Best value secondhand DSLR !

[plesbit]

I've been reading up on the IS, it looks worthwhile to me, although the "rattles" might be a bit disconcerting, would you say it's worth going for ?

Are we talking about the Sigma here or the Canon kit lenses? I understand that the IS version of the kit 18-55 is a much superior lens too. I'd have every lens stabilised if I could. Well I did, in fact, in my last system, and I have to say that I miss it now. A must have feature I think, on longer lenses at any rate.

[Strowager]

I'm becoming quite a researcher of eos ef, ef-s, and is lenses now (although I don't think I'll ever say "expert" with a straight face )

The kit lens with the EOS 500d is the 18-55 IS, so at only an extra £50 on the body price, I went for it. I reasoned that if I ever went for the 18-200 IS, I could sell it more easily through fleabay.

The camera hasn't even arrived yet (expected today ! ), so I don't want to get too far ahead of myself.

I have been amassing bits and bobs from eBay though, a spare battery and car charger (£12), a pentax m42 adapter (£4), a pentax k adapter , with focus electrics (£17), and the mini hdmi lead (£4).

I have a few fixed length film camera lenses (mostly Pentax K, eg the 50mm f2), that should give good results, albeit without the advantage of IS, or auto diaphragm, and maybe not even focus "assistance", although I'm hoping the PK adapter's electrics might help there. It mentions some sort of coupling to the EOS's focusing electronics with a light the comes on when the focus is turned manually. This'll be good (if it works), because I understand that the 500d is devoid of any centre split manual focusing aids in the viewfinder ?

I found this page made good reading on the subject of using non Canon lenses on an EOS body, http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-manual-lenses/

It seems as though ,any older high quality film lenses will adapt quite nicely, and focus to infinity etc.. The danger area is with some "older" eos fitting (but non Canon) lenses, where the electronics of the ef can be incompatible and cause the focus to hang the camera.

I still have some quality pentax k & m42 accessories too, macro bellows, rings, & a microscope adapter (and the "proper" microscope that it fits on to !) So the adapter rings should enable some use of those.

----------------------

Getting back to the Canon ef-s lenses, I'm beginning to think the IS is a very desirable feature as well, so have been narrowing down my options there for the longer focal lengths.

The Holy Grail (for me anyway, can't even look at the "L" series !), is the 18-200 with IS, but they seem to be up around the £400 mark, so no chance while they're the latest thing.

The close second, at about £140-150 is the 55-250 Canon with IS, to compliment the 18-55 IS that comes with the camera. It still means changing lenses, but I guess the payoff is maybe a smidgen less distortion, and 50mm more at the top end. On the downside, they both have the same maximum aperture, but then to offset that, they take the same 58mm filters....

But... I'm still slightly tempted by the much cheaper ef-s 75-300 lens which can be had for about £60, but alas, no IS.

[Pete]

Hi Strowager,

I've had the 500D for about a month now, and am loving it. Like you I went for the 15-55mm lens, as due to the cashback offer on the kit, I could get the kit + a 2nd lens for the same price as the body only and a lens; which gave me the benefit of being able to experiment a bit before forking out/choosing for a 2nd lens.

I find the images taken with the 15-55mm lens to be of decent quality. It does however have a pretty narrow range, so I've been looking to get the 17-75mm lens, which I believe Musiclive uses. Before that though, I'm going to get a zoom lens; probably the Canon 70-300mm IS one, as this would suit the sort of photography I do more.

[Strowager]

Rather than post on both current threads, I thought I'd better just stay with the one that I started.

So this is a joint reply, yes Ian, it'll be interesting for me as well (to see what lens I finally go for !)
and Pete, we're proceeding along a similar path too...

I've bought the 18-55 ef-s with image stabilisation with the camera body, (too little price differential for me to pass it up).

So I need to get my high end zoom range back (that is to say from my Bridge camera's 10x range).

Like you, I've been looking at the Canon 55-250 with optical stabilisation, for £150'ish.

I've also been watching the secondhand Eos ef-s 75-300 non OS lenses on ebay, and they seem to go for around £70.

