# new lens or new body???



## kyle9128 (Jul 6, 2009)

OK so right now im torn between buying a new lens or a new body. Right now I have an Eos digital rebel...the original one. For lenses i have a 55-200 usm and the kit 18-55 no IS... What should i buy, the new T1i or the 100mm 2.8 macro lens? the body i have now is getting around 10k count on the shutter.


----------



## KmH (Jul 6, 2009)

You're not even 1/2 way yet on the shutter, maybe not even a 1/3rd.

Unless the body is holding you back because of a lack of features, glass is always a more lasting investment than a body. Particularly a lens like the 100mm f/2.8 macro.

I say get the lens.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Jul 6, 2009)

Sounds to me like you need some faster glass.


----------



## AtlPikMan (Jul 6, 2009)

I want to say body because that EOS Rebel is a bit dated but, With the right lens, it would be like having a new camera. If not the 100mm macro then something better than what you have...


----------



## musicaleCA (Jul 7, 2009)

Yeah, I'd spring for new glass as well, unless you are being held back by lack of features as KmH noted. (And indeed you aren't very far on the shutter's life span. I'm almost at the 9k mark myself. I swear I'm going to shred the shutter before I get a new camera. Eep. >.< )


----------



## Battou (Jul 7, 2009)

Go with the glass, Build your self a good lens arsonal to work with. The body can always be pushed right to it's limits and it sounds like your current body, despite being a bit dated has plenty of life left in it. Get closer to it's life expectancy before replacing your body.


----------



## newrmdmike (Jul 7, 2009)

lens . . .


----------



## Josh220 (Jul 7, 2009)

Both  

Glad that's settled.


----------



## xmaxonx (Jul 7, 2009)

Josh220 said:


> Both
> 
> Glad that's settled.



Well played sir. I would say go for the new glass. Keep your current body for a bit longer mate.


----------



## Josh220 (Jul 7, 2009)

xmaxonx said:


> Josh220 said:
> 
> 
> > Both
> ...



My previous post was the best case scenario, but in all seriousness, this guy is 100% spot on, as are the rest of the posters in this thread. I went with upgrading my body first, but only because I also have the funds for better glass; I am just waiting a little bit to space out my purchases. My old body would have been dwarfed by my upcoming lenses, so I needed a more capable/larger body. Better glass is on the way though, so get your lenses first.


----------



## Tiberius47 (Jul 7, 2009)

I add my vote for glass.  Go for a fast f 2.8 replacement for the kit 18-55.  The Tammy 17-50 f2.8 is a great lens.


----------



## inTempus (Jul 7, 2009)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and recommend a new body.  Get a 1D.  It will drastically improve your photography.  It is all that stands between you and being a professional photographer.


----------



## kyle9128 (Jul 7, 2009)

thanks for all the comments, and yeah having slow glass sucks. I was thinking the new body just because of the upgrade in the digic processor. Having the extra pixels going from 6.3 or w.e mine is to the 15 would be nice also for having a better ability to crop and still be able to print above 300dpi which has been a problem. So someone mentioned a 17-50 lens...If not the 100mm 2.8 macro lens..what other options do i have that are a good investment that arent very expensive...under $500 mark


----------



## kyle9128 (Jul 12, 2009)

is the 50mm 1.8 worth getting?


----------



## Hardrock (Jul 13, 2009)

Go for the 100mm macro the lense is awesome! I also use an earlier rebel model the 350d and it drastically improved my images! The only issue so far is at times its slow to focus which might be a body issue. The lense is quite universal also, I've used it for macro and some portrait shots and the images are great.


----------



## Joves (Jul 13, 2009)

Id be more for glass as it holds value and, unless the body is holding you back as said, then the one you have is fine. Bodies are cheap but, glass prices will rise faster in short periods of time.


----------



## Josh220 (Jul 13, 2009)

Joves said:


> Id be more for glass as it holds value and, unless the body is holding you back as said, then the one you have is fine. Bodies are cheap but, glass prices will rise faster in short periods of time.



The Nikon 70-200 has already risen almost $100 in the past couple weeks.


----------



## kyle9128 (Jul 13, 2009)

gah why are the prices rising


----------



## Joves (Jul 13, 2009)

kyle9128 said:


> gah why are the prices rising


 THe difference between the Yen and the dollar is why.


----------



## JFew (Jul 15, 2009)

Weellll...

Canon's 50 f/1.8 is...cheap. It's only what? 80-90 bucks right now? It's worth a lot more than that...but the lens itself is junk. The glass is really great, the body...not so much. It's got a noisy AF, and the manual focus ring is unusable unless you have chopsticks for fingers. Also, the aperture arrangement creates blown out pentagons in the background. Very distracting.

If you're interested in 50s...you should take a look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4. That's the one I use, it's a beast. It's extraordinarily sharp...some say it's even sharper than Canon's f/1.2 "L" series 50. *puts on a flak jacket*...I've used the Canon f/1.2 and at the very best...there's little to no difference at f/2 +. At f/1.4 I'd have to say the Sigma is slightly sharper than the Canon. *hides*


----------

