New Body + Lens or only new Lens?

[Wilsonhajmola]

Hey, recently I wanted to upgrade from my Canon 18-55mm IS (not the STM or II version) to a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. Luckily I now have the opportunity to spend a little more. I then started to think about also upgrading my body (a >8 yr old 500D). Pretty old setup. I also have the 55-250mm. Why do I consider upgrading the body?

Just 2 days ago I came across dxomark. Seeing that the same lens gets very different points overall and in sharpness if you change the body from a "cheap" one to more expensive, I was a bit worried. Especially because everyone says to stick with the body and invest all in the lens. Is that maybe only true until a certain point? I mean at the end I guess the body and the lens create the image together and its not 100% the lenses job? So to make the question a little more precise, should I upgrade to something like:

500D + Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 // Canon 17-55mm 2.8 ... (like 100% of the budget on the lens)

or (and I dont researched a lot on a good upgrade for the body, but.. )

70D (?) + Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 // Canon 18-55mm STM, .... ( something like 50/50 on body and lens)

I would be happy about a little bit of help on how to decide. At the end I am ok with the functions that the 500D offers. I dont need anything special. From what I heard it is mostly about needing special functions, fast AF or whatever when you should consider to upgrade the body. But can a really old (bad?) body limit a good/new lens?

[Waddizzle]

I do not recommend a 70D, only because it is most likely a used camera.  The 70D seems to have had a long history of issues and potential flaws.  The 80D is a much better camera than the 70D, especially at the Canon Refurbished Store.

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-80d-ef-s-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-is-stm-kit-refurbished

I think the best lens you named so far has been the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8.  Get that lens, if you want a lens in that category.  Although, for that amount of money, I would invest in the EF 17-40mm f/4L lens, instead of an EF-S mount lens.

When at all possible, I recommend that people stick to Canon lenses, most especially if you are using Canon’s DPP software to process photos.  The DPP software only has lens correction for Canon lenses.  If you are shooting RAW, which everyone should, then you would need buy third party software to apply lens correction.

[shadowsports]

Posting again after Waddizzles recommendation (usual good advice) above and am in full agreement.

Yes, big no to the 70D.  This body was plagued with PCB board failures resulting from (I believe) overheating during extended video shooting.  Either that or just an inherent flaw.  Canon finally stepped up and accepted responsibility for them, but its not worth the investment. 

Depending on your needs the 7DII or 80D will give the most bang for your buck in APC format.  The 80D being my first choice for no other reason that its articulating screen. Its proven itself, and unless you are a dedicated wildlife photographer or sports action enthusiast, you be hard pressed to find better.  The refurb price on the 80D is beyond attractive.    

[Tronhard]

Not having any idea of budget - I see no numbers mentioned - I can only hazard a guess at the best bang for buck.

I am focused on the comment that Wilson made: "At the end I am ok with the functions that the 500D offers. I dont need anything special."    That said, it would seem to me that as long as he gets an adequate body he would prefer to invest his funds in a lens, so while I can certainly see the merit in the 80D (I have one myself and love it) for this situation I would  also consider the Rebel T7i (EOS 800D), which was released in Feb 28 making it almost a year younger than the 80D. It gets excellent reviews and should offer sufficient features.   That should give him some cash to spend on a decent lens.

Here are the specs of the two side-by-side: Comparison

As regards DxO Mark... yes, they do suggest rightly that the body has an impact on the outputs from a body lens combination.   That said unless he is going to push the combination to its limit (and the fact that he has been ok with the 500D suggests not), then getting a decent spec'd lens comes down to the Field of View he wants to capture, and the speed he is looking for.  The specs of the two bodies are VERY similar and while the T7i has the newer sensor, the 80D is weather-sealed if that is significant.

So far we have no specific mention of the type of photographic input or output these are meant for, so we just have to go with the focal lengths mentioned.  I have both the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 and the EF-L 17-40 f4.0 and they are both great lenses depending on what conditions you are going to shoot under and what you want to produce.  If weather sealing is not an issue then I would consider the T7i with the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 as it is designed for this sensor size, and is faster, altought neither is weather sealed.  If sealing is an issue then the 80D with the EF 17-40L f4 would offer both sealed units, but a bit slower.

---

@Wilsonhajmola wrote:

Hey, recently I wanted to upgrade from my Canon 18-55mm IS (not the STM or II version) to a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. Luckily I now have the opportunity to spend a little more. I then started to think about also upgrading my body (a >8 yr old 500D). Pretty old setup. I also have the 55-250mm. Why do I consider upgrading the body?

Just 2 days ago I came across dxomark. Seeing that the same lens gets very different points overall and in sharpness if you change the body from a "cheap" one to more expensive, I was a bit worried. Especially because everyone says to stick with the body and invest all in the lens. Is that maybe only true until a certain point? I mean at the end I guess the body and the lens create the image together and its not 100% the lenses job? So to make the question a little more precise, should I upgrade to something like:

500D + Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 // Canon 17-55mm 2.8 ... (like 100% of the budget on the lens)

or (and I dont researched a lot on a good upgrade for the body, but.. )

70D (?) + Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 // Canon 18-55mm STM, .... ( something like 50/50 on body and lens)

I would be happy about a little bit of help on how to decide. At the end I am ok with the functions that the 500D offers. I dont need anything special. From what I heard it is mostly about needing special functions, fast AF or whatever when you should consider to upgrade the body. But can a really old (bad?) body limit a good/new lens?

---

[ebiggs1]

This is the correct answer, "...the T7i with the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 ...".

Other options..............

"70D (?) + Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 // Canon 18-55mm STM, ...."       Don't even consider.  This is a bad idea. Besides, you don't need another entry level lens, you have a Canon 18-55mm. If you are going to upgrade, then upgrade!

The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Lens is the best lens you have listed.  It is $700 but if you can afford it, you didn't mention a budget, I would buy one. It is nothing short of fantastic, fast and constant aperture with great IQ.

[ebiggs1]

IMHO, the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Lens is a buy only for the fact it is an older design that is on a terrific sale right now.  I used one for a couple years and found it to be a good lens.  However, I would not use it on a Rebel. It really shines on a FF.  If you think FF is in your near future, than the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Lens just might be a good choice.  Great sale right now. Its probably going to be discontinued shortly.