I was pretty much decided on the 55-250, when I noticed the Sigma 18-200 that Plesbit spoke of. The optically stabilised version is still a bit pricey for me (about £260), but the non stabilised version is a little cheaper than the Canon 55-250.

So now I'm mulling it over again. For about the same money, I can get either the Canon Stabilised lens that matches up nicely with my 18-55, and both stabilised, or I can go for the Sigma 18-200, and not have to swap the lenses as much...

[plesbit]

So now I'm mulling it over again. For about the same money, I can get either the Canon Stabilised lens that matches up nicely with my 18-55, and both stabilised, or I can go for the Sigma 18-200, and not have to swap the lenses as much...

I guess it depends on your shooting expectations. For a long time I survived on the Sigma 18-200 largely alone. However I when my shooting stepped up a level and I had more specific needs I bought a Minolta 24-105 and 100-300 APO off Fleebay. After that I generally used the 24-105 as a walkabout lens and left the 18-200 at home. It still had its uses though and whenever I was going to be shooting in circumstances where both closeup and distance work was going to be involved I always reverted to the 18-200 and was happy with that.

So really the answer lies in how you expect to use the camera. Potentially the two lens combo might offer slightly improved IQ at the expense of more to carry around and time taken to change the lenses. I say potentially, because whilst I'll be the first to say that two lenses are normally better than one the two lenses you refer to are pretty cheap and you might not fully realise the benefits of going down the two lens route until you're buying lenses from further up the food chain.

On the other hand, the Canon lens you mention is a 55-250 rather than 200 so you have a little extra on the long end if you go down that route.

[Strowager]

"buying lenses from further up the food chain"

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. Back in my Pentax ME days, I bought it with the 50mm f2 smc takumar lens, and also a (not cheap) third party (damned if I can remember the name) 28-135 superzoom.

When I processed my first test roll of FP4 and enlarged it to a few 20x16's, I was very disappointed. The superzoom's distortion and softness was appalling. I realised that they wouldn't be as good as the 50mm Pentax prime, but the difference was immense. I guess most users would never know, if they just had 6x4's or slides.

The camera's arrived now, plus a lot of bits and bobs that I'd ebayed, such as the pentax - eos adapter (£6 !). I've tried the Pentax 50mm lens on the Canon, (yes, I still have it !), and the manual focussing and stopping down doesn't seem to be a problem, or a lost art (the good old days).

I also picked up a Sigma 70-300 APO off ebay for £22. It's the older full frame version (not dg), and despite the slight fear that the EF chip might not work with the 500D, it does work perfectly, without locking up. I know the reviews don't rate it so good past the 200 mark, but it's quite an EF lens for the money !

I'm now looking at the Pentax M42 and Pentax K prime lenses on eBay, (50mm 1.4, 135mm 2.8, and 200mm f3.5). They seem to go for very little money. I have another Pentax K to EOS adapter making it's way over from China, which is chipped, and allegedly offers "focus assist" when used a certain way, so ,maybe that'll make the Takumars even more usable.

(Is this the same bloke that said a few days ago that he didn't want to bother with changing lenses ?)

[Strowager]

I've been playing with my prezzie, and I must admit I'm very impressed, thanks chaps.

The 18-55mm IS kit lens is very good, and the results from my Pentax F2 Takumar on the PK adapter are amazing, ( hand held, no flash, in a subdued light lounge).

Still working my way through the instruction manual, and I came across the section on the "included software". Each time I've bought a new camera I've ignored such CDs, as they usually contain limited scope freebie picture editors and browsers, and I don't like filling my PC with superfluous software.

I'm impressed with "EOS Utility" though, it has a remote control function, where you can see the viewfinder output live on the PC screen, manipulate most of the settings, and take stills or movies by remote control. It even has timelapse control.

Coupled with my little netbook and a 5m USB extension lead, I'll be able to relax in an armchair in the conservatory whilst taking bird table closeups !

Here's a photo of the Netbook taking a picture of itself with the 500d....

(Blast !.... I left the focus box on the keyboard, whereas I should really have put it on the screen though...)

[MusicLive]

Strowager,

You made a good choice with the purchase of the 500d. It's a darned good tool and I'm certain it will bring you a great deal of pleasure and some lovely shots to boot!

