Olympus vs canon: your advice

[abstraction]

My favourite SLR was an olympus half frame. My first digital was an Olympus C1010, which i loved, but just died. I loved the versatility- but now to replace i'm wanting better lenses & DSLR capabilities.

However, i've been thinking about Canons because of bigger sensors. Disadvantage - they are big, and in travelling something smaller is easier in handluggage.

I'm buying a new DSLR and despite many hours reading before posting this I've realised that i hardly know anything about cameras. I'm really interested in different perspectives here because you are likely to raise things i haven't considered.

I have limited budget of c.$1400. I'm thinking it's best to invest in a least 1 lens better than the kit lens since digital cameras can just die in a few years with no parts to repair them, and lenses play such an important role.

HOW I USE MY CAMERA
* Portrait. I want that crisp focus on eyes. I'm thinking the Canon 50mm F1.8 might be a cost-effective investment to achieve this. One of the reasons I want DSLR is to minimise that dreaded shutter delay from my photography of children.
* Low light - I do a LOT of low light photography, particularly portraits in chiascurro. I'm often in a hut or dingy classroom in my travels and dislike flash. I also just like any unusual light - late, night, whatever. My recent reading suggests this is about decent ISO, lens speed and available aperture. Bracketing sounds like a nice feature too.
* Landscape. My old olympus c1010 had wide angle at the infinite setting, which was nice, but not essential.
* Macro - i love small things. I also love to take something small crisply focused in the foreground but still be able to observe the background, even very distant. I was able to do this with settings on my old olympus c1010.
* Zoom/telephoto - Not so much. I used to carry a decent tele/zoom with my old film SLR but hardly ever used it. My Olympus had only small amount of zoom, and that really worked for me. So I'm thinking of going for a smaller zoom lens now, and maybe in the future saving for a really nice larger zoom.

CAMERA
So i'm thinking either -
EOS550D - Cheaper than 600d (can invest in a better lens) The 600d has no bracketing (I've never used it but seems like a great feature for low light). =OR=
EOS600D (shutter lag is much better on 600D 0.1 vs 0.2!!! + Flip out screen - i often put my camera on the ground + Face detection (never used it, no idea, but might help when my eyesight isn't up to the lighting levels) + Wireless flash control (i don't currently use so no big deal)
(The 60D is available body only for under $1000 at quikshop.com.au. If this is for real, it seems like a pretty amazing option to consider too).

LENSES
I know very little about lenses. I'm thinking portrait is where i need to invest beyond the stock lenses, particularly since i like low light.

* 50mm F1.8 for portraits. (Cheap way to get a good portrait lens that can handle relatively low light conditions).
* Another general purpose lens with moderate zoom. Larger zoom I can purchase later. Maybe the stock lens or lenses will cover my needs here.

I travel a lot, so i can purchase overseas, but i understand canon don't honour overseas warranties(?)

What would you do for your $1400?

Appreciate any help. i'm learning heaps - enjoying the journey

[jjphoto]

Your interests are varied so you'll probably have to compromise in many respects. I would try to go full frame rather than crop but this will potentially test your budget. I have no idea how much a second hand 5D costs but this might be worth considering in favour of new crop cameras. You are quite right to minimise your spending on a body and to try to 'invest' in lenses that will last you much longer than any digital body will.

The Canon 85/1.8 has a very good reputation so this might be a great portrait lens but may not serve you well for your other interests.

JJ

[Roosta]

Depending on what budget you go for in a body, a Canon 100mm F2.8 non IS lens would/may suit you. It is a macro lens and also alot of people use it as a portraite lens. Being a solid prime it is a great piece of inexpensive glass. Try (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx) also for general lens ideas, the Nifty Fifty 50mm F1.8 for around $100.00, you cant go wrong. Here is a site sponsor link to all things DSLR, some good prices here to be had, navigate through and take a look. ( http://www.digitalrev.com/en/camera-lens ) See coloum on the left to select brand. The Sigma and Tamron lenses are well worth a look aswell. I.E Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 (Canon copy)

The body is a personal decession, get as good as you can afford, but go and hold them, see where their functional buttons/dials and soforth work for you. Do you need FPS or Video? ask your self that, that will help with cost toward a body, If you go for a stand alone DSLR rather than a twin function DSLR, you should get more features on a stand alone, but are they what you want need. Lots of 550D users on this site and with the 600D just out they should drop in price.

With the decession to buy local or Gray market, the choice is your's, There's lots of forum talk about DIgital Rev and say DWI, others have purchased from Hong Konk and had no problems. You'll get mixed results when asking that question.

I and most others feel, Get the best glass you can, bodies will always be upgradable in the future as you state, but if you feel you may go to a FF body (Full Frame) just bear that in mind, EF-S or APS-C lenses aren't designed to work on full frame bodies, but EF (Full Frame) designated lenses will work fine on a crop sensor (APS-C) body.

