Upgrading from a 450 XSi - looking at all my options

[Bikemike66]

Joined this community to ask this question!

I have already perused the "upgrading" thread by the bird/nature photographer, and the "new equipment priority" by the swim meet photographer, and gained some knowledge from both. Selfishly, I want to ask my own questions though.

I find myself taking a lot of pictures at my kids' sporting events. In a well lit hockey arena, I can often get some good shots, but just as often I am limited by lighting, and the f- stop of my lens when zoomed in (75-200 4.0-5.6). So my current choices seem to be increased noise with higher ISO, blurred shots, or only getting a few good shots.

I have a limited budget (shouldn't really spend the $$, but probably will - definitely under 1000). With a 7 year old camera (digic III processor), I am not sure that getting a better lens with larger opening at zoom is necessarily the best idea.

I have been researching the DIGIC processors, and it makes it sound like there would be significant improvement from moving to a T3i (DIGIC IV ) alone, but that there is a bigger difference between the IV and V, and that I should possibly be looking at the T5i, especially if I cn get it used or on clearance when the 6i comes out.

Although I would love a new lens too, I am hoping that a faster processor and higher MP (18 vs. 12.2) might be a good investment.

Am I correct in my assumption that the processor and its software alone could be a significant improvement over my current camera ( which I would keep, probably have the 28-70 on there, with my telephoto on the new one- not switching lenses constantly would be a nice bonus too)

[ebiggs1]

A better lens is always the correct answer.

But a great lens will not be great on a poor camera.  A poor camera will certainly compromise the best lens in the world, too.

To be brutally frank, what you have is not real "great". So upgrading any of it or both is going to make a big deal.  It is not the number of mega-pickles that makes the difference, persay.  A 18MP sensor made 7 years ago will not be as good as a 18MP made in 2015.  Things just get better.

Being limited to a grand, I woul still opt for a better lens. Perhaps the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.  Notice how it is a constant f2.8 aperture?  But it is not a cheap lens at about $900 bucks.

The Rebel T5i runs around $600.  So if you did decide to get this pretty nice combo it would be well over a thousand at $1500.  

Maybe get one at a time?

[ScottyP]

Hi, Mike.

If I were going to get a camera body with the stated budget I'd wait a month and get the T6i, which will sport 19 all cross type focus points. You could also spend the whole $1000 and get a 70d which will allow you to do autofocus micro adjustment.

Your body is old, but your lens is definitely not for low light. I think a brighter lens would do you more good than a body.

An 85mm f/1.8 is 3 stops faster than your lens at the same focal length.. That would be like letting you shoot at ISO 400 compared to ISO 3200 in the same conditions, which is HUGE. You can get one for $375 or $400.

You could pair the T6i with the 85 f/1.8 for about $1,100 if you shop around.

[TCampbell]

ebiggs and scotty are giving you solid advice.  I've seen people pick nits over the "best" camera ... agonizing over details like one camera's ISO performance outperforming another by a fraction of a stop.  Meanwhile... they're using lenses which are resulting in the loss of a full 2 or 3 stops of light.  Having good "glass" is a huge advantage.

Most professional photographers are not making incomes that allow them to spend without consideration of the price tag.  And yet... these same pros will pick lenses that cost thousands of dollars.  It's not because they want to... not becuase they have a cash-flow that allows them to buy anything without having to check the price tag first... they buy the lens because it REALLY makes a difference in their work.

When Canon introduced the T2i body, they also came out with a brand new 18MP sensor and a nice little bump in ISO performance.  But that same sensor was then used in the T3i, T4i, and T5i (and also the 60D and 7D).  The T6i, 70D, and 7D II all have newer sensors... but they're all in a higher price category.  

You could buy a refurbished or used T3i, T4i, or T5i and gain at least a full stop (maybe even a little more) of higher ISO with lower noise... but it sounds like you need more than just an extra stop.  A lens can provide at least 2 full stops (maybe more.)  A lens and body combined would get you at least 3 full stops (maybe 3.5).  3 stops is 8x more light -- so that's fairly significant.

[Bikemike66]

Thanks to all three of you.  

I am leaning towards getting the T5i, as with the T6i coming out, it is now a good deal, and represents a significant improvement over my 450D. I have located a used one with shutter count in the hundreds for around 500 including the stock 18-55 (which I would like, as I replaced my broken one with a 28-70)

450D             T5i

Digic3          DIGIC 5

12.2 mp              18

3.5 fps            5.0 fps

ISO 1600    ISO 25600

From what I read the DIGIC 5 was a much bigger improvement over the 4 than the 4 was over the 3, so I am also hoping for overall improved quality and performance, not just indoors. Video, and articulating touch screen are also features that I didn't have before.