Strange why so many folk sell their old lenses for next to nothing on ebay?
Maybe it's the age of Auto-focus and IS that causes them to dispose of the old 'manual' items.

I also use my Pentax K series prime lenses on my Canon's, 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, and 200mm f3.5, the results are always first class and yes, I prefer to use manual focus for a great deal of my experimental stuff. I'd intended to sell them, but will keep them now I know how good they perform on the Canon's
The Pentax 50mm 'K' f1.4 is a better lens than the 60mm Canon macro I own, IMHO
Most folk these days would think me insane ( nothing unusual there then!) to use manual settings on highly sophisticated camera's, but that's what I always did, so I'm used to manually operating lenses etc.
Albeit the Auto-focus is a boon at times and I would not like to be without it...both have their uses!

One thing I hate about the Auto-focus is when it 'Hunts' the subject and the shutter locks-up on that all important shot...very frustrating!

FP4.....What's that?? Some sort of Aeroplane? I can hear you all saying!
You've reminded me of days spent with bottles of Chemicals, stinking the place out, and 'Ciba-chrome'...yes, that lovely paper stuff we used to get vibrant colours with, and Durst Colour Analyzers / Enlargers, frustrating the life out of us, whilst trying endlessly to get it just right!!
Good old days? ...'er no!!
Much better to sit in font of the 'Puta' and edit RAW files without having to get your fingers dirty..or even sit in the conservatory (if you have one) and take remote controlled shots of the Birdies!
Then stick them in the pair of correctly profiled and set-up R1800's with Lyson CISS feeds and rip off a few A3 plus prints...easy!! That's what I do!

Enjoy your new camera.

I'm sure you will.

[Strowager]

Yes I'm very pleased with it Clive.

As readers will know from my waffling on here, I was in two minds between that and a Bridge SLR.

Maybe a tiny voice in my head knew I was then going on another quest of lenses and bits and pieces, (and was right !)

I can identify with everything you said. I even pre-date manual, when built-in non-coupled exposure meters were expensive, and you weighed up "cloudy, 125asa, 125th sec, hmmm, that'll be about f5.6".

I've managed to get the best of both worlds with my Pentax K > Eos lens adapter, I bought one of those "AF Confirm" chipped adapters, which enable the in-focus flash & beep while manual focusing, with any lens at f5.6 or better.

FP4, I used to buy it in 120 & 220 and keep bulk packs in the fridge, to extend the storage life.

Cibachrome, yes been there, done that, at a pound per 10x8 sheet.

The Melico colour analyser saved all those tedious 5x4 test grids, even though it did cost £130 (30 years ago !).

At one time I had a De Vere 7x5 cold cathode enlarger, to print the cut film negs from my MPP tech camera.

Luckily, most of that lot was sold on a few years ago, or judging by today's eBay prices for it, it would have been a total loss.

And yes, I'm the same as you've said with modern day "processing", here's my R1800 with CISS. A fantastic enhancement, I buy the 8 different inks in 250ml bottles now, equivalent to dozens of cartridges. I can do a run of 30 A3 SHQ prints without the damn things running out !

[MusicLive]

Strowager,

I hope you won't mind my asking this but are you using dye inks, or the real pigment type?

Just wondering, as I know there are many out there who use cheaper far eastern produced dye inks, instead of the correctly ballanced pigmented stuff.

[Strowager]

I remember researching it all carefully in 2008 when I bought the system and the ink, but I'm blowed if I can remember exactly what it was now !

This is the company that I bought it from, and I think this was it, (although the bottles have changed).
http://www.continuous-ink-systems.co.uk ... d529ceb1b7

They are UK based, and when I was looking then, the ink name that they used was from a large German based chemical company, (unlike the other ebay sellers at the time).

I vaguely remember the options of dye or pigment, and I think I went for pigment.

Anyhow, that was 15 months ago, and I'm about 25% of the way through the stuff, having printed hundreds of A4 & A3 photos.

I've had a lot of colour printers, both at work and at home, and this set up (with the 8 tank R1800) is still head and shoulders above everything else.

