• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

If you were to buy a Canon DSLR on an extreme budget... (1 Viewer)

CalvinFold

CalvinFold

Well-known member
An idea struck me that maybe, just maybe, this is possible. Well, at least later this year...

If you wanted to buy a Canon DLSR, with amateur and budget considerations in mind...what would you choose? And what lens?

And let's be super, super clear: I actually don't mind the SX60 I currently use, given what it is. And I don't plan to be a professional photographer, and I fully acknowledge I'm an amateur of the highest order. But I am also a pixel-jockey (Photoshop) and appreciate the quality of what a DSLR can produce.

So we're really talking about a DSLR for someone who knows his limits, knows his skill level, and is looking for a "prosumer" choice (since the old "prosumer" category seems to have vanished). For example, I love the setup of my girlfriend's Nikon D700, a lovely FX camera, but in helping her set it up, it nearly made my head explode from all the options. Far, far more DLSR than I'd ever need.

Conversely, I shoot in Tv mode on the SX60, fiddle with exposure compensation and ISO, etc. So "prosumer" is the best way to describe it...a smart camera that takes-over or second-guesses when I need it to ("idiot mode") and has semi-auto when I want to control some aspects but not others.

What I've learned using my Canon SX60 for a year that I'd like in a DSLR:

  • I already have a Canon flash, so really is just easier and less expensive to get a Canon DSLR.
  • I don't like camera settings buried in awkward menus. Give me lots of exterior buttons, let me program them, let me assign what I want to them.
  • I have smaller hands (men's medium) and a not-so-great back and elbows, so a smaller DSLR is more my speed.
  • I have to shoot in odd lighting, so low-light performance is a good thing. But to be honest, I suspect any DSLR is better than a bridge camera in this regard.
  • Distance is king. I really want a lens that is compact, lightweight, and doesn't weigh any more than necessary. But I still figure I need 300mm or more. I routinely need to reach out 40-50m and often need 100+m distance. Even the 1350mm equivalent on the SX60 isn't quite enough sometimes (though better image quality and less noise on a DSLR will compensate somewhat).
  • If I can use a teleconverter with said lens it would be a bonus, even if it mean sacrificing light quality.
  • I can't afford a constant-aperture lens, otherwise some of the 200mm plus a teleconverter would be so tempting.
  • Since distance is king, I suspect I will be perfectly happy with DX or other crop-sensors.
  • A good example: my girlfriend has a Nikon with the NIKKOR 70-300mm lens, which has proven to be a very nice lens and about the limits of what she can carry and use (she tried the NIKKOR 200mm constant-aperture and it was a lovely lens but far too heavy).
  • In that vein, the long lens would likely live on this camera, so something that starts at about 70mm seems a good sweet spot for a zoom.
  • And yes, cost matters, alot. But I would prefer sticking with a Canon lens unless there is one of quality that works properly with the camera in all respect (focus speed, sensors, etc.)
  • BiF capabilities important: burst speed, tracking, focus speed, etc.
And yes, I may be asking for the impossible, but if that is the case, then I stick to the SX60. It serves me quite well, but it doesn't mean I can't be curious about what "better" would cost.
 
If I was you I consider the mirrorless camera like a second hand Panasonic gh3 or gh4 with the 100_300 lens and use your sx60 along side.
 
Paul Jarvis said:
If I was you I consider the mirrorless camera like a second hand Panasonic gh3 or gh4 with the 100_300 lens and use your sx60 along side.
Click to expand...
That is definitely a thought, I had considered a MFT camera (Olympus OM-D series.) just before getting the SX60. But there didn't seem to be decent long-reaching lenses for the system.

Maybe I'm confusing focal length given to 35mm equivalent? I only see sub-200mm LUMIX lenses, plus one $1800 400mm lens from Panasonic.

Also, why Panasonic (which I understand has the stabilization in the lens) over Olympus (which puts the stabilization in the body)?

Also, I prefer new to used, only because I've been bitten one too many times by people who are abusive to their own property and then sell their stuff that way with no consideration to the buyer. Been stung too much in used electronics.

Thanks for the great feedback!
 
