Upgrading from 1000D : 550D or 50D or 60D or 7D?

[Soumendra]

Hi..
Im using a 1000D right now and photography is just my hobby.
Lens owned : Canon 50mm f1.8 , Sigma 70-300mm APO DG, Canon 18-55mm IS.

It serves all of purpose. Just need to upgrade the body.

My Subjects : Wildlife, Birds (A LOT) , Moving cars, Indoor Portraits , Indoor ceremony, Product photography indoor, still cars, landscape, beaches (A LOT) and outdoor portraits(A LOT), Sunrise and sunset, etc.


So, I have shortlisted the Canon 50D, 550D, 60D and 7D.

7D is totally out of my budget, but if its a good deal with my existing lens collection, then I can become a street beggar to get this . Not sure, if the 7D will work the best with the Sigma 70-300APO DG or not, as I have heard people saying, for 7D and up, we need L lenses to do good.

50D is getting out of my list,as I have heard, it doesnt perform well on high ISO and low light. Only thing, I love in it its metal body and ergonomics.

60D : I was expecting a lot from it, but stupid Canon shattered everything by making it plastic body and with lower fps that 50D even.

550D : It comes in my budget and I think, it can perform with my existing lens collection..


====================

So, now I need suggestions from you guys, that if 550D is going to perform perfect for the above subjects mentioned or should I start begging for 7D ?

[inkista]

Originally Posted by Soumendra

...Im using a 1000D right now and photography is just my hobby.
Lens owned : Canon 50mm f1.8 , Sigma 70-300mm APO DG, Canon 18-55mm IS.

Are you sure you need to upgrade your body vs. upgrading your glass?

For birding, I was shooting with an XT and a 75-300 III, and I got shots like this:



Then, I blew $1100 on a 400/5.6L, spent a year learning how to use it and how to chase birds in the canyons, and I got this:



If your body is serving all your purposes, why do you need to upgrade? Yes, I blew $1100 on a lens. And I can still use that lens now that I've moved from an XT to a 50D. And when I move from the 50D to my next camera body, I'll probably still be able to use that lens. Money you spent on glass stays with you longer than the money you spend on a camera body, in my experience.

7D is totally out of my budget, but if its a good deal with my existing lens collection, ...

Which features of the 7D do you need? I would never advocate going into debt for a camera body when you're a hobbyist photographer (or even if you're a pro, really, but at least if you're a pro, it's a tax write off). Which features are the ones that are going to make a difference to your photos? And can you find it on a lower-end body? If it's image quality you're after--the 550D shares mostly the same sensor and processor. Get the 7D because you need the frame rate, and the AF system. Otherwise, the lower-end models can probably do what you want.

50D is getting out of my list,as I have heard, it doesnt perform well on high ISO and low light. Only thing, I love in it its metal body and ergonomics.

Frankly, I hate the weight and bulk of the metal body: it hurts my hands (I have RSI). I had to rearrange all my camera bags to get the &#*$&@er to fit when it replaced my little XT. But I'm weird. The main consideration, though, is while a metal body is nice, it doesn't actually help you get a better shot...

But high ISO and low light, while not as nice as the 7D/550D's, isn't exactly in the suckass category, either. It's one generation better than your XS.

Or go back one more generation and get a 40D. But then, you won't have autofocus microadjust.

60D : I was expecting a lot from it, but stupid Canon shattered everything by making it plastic body and with lower fps that 50D even.

Gee, the fact that it's $200 cheaper than the 50D was, has that better 7D sensor/processor with the great high ISO performance you want, and still offers 90% of the improved ergonomics of the 50D, retains the better AF system of the XXDs, has interchangeable focus screens, adds a flash master in the pop-up, the LCD overlay, HD video, and a flip-out screen with a higher-resolution LCD just doesn't count for anything, then? Yeesh.

And if you can actually tell the difference between a 5fps and 6fps burst, more power to ya. I'm still using the 3fps burst rate about 90% of the time on my 50D.

Short version: I'd reserve judgement until you can actually get your hands on one, vs. just parroting what other people write on messageboards (especially dpreview). The 60D is still a sizable step up from a dRebel--and you're on an XS, which is one step down from those. It's also only 10% lighter, and maybe 1mm shaved on each side. Grip-wise, my guess is that the ergo is going to be pretty damn similar to previous XXDs.

550D : It comes in my budget and I think, it can perform with my existing lens collection..

And maybe that's all you really need.

[BigVinnie]

From what you are saying focus speed should be your number one shopping point.

I think I would look around and try to find a deal on a 1d MKII or III. Whichever you can afford.

[inkista]

Personal tastes, but I think a 1-series is overkill for a hobbyist photographer who just wants a few bird shots, and for whom a 7D is going to break the bank. And, of course, the OP's 18-55 would not be usable on it. (While the 1D is 1.3x crop, it still can't really use EF-S lenses).

If you're pro shooting sports, then, yeah. MkIII is probably out of budget (~$2k). MkIIN is probably the one to look for.

