Advice on Canon 60D/With Camera Lens or Body Only?

[here2rock]

I am looking to buy my first DSLR. I am looking at mid-range Canon 60D. It is probably a bit more then what I need at his stage but I am thinking it is probably worth while spending a bit more now on better quality body now.

The camera will be for general use, a lot of family photos indoors in low light conditions. I am hoping to learn a lot more.

I am not sure whether I need to purchase the body only or with a kit lens. I have an old Canon EOS 50E, which has a 28-80mm, Ultrasonic lens. Am I correct in thinking that this lens is probably about the same quality or perhaps better than the current kit lens?

I will be looking to invest in a better quality lens if I am not going to lose anything in terms of quality of pictures I want to take now.

Thanking a wonderful community here in advance.

[dlambert]

I'm not familiar with that lens -- is this it?
Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II Lens Review

Also, which kit lens are you looking at? I've seen the 60D bundled with the 18-135 or the 18-200. I'm not sure what you're looking at as far as a price difference between the body-only and kit, but the prices I'm seeing indicate a pretty reasonable upcharge to get the 18-135 lens.

If you've already got an idea what you're going to do as far as a lens upgrade, and you're pretty sure you're not interested in holding onto the 18-135 or 18-200 as a walkaround lens, then I'd say go for the body-only. Otherwise, I think you'll find the kit lens to be pretty decent -- it's not "L" quality, obviously, but it's got IS, which is nice when you don't have a really large aperture. The 18-135, in fact, is brand-new, so it's got the latest IS, which is supposed to be good for four stops (your mileage may vary, of course).

[here2rock]

No it is not the one on that link, it has Ultrasonic with gold dotted circle near the edge. I would imagine that it is a cheapy.

There are a few options with 60D as follow:

Body only $1349 (AUD)

Canon EOS 60D DSLR Camera Body Only | Harvey Norman Australia

Single lens kit $1499

Canon EOS 60D DSLR Single Lens Kit | Harvey Norman Australia

Premium kit $1999:

Canon EOS 60D DSLR Camera Premium Kit | Harvey Norman Australia

Super kit $1849

Canon EOS 60D DSLR Camera Super Kit | Harvey Norman Australia

The kit you are referring is the last one with $500 upgrade cost.

[RichardTaylor]

Those lenses are OK for general purpose use.

They are not good for family photographs, without using a flash, in low light conditions.

You may want to have a look through this tutorial on lenses (on this site).

Lenses #1 - Introduction to DSLR lenses.

[here2rock]

Richard that is why I was thinking to go with body only and use my old 28-80mm lens. What would be the best lens to use with low light conditions and perhaps without flash?

I noticed that one of the most popoular lens is Canon EF 50mm which is a prime lens. Will this sort of lens give me better results than let's say 28-80mm or 18-135mm lens?

[ceremus]

I usually advocate getting a kit lens as a first time DSLR purchase, or as one you intend to sell later, the former being that it's usually only $100 bundled so it makes a good backup "just in case" lens, and for the latter it helps your resale value.

If you don't fit either of those conditions buy the body-only and get a 50mm prime, they're excellent for portraits, work great in low light conditions, they can produce a very attractive out-of-focus background, and they're really good in general for beginners since it forces them to think about framing and composition since you have to "zoom with your feet".

The 50mm f/1.8 is a very inexpensive prime, the build quality is on the low-end, but makes up for it in image quality. The 50mm f/1.4 is a bit more expensive, the build and feature quality is bumped up, and it's a very fast lens that can render quite a narrow depth of field.

[here2rock]

The difference is about $500! If I import from Asia somewhere then it is a lot cheaper but I prefer to but it locally.

[inkista]

I'd say go body-only and use your 28-80 until you know what you want--as long as you aren't planning on doing a lot of wide angle photography, night-time cityscape, or travel shots.

The sensor in a crop-body dSLR, like the 60D, is smaller than a frame of 35mm film. By a factor of 1.6. So, to have a lens that had the same field of view that your 28-80 gives on your old film EOS, you'd need a 28-80/1.6 => 17.5-50mm lens. Which is why the kit lens is an EF-S 18-55 IS. Your 28-80 on a crop will look like a 28-80x1.6 => 44.8-128mm lens would have on your film camera. So, it's going to look more like a normal-to-telephoto lens.

The kit lens has two advantages over your 28-80: it's got IS (stabilization), which would let you handhold it down to the 1/10th second range if you've got good handholding technique. And it will actually be wide on a crop.

The chances are good you'd have replaced the 18-55 anyway, so using your 28-80 in the meantime as a stopgap measure might not be a problem. But the 18-55 is small, light, cheap, and trashable , so it makes a good travel lens, too.

The EF 50mm f/1.8 II is a good, cheap, trashable lowlight lens. Everybody gets one because, like the kit lens, it's only $100 and it's good. But a lot of us eventually move on to a more usable prime. Whether it's the EF 50/1.4 USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, EF 35mm f/2, or whatnot, generally depends on how you frame, what working distance you like, and whether you're shooting crop or full frame. Use your 28-80 for a while, and then examine the exif of portraits you've taken to see what focal length you tend to sit at. For most of us, a 50mm on a crop might frame a little too tightly for across-the-table portraits. But YMMV.

[here2rock]

Thanks Inkista. Would the 18-135 have advantages over the 18-55, I know it is a bit more expensive? I am thinking It might be a more of an allrounder lens.

[inkista]

The only advantage is the larger zoom range. It's just as slow (i.e., maximum aperture isn't great), it's also IS-only (i.e., doesn't have USM). It's better if you don't want to swap lenses at all, and need the versatility of going from wide to telephoto in a single lens. But (and this is just me. I shoot mostly primes and I'm a hobbyist, so I can miss shots and not worry too much), the 18-55/55-250 IS twin kit lens combination will cost you less and probably have better image quality as well as more reach.

The larger the zoom range gets, the more compromises have to be made optically to accommodate it. The 18-135 sits price- and image-quality-wise between the 18-55/55-250 combo and the 18-200. Note that all of these lenses are EF-S (crop body only; you can't use these on a 5D if you eventually get one) and IS only. If you want to go up a step in image quality, the USM lenses are a more likely bet. The old EF-S 17-85 IS USM might be more what you're looking for. You can find these quite low-cost used, because it's since been replaced by the EF-S 15-85 IS USM, which improved a bit on the wide-end chromatic aberration/distortion. But the 17-85 IS USM is still a great lens.