CalvinFold said:
Maybe I'm confusing focal length given to 35mm equivalent? I only see sub-200mm LUMIX lenses, plus one $1800 400mm lens from Panasonic.

Also, why Panasonic (which I understand has the stabilization in the lens) over Olympus (which puts the stabilization in the body)?
Click to expand...

I looked into MFT cameras before I decided to buy a Canon T4i and Sigma 100-300 f/4 (which is not the way to go if looking for a lightweight rig ;) ), and by my understanding you get a 2x crop factor on MFT cameras. So on, for example a Panasonic or Olympus body, a 200mm lens will become a 400mm equivalent, a 300mm will become a 600mm, and so on. In my opinion, the right lens is at least or maybe more important than the camera body. Whether you go Olympus or Panasonic, two popular telephoto zooms (Oly 75-300 and Panny 100-300) are compared here. Keep in mind that the Panny has an extra half stop of light over the Olympus, and both lenses go for around $500 dollars, which is a bargain for that kind of reach. Most other options are not in an extreme budget range, here I'm talking about Olympus 300 f/4 and Panasonic 100-400 which go for ~$2400 and ~$1800, respectively. There are many different bodies from Panasonic and Olympus that fit your price range, and offer both mirrorless and DSLR-like feel, and a bit of research on Amazon may help.

Now if we go back to your original inquiry about a Canon DSLR, the best option I see is the Canon SL1 which has the capabilities of a DSLR and body only runs $400. I know you're not looking for used cameras, but the Rebel series (both new or old) are great and can take a beating (I own one myself). If you do rethink this, KEH is one of the best online used camera gear sites, and my "Bargain" grade T4i came with only a scuff over the model name. Also, remember that with a Canon DSLR you get a 1.6x crop factor, so that a 300mm lens turns out to be a 480mm equivalent. Don't forget to look at Third-Party lenses too which can, in some cases, be superior to their name brand equivalents. One to look into is the Tamron 70-300 (this one), which I've seen many good photos taken with. Hope I didn't confuse you too much!
 
Last edited:
If you've got the money buy new defo. I sold my slr gear and went with panasonic gh3 but I'm looking to upgrade to the GH4.

Sony olympus panasonic are all pretty good the choice is personal with which make you go with. The new panasonic 100-400 is out later this year with the equivalent focal length of 200-800.
 
Rapala,

When I first debated between Bridge and MFT, I was less aware of my needs and crop factors and so on, so knowing now about the 2x crop factor does certainly change things.

Yes, I am aware the lens is very important, and I do understand constant aperture lenses are better but also usually heavier and more expensive. Though I suspect a constant aperture lens for MFT at, say, 200mm is still lighter than the Canon FX 200mm 2.8 my girlfriend tried for a while...my goodness that thing was heavy (lovely photos, but she gave it back as it wasn't practical for swinging around trying to catch BiF). :eek!:

Everyone,

One other question, in case you folks might know, do quality teleconverters exist for MFT for the Olympus or Panasonic lenses? I am aware they tend to pair better with constant-aperture lenses and reduce the light by a stop or two. Remember, I'm coming from a bridge camera, even that "sacrifice" is more light gathering than I tend to have now at long range. ;)

Starting to sound like I need to save my pennies for a couple years to upgrade. :t:
 
Totally off topic from you initial question but i thought i would mention,Nikon are supposed to be launching in the next couple of months 3 new 1 inch sensor cameras,they will have fixed lenses and are supposed to have the very latest Sony sensors.
The one ime interested in will have a 24-500mm lens,on the 1 inch sensor this equates to a 35mm equivalent of 64mm-1350mm.
 
nikonmike said:
Totally off topic from you initial question but i thought i would mention,Nikon are supposed to be launching in the next couple of months 3 new 1 inch sensor cameras,they will have fixed lenses and are supposed to have the very latest Sony sensors.
The one ime interested in will have a 24-500mm lens,on the 1 inch sensor this equates to a 35mm equivalent of 64mm-1350mm.
Click to expand...

that seems like a rumor,
and a strange zoom range,
will be a large cam if it's a true 500mm lens...
P900 have 357mm and it's huge..
 
