Canon EOS 1300D DSLR Camera with EF 18-55mm III Lens & EF 50mm f/1.8 Lens £329 @ John Lewis - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
563Expired

Canon EOS 1300D DSLR Camera with EF 18-55mm III Lens & EF 50mm f/1.8 Lens £329.00 @ John Lewis

£329.00 @ John Lewis
A family member asked to recommend a decent starter DSLR for an upcoming trip. Found this which seems fairly good considering the 50mm sells for £100 on its own. I gather the 18-55mm Canon now bundle … Read More
Rajk76 Avatar
2m, 1w agoFound 2 months, 1 week ago
A family member asked to recommend a decent starter DSLR for an upcoming trip. Found this which seems fairly good considering the 50mm sells for £100 on its own. I gather the 18-55mm Canon now bundle is not image stabilised anymore (however, with the 50mm f/1.8 this should not be an issue in low light). JL also include a 2-year warranty, and Canon are offering a free photo book.

***Update*** it seems that John Lewis are now out of stock of this bundle, however, the same can be obtained from Jessops for the same price (not sure about warranty with them, however, a possible 3.03% TCB available too)
More From John Lewis:

All Comments

(38) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Great little camera for the money, a family member got one a few months ago with the same package through Jessops and they couldn't be happier with it.

HEAT ADDED

Edited By: liambrewer01 on Apr 17, 2017 08:51: Left information out
1 Like #2
The deadline for redeeming the photo book has been extended to 16 May.
1 Like #3
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here

Edited By: moby_matt on Apr 17, 2017 10:09: Link text updated
3 Likes #4
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
Don`t do it in my opinion, the 75-300mm is an awful lens, while the 50mm is a great lens.
Better to put the £20 towards a 55-250mm.
#5
i wouldn't say the 50mm is an indoor lens, its nice but too long for general usage inside
#6
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.

Edited By: FoSho on Apr 17, 2017 10:42
1 Like #7
Better than Nikon d3300?
#8
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.
Maybe better to buy in us, you should get it for the same amount in dollars.
1 Like #9
Same camera but differnet deal was on here last week
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/349-canon-eos-1300d-dslr-camera-with-18-55-mm-f-3-5-5-6-75-300-mm-f-3-5-5-6-lens-2656466
Some good tips in there of you are thinking of buying this camera
2 Likes #10
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.



Pretty much spot on and answered your own question :)

The 50mm is amazing for portraits and shallow DOF however doesn't leave a lot of flexibility for long range shots. As a Prime lens (fixed focal length) it will be a case of "zooming with your feet". I have the 50mm 1.8 and it's a beautiful lens that takes razor sharp shots with lovely DOF but I couldn't have it as my only lens. 75-300mm will give you that flexibility to shoot long range, but I echo the previous comment by snoopy18 and would go for the 55-250mm. It's worth saying that 50mm+ on an APS-C you will struggle to get everyone in during a group shot indoors in a smallish room, so you'll probably have good use of the 18-55 too. Eventually I sold both my 18-55 and 55-250 and got the Sigma 18-250 which is an awesome lens, but a bit pricier at £300ish.

I'd say, as a beginner, having the 18-55, 55-250 and the 50 will be an excellent range of reasonably priced lenses to cover most bases.
1 Like #11
RoryJoe
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.
Pretty much spot on and answered your own question :)
The 50mm is amazing for portraits and shallow DOF however doesn't leave a lot of flexibility for long range shots. As a Prime lens (fixed focal length) it will be a case of "zooming with your feet". I have the 50mm 1.8 and it's a beautiful lens that takes razor sharp shots with lovely DOF but I couldn't have it as my only lens. 75-300mm will give you that flexibility to shoot long range, but I echo the previous comment by snoopy18 and would go for the 55-250mm. It's worth saying that 50mm+ on an APS-C you will struggle to get everyone in during a group shot indoors in a smallish room, so you'll probably have good use of the 18-55 too. Eventually I sold both my 18-55 and 55-250 and got the Sigma 18-250 which is an awesome lens, but a bit pricier at £300ish.
I'd say, as a beginner, having the 18-55, 55-250 and the 50 will be an excellent range of reasonably priced lenses to cover most bases.
Very helpful, many thanks
1 Like #12
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.


Better get this bundle, 18-55mm its fine in urban environment and you have the f1.8 to play with...as the other said,if you feel the need for more reach, get the 55-250 stm, they sell on ebay lightly used £120-140 and you can re-sell it about the same price...I ve got one, but rarely use it when traveling..

