File :-(, x, )
Getting a new dslr Anonymous
I've got an analog Canon EOS 1000F with a Canon EF 25-80mm 1:4-5.6 lens(has some mysterious diaphragm and AF issues, so I'll need a new one) and a EF 80-200mm 1:4.5-5.6 lens (perfectly fine), they both came with the camera as a kit.

I want to upgrade to digital slr and I figured it would be best just to get a new EOS (the lenses are compatible right?).
So my question is; What EOS should I get? And should I get a new 35-80mm with a kit or as a single lens?
I got about 1500 euro's to spend, but I'd rather spend some less.

picture very related
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A530Maximum Lens Aperturef/6.3Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size5.80 - 23.20 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00Owner NameArvid JenseImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:06:26 20:11:38Exposure Time2 secF-Numberf/6.3Lens Aperturef/6.3Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.89 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2592Image Height1944RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationUnknownContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingSuperfineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.470 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed149Image Number100-3261
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Yes, the lenses are compatible. One caveat, though: unless you're spending way more money than you're willing to spend, the sensor's gonna have a 1.6x crop factor. This means that, to get the "35mm equivalent", you need to multiply the focal length of your lens by 1.6. E.g., a 50mm lens will act like an 80mm lens on a digital SLR.

Note that *forwards* compatibility is a bit less thorough. I.e., an EF lens will work on a digital SLR, but an EF-S lens (e.g., the kit lens) won't work on your film SLR.

What're the mysterious diaphragm and AF issues? Might just need to have its contacts cleaned (and it might be an issue with the body rather than the lens)

I'd recommend getting the Digital Rebel XTi. It's well below $1500 (I'm too lazy to look up what that is in frenchy-frou-frou money, but I seem to recall that dollars and Euros are reasonably close to parity, or at least closer than the nearly-2x crop factor that GBP has)

I'd recommend getting the kit lens. Given the aforementioned 1.6x crop factor, the kit lens (which is an 18-55 for the digital SLRs) is a really cheap way to get a real wide angle on those bodies. You've presumably been happy with the kit lenses on your 1000F, so the fact that it's a little lower quality than the over-$500 options for a wideangle shouldn't be too much of an issue for you.
>> Anonymous
The 35-80 would be a stupid kit lens for a DSLR because of the crop factor it would be a 56-128mm lens. Take a look at the Rebel XT or Nikon D40 with 18-55mm kit lenses since the lenses you already have are shitty and one of them is broken.
>> Anonymous
>What're the mysterious diaphragm and AF issues? Might just need to have its contacts cleaned (and it might be an issue with the body rather than the lens)

It sometimes stays all black after taking a picture, seeing this never happens on the other lens, it must be the diaphragm. And the AF jsut acts weird sometimes (taking way to long to focus)

The Rebel XTi is the American version of the 400D right?

Is it worth to get the more expensive kit, with the presumably better lens?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>58467
Yeah, XTi/400D. Or you can go a bit cheaper for pretty much the same image quality and get the XT/350D. I believe (although have no actual experience) that the 400D has better controls in the camera firmware (i.e., less clicks to do stuff, better histogram). Also, better screen. Yay chimping.

Also: Better lenses are always a better idea. What're the kits available for it? I agree with the previous guy that replacing your 25-80 probably doesn't make sense vs. using your 80-200 and the 18-55 (or whatever) kit.
>> Anonymous
>I agree with the previous guy that replacing your 25-80 probably doesn't make sense vs. using your 80-200 and the 18-55 (or whatever) kit.

yeah of course, I just meant replacing it with a lens for general use

The choice between kit lenses seems to be between a 18-55 mm and a 17-85mm IS (which is about 300 euro more expensive)
(I don't see any reason to get a kit with another zoom lens)
>> Anonymous
>>58485
Don't forget third party lenses. Sigma and Tamron make some nice alternatives to the Canon offerings. The Sigma 17-70mm and the Tamron 17-50mm both come to mind.
>> Anonymous
oh, and is Image Stabilisation a must for 18-70mm kind of lenses?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>58485
I'd say the 17-85 IS is worth it. Image stabilization is win.

And no, it's not *necessary*, but it's a damn nice thing to have (especially since the kit lens tends to have a relatively narrow max aperture).
>> Anonymous
>>58488
its only ever a must for telephoto lenses, Where lens shake is actually a big problem.