T5i vs SL1 ??

[misse336]

I am in the market for a dslr camera. I am not knowledgeable about dslr cameras, although I have been doing a lot of reading on the subject (although I admit I get confused easily with all of the technical talk). I had a dslr camera that was gifted to me back before the digital age. I only shot in auto focus though, but am interested in learning how to shoot in manual now. I have been watching online videos about shooting in manual mode, have read lots of tutorials, read a lot of posts in this forum and am looking into a class offered by a photography studio about a half hour away from my house. I am thinking of sticking with a Canon at this point just because that is what my older slr camera was and what all of my point and shoots have been so I am familiar with them, plus I have one Canon lens. I have a Canon 75-300mm 1:4-5.6 lens that was bought to go with the slr camera 10ish years ago and the standard lens up to 55mm that came with the slr camera.

This is going to be a hobby only as I have no intention of making money off of it. I just enjoy taking pictures and would like really good pictures of my kids and am not happy with the pictures I am getting with my point-and-shoot. I plan on shooting mainly landscapes, vacation photos, pictures of my kids and pictures of my kids at sporting events (basketball, swimming and football at this point). Taking great pictures on dark rides at Disney would be nice, but since I'm just going this summer for the first time in 15 years it's not my highest priority, although taking some indoor sports pictures of my kids will be the same principle of poor lighting and movement.

I am debating between the SL1 and T5i after visiting a local camera store. The main differences that I see between them are size and 4fpm on the sl1 vs 5fpm on the t5i.

My questions are:
-Will I miss the extra 1 fpm with active kids and sports if I go with the sl1 or is it so small of a difference that it is not noticeable?
-Also I've been reading that the lens that comes in the kit isn't a really good lens. With the t5i there is a choice of an 18-55 or an 18-135 lens. Is the 18-135 lens a good lens and thus worth the extra money? The sl1 only comes with an 18-55 lens. Which camera/lens would you recommend?
-Or should I get just one of those bodies and get a totally different lens altogether?
-Or is there a totally different camera/lens that would be better for what I need/want?

Thanks! Any/all opinions are welcome. This is going to be the only dslr camera that I will be able to purchase for a while (although I hope to expand on my lens collection) so I want to make sure that I get the correct camera.

 

[havoc315]

No, you won't miss the extra 1 frame per second but...

A Canon shooter can help you more than me, my understanding is that they are mostly very similar cameras in two different packages.
More important than the extra one frame per second, the t5i has a slightly better autofocus system. So particularly when shooting your kids sports, this could be helpful.

But the main difference is indeed body size. Depends what you are comfortable with in your hands. As opposed to a point and shoot, a larger body is often preferable in a dSLR for some users, for a couple of reasons --- Better balance of large lenses, and better ergonomics for manual controls. In other words, if you are switching lots of manual controls, sometimes their layout on a larger body is helpful. Other users will prefer the more compact overall body. Though much of the bulk becomes the lens.

I won't comment on the current Canon lenses and leave it for a Canon shooter. I will say that your old lenses are unlikely to perform very well on newer Canons. Only the newest "STM" lenses are fully compatible with the live view hybrid AF, if you intend to make use of it. And I know the old 75-300 is a notoriously bad lens.

 

[SkaGoat]

You won't notice the 1 fps difference between the two cameras, but you may notice the size (SL1 is smaller). They both have the touch screen, (T5is is one of the flippy ones). Neither kit lens is bad, I haven't used the 18-135mm, but I have used the 18-55mm kit lens.

The only reason I'd go with a T5i is if you felt like you needed the flippy screen, or if you felt you needed the extra AF points.

They both have 9 AF points, the big difference is the T5i's are all cross-type (meaning it can focus on horizontal, and vertical lines), where as the SL1 only has 1 cross type AF point (the centre point).

The 75-300 is not a good lens, but it may be enough to get you started and for indoor sports you may want something a little faster (depends on how good the lighting is in the gym/arena is).

 

[photo_chick]

The cross type AF points is not as big of a deal as people like to make it out to be. I shoot with a 6D and only the center point is cross type. I nail the focus with it 99.9% of the time. Are cross type points better? Sure. But its not a defining factor in determining which AF system is better. And non-cross points can work very well for you if you understand how they work.

The biggest issue to me is the view finder size and ruggedness. The T5i has a larger view finder (they're both 95% coverage) and is build a little more ruggedly. Thats not to say I'd choose the T5i over the SL1.. in fact I'm hoping to pick up an SL1 before my trip because I want a small camera option. You can pick up the SL1 refurb from Canon right now for $383, body only.

There are other major differences in terms of features... if you plan to do any studio work you would want the T5i. It's also got some other bells and whistles that are nice. It comes down to what your priorities are though.