Edited By: pwel on Apr 17, 2017 12:08: 1
2 Likes #14
^ personally wouldn't recommend that 75-300 lens, as your likely to be disappointed with no image stabilisation with that focal range without good light or a tripod. As mentioned earlier, the 55-250mm IS version is a lot better.
1 Like #15
Please do not shop photography tools same way like you shopping potatoes. More zoom for money or more megapixels are just marketing tricks how to sell something what experienced photographers rather pass. It's expensive hobby, so think twice if, what, where and how you shot. Study photography first, find your style, learn to edit. it's part of process. Most of people enjoy photos from phones or compacts.(bit like mp3 vs dsd).Other way you find yourself carry on full bag of expensive items without use, disappointed by low quality photos. Ebay and gumtree are full of ''examples''
1 Like #16
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.

https://s20.postimg.org/brhleuq59/20170405_151620_Burst02.jpg

https://s20.postimg.org/aqhcpq95p/20170406_121922_Burst08.jpg
1 Like #17
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.

THis has already been answered generally, but if you are looking to take lots of wide angle scenery shots, you might find neither of these lenses are ideal. The 50mm lens on a crop sensor camera (like the 1300d) is more like an 80mm lens, which is not normally wide enough for landscape/scenery photography. But here comes the beauty of an SLR, you can but another lens!

This is a great deal and I would definitely got for the 50mm instead of the 75-300mm zoom. If you can then afford another or more lenses and need a telephoto zoom look at the Canon 70-300 (or similar Sigma model), and for wide angle/landscape look for something around 18-24mm.
1 Like #18
Adidas.Addict
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.

https://s20.postimg.org/brhleuq59/20170405_151620_Burst02.jpg

https://s20.postimg.org/aqhcpq95p/20170406_121922_Burst08.jpg


When it comes to good focus speed, tracking and fast burst modes there are no sort cuts, you are looking at the top end of the market...very nice photos, especially the second one, but ideally need wider aperature lens to blur the background("bokeh")...and a nice creamy bokeh cost a lot ;)

Edited By: pwel on Apr 17, 2017 16:43: 1
3 Likes #19
Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap lens and all it serves to do is disappoint you when you realise you want to be able to take high quality shots with a tele. Get this kit, or just a basic 1300D/100D kit and save for the 55-250mm STM.

Adidas.Addict
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.

What's your budget?
#20
ElGofre
Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap lens and all it serves to do is disappoint you when you realise you want to be able to take high quality shots with a tele. Get this kit, or just a basic 1300D/100D kit and save for the 55-250mm STM.
Adidas.Addict
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.
What's your budget?

Nothing set, but this deals price appealed
#21
ElGofre
Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap lens and all it serves to do is disappoint you when you realise you want to be able to take high quality shots with a tele. Get this kit, or just a basic 1300D/100D kit and save for the 55-250mm STM.
Adidas.Addict
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.
What's your budget?
Is the STM one worth the extra £30 Amazon are charging compared to the non-STM one? Planning on using it for photography rather than video so the fact it's near-silent doesn't matter to me. Not sure how much else it adds. Thanks
1 Like #22
Its a lot newer, considered having better optics, maybe improved IS, quiet of course, even if you just taking photos I assume you prefer less people look at you trying to get the perfect shot...imo, just for 30 quid more its a no brainer

Edited By: pwel on Apr 17, 2017 16:36: 1
#23
UK2004
Better than Nikon d3300?

Wouldn't mind the answer to that too?.

Is the OP's Deal better than the Nikon D3300?, thanx. :-)
#24
UK2004
Better than Nikon d3300?


D3300 has a higher spec..
http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/2016/03/11/canon-1300dt6-vs-nikon-d3300/
1 Like #25
brilly
i wouldn't say the 50mm is an indoor lens, its nice but too long for general usage inside

I agree. I bought the 50mm for portrait shots indoors, but unless you are in a very large room you are too close to get anything other than head shots. I prefer the 40mm pancake lens.
#26
Rajk76
^ personally wouldn't recommend that 75-300 lens, as your likely to be disappointed with no image stabilisation with that focal range without good light or a tripod. As mentioned earlier, the 55-250mm IS version is a lot better.

Yep, but the EF 75-300 mm f/4.0-5.6 USM III is better than the 55-250 IS.
#27
FoSho
ElGofre
Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap lens and all it serves to do is disappoint you when you realise you want to be able to take high quality shots with a tele. Get this kit, or just a basic 1300D/100D kit and save for the 55-250mm STM.
Adidas.Addict
While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me asking a 'related' question. I've been considering a semi-decent camera, my main priority is focus tracking, focus speed and a good burst mode. As you can see I want to take action shots. I've been looking at M4/3 & Entry DSLR, but don't want something too large. Photo for attention, but these are the kind of shots I want to be taking/improving on.
What's your budget?
Is the STM one worth the extra £30 Amazon are charging compared to the non-STM one? Planning on using it for photography rather than video so the fact it's near-silent doesn't matter to me. Not sure how much else it adds. Thanks

I have the canon 700d with a 18-55mm stm and the 55-250mm stm and would defo recommend them over non stm.If you are going for any lens with a decent zoom then you should make sure it has image stabilisation as otherwise you will struggle to get sharp photos without the use of a tripod.


