Have a 450d, but I want to downsize . . - 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

Have a 450d, but I want to downsize . .

£0.00 @
Silly topic probably. I have been in to photography for a few years, I have owned loads of DSLR'S and sometimes my bank balance has decided which one to go for, and not my actual needs. Anywa… Read More
aircanman Avatar
7y, 8m agoPosted 7 years, 8 months ago
Silly topic probably.

I have been in to photography for a few years, I have owned loads of DSLR'S and sometimes my bank balance has decided which one to go for, and not my actual needs.

Anyway, I am the kind of person who loves taking pics of my son, family etc, but the pictures that come right out of the 450d are lacking some ooh la la - I have a sony compact which produces better colours to be honest.

Anyway, I currently have the 450d, with the 17-85 IS lens - Not a bad setup, but I am thinking of selling on ebay and getting something cheaper like the nikon d3000 or one of the sonys. Does anyone have any suggestions?

REP WAITING !
Tags:
aircanman Avatar
7y, 8m agoPosted 7 years, 8 months ago
Options

All Comments

(8) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
I reckon a top end bridge camera is better than a bottom end DSLR.
I have the Sony DSC-HX1 & its brilliant.
#2
If you're looking for better colours, have you tried creating your own colour profiles in the camera?
#3
Magic_monkey
If you're looking for better colours, have you tried creating your own colour profiles in the camera?


+1 :thumbsup:
#4
esq3585
+1 :thumbsup:


Yer, have tried this. Thing I find with the 450d, you set the profile, then if the white balance needs to be adjusted then it knocks the whole thing off again.
#5
SLRs tend to have flatter output than bridge and compact cameras to give users the flexibility to process the image as they want which is why bridge/compact cameras usually have punchier output. Have you tried shooting raw at all?

I think you need to have a careful think about the type of shots you want to be able to take and what you can afford, while the 17-85mm lens is an ok one you're losing a lot of the 450D's sensitivity advantage to the slower aperture of that lens. For me the main advantages of an SLR are the speed, high sensitivity and flexibility which you're not benefitting that much from.
#6
Johnmcl7
SLRs tend to have flatter output than bridge and compact cameras to give users the flexibility to process the image as they want which is why bridge/compact cameras usually have punchier output. Have you tried shooting raw at all?

I think you need to have a careful think about the type of shots you want to be able to take and what you can afford, while the 17-85mm lens is an ok one you're losing a lot of the 450D's sensitivity advantage to the slower aperture of that lens. For me the main advantages of an SLR are the speed, high sensitivity and flexibility which you're not benefitting that much from.


Hey, thanks for that.

Yer I would have a nice compact if I could deal with the serious image noise the smaller sensor cameras give. I love a massive image, with massive detail, but I want it out of the camera. I know alot of photographers will say thats not possible with a DSLR, but I could get it with my 300d, 350d, 40d. Just the 400 & 450d I have had, havent seemed to gel with me!

Im thinking of a d3000 nikon because they give lovely vivid images, and are quite basic (ish) !
#7
Would be a big waste of cash to get rid of your 450d and get a Nikon d3000 imo as your 450d is more than capable of producing massive detail.
All you need to do is goto http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=detailed&ss=2&cm=canon%2Feos_digital_rebel_xsi&s=int and look at some of the 450d shots that have been taken. :thumbsup:

This was taken with a 450d, great detail.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lady_don/3317468956/

Also why are you considering a d3000 when you have an awesome 40d?
#8
esq3585
Would be a big waste of cash to get rid of your 450d and get a Nikon d3000 imo as your 450d is more than capable of producing massive detail.
All you need to do is goto http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=detailed&ss=2&cm=canon%2Feos_digital_rebel_xsi&s=int and look at some of the 450d shots that have been taken. :thumbsup:

This was taken with a 450d, great detail.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lady_don/3317468956/

Also why are you considering a d3000 when you have an awesome 40d?


I had a 40d lol. I buy and sell things (not for profit, but because I am unsure of things, very bad habit) -

Its all in the lens though, and the 17-85 is pretty poor. I can sometimes take 50 pics of my son in one go and I cant edit every picture I just dont have the time. Im after simple auto point and shoot, and the canon just seems to meter so wrong most of the time.

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

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!