)?