Coming back to photography after many years away - thinking of a new body

Hi guys,

I've been away from this forum and photography for a good many years. With life getting busy and with having a mediocre camera available on my phone 24X7, I got away from carrying my heavier bodies and lenses, and still occasionally shoot with my ancient digital Rebel XT (350D) that I bought in 2005 combined with either my beloved 17-40L or the 18-55 kit lens.

To tell you the truth, even though my photographic skills are maybe at the advanced amateur level, I still have not maxed out what the 350D can do. I am perfectly content to continue shooting with that camera until it dies on me (and I can't seem to kill that camera even though it has been with me to multiple continents over the past 14 years and has gone through multiple mishaps, including being run over by a airport shuttle bus).

However, on the spur of the moment we made plans and are going to Australia for a two week trip next month and I thought I'd get some thoughts on what the current bodies are offering that would make it worthwhile to buy and upgrade. I don't shoot video much, so I am mainly into photography. That may change, but it's not a priority. I shoot mostly wide angle to near zoom and photograph people, buildings, and landscapes. I also don't care to lug around 8-10 lbs. of gear like I used to in the past when on vacation.

Your thoughts are much appreciated.

Here is my "blacked out, unmarked" Rebel XT that looks so bad, even Parisian pickpockets wouldn't steal it. Photo below it was taken with her after avoiding same pickpockets.

I guess it really comes down to updated features like wi-fi, touch screens, and the like. If you are just knocking around and this setup works, then there's no real need to change. If you want something special perhaps you could rent a body in country to save yourself from extra expense and traveling with it.

There's always the Micro 4/3rds cameras too. They have less weight and lots of nice features.

don't think of buying when you get here.
USA prices would kill any Oz ones.

I agree with comment re why change?

But also the 4/3rds. I've 2 Em5's and love them and their lenses, but that's personal and many here are big fans of full frame etc.
There's plenty of lenses to chose from.
a 12-100 isn't tiny, but may suit?

Panasonic also make decent 4/3rds but I've no experience with them.

I think the biggest photographic changes since then have really been increases in resolution and dynamic range, decreased noise at higher ISOs, and better AF systems. There are also the usability things like touchscreen, wifi, etc.

If you never print bigger than 8x10 or look at them full-size on a 27" monitor, you may not notice a huge difference. But I will say that I've noticed a bit of an intangible difference with the 7d2 vs 7d, that I just seem to be getting more pictures that I'm happier with. I think it's probably a combination of all the small changes, as I can't put my finger on one single upgrade that made the difference. You may notice a similar difference going from your XT to something like a T6i or T7i, or better yet, a rebel SL2. The SL2 has a pretty outdated AF system by today's standards, but it would be familiar coming from the XT, and the camera is packing the best APS-C sensor Canon has made to date. It would still work wonderfully with your 17-40. You can get a refurb kit with the newest version of the 18-55 for $450, which I think is one of the best camera-for-money deals going (I've never used the older 18-55s, but the new ones are surprisingly good... and my understanding is that they're a big step up from the older ones.) That's where I'd look if I was itching to try something newer...

goalerjones wrote in post #18849544
I guess it really comes down to updated features like wi-fi, touch screens, and the like. If you are just knocking around and this setup works, then there's no real need to change. If you want something special perhaps you could rent a body in country to save yourself from extra expense and traveling with it.

There's always the Micro 4/3rds cameras too. They have less weight and lots of nice features.

Renting a body in Australia is out of the question...way too expensive. Like a week rental is $985, almost 1/3 the cost of a 5D MKIV.

I had heard about the Micro 4/3rds system many years ago, but haven't looked in it. How are these mirrorless cameras that can take EF mount lenses?

avondale87 wrote in post #18849583
don't think of buying when you get here.
USA prices would kill any Oz ones.

I agree with comment re why change?

But also the 4/3rds. I've 2 Em5's and love them and their lenses, but that's personal and many here are big fans of full frame etc.
There's plenty of lenses to chose from.
a 12-100 isn't tiny, but may suit?

Panasonic also make decent 4/3rds but I've no experience with them.

I used to shoot an all titanium manual OM4T back in my film days. Seems like this 4/3rds is something to look at.

bseitz234 wrote in post #18849693
I think the biggest photographic changes since then have really been increases in resolution and dynamic range, decreased noise at higher ISOs, and better AF systems. There are also the usability things like touchscreen, wifi, etc.