Last edited:
nikonmike said:
Totally off topic from you initial question...
Click to expand...
I don't mind off-topic in this case...just goes to show what I've learned and where the market has gone in the last 18 months. Just when DSLR seems like the place to go, other alternatives get better and more viable.

...but i thought i would mention,Nikon are supposed to be launching in the next couple of months 3 new 1 inch sensor cameras,they will have fixed lenses and are supposed to have the very latest Sony sensors.
The one ime interested in will have a 24-500mm lens,on the 1 inch sensor this equates to a 35mm equivalent of 64mm-1350mm.
Click to expand...


Link to these Nikons you mention?

I found this and this thread at DPReview, but no specifics or photos.

Depending on the price, this would be the "bridge camera" that bridge camera owners have been begging for (bigger sensor). 1350mm equivalent is the same as the Canon SX60 HS, though 64mm isn't quite as wide angle (SX60 is 21mm equivalent) it would be fine for my photographic uses.

The real question seems to be (beyond the usual IQ and features issues), will they have EVF? Having tried both, I really prefer an EVF to using the screen when trying to do photography handheld at those kinds of focal lengths (distances).

I know my girlfriend is planning to get the Sony RX100 III and from the reviews I can't wait to borrow it for short-range and pocket-cam photography. Sounds like the Nikon might get the same/similar sensor?
 
CalvinFold said:
I don't mind off-topic in this case...just goes to show what I've learned and where the market has gone in the last 18 months. Just when DSLR seems like the place to go, other alternatives get better and more viable.




Link to these Nikons you mention?

I found this and this thread at DPReview, but no specifics or photos.

Depending on the price, this would be the "bridge camera" that bridge camera owners have been begging for (bigger sensor). 1350mm equivalent is the same as the Canon SX60 HS, though 64mm isn't quite as wide angle (SX60 is 21mm equivalent) it would be fine for my photographic uses.

?
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint, but the referenced text specifically notes that 500mm is the 35mm equivalent focal length for the 1" superzoom. So not close to the SX60 or its ilk.
 
etudiant said:
Sorry to disappoint, but the referenced text specifically notes that 500mm is the 35mm equivalent focal length for the 1" superzoom. So not close to the SX60 or its ilk.
Click to expand...

that seems more plausible.

but with a 1 inch sensor it might
even out a bit when the light is low
but for bird photo, perhaps a bit short
 
Last edited:
To answer a question from a few posts back:
There is an olympus 1.4x TC that will work on the prime 300 mm lens they are making. It seems unlikely to pair up with the pana lens (design differences seem too big).

Niels
 
etudiant:
Thanks for the clarification. Thought it seemed too good to be true, but I was allowed to hope! ;-p

Vespobuteo:
Based on my experience so far (borrowing a D700 with a 70-300mm lens), 500mm might only work if we're talking DSLR quality. But I've only found "you can get by with less sheer focal length with cropping a photo from a better sensor" only goes so far. I tend to lean towards sheer focal length myself, not relying just on the sensor.

For me, it's one of those "it kinda depends" questions. Since most photographers use focal length as a metric, where I prefer "meters to target," it makes it tough to compare in an apples-to-apples way I find important to me. I know what I can reach-out to with my SX60's "1350mm equivalent" and what a 300mm focal length reaches to on a D700. Means 500+ is likely what I need. If I had to guess, I'd be happy with 800-1000mm equivalent on a MFT or DSLR if such a thing existed in something I can afford.

njlarsen:
Thats another "good to know" piece of info (the teleconverter). Looks to me like MFT may be back on the table as an alternative way to manage the "cost vs. distance vs. weight/size of system" equation. It's going to be a complicated decision, but the info here has been really useful.
 
Re MTF: Any of the pana/oly cameras with the pana/Leica 100-400 would take you to the 800 mm number you crave. Using the oly lens you probably would like to have the extra integration an Oly camera can give you. That combo with the TC would give you a reach equivalent to about 840 mm.

For the most extreme distances, you can set the camera to use an in-camera crop which acts in a way to give you a 2x tc but at the cost of fewer pixels used. I personally prefer shooting in RAW, so therefore I do not use that option.