The ISO is the interesting one..allowing you to shoot at up to 25600 instead of 1600 implies to me that CANON believes that they have improved by 4 stops, which I assume most of you don't believe is the case. The way I see it, I had enough light on my current camera at 1600, I just didn't like the quality...but if I shot at 1600 or 3200 on a camera that went to 25600, I'd be 3-4 stops below the max ISO.

I did read another thread and after following a link, took some time looking at photos taken at high ISO.

Note: I have also found a T3i that I could probably offer under 350 for, but I think I am leaning towards the T5i.

[TCampbell]

The ISO is improved... but you're wise to inspect images at high ISO and evaluate what you think of the noise.

As you increase ISO, you also increase noise.  Better chips can keep those noise levels down.  But manufacturers are allowing us to set ISO levels that result in more noise than previously.  In other words, while you can set ISO 25600, you probably will not be happy with the noise... even at 12800.  You might be "ok" with the noise at 6400.

Noise tends to be stronger in darker areas of the image (shadow, etc.) and much weaker (or nearly non-existent) in the highlight areas of the image.  When you use de-noising algorithms, they basically take each pixel and inspect that pixel's value as compared to all the surrounding pixels.  If you slightly "average" each pixel to it's surroundings, you naturally bring down the noise... but you also have the side-effect of softening the whole image (so there is no free lunch.)

Some photo editors allow you to selectively apply an effect -- so you can "brush in" noise reduction only in the shadow areas and leave the highlights alone.  I use a program called Noiseware Pro which allows you to "tune" the noise levels and aggressiveness of the software.  I can set how aggressive I want it to be in the shadows vs. midtones vs. highlights, etc.  I can also tell it if I've mostly got a problem with "chroma" noise vs. "luma" noise, etc.    This allows me to knock back the noise in the worst places, but avoid softening the highlight details (where there wasn't much noise to begin with.)

I never try to eliminate all noise (otherwise your subjects have skin that looks like plastic.)

[Bikemike66]

Thanks Tim. 

---

@TCampbell wrote:

... manufacturers are allowing us to set ISO levels that result in more noise than previously.  In other words, while you can set ISO 25600, you probably will not be happy with the noise... even at 12800.  You might be "ok" with the noise at 6400.

.

---

This is what I suspected with the huge increase in ISO. Also, I was looking through some old shots and realized that I am looking for 3-4 stops in a gym shooting basketball, but in a hockey arena, I am often only 1-2 stops away from ideal (found some shots I took in action mode, where the camera chose 7.1, 1/250 and 1600, and realized that I could try going with 400 or 800 and AV mode with my current set-up). My kids play WAY more hockey than basketball, fwiw.

I think with all my options that the T5i is still a good idea. As ebiggs said, "A 18MP sensor made 7 years ago will not be as good as a 18MP made in 2015.  Things just get better"

 That statement rings true to me. I am also a cyclist, and we know that components also improve to the point where the current midrange 105 is probably better than 5-6 year old top of the line Dura Ace.

I have Aftershot Pro 2.0, but haven't really used it much yet, and have only shot in RAW a few times (never inside iirc), but maybe that could also be part of the solution.  

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Bikemike66 wrote:

I think with all my options that the T5i is still a good idea. As ebiggs said, "A 18MP sensor made 7 years ago will not be as good as a 18MP made in 2015.  Things just get better"

---

A couple of points. Your XSi doesn't have an 18mp sensor made 7 years ago. It has a 12.2mp sensor. Also, I think the T3i and the T5i have the same (18mp) sensor. AFAIK, the T6i and T6s are the first Rebels since the T2i to get a new sensor.

[Bikemike66]

Right, even better. A new 18 MP sensor over a 7 year old 12.2 one.


I have committed to a Kijiji sale for tomorrow. $500 Cdn for a gently used T5i including lens (18-55), bag and a 64gb SD card.

This setup goes for 650 plus tax new right now around here.

I will start saving for a lens now ( probably still want a zoom for sports)

[ScottyP]

If you are shooting indoor sports you need a bright wide aperture lens. The widest aperture zoom will be an f/2.8 lens. (The Unique Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is too short for sports).

That may do indoors, or you may wish you had a little more aperture to keep the ISO down another stop, as with a prime like 85 f/1.8. I really think you will begin finding fault with a lot of shots at ISO1600 on a crop, and you probably won't like them much at all at ISO 3200 and above. It is not just grain, but also lack of fine detail, which is made even worse when you apply noise reduction to lessen the grain, which takes even more detail out.

A good 2.8 zoom in a sports range will be some sort of 70-200 f/2.8. The Canon ones are big whites and they are not cheap. The IS MK2 version is $1800 or more, but it is a magnificent lens. A Canon prime at 85mm will be $369.00.