If you never print bigger than 8x10 or look at them full-size on a 27" monitor, you may not notice a huge difference. But I will say that I've noticed a bit of an intangible difference with the 7d2 vs 7d, that I just seem to be getting more pictures that I'm happier with. I think it's probably a combination of all the small changes, as I can't put my finger on one single upgrade that made the difference. You may notice a similar difference going from your XT to something like a T6i or T7i, or better yet, a rebel SL2. The SL2 has a pretty outdated AF system by today's standards, but it would be familiar coming from the XT, and the camera is packing the best APS-C sensor Canon has made to date. It would still work wonderfully with your 17-40. You can get a refurb kit with the newest version of the 18-55 for $450, which I think is one of the best camera-for-money deals going (I've never used the older 18-55s, but the new ones are surprisingly good... and my understanding is that they're a big step up from the older ones.) That's where I'd look if I was itching to try something newer...

Thanks for the thoughts. Increased DR and decreased noise at higher ISOs would be very useful for the type of photography I do. Touchscreen, wifi, etc. are nice, but not essential.

I was looking at the T6i and it seemed like a nice upgrade for me. Same form factor, and I get the benefits mentioned above. Never considered the SL2...the specs looks similar to the T6i and cost the same. Interesting.

I have the 18-55 IS model that was like the second generation of that lens and it is quite capable. I prefer it as my knock-around lens over my 17-40L.

Since I've got a small investment in EF mount L lenses, what are your thoughts on those mirrorless bodies. Is the AF as good as a traditional dSLR?

Sounds like with your own glass you probably need a compatible body more than a whole new system.

Re my EM5, (1 & 2) and autofocus
I get very frustrated at times.
A bird sitting on a branch 10 feet from me and it won't lock.
Another time it will lock onto a fence wire with ease. Or a blade of grass when I deliberately point at such.
Doesn't always happen but when it objects its highly frustrating.
Apparently it's not uncommon and a trait of my camera.
Lenses are 12-40, 40-150mm, both pro, 75-300mm.
All do similar.
No problem with landscapes.

I usually fine tune with manual focus for latter.

4/3rds offers a lot, due to its mirrorless and the software.
The image stabilisation of my EM5's is nothing short of astounding.
That's worth a lot to me.

If you've good native lenses and you are familiar with that menu structure then probably stick to upgrade current camera.
I wouldn't want to persuade you either way.

For me, the biggest advances in DSLRs have been DR and much improved AF. The newest sensors allow you to pull shadows at base ISOs and there’s no noise. Earlier Canons would show noise pretty quickly in PP, and the adage was “expose to the right” to mitigate pushing shadows in PP. Not getting noise in PP and having reliable AF were the two main weaknesses I found with my first DSLRs (5D and XTi). With the 5D, I even installed a manual split prism screen for manual focusing. Now, most DSLRs have more AF points, are more accurate, and are faster.

davesrose wrote in post #18850073
For me, the biggest advances in DSLRs have been DR and much improved AF. The newest sensors allow you to pull shadows at base ISOs and there’s no noise. Earlier Canons would show noise pretty quickly in PP, and the adage was “expose to the right” to mitigate pushing shadows in PP. Not getting noise in PP and having reliable AF were the two main weaknesses I found with my first DSLRs (5D and XTi). With the 5D, I even installed a manual split prism screen for manual focusing. Now, most DSLRs have more AF points, are more accurate, and are faster.

Yup, "exposing to the right" was my mantra back when I was doing a lot of landscape photography. Hearing and reading about the expanded dynamic range and low noise at high ISO is making me salivate at the possibilities once again.

if you want a really small kit, I'de take a look at the sony A6400 + 10-18 + 16-50. That entire set probably weighs 700g or so.

I have the 16-50 that I use for video on a FF body, and I'm shocked how ridiculously small this thing is. Tipping the scale at only 120g, it's sort of ridiculous , nice to have a zoom around even though I shoot mostly primes.

The AF of the A6400 would blow away the rebels, and that's another story, it's a more costly camera.

Charlie wrote in post #18850336
if you want a really small kit, I'de take a look at the sony A6400 + 10-18 + 16-50. That entire set probably weighs 700g or so.

I have the 16-50 that I use for video on a FF body, and I'm shocked how ridiculously small this thing is. Tipping the scale at only 120g, it's sort of ridiculous , nice to have a zoom around even though I shoot mostly primes.

The AF of the A6400 would blow away the rebels, and that's another story, it's a more costly camera.

Hosted photo: posted by Charlie in
./showthread.php?p=188​50336&i=i87711819
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Wow. That is ridiculously small for an APS-C sensor camera. Since I shoot 95% with my 17-40L or 18-55, that body with a 16-50 would be great for me.

You've given me something to think about.

I am big believer in buying used equipment. What would be a good used body one or two generations back that stands out for you?