563°
EXPIRED
Canon EOS 1300D DSLR Camera with EF 18-55mm III Lens & EF 50mm f/1.8 Lens £329 @ John Lewis
Canon EOS 1300D DSLR Camera with EF 18-55mm III Lens & EF 50mm f/1.8 Lens £329 @ John Lewis

Canon EOS 1300D DSLR Camera with EF 18-55mm III Lens & EF 50mm f/1.8 Lens £329 @ John Lewis

Buy forBuy forBuy for£329
GETGet dealVisit site and get deal
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)

38 Comments

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" 17th Apr

The deadline for redeeming the photo book has been extended to 16 May.

Can get a 75-300 lens instead of the 50 for another £20 here
Edited by: "moby_matt" 17th Apr

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.

i wouldn't say the 50mm is an indoor lens, its nice but too long for general usage inside

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" 17th Apr

Better than Nikon d3300?

FoSho

I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is … 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.

Same camera but differnet deal was on here last week
hotukdeals.com/dea…466
Some good tips in there of you are thinking of buying this camera

FoSho

I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is … 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.

RoryJoe

Pretty much spot on and answered your own question :)The 50mm is amazing … 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

FoSho

I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is … 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" 17th Apr

Original Poster

^ 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.

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''

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

FoSho

I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is … 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.

Adidas.Addict

While there's a few photography geeks in here I hope you don't mind me … 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.



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" 17th Apr

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 … 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?

ElGofre

Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap … 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.What's your budget?



Nothing set, but this deals price appealed

ElGofre

Another vote here for the "f**k the 75-300mm lens" crowd, it's a crap … 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.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

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" 17th Apr

UK2004

Better than Nikon d3300?



Wouldn't mind the answer to that too?.

Is the OP's Deal better than the Nikon D3300?, thanx. :-)

brilly

i wouldn't say the 50mm is an indoor lens, its nice but too long for … 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.

Rajk76

^ personally wouldn't recommend that 75-300 lens, as your likely to be … ^ 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.

FoSho

Is the STM one worth the extra £30 Amazon are charging compared to the … 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" 17th Apr

Aww man it's outta stock

Original Poster

memistokkan

Aww man it's outta stock



Have updated original post, you can still get it here

FoSho

I know very little about lenses but the JL one is f1.8 and the Currys is … 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.

Rajk76

Have updated original post, you can still get it here



Thanks. Bought

TK42

D3300 has a higher … 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.

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

Adidas.Addict

Sorry being a bit thick, do either/both of the lens's have image … 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.

simandoo

If buying cheap lenses, always go for prime is my advice! The zoom lenses … 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

danbrooks9237

D3300 is better no doubt.Better low lightBetter kit lensBetter focusing … D3300 is better no doubt.Better low lightBetter kit lensBetter focusing systemBetter dynamic rangeMore megapixelsBetter 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

brilly

thats an answer to a faulty question thoughsure the d3300 is a better … thats an answer to a faulty question thoughsure 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 dealits about tradeoffs and price is oneyou 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.

phoni

Neither lens has IS. There are slightly more expensive models of 18-55 … 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
Avatar
@
    Text