Best of luck. Buy good glass and the best body you can afford with your budget is my bet. You haven't mentioned video, so get a better non video body for your money.

[Arg]

I did the same as you - too much online 'window shopping'. Picked everything I thought I needed off spec sheets and online test reports. Weight and image quality were soooo important.

Then I went into the local shop and had to throw all my choices out the window. The lovely light cameras I favoured were too small in hand! (that included the 550D, darn it). The viewfinder images were rather dim! The eye points were not long enough! (I wear glasses).

So I suggest you get into the local shop and spend real time with the cameras. Be realistic about its fit in your hand and fingers and eye. Try the next model up and compare.

With your expressed interest in portrait and macro, the EF-S Canon 60mm f2.8 macro might fit in your budget and kill two birds.

P.S. I don't recommend full frame for your budget and needs. You will get much a better overall package at your budget from APSC cameras.

[arthurking83]

1000D plus 50mm f/1.4

for low light tho, I reckon (currently) a Nikon D7000 plus 35mm f/1.8 may be a better solution(approx $1400)... I think the Pentax K5 is a bit more expensive from what I've seen.

Note tho, I just had a look at some pricing, and it seems that some(not all) camera gear has gone up in price due to the recent earthquake in Sendai. Sendai is where a lot of camera gear is made.
as an example, the Nikon 35mm/1.8 used to retail in the mid to high $200's(grey market) but has seen an increase to over $400 now(at the same retailer) and probably because it's 'made in Japan'... (if someone can confirm that).
D7000 has remained stable tho, in the $1200's, and I think this is because it's made in Thailand.

[JM Tran]

haha I am staying out of this one.....!

[AdamR]

Out of your options, I would choose canon. The reason being is that with only 1400 to spend (i know its a lot, but not in camera terms). I would buy second hand. I would consider something like a canon 40d, with zoom lens (prob around $700-1000) and then add the suggested 50mm 1.4 for the portraits and low light. To me there is little point buying new and getting the bare minimum whereas second hand could see you fully set up. You may even have a little left to buy other basics such as a tripod for your landscapes a carry bag/case, other bits and pieces you will eventually desire.

[MarkChap]

From your list of wants, my suggestion would be

550D with 18-55 single lens kit, this will allow you to get a wide angle shot if you want, as you say not important
50mm f1.8, won't break the budget, but is a great value for money lens and the f1.8 aperture will sure allow a good bit of light gathering.

Macro is another thing though, cheapest option whilst still maintaining great image quality would be the Tamron 90mm, however this will push your budget up over your $1400.00 but not too far if purchased wisely.

As for your warranty issue, Canon won't provide warranty service for overseas purchased Camera Bodies, lenses how ever carry an international warranty.

[Roosta]

Just flicking throught the Forum of Site Sponsors and came across this, just add the 50mm 1.8.

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...Lens-Kit-1-000

Not sure if this suits your needs?

[Max]

I really got into this whole DSLR thing because I wanted better shots of the kids. I find I often use the 50 and the 100 macro. The fact that the 100 also does macro work is a nice bonus. I found a flash very useful outside during the day, not because of low light, but for lighting up their faces. Think wedding photographers, they use flash frequently to light up the subject especially outside. Maybe do some research on outdoor use of flash. Would like to get the 85 1.8 one day.

as has already been said, see if you can pick up a second hand body, ie 50D.

[Bennymiata]

A grey marketer, Top Buy, has the Canon 550 with a triple lens kit, including the 50mm 1.8, for around $1050 delivered.
Sounds like a good deal to me.
However, the 550 has been superceded by the 600, but this is too dear now as it has only just been released and in that case, the 60D is a better buy IMHO.

While i'm not knocking Olympus, as they do make some good cameras, they are going to end production of SLR cameras soon, from reports I've heard, so either a Canon or Nikon would be a good choice.
The Canon 550 is not a large camera either, it's hardly bigger than many bridge cameras, but you have the advantage of changing lenses and getting all those wonderful little accessories that are available for it.

[abstraction]

Lots of great advice here, and i'm going through every reply with further research. Three questions...

A few suggest i may regret not going full frame or at least 50D/60D.

1. 50D/60D - these don't seem significantly different to 600D. I'm not sure i'm seeing huge advantages, given camera bodies don't last like old SLRs used to.
2. Full frame - i see it makes a difference if i purchase SLR lenses. But I'd have to get an older model with much lower sensor, etc. Photography isn't my only hobby - will I really be that sorry?
3. The lens. I'm in a dingy hut somewhere, maybe light coming in through a small window. I might want face or full body or 2-3 people. Or swing back and take in the whole scene. Which is true:
a. The 50mm 1.4 will cost me more, but works MUCH better in these situations... Absolutely worth the extra.
b. The 50mm f1.8 is good enough to do this job, not far behind the 1.4 and therefore given the price difference and limited budget is still a good choice.
c. Another option - a few suggestions above i'm still looking at.

