Quote:
Originally Posted by MonArk  Hi everyone,
I am currently using a Canon 350D with the 70-200 F4L lens. Ignoring compsition issues, lack of experience etc. I can't say I am overwhelmed with the detail even after adjustment ( I always shoot RAW). Part of the problem of course is that the 200mm length is still not that long and cropped pictures inevitably reduce IQ(or is it inevitable?). I am therefore considering a secondhand purchase:
1. Upgrade lens to the 100-400mm L series,
2. Upgrade body to either 450d, or
3. Upgrade body to 40d.
The 40d feels lovely but I understand it has the same sensor as the 450d and so I wonder if the image quality is actually any different. (I have heard it suggested that the metal body reduces shake vs the plastic 450d) but even s/hand there is a big difference in cost. If I trade in my 350D my net outlay on the 40D is going to be about £250 - £300 but only £200 or so on a 450D.
If I trade in my 70 - 200 for the 100 to 400 (both without IS) then my net outlay will be about £200 to £300. (I think)
Your thoughts would be welcome.
Thanks |
Hi
I think you would be very foolish to get rid of your 70-200 F4L, it is one of the best L lenses for the money that you could wish to buy. Its very versatile as you can also use it for much closer shots - down to around 4ft. The quality of photos taken with the combination of the 350D and the 70-200 F4L should be very good indeed - and without wanting to cause offence, I would imagine that the quality issues you mention may well be down to either your lack of experience or something you are doing in your post processing that is not bringing the best out of your photos.
In answer to your question: "the 200mm length is still not that long and cropped pictures inevitably reduce IQ(or is it inevitable?" - the answer is no, it is not inevitable. If you have taken a really good shot in the first place, cropping wont badly damage the quality - I have several shots with that combination, taken at a distance that was pushing it distance wise for that lense, then cropped and they have still been pretty good quality, even shot in jpeg and not raw!
I still have, and use, my 350D as a second body (prior to that I had the
300D), but I do have the 40D as well. I also have the Canon 400mm F5.6L prime which is also very good. It has taken me 4 to 5 years to acquire some decent lenses, so its certainly worth waiting and saving to get a decent lense.
Yes, the 40D is a very nice camera, it is also much heavier than the 350D - I will also hasten to add, that unless you get yourself far more familiar with using your 350D with good results, I personally dont think your results would be much better with an upgraded camera.
If its more distance that you want, then the best use of your money would be to save up and look for a decent longer focal length lense - you can pick up some decent second hand ones if you look around. With a longer focal length lense, apart from the cost, comes the extra weight of the lense which will also add to your quality frustrations unless you are prepared to put in a lot of practice to get better image results, and maybe adjust your post processing - try shooting in large fine jpeg and see if the quality is any better.
It might be interesting to hear in more detail what your quality issues are, what shooting modes and adjustments you are using, and subjects you are photographing.
I honestly dont think you are ready to upgrade to a 40D from what you have said above - I would save your money for the time being towards a good longer focal length lense and endeavour to get some help with your quality issues.
Regards.
Linda