Edited By: Biggunspaul on Apr 17, 2017 18:53: Added text
#28
Aww man it's outta stock
#29
memistokkan
Aww man it's outta stock

Have updated original post, you can still get it here
1 Like #30
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.

If buying cheap lenses, always go for prime is my advice! The zoom lenses will give significantly worse results and in low light can be terrible.
2 Likes #31
Rajk76
memistokkan
Aww man it's outta stock

Have updated original post, you can still get it here


Thanks. Bought ;)
#32
TK42
UK2004
Better than Nikon d3300?


D3300 has a higher spec..
http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/2016/03/11/canon-1300dt6-vs-nikon-d3300/


D3300 is better no doubt.
Better low light
Better kit lens
Better focusing system
Better dynamic range
More megapixels
Better value, at least at normal prices.

And before any canon fanboys come back at me, I use both canon and Nikon and I would recommend the Nikon every time, at least at this price range.
#33
Sorry being a bit thick, do either/both of the lens's have image stabilisation?
+ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DC III Lens
+ EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens
#34
Adidas.Addict
Sorry being a bit thick, do either/both of the lens's have image stabilisation?
+ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DC III Lens
+ EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens
Neither lens has IS. There are slightly more expensive models of 18-55 that do have it but not this one.
#35
simandoo
FoSho
moby_matt
Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is f/3.5-5.6. Is one of these better or are they able to produce markedly different results? Looking for a decent little DSLR to take on holiday to USA and not sure which to go for. Will be taking shots of national parks and general scenery, but I'd also like to be able to play with shallow depth of field so the f1.8 one would be better for that right? Whereas the 300mm would be better for long distance and scenery? Sorry I'm pretty useless with this.

If buying cheap lenses, always go for prime is my advice! The zoom lenses will give significantly worse results and in low light can be terrible.


If you are starting out then you should aim to find your feet with a standard lens. Fine for general use. Once you get to know you camera and figure out what you are shooting majority of the time then tailor your next purchase. For example, a good quality prime later on like the gent suggests.

Otherwise you will be deciding on expensive purchases too soon. some people prefer and get on better with point and shoot compact cameras (versatility/portability) so might be wasting money. Or like me, it could become a slippery slope with lenses craving that beautiful bokeh :)
#36
danbrooks9237
TK42
UK2004
Better than Nikon d3300?
D3300 has a higher spec..http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/2016/03/11/canon-1300dt6-vs-nikon-d3300/
D3300 is better no doubt.
Better low light
Better kit lens
Better focusing system
Better dynamic range
More megapixels
Better value, at least at normal prices.
And before any canon fanboys come back at me, I use both canon and Nikon and I would recommend the Nikon every time, at least at this price range.
thats an answer to a faulty question though
sure the d3300 is a better base camera but the question is comparing this deal to a camera, not a camera to a camera or deal to a deal
its about tradeoffs and price is one
you want to go cheap then go canon, you want the equivalent nikons cheap versatile setup (50,wide,standard,long zooms) then you need to pay much more making the comparison moot
#37
brilly
danbrooks9237
TK42
UK2004
Better than Nikon d3300?
D3300 has a higher spec..http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/2016/03/11/canon-1300dt6-vs-nikon-d3300/
D3300 is better no doubt.
Better low light
Better kit lens
Better focusing system
Better dynamic range
More megapixels
Better value, at least at normal prices.
And before any canon fanboys come back at me, I use both canon and Nikon and I would recommend the Nikon every time, at least at this price range.
thats an answer to a faulty question though
sure the d3300 is a better base camera but the question is comparing this deal to a camera, not a camera to a camera or deal to a deal
its about tradeoffs and price is one
you want to go cheap then go canon, you want the equivalent nikons cheap versatile setup (50,wide,standard,long zooms) then you need to pay much more making the comparison moot


Someone asked which was better, and the D3300 is better! Obviously pound for pound then it takes more considering, and this deal is better then what Nikon are offering at the moment, but I would not recommend this camera to anyone.
#38
phoni
Adidas.Addict
Sorry being a bit thick, do either/both of the lens's have image stabilisation?
+ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DC III Lens
+ EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens
Neither lens has IS. There are slightly more expensive models of 18-55 that do have it but not this one.

Thanks, I've decided that focus speed and burst mode are not great on this for my needs. Bargain though.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!