[jjphoto]

The best reason to go full frame (ie the biggest sensor you can) is because it gives you a shallower depth of field for any given lens (due to distance/focal length combinations to achieve the same angle of view on different sensor sizes) and this is very usefull as a creative tool for isolating subjects.

For sport, a crop body is generally much better due to higher frame rates and it makes your long lenses even longer which is very handy too.

Horses for courses but I don't use crop bodies any more except if I want small files or I just want to use a cheaper/lighter body.

JJ

[KeeFy]

Suggestion for saving $$ rather than participate in the branding.

Buy local (best price you can get), travel overseas and claim 10% back within the month of purchase.

Buy grey and mack diamond warranty which brings your warranty to 3 years by Canon.

Take your pick

Lastly.

And i'm sorry but i need to bold this.

AS OF AUG 2010, CANON STOPPED OFFERING INTERNATIONAL WARRANTY ON ALL LENSES, INCLUDING L LENSES.

If you by any chance do get one that does, it was one of older unsold sets that had the international warranty card. Grab it if you find one. International warranty card is GREEN. Local warranty card is pink (if i recall correctly).

[abstraction]

The best reason to go full frame (ie the biggest sensor you can) is because it gives you a shallower depth of field for any given lens (due to distance/focal length combinations to achieve the same angle of view on different sensor sizes) and this is very usefull as a creative tool for isolating subjects.

Wow. Now that's making me feel like i need to trade in my car or something. Probably can't afford it, but... i get that.

[fabian628]

550D - approx $700 grey or used
85mm f/1.8 - $400 used
18-55mm IS - $100 used.
kenko extension tubes - $150.

Thats what I would do in your situation.

[KeeFy]

Actually check out Gumtree. There are some good steals occasionally.

[Arg]

Lots of great advice here, and i'm going through every reply with further research. Three questions...

A few suggest i may regret not going full frame or at least 50D/60D.

1. 50D/60D - these don't seem significantly different to 600D. I'm not sure i'm seeing huge advantages, given camera bodies don't last like old SLRs used to.

See my post above about handling the cameras.

2. Full frame - i see it makes a difference if i purchase SLR lenses. But I'd have to get an older model with much lower sensor, etc. Photography isn't my only hobby - will I really be that sorry?

Definitely not. Storm in a teacup here. The old 5D is actually noisier than a modern 550/600D.

3. The lens. I'm in a dingy hut somewhere, maybe light coming in through a small window. I might want face or full body or 2-3 people. Or swing back and take in the whole scene. Which is true:
a. The 50mm 1.4 will cost me more, but works MUCH better in these situations... Absolutely worth the extra.
b. The 50mm f1.8 is good enough to do this job, not far behind the 1.4 and therefore given the price difference and limited budget is still a good choice.
c. Another option - a few suggestions above i'm still looking at.

b and c. An extra half a stop of light in the 1.4 will not make or break the image. But I suggest c. (change your technique) because if you are trying to take such photos with not so much as a prop, never mind a tripod, then you are failing to put your equipment to best use.

[Arg]

Originally Posted by jjphoto

The best reason to go full frame (ie the biggest sensor you can) is because it gives you a shallower depth of field for any given lens (due to distance/focal length combinations to achieve the same angle of view on different sensor sizes) and this is very usefull as a creative tool for isolating subjects.

Wow. Now that's making me feel like i need to trade in my car or something. Probably can't afford it, but... i get that.

I think I know what jj meant but it's not what he wrote. Full frame and crop frame give you exactly the same depth of field for any given lens. The only thing that changes is the angle of view. So that 50/1.4 is just as good for controlling DOF on a crop sensor as a FF.

Anyway, you can always add shallow DOF to an image in PP, on the odd occasion where you can't get enough.

$1400 = 550D plus triple lens kit including 50/1.8/II. Nice!

[fabian628]

I think I know what jj meant but it's not what he wrote. Full frame and crop frame give you exactly the same depth of field for any given lens. The only thing that changes is the angle of view. So that 50/1.4 is just as good for controlling DOF on a crop sensor as a FF.Anyway, you can always add shallow DOF to an image in PP, on the odd occasion where you can't get enough.

$1400 = 550D plus triple lens kit including 50/1.8/II. Nice!

it changes the angle of view by croping, therefore reducing the depth of field in the final image.
If you have a 50mm f/1.2 on a full frame, to reproduce this on crop you will need a 31mm with a very wide aperture, 0. something

Therefore you have a greater ability to control depth of field becuase you can always stop down with full frame, but with a crop the aperture size will limit you comparatively.
Sometimes you want very big dof, like with an ultra wide lens and focusing on a close subject. This is where a bigger sensor does not help you