350D body or lens upgrade required?

Hello All,

After many years of using 'point and shoot' digital cameras I decided to try DSLR photography for the first time and purchased the following equipment second hand;

Canon 350D body
Canon EF 75-300 1:4-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 35-105 1:4.5-5.6
Canon EF-S 18-55 1:3.5-5.6 II

I do stress that I am a beginner and that my intention was to ease myself gently into the world of aviation photography. It is only when browsing other people's splendid efforts that I feel my own pictures are a long way short of what I would like in terms of image quality. I wanted to ask for opinions as to whether or not photos taken with my 350D and EF 75-300 are as good as I can reasonably expect? It is possible that I have not yet got the best out of my current set up or possibly my current equipment is slightly defective?. If so, I would welcome any suggestions as to suitable equipment that you feel would generate a noticeable improvement without spending thousands of (UK) pounds. I was toying with the idea of purchasing (secondhand) a full frame Canon such as the 5D?

Thanks in anticipation, below is a photo which I took a few days ago which I have cropped but is otherwise untouched:

David Harvey - Sussex - England
===============
EXIF IFD0
Camera Make {0x010F} Canon
Camera Model {0x0110} Canon EOS 350D DIGITAL
Picture Orientation {0x0112} normal (1)
X-Resolution {0x011A} 72/1 ===> 72
Y-Resolution {0x011B} 72/1 ===> 72
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} inch (2)
Last Modified Date/Time {0x0132} 2013:08:25 11:41:16
Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) {0x0213} co-sited / datum point (2)
EXIF Sub IFD
Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) {0x829A} 1/2500 second ===> 0.0004 second
Lens F-Number / F-Stop {0x829D} 80/10 ===> ƒ/8
Exposure Program {0x8822} action program (high-speed program, fast shutter speed) (6)
ISO Speed Ratings {0x8827} 400
EXIF Version {0x9000} 0221
Original Date/Time {0x9003} 2013:08:25 11:41:16
Digitization Date/Time {0x9004} 2013:08:25 11:41:16
Components Configuration {0x9101} 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
Shutter Speed Value (APEX) {0x9201} 739752/65536
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) 1/2500.01 second
Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9202} 393216/65536
Aperture ƒ/8
Exposure Bias (EV) {0x9204} 0/2 ===> 0
Metering Mode {0x9207} pattern / multi-segment (5)
Flash {0x9209} Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length {0x920A} 255/1 mm ===> 255 mm
Maker Note {0x927C}
FlashPix Version {0xA000} 0100
Colour Space {0xA001} sRGB (1)
Image Width {0xA002} 3456 pixels
Image Height {0xA003} 2304 pixels
Focal Plane X-Resolution {0xA20E} 3456000/874 ===> 3954.23
Focal Plane Y-Resolution {0xA20F} 2304000/582 ===> 3958.76
Focal Plane X/Y-Resolution Unit {0xA210} inch (2)
Custom Rendered {0xA401} normal process (0)
Exposure Mode {0xA402} auto exposure (0)
White Balance {0xA403} auto (0)
Scene Capture Type {0xA406} standard (0)

The 73-300 won't do you any favours to be honest. I had it for a year and cried everytime I posted a picture because people laughed at me for buying it. A 350D works well as I had one of those too.

I'd always advise buying better glass for your camera. It can make a huge difference, however, buying the right thing is key, and it all depends what you enjoy shooting the most.

If it's longer reach you need then there's the 55-250 canon IS lens that people get amazing results from. It's a great starting point. Some might say "but its only 250mm" That's for folk who bother about that sort of thing, but its a cool wee lens to start out with.

I have the Tamron 70-300 SP VC and it was only £280 brand new. I swear by this lens so much that I'm loathed to sell it and I have one of Canons best lenses now. I just can't give up the Tamron is really that good and the VC (vibration control) works so well that you'll be very impressed.

All the wildlife pictures on my Flickr page (link in my sig) were taken with the Tarmon lens, and I think on balance, between weight, features, price and quality its pretty hard to match.
Paul

Paulstw wrote in post #16249571
The 73-300 won't do you any favours to be honest. I had it for a year and cried everytime I posted a picture because people laughed at me for buying it. A 350D works well as I had one of those too.

I'd always advise buying better glass for your camera. It can make a huge difference, however, buying the right thing is key, and it all depends what you enjoy shooting the most.

If it's longer reach you need then there's the 55-250 canon IS lens that people get amazing results from. It's a great starting point. Some might say "but its only 250mm" That's for folk who bother about that sort of thing, but its a cool wee lens to start out with.

I have the Tamron 70-300 SP VC and it was only £280 brand new. I swear by this lens so much that I'm loathed to sell it and I have one of Canons best lenses now. I just can't give up the Tamron is really that good and the VC (vibration control) works so well that you'll be very impressed.

All the wildlife pictures on my Flickr page (link in my sig) were taken with the Tarmon lens, and I think on balance, between weight, features, price and quality its pretty hard to match.
Paul

+1

your body can at some stage be improved on but your long lens is certainly at the lower end of the quality spectrum

Hello Paulstw and jaomul,

Thank you very much for your feedback which I spent a few days mulling over and researching. I took the plunge on Saturday and bought a Tamron VP 70-300 Di VC USD lens and used it for the first time on Sunday. I am very pleased with it and I am amazed at how well it takes pictures on the 300mm setting, handheld at 1/30 of a second. It has achieved exactly what I was hoping for.

It will take me some time to become comfortable with my new set and when I am, I am wondering what difference (if any) I can expect to notice by changing my 350D for a full frame EOS, other than the obvious change in focal length? I was wondering about buying a second hand Canon 5D. I have used http://photonotes.org/​lookup/ to show the precise difference in specification between the 350D and the 5D but what might I notice in respect of picture quality? (I use my camera for mostly aviation but also scenery and general photgraphy)

Thanks again.

Definitely body!

Upgrade the lens. A newer body will only help with high ISO noise. At iso 100-400 no one will be able to tell what body you're using. I've used the 75-300 and it was very disappointing.

I have a Tamron 70-300 vc. I bought it in this forums recommendations. It's stunning.

I was in the same boat 3 years ago. My decision was to upgrade the lens first (bought 70-300 IS USM & 17-55 IS USM). One year later I upgraded the body (7D).

For me it was a good move like this. I enjoyed the lenses on the 350D and it improved IQ a lot. Upgrade to 7D was great especially in termsvof focus accuracy at f/2.8.

Good luck!

As with most things it depends on your budget, as already said the 75-300 is not a particularly stellar lens, I have one myself. Best improvement I made was getting a Sigma 150-500 which I used on my 350D for a few years before upgrading the body to a 7D. I'd suggest a similar route.

Nice Strikemaster shot there. I used to have the 75-300 but somehow it went missing, and although I replaced it with a super zoom that is a bit better. But if you really want to see what an older Canon body can do then I would maybe suggest hiring a Canon 100-400L for an airshow. That extra 100 mm really will make a big difference in your results. Lenses fo Hire are really good and a weekend hire (which gives you 3 days, delivery on Thursday collection on Monday) with courier both ways totlas abot £80. It's what I try to do for big shows these days. Otherwise I am stuck with a Sigma 28-300 f4.5-6.3, and no IS. This is shot is from my 300D and was shot manual focus as the 300D's AF is broken.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8644296717/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8643538685/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8644484774/