 

[boBQuincy]

Canon's 18-55 IS kit lens is inexpensive and it looks/feels the part. However, it is optically quite good and the IS really works (good for maybe 3 stops). For the price and focal length range this small, light lens is a good match for a Rebel camera. The optional lens hood does not do much but I used it anyway just because I use lens hoods.

As for the camera, I prefer small and light but ymmv.

 

[SrisonS]

I'd suggest getting the 18-135 over the 18-55. I have the 18-135 (non-STM version); and used to have the 18-55. Neither of them is bad. But it's nice to have that zoom versatility.

 

[SkaGoat]

But its not a defining factor in determining which AF system is better.

It's not a defining factor, but it's a big difference, it might not be a big deal for certain types of photography (portaits & landscapes).

But for sports and wildlife photography, using AI Servo, they make a difference.

It's one of the reason if I decide to move on to a full frame camera a 6D won't do (which is one of the reasons I haven't switched as a 5D isn't in the budget), it's too slow, and doesn't have things like point expansion, zone selection, and it's only got a single cross type AF point vs. the 19 cross type points I have now.

I personally think you should go for the SL1, but play with both, you might find you like the extra size you get from the T5i.

 

[Skywise]

-Will I miss the extra 1 fpm with active kids and sports if I go with the sl1 or is it so small of a difference that it is not noticeable?

Probably not. You use that to hold down the shutter button and snap as many shots as you can while the activity is going on (EG get that perfect shot of your kid doing a slam dunk or your dog catching a ball at just the right point). 1 more frame isn't going to gain you that much more.

-Also I've been reading that the lens that comes in the kit isn't a really good lens. With the t5i there is a choice of an 18-55 or an 18-135 lens. Is the 18-135 lens a good lens and thus worth the extra money? The sl1 only comes with an 18-55 lens. Which camera/lens would you recommend?

I've heard good things about the 18-135 but not used it personally. the 18-55 II is also a decent kit lens. If you want the 18-135 you could order an SL1 without a lens and buy the 18-135 separately. (The SL1 can use any of Canon's EF and EF-S lenses but the EF-S lenses are built specifically to work with your camera type so you'll want to stick with them at first)

-Or should I get just one of those bodies and get a totally different lens altogether?

Well if you've got the coin... The killer combination I used was a T4i with a 10-22 EF-S lens and the 17-55 f2.8 EF-S lens (about $900!). The 10-22 gives fantastic wide angle shots that I used at Disney last year and the 17-55 f2.8 gives fantastic low light performance for indoor shots. Both of those will work on an SL1 as well.

 

[photo_chick]

It's not a defining factor, but it's a big difference, it might not be a big deal for certain types of photography (portaits & landscapes).

But for sports and wildlife photography, using AI Servo, they make a difference.

It's one of the reason if I decide to move on to a full frame camera a 6D won't do (which is one of the reasons I haven't switched as a 5D isn't in the budget), it's too slow, and doesn't have things like point expansion, zone selection, and it's only got a single cross type AF point vs. the 19 cross type points I have now.

I personally think you should go for the SL1, but play with both, you might find you like the extra size you get from the T5i.

My point was that it's not just the cross type points that make a system better. You can't just look at the specs and say one is superior. I didn't do a good job of conveying that in my post because you're absolutely right, there are times like you mentioned when the AF system makes a big difference to people. When you compare the 6D to the 5D3, which is the normal AF system comparison in Canon full frame cameras, it's more than the fact that there are more cross type points that make the 5D3's AF system better for sports and wildlife. And all of that comparison really serves no purpose here anyway. I just brought up the 6D because people say non-cross points blow, and they don't. There's more to it than that.

Having used the SL1 and T5i a bit recently (I am so going to miss access to equipment now that I'm not in school) both AF systems were surprisingly similar. I didn't have any issues nailing focus with the SL1. Granted I didn't use either one for an extended period of time, but I'm far more particular than a casual shooter in evaluating the results. I just don't see where it's going to be a huge difference for a consumer unless they're a serous enthusiast.

 

[misse336]

Thanks for all of your thoughts/opinions. I'm going to head back to the camera store this weekend and hold the two cameras again to see if the SL1 feels ok with a little bit larger lens than the 18-55 one it comes with.

Then I have to start looking at camera bags, probably a backpack type style since I'm often out with my 3 kids.

 

[misse336]

Probably not. You use that to hold down the shutter button and snap as many shots as you can while the activity is going on (EG get that perfect shot of your kid doing a slam dunk or your dog catching a ball at just the right point). 1 more frame isn't going to gain you that much more.


