I want to buy 500D and need your advice

[SCN]

I have been planning to purchase a DSLR for quite some time. I would primarily use it to take pictures of my kids, family photos, vacations etc. I do not plan to use it for wild life or bird photos. I am not sure if I'd take any sports photos any time soon too. I am the kind of user who would not replace an equipment until the working equipment breaks down. So I may end up using this one for quite some time. I have zeroed in on canon 500D. It fits my budget quite well. I have tried it in a store and I liked the feel.

There are couple of concerns I have about buying a 500D -

1. This is an old design (and technology?), 2009. Is it considered too old to buy now?
2. I remember reading that this model is discontinued by canon now. (It is still available at the stores here.)

Considering these points, would it still be a good decision to buy 500D?

So next in line is 550D. The price difference is about Rs. 5000 i.e. roughly 110USD. Cost of 550D is not beyond my budget, but I don't mind saving some money I don't want to buy a lower model just because I think that the features in the later model are not necessary. Nor a higher model just because it is *supposed* to be superior.

I have tried both and I liked the way both of them feel. I cannot afford the 600D. So I am not considering that. As of now, I plan go with the kit lens and decide later on any additional lens purchase.

I need your help in deciding which one of these two should I buy wrt the points I am considering.

[RichardTaylor]

If you want to shoot movies - the 550D
If you want to shoot at very high ISO (>1600) - 550D

If you don't want any of the above then the 500D should meet your needs.

Personally, and I don't shoot movies, I would get the 550D

[ik631]

I received the 500D (T1i in the US) about 9 months ago and love it. See my pics Flickr: ik631's Photostream

It DOES take fairly good movies but a P&S does a better job than most of DSLRS do because of the autofocus issue.

ISO DOES go beyond 1600.

With the 550 and 600 the differences are negligable, flip out screen, remote flash control (neither of which I would use) higher megapixels which can make a picture look worse. I don't know the science behind it but I just read an article about it in Digital Photo Pro magazine how most lower megapizel cameras produce better results than the supper high megapizel cameras. Don't spend the money if you won't use the features and it is just for a few megapixels. You can print up to poster size with the 500D. It should suit you fine and it is easy to learn on.

By the way the kit lens sucks and I regret wasting my money. Upgrade to a better lens if you can. I'm still saving my money for a better one.

[SCN]

Thanks for the responses. Any comments about the seemingly old design?

Both responses indicate that as long as I am not keen on movies, which I am not, 500D fits the requirements.

[veritasimagery]

Originally Posted by ik631

With the 550 and 600 the differences are negligable, flip out screen, remote flash control (neither of which I would use)

Here's something to think about, one of the biggest pros of the articulated screen on the 600D/T3i is that you can flip it around and protect the screen. This can be very handy if walking in the woods and such, very nice to keep the screen from getting scratched (including in the case). It's more than just for taking movies.

Also, the 600D has wireless remote flash capabilities built in. That alone is worth more than the price difference between the 55 and the 600.

[ik631]

The flash option is only good if you would use it. I have no use for it.

The screen protection is a good argument but not worth the money. $3 screen protectors can do the same job. I have a p&s with an articulated screen and always forget to flip it back so it is scratched up and has not saved the screen. A screen protector is always on.

[Glenn72]

Don´t let the "old technology" fool you as the Canon 500d is quite capable of taking very good photos. I´m still using the Canon 450d and will upgrade in the future after I have taken care of my lens wish list.
The major difference between the 550d and the 500d is the sensor. The 550d has a better sensor as it is the same one in the much higher priced 7d. From my research the advantage of this sensor are:

1. Slightly more megapixels (can be helpful in cropping)
2. Better high ISO capable by 1 stop (helpful in low light situations)

If you are a beginner in photography you will probably not notice these differences and the extra money saved would be better spent on purchasing a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 lens.
However with the experience that I have now and if I were in the same situation I would purchase the 550d (or maybe even the 600d for the flip screen and wireless flash capability).
In the end neither is a wrong choice but it will depend on what you want out of photography. If you are interested in macro (cropping) and low light night time (high ISO) photography go ahead with the 550d, if neither of those interest you then the 500d would be a great choice.

[siamnaulak]

Originally Posted by SCN

1. This is an old design (and technology?), 2009. Is it considered too old to buy now?
2. I remember reading that this model is discontinued by canon now. (It is still available at the stores here.)

Hi SCN, we are in the same boat. I am also planning to buy my first DSLR and I had selected Canon 550D and Nikon D5100. 60% goes to 550D and 40% goes to D5100.

BUT, 550D is released in Feb 8, 2010 (if I am not wrong) and D5100 is released in Apr 5, 2011 (if I am not wrong).

So this older model of 550D makes me a bit nervous to buy.

My question is will this released date mater in terms of support from the company?

Thanks
Siam

[Glenn72]

Technology has little to do with making a great photo, if this was a true statement then people like Ansel Adams would have long been forgotten by now.
When you purchase a camera new in a store it will come with a guarantee of 1 or 2 years. The camera manufacter will have to honor this warranty so no worries there.
Image quality between Canon and Nikon are very similar, if one side had a huge advantage over the other then you would see everyone shift sides instead of being divided.
However Canon does have a nice advantage over Nikon and that is with the prices and number of lenses available. Nikon lenses tend to be more expensive then their Canon counterparts and they have less of a selection.

[Preeb]

I have the 500D and it should do just fine for what you are saying you need it for. Just because it's a couple of years old doesn't make it an antique. I haven't had any issues from not having the flip screen, and I don't take video so that isn't an issue for me either. The camera takes as good a photo as you could want, only really limited by the lens you put on it and by the skill of the photographer.