Take a look at this thread from the id forum. I was so far away that I could not see any colors on the second bird using my binoculars. The crops shown were clearly enough for id. Distance in both bird 1 and bird 2 were beyond 100 m, how much beyond I cannot say. Camera Pana GH2 with the 100-300 lens, I hope that a newer camera with the 100-400 lens is in my future within about a year.

Finally, reach with a Canon dx type camera: 1.6x crop factor and the older 400 mm prime would give you about 640 mm, which only with a 1.4x TC would get above the 800mm mark (896).

Niels
 
Weight comparisons
Pana G7 with pana/Leica 100-400: 1393 g
Oly EM1 with Oly 300: 1767 g
Oly EM1 with Oly 300 + MC14: 1937 g
Canon T6i + 400 mm f5.6 + 1.4x: 2025

Note: I am not sure the Canon combo would be able to use AF, you might need a more expensive and heavier camera body for that. Or you could go up to a more expensive and heavier lens to get AF.

Niels
 
njlarsen:
Not knowing the typical weight a DSLR person hefts around, are those "better" weights?

Poking around, here's some estimates on the weights of my girlfriend's setup:

  • D700 + 70-300mm f/4-5.6G VR II: 995g + 745g = 1740g
  • D700 + 70-200mm f/2.5G ED VR II: 995g + 1540g = 2535g

So in an ideal world:

  • OM-D E-M10 Mk II + M.Zuiko ED 300mm f4.0 IS PRO + MC14 = 390g + 1475g + 170g = 2035g (840mm equivalent)
  • OM-D E-M10 Mk II + M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f2.8 PRO + MC14 = 390g + 880g + 170g = 1440g (420mm equivalent)

Does that seem about right?

By comparison:

  • Canon SX60HS + Canon Speedlight 430 EX II + Better Beamer FX-5 = 650g + 450g + 45g = 1145g (the idea would be that the MFT would simply be better in low light and wouldn't need the flash as much as the SX60 needs it)

In which case even the lighter setup is lighter than my girlfriend's DSLR with more reach, and the heavier setup is likely a good happy spot for distance while still being fairly light in DSLR terms. And while heavier than my SX60 setup, not horribly so in the lighter combination.

Food for though, just need $2000-3000 USD, not a problem. :eek!:
 
Because of what you had said already, I selected the lightest canon lens that would get you the reach you crave.

I would seriously consider the pana solution if I was you: 1393 g for 800 mm equivalent reach. When DP review made their review of the G7, it was touted as the mft camera with the best tracking AF yet.

I have chosen to avoid flash and better beamer completely. I accept that noise is visible in some of my photos, and I regularly use iso 3200 on my GH2. On a newer camera, I would expect to be able to go to at least iso 6400 and get similar noise as what I see now.

Niels

Edit: I intended to add that there are lots of canon lenses with more reach or more light that both cost and weigh a lot more than the one I made the calculation for.
 
Kevin,

A couple of notes. MFTs seem to be moving to 20mp sensors from 16mp, which in theory should give you a bit more effective reach via cropping. Panny GX8 has one, and also had the best low light score at DXO mark among MFT cameras (though by a slim margin). Olympus will soon release the Pen-F with a 20mp sensor, and the EM-1 mk II (their flagship camera) is expected to be released with one later this year. Just how much of an advantage there is of pairing the new panny zoom with a panny camera remains to be seen since no production models of the lens have been tested yet.

Also the Nikon D7200, which gets top low light scores among APS-C cameras, is only c. 630g. There's a lightweight 300mm prime lens for it, which can get you 600mm equivalent reach when set to crop mode, but the other relevant nikon lenses would be heavier than mft lenses.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

S
Second camera body - R7 or 5d mk4??
Replies
1
Views
338
Fowl Mouth
Fowl Mouth
The Robin
Camera advice...R7
Replies
6
Views
1K
paddyluke
paddyluke
BenjiS
Budget Canon lens
Replies
8
Views
1K
nikitasius
N
O
Canon EOS 80D always slightly "fuzzy"
Replies
14
Views
2K
nikitasius
N
A
Beginner camera recommendations?
Replies
6
Views
783
Ash Anne
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top