Silly questions

[michaelachan]

So I have a 350d, but I was wondering, what difference would an upgrade do to my pictures?

I am very satisfied, just wanting to know....

say a 20D and a Canon 1D Mark II- surely a camera just takes a picture, so what new functions would these cameras have? and would it really make a difference?

[dang]

Unless you're needing to upgrade to a body with more frames per second ability, you can shoot most anything with one as the other. You can compare specs here: http://www.dpreview.com for what each offers. Unless you have the best lenses already, you'd probably benefit more by adding high quality glass. Bodies become outdated constantly, but glass lasts decades.

[normlynch]

Just to backup what dang said. Glass is everything, I've seen award winning shots taken on a 'standard' digital camera with a good lens. Then again, having 'the eye' is also required and this can only be got through birth and life experience...

[gemmf]

It's also down to your ability too. Pictures will look the same with 1D MarkII or 350D if you don't know what you are doing. Upgrading the camera does not automatically guarantee the better quality.

With 1D MarkII, you'd get weather sealing; it's built like a tank (you'll feel the difference when you hold it); it's fast (AF, fps, etc), you can personalise the camera to your needs (e.g. you can disable some functions that you don't use for faster accessibility, etc). But obviously you pay more for those. It's up to you to decide if it's worth it or not. To me, it does make a great difference.

[dougj]

Michaela – I looked at your images, and they are quite good, regardless of the camera you use – P&S and DSLR images are equally well done. Your post processing is also very good, based on the examples you posted for your PP course and your overall shots.

The decision of an upgrade depends on where you want to go, what you want to do, and your current hardware limitations. IMHO you’ve done a good job conveying some real life situations; your flora & fauna are OK, but these are not your strong suit and might simply reflect photography of convenience – shooting what is available, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.

The folks that have contributed to this thread have made some good suggestions. From my perspective, I suggest you look more at style than hardware at this point. Focus on telling real life stories through your lens, you have some skill in this and it can be very interesting.

I think you are doing very well with your current cameras and lenses. Upgrade needs will become more apparent as you shoot more and/or get into new areas of photography. Your current hardware may have limitations if you need to sell images, or print large images. Still, I’ve sold & published shots from my humble Canon S45.

[gilp]

There are HUGE differences between a entry level camera like the 350d and the top of line 1dsM2...

aside from the obvious body quality differences and tech features.

The image quality is very much different, especially at higher iso and in darker scenes. before the advent of digital, everything had to do with proper "film" selection.. no one film was good for everything... so stocks where great in brigh scenes, others in darker and you could even chose film according to which color was most prominent in the scene....

today, you can't change films...and everything has to do with the camera sensor and engine... some people shoot exclusively in very dark environements.. so a "noisy" camera is really not a good choice... (the 350d is the most noisy of the Canon slr range) for others, extremely fast shutter response is a must, the 1DMkIIn offers not only fast shutter speeds...but also NO lag time on the shutter release button..and has a huge buffer for continous shooting.


in the end, it's really all about application and how much you are willing to spend on your passion.

[blachly]

I own a Canon 400. There is not enough reason for you to upgrade to a 400 or a 30D. I would wait for the next version of the 30D to come out and upgrade then (assuming you don't want to drop the coin for the top of the line cameras). If they upgrade the 30D to have some of the cool new features the 400 has then the big advantages you would gain is a spot meater and better quality at a higher ISO. There are other advanges 30D series brings but not as big as those two.

That said, the big difference in quality is glass. I looked at your photos (good photos BTW) and it looks like you are shooting the kit lens that came with the 350. That lens is not a good lens so if you want to improve your photo quality, buy some better lenses.

[dirtyol]

I'd go for a lens upgrade first. You will notice a big improvement in your photographs.

Don't do as I did & get cheap ones & then have to spend more money for the good ones.

[madlights]

I'd go for a lens upgrade first. You will notice a big improvement in your photographs.

Don't do as I did & get cheap ones & then have to spend more money for the good ones.

I agree...lenses will take you farther for the extra money than a camera body...and if someday you want to spend the money on a ful frame sensor body, you'll have the glass to go with it. Really don't think you'd see much of an improvement in picture quality with a 20d or 30d vs the 350d under most conditions. There are other considerations...metal vs plastic etc...but at the speed technology is progressing I think I'd not care too much about that..unless the feel of a camera is important. Since you'll probably be able to buy two of the cheaper bodies, with the same sensor/processor combo for what one of the xxd's would cost. So you could upgrade twice...and as far as the cost of a 1ds series you could upgrade a FF like the 5d a few times. I do think lenses are way more important as they've always been.-