BTW, that second white-tailed kite shot I took? Still done on the XT, crappy plastic body, 7-pt AF with single cross-type AF at the center, and 3fps [essentially the same gear the OP has in his XS, only with a lower resolution sensor and earlier processor]. The 50D makes it a little easier to get that kind of shot, but not by much. When a bird flashes by overhead for a second or two, it's not so much the camera's frame rate that determines your results, but your own reflexes and tracking abilities.

[BigVinnie]

You're probably right about the 1d.

I personally made the decision NOT to upgrade bodies until I have maxed the capabilities of the one I own now, an XSI or 450d outside the U.S. Instead I'm using what little spare cash I have to invest in better optics. I talk a little bit about that in my blog.

It is really easy to get caught up in the "if I just had a better camera" marketing hype. A couple of faster primes might serve you better than a new body.

[vsa]

Originally Posted by Soumendra

It serves all of purpose. Just need to upgrade the body.

I'd question why you need to upgrade the body, like inkista said.

But as for the final question... 550D is probably be all you need and you don't need to start beggarlife to get 7D.

[GadgetRick]

First, I have to defend the 50D. You said you've heard it doesn't do well in high-ISO/low light situations. Not sure where you're hearing that. I have a 50D and never heard that about it and I've shot in these situations quite a bit with great results. I shoot in these situations quite a bit when I'm shooting MMA.

The 50D also focuses quite fast and quite accurately on moving subjects. Not quite as good as the 7D (I've used a 7D as well) but pretty darn good.

More importantly, what is it about the 1000D which makes you feel you need to upgrade it? Better glass may be all you need.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by GadgetRick

First, I have to defend the 50D.

Amen, brother.

You said you've heard it doesn't do well in high-ISO/low light situations. Not sure where you're hearing that.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I know where that's coming from. It's the first bullet point in the Cons list on the dpreview conclusions ("High ISO performance worse than 40D"), mostly based on the high ISO test 100% crops and the banding, and a lack of understanding among the readership about how 100% crop comparisons can disadvantage a higher-resolution sensor. (dpreview definitely had an agenda at the time to proove that MP => worse noise performance. That thinking is not wholly wrong, but it's not wholly right, either. Phil Askey was talking about P&S tiny sensor pixel-density when he made the original argument: not dSLR sensors where we still have more elbow room for pixel density. Matter of fact, I really wish Phil Askey had done the 50D review).

The 50D's high iso performance on a per-pixel level is roughly the same (or slightly lower) than the 40D's, depending on who you talk to. But given that the 50D has higher resolution, its overall image quality and noise performance is the same or better (again, depending on who you talk to). It's not worse, but since everyone expects technological miracles for free every camera release period, the fact that the 50D wasn't a quantum leap of improvement over the 40D's noise performance was greeted with disdain all 'round (particularly in light of what was happening on the Nikon side of the fence at the time). Kind of like the 60D's not being better and cheaper than a 7D has been greeted this Photokina round.

And then, there's the red-banding issue (which also plagues the 500D and 5DMkII--it's fixed in the 7D and 550D), which I have personally run into. But that involves using the in-camera "pushed" (H) ISO levels. If you stay away from underexposing with iso 6400/12800, you're not likely to run into it.

The 50D also focuses quite fast and quite accurately on moving subjects. Not quite as good as the 7D (I've used a 7D as well) but pretty darn good.

Yup. Given that the OP mentioned birding, I'd say this is the main reason an upgrade from the XS may be needed. Remember, the AF system in the 1000D is even more primitive than the one in the 500D or 550D. It's the same one I had back in my XT: 7 pt. AF, single center cross-type sensor. The dRebels now have 9-pt/cross-point center. And the 40D/50D/60D have 9-pt, all cross-type AF sensors. And, of course, a higher pixel count, which gives more freedom for cropping. Plus, there's all those UI goodies.

Also, the XS is getting long in the tooth (remember it's roughly the same age as the XSi). I'm happier to see someone with an XS contemplating an upgrade, than, say, someone with a 550D thinking their camera's too junky now that the 60D been announced. In this instance, I'm mostly plunking down on the side of new glass because I think a) it will fix most of the OP's issues, b) the lens will last longer and therefore get more bang for the buck, and c) the OP says the XS still does everything he needs.

More importantly, what is it about the 1000D which makes you feel you need to upgrade it? Better glass may be all you need.

+1. AF speed also depends on the lens and its focus motor. My XT with a 75-300 III sucked mightily at acquiring focus. Especially if I put a 1.4x tc on it (honestly, I could manually focus FASTER than that combination could autofocus). Moving to a USM L lens where I didn't need a 1.4x tc for reach--that was a night and day switch. If the OP gets a Sigma telephoto or supertele with HSM (e.g., 120-400 OS HSM), it's likely to help speed up the AF. A lot.

One more note for the OP: one thing you can try without spending any money at all: learn to use back button autofocus. I really wish I'd learned this a lot sooner for my bird photography.