Because of my new 500D, I'm busy at the moment creating a lens testing target on A1 foam board, to which I'm sticking lens testing gradients and colour panels downloaded from the internet. These I'm printing on the R1800 at it's highest resolution on Epson H/W matt photo paper. It turns out to be a good test of the printer, especially the A3 colour card, which has printed superbly, even when viewed through a magnifying glass.

I wondered about longevity of the inks as well, but none have faded so far, even the framed prints around the house.

Here's a much reduced copy of the testing images, (the original PNG is over 40mb !)
When printed on the R1800 with the original PNG file, the bars are resolved right down to the finest, unlike this giant "thumbnail" here.

[MusicLive]

Strowager, I must offer you my apologies for going off topic!

But you've captured my interest, especially when it comes to printing the images we all take.

Before I go rambling on, I must ask you if you have had custom printer profiles produced for the ink / printer you are currently using?
Profiling a printer correctly with your monitor and the inks you use will make a vast difference to the final printout!

I use Lyson, (now called Nazdar) System inks, and I spent considerable time liasing with their technical department / chemists!
They were, and continue to be, extremely helpful in producing R1800 profiles for me, and until I spoke with them I hadn't realised that two identical printers using the same ink system, will produce vastly differing results. I also spent a considerable amount of time helping develop the Gloss opimiser for Lyson's R1800 system inks!
The Gloss optimiser was the icing on the cake when it came to finish and to match Epson's results!
I must stress that I do not work for Lyson, it's just that I wished for the best results from my R1800's.
The results astounded me when their chemists produced an inking system to match Epsons own!
It took a lot of work and testing to achieve mind!
If you have'nt already had custom profiling done for your system it may be worth your while checking with the ink supplier as to whether they can set-up a profile! Believe me the effort is well worth it!

Seems like you are enjoying your new aquisition too!!!

Regards,
Clive.

[Strowager]

No apologies needed to me Clive, my DSLR questions were answered and guided me well, (although I'm poorer now)

Profiling the printer ? I'd heard of it, but I seem to get pretty good results as is, so I've been too lazy to get into profiling.

Now that you've said the name "Lyson", it rings a bell, I'm pretty sure that was the origin of the one that I bought (15 months ago). There were cheaper systems on eBay, using the same hardware, but with unbranded, (probably far Eastern) inks, so I didn't chance those.

-----
Yes, still very pleased with my new acquisition, despite my initial protestations to the contrary, there's a basic pleasure from having a variety of lenses and attachments that all fit nicely together (sad, I know ).

I've just acquired a Sigma 600mm mirror lens, and I'm amazed to find that the Chinese "focus assist" PK to Canon lens adapter works fine with it, (despite being f8 max).

Yes, I know catadioptric lenses usually get bad reviews, but reading carefully through the Internet, some makes and models are better than others, (eg this one). If used properly, on a tripod, with the mirror locked up, you can get pretty good 20x telephoto shots from a lens no bigger or heavier than a zoom. I say 20x, because with the APSc sensor, it's the equivalent of 960mm on 35 mil.

I'll post a shot from it on here when I see something interesting through it.

[Strowager]

I haven't taken anything with my 500D good enough yet to post on here, (compared to other people's efforts), but since it's been so long since I bought it, I thought I'd better show how things are going.

I'm very pleased with the versatility of the interchangeable lenses again, (despite originally thinking one for all was a good idea). I now have quite a collection of lenses, bought quite cheaply off eBay, (all for probably less than the cost of one Canon "L" lens.)

The Olympus OM & Pentax K focus assist adapters work really well, making the cameras very versatile, even with my microscope and astro telescope.

If you bear in mind that this photo of Dyson ** was taken hand-held, through two sets of double glazed windows, the resolution is still fair, and would have been excellent if I could have approached him without the glass in between.

The inset of his head shows the actual pixels, and the EXIF details from the original were:

Canon EOS 500D
Lens: EF75-300mm
focal length 160.0mm
f6.3
1/320
ISO 3200
(completely unedited, apart from the resizing of the full frame and clipping of the inset)

( ** He's called "Dyson" because he Hoovers up the grub from our bird table )