upgrading my canon 300D

[Alii]

I am in the process of ungrading my Canon 300D with the 600D or 60D. As I already have the standard kit lenses from the 300D I am thinking of just buying the body and investing in a better lens. The old lenses are not image stabilizers. Is it worth duplicating the lenses I already have just for the IS?

[russellsnr]

Hi, you say the kit lens but not what other lenses you have, I think it will also depend what kind of photography you intend to do, land/seascape then IS should IMO not be a factor as you would use a tripod anyway along with your cable release
If you intend to purchase a walk around lens then yes IS would be handy more so in low light.
I only have the one IS lens 28-135mm and that's what I use as a walk around lens.
Russ

[Alii]

Thanks, I only have the two lenses - 90-300mm f 4.5-5.6 and 18-55mm. I quite like the look of the canon 50mm f1.4. I am looking for a walk around lens at the moment. I am very much a beginner

[russellsnr]

Thanks, I only have the two lenses - 90-300mm f 4.5-5.6 and 18-55mm. I quite like the look of the canon 50mm f1.4. I am looking for a walk around lens at the moment. I am very much a beginner

I would'nt class the 50mm as a walk around lens as you only have the 50mm and you can be sure when you are walking around you will see something that is to far away for the 50mm,I would suggest 24-70 or you could also look for a camera that comes with the 24-105mm IS included.
Russ

[rpcrowe]

If the focal range and the f/stop of your 18-55mm kit lens suit you, it would still be an advantage upgrading to the later IS model of that lens. You will not only gain Image Stabilization (which is great for a lens that has a slower aperture) but the general IQ of the IS kit lens is superior to your present non-IS model.

If you want to upgrade to a far better lens of that focal length, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. The non-VC (VC is Tamron's anti vibration/shake control system) supposedly produces better image quality than the VC model and is, of course, less expensive. IS or VC is really icing on the cake for an f/2.8 lens of this focal length because it is not absolutely critical and at 50mm, you are two stps faster than your present lens.

If you desire a lens of a greater focal range for a walk around lens, you will be confined to roughly the same aperture as you are using in your kit lens. The advantage, however, is that you will have a focal range from relatively wide to relatively long without switching lenses which will be convenient. However, the image quality of an extended focal length lens will not match that of the 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron.

It is a toss up whether you want the convenience of an extended focal range or the image quality and constant f/2.8 aperture of the Tamron...

[Alii]

Thanks for that

[Alii]

Thanks. This is the first time I have contributed to a forum and I think you guys are great for sharing your knowledge

[inkista]

You may want to go for a kit rather than just the body if you plan on selling your old 300D. It might be easier to sell if you throw in the old 18-55 kit lens as part of the package.

And, as Richard mentioned, the 18-55 IS is nicer than the older non-IS version, but while it's better, it's not hugely better. The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is faster. The EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS has more reach. The EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is yet another step up in image quality. And the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is sharp AND fast. There are also the L walkarounds, the EF 24-70/2.8L USM and the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM, but they're super big, heavy, expensive, and not particularly wide on a crop body.

IS is a good feature, but in my book isn't a "have to have." It's only useful in situations with lower light, where you need to use a slower shutter speed without camera shake blur affecting your image. But it doesn't help with moving subjects. And its effectiveness is less than that of a monopod in my experience. And a monopod costs less and can be used with all your lenses. Where IS becomes more critical is with longer lenses, in overcoming the 1/focal_length rule of thumb on shutter speed. So, upgrading your 90-300 to the EF-S 55-250 IS might be worthwhile. But again, it's not likely to be a huge leap up in quality, and if you're mostly using the lens to shoot fast-moving subjects, you may already be at shutter speeds over 1/focal_length, and stabilization becomes unneeded.

One more thing. Most folks are attracted to 50mm primes on crop because of the low-low bargain price of the EF 50mm f/1.8 II. but some folks do find them a little long for general-purpose/walkaround shooting, or when used for portraits in smaller spaces. Some folks prefer a 30-40mm lens for this type of shooting. The EF 28mm f/1.8 USM or the EF 35mm f/2 are likely candidates here. Picking up a used 50/1.8 for dirt cheap, or studying the EXIF of your existing photos might be a good guide to finding out if 50mm is a good choice for you, before sinking money into the 50/1.4 USM (or 28 f/1.8 USM, or the 85mm f/1.8 USM).

[Alii]

Thanks for that, I have always considered the larger the f stop the better the lens but this doesnt appear to be so

[inkista]

Thanks for that, I have always considered the larger the f stop the better the lens but this doesnt appear to be so

The EF 50mm f/1.4 USM is a better lens than the EF 50mm f/1.8 II, but in ways that aren't so much about image quality. The build quality is better, it's got a metal mount, not a plastic one, it has a distance scale and a decent manual focus ring. The 50/1.8 II is much cheaper in every way, but the image quality is not that far from the 50/1.4's, particularly on a crop body camera.