I have an XSI and a 70-300 IS USM, I can either upgrade to the 50D or to the 70-200 f/4 IS USM. What to do?
w7cma Senior Member  459 posts Likes: 7 Joined Aug 2008 Location: Missoula, Montana More info | Oct 06, 2009 08:55 | #1 I have an XSI and a 70-300 IS USM, I can either upgrade to the 50D or to the 70-200 f/4 IS USM. What to do? With the touch of a button, I can speak a thousand words.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
stsva Cream of the Crop  More info | Oct 06, 2009 08:57 | #2 w7cma wrote in post #8770465  I have an XSI and a 70-300 IS USM, I can either upgrade to the 50D or to the 70-200 f/4 IS USM. What to do? You should be able to get excellent image quality out of the XSi. The 50D has more features, but I think I'd go for the lens. Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Njv Goldmember  1,858 posts Joined May 2009 Location: Ohio More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:08 | #3 70-200 f/4 all the way. 7d|tamron 17-50mm f2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Cyrix_2k Senior Member 299 posts Joined Dec 2006 Location: Westminster, MD More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:17 | #4 Easy choice... 70-200. Olympus OM-10 35mm SLR | Canon EOS 5D | Canon EOS 5D Mk III
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ebann Once an ugly duckling  3,396 posts Joined Jan 2003 Location: Chimping around Brazil since 1973! (Sometimes NYC) More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:19 | #5 cheapest L lens and a fine set too: 17-40, 70-200/4, and 50/1.8 Ellery Bann
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nervous Senior Member  372 posts Joined Oct 2008 More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:22 | #6 Depends what do you really want. 70-300 IS USM is very capable lens, XSi is a good camera, but with some ergonomic quirks (in comparison with xxD and xD lines). 7D | 5D classic | EF-S 10-22 | EF 24-105 L IS | EF 70-300 IS USM | EF 85/1.8 | EF 50/1.8 II | Sigma 24-60/2.8 | Tamron 90/2.8 | 580EXII | 2x 420EX | 055XPro + 488RC2
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jubu Senior Member 752 posts Joined Jan 2009 Location: NYC, USA More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:23 | #7 I just picked up a 70-200L f4 non-IS and am extremely happy. I'm sure you'll love the IS version even more. The L lenses are simply amazing. Canon EOS 5D Mark II | My Flickr Favorites
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JustBe Goldmember  1,449 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: Seattle area More info | Oct 06, 2009 09:50 | #8 I upgraded to the 50D from the Xti. Very happy with the move.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
foxesamu Senior Member 507 posts Joined Feb 2009 More info | Oct 06, 2009 10:26 | #9 Just Be wrote in post #8770804 I upgraded to the 50D from the Xti. Very happy with the move. I upgraded the 70-300 IS to the 70-200 2.8, but that's alot more money. If I were you I would keep the 70-300 IS because of the range and the IQ is very very good on that lens. At least my copy was. I don't think you will notice a lot of IQ difference from either change. Conversely, I think there will be a noticeable difference between the 70-200 and 70-300 (70-200 tack sharp wide open)... there won't be from the 450D to the 50D.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nervous Senior Member 372 posts Joined Oct 2008 More info | Oct 06, 2009 10:32 | #10 Agree, I guess the difference in IQ between 70-200/4 and 70-300 is mentionable. But the difference in ergonomics/VF/AF/features between XSi and 50D is also very mentionable. So, as I mentioned before: it is really a question what OP wants more. 7D | 5D classic | EF-S 10-22 | EF 24-105 L IS | EF 70-300 IS USM | EF 85/1.8 | EF 50/1.8 II | Sigma 24-60/2.8 | Tamron 90/2.8 | 580EXII | 2x 420EX | 055XPro + 488RC2
LOG IN TO REPLY |
runninmann what the heck do I know?  More info | Oct 06, 2009 10:32 | #11 Going to the 70-200 isn't an upgrade if you need 300mm. You'd have to add the cost of a teleconverter, at additional cost, to get close to the same FL at the same aperture while reducing your FL range when using the T-con.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jethro790 Goldmember  2,193 posts Likes: 3 Joined Nov 2004 Location: Southern New Hampshire More info | The 70-300 is one amazing lens. My copy is L image quality for sure, although certainly a slow, less well built lens. Personally I would keep it, and go for a 50D. Either that or get a better quality, faster walk around zoom like a 17-55.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ebann Once an ugly duckling 3,396 posts Joined Jan 2003 Location: Chimping around Brazil since 1973! (Sometimes NYC) More info | Oct 06, 2009 11:34 | #13 I'd rather have an XT with 17-40/4L + 70-200/4L Ellery Bann
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ingraman Member 169 posts Joined Mar 2009 More info | Do you do sports or birds? If so, I'm going against the grain and voting for the 50D. The improved autofocus/fps makes a huge difference, especially with fast moving objects. You can have the best lenses in the world, but if you're getting blurred shots due to slow AI focus, all that image quality is moot.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Njv Goldmember 1,858 posts Joined May 2009 Location: Ohio More info | Oct 06, 2009 12:52 | #15 ebann wrote in post #8771424 I'd rather have an XT with 17-40/4L + 70-200/4L than 50D with 18-55 + 70-300 Couldn't agree more. 7d|tamron 17-50mm f2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ealarcon 781 guests, 118 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