I've heard good things about the 18-135 but not used it personally. the 18-55 II is also a decent kit lens. If you want the 18-135 you could order an SL1 without a lens and buy the 18-135 separately. (The SL1 can use any of Canon's EF and EF-S lenses but the EF-S lenses are built specifically to work with your camera type so you'll want to stick with them at first)


Well if you've got the coin... The killer combination I used was a T4i with a 10-22 EF-S lens and the 17-55 f2.8 EF-S lens (about $900!). The 10-22 gives fantastic wide angle shots that I used at Disney last year and the 17-55 f2.8 gives fantastic low light performance for indoor shots. Both of those will work on an SL1 as well.

Unfortunately $900 isn't in the budget for just the lens right now. Maybe in the future (if this is something that I really find myself drawn to) I will be able to upgrade to a lens of that quality, but not yet. I'm planning a Disney trip this summer so I wish I could get a low light lens for all of the rides but will have to see what I can get with a cheaper lens since I"m not sure I would use a 10-22 EF-S lens after our trip that much.

 

[havoc315]

Unfortunately $900 isn't in the budget for just the lens right now. Maybe in the future (if this is something that I really find myself drawn to) I will be able to upgrade to a lens of that quality, but not yet. I'm planning a Disney trip this summer so I wish I could get a low light lens for all of the rides but will have to see what I can get with a cheaper lens since I"m not sure I would use a 10-22 EF-S lens after our trip that much.

The good news is that for dark rides, for true low light---- even that $900 lens isn't good enough. But there is a better (not all around better, just better in terms of extreme dark) lens for much cheaper. For about $100, you can get the Canon 50/1.8.

It is not ideal --- 50mm is a little too long for some dark rides. You'll find yourself wishing you could "back up" or get a wider angle. But the 1.8 aperture is a must for dark rides and low light. And you can't beat the price. You will be able to get some very good dark ride shots with that lens, and it is a great lens for general use indoors if you want to skip the flash.

 

[photo_chick]

The good news is that for dark rides, for true low light---- even that $900 lens isn't good enough. But there is a better (not all around better, just better in terms of extreme dark) lens for much cheaper. For about $100, you can get the Canon 50/1.8.

It is not ideal --- 50mm is a little too long for some dark rides. You'll find yourself wishing you could "back up" or get a wider angle. But the 1.8 aperture is a must for dark rides and low light. And you can't beat the price. You will be able to get some very good dark ride shots with that lens, and it is a great lens for general use indoors if you want to skip the flash.

I used the 50mm f/1.8 on a crop body (Canon 50D) on my last two trips. I really didn't have any major issues with it being to long on rides. Once in a while it annoyed me but overall I didn't feel it hindered me. Character meals however, were a different story. I found myself stepping back into my neighbors table often. Such is the trade off for this lens. All in all I don't think there's a better prime from Canon for under $200.

 

[SkaGoat]

That $900 Canon 17-55mm lens has an equivalent from Tamron, and it's an excellent lens.

The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 you can get it without IS (Image stabilization) for $516 and with IS for $649. The Tamron lens at f/2.8 will be much better for indoor photos without flash.

So you could get the SL1, body only, add in the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, and it's only around $100 more than the T5i 18-55 kit.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

Quality glass is more important than a quality body. Camera bodies today are much better than they've ever been! Yes an APSC has a different look from Full frame and Medium Format, but lets get over all that already! There are photographers out there absolutely killing it with their iPhones! Cause they know how to compose a shot! Stop worrying about gear and learn your equipment..... to the OP I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but I'm getting kinda tired by the same old responses from the same people all the time...

 

[photo_chick]

I'm of the mindset that full frame really doesn't look different than APSC when all other factors are equal and I wish I could get the 6D's ISO performance in a small crop body. Or in a smartphone.... I'd be all over that. But alas we're not there. Yet.

 

[cobright]

The flippy viewfinder is a godsend when shooting over crowds.

 

[SkaGoat]

I'm of the mindset that full frame really doesn't look different than APSC when all other factors are equal and I wish I could get the 6D's ISO performance in a small crop body. Or in a smartphone.... I'd be all over that. But alas we're not there. Yet.

wouldn't the perfect Canon dSLR be 6Ds sensor, 5DmIII A/F system, 7D's build quality and ergonomics in a body the size of the SL1?

 

[photo_chick]

wouldn't the perfect Canon dSLR be 6Ds sensor, 5DmIII A/F system, 7D's build quality and ergonomics in a body the size of the SL1?

Totally. With an L series quality 18-200 f/1.8 zoom that's super light and compact.

 

[havoc315]

Totally. With an L series quality 18-200 f/1.8 zoom that's super light and compact.

Why limit yourself?
16-300, 1.8, zero distortion. Light and compact.