Canon 1100D vs Canon 600D

okay there seems to be a lot of wrong concepts here:

1. the KIT lens is crap at auto-focus:

what kit lens are you talking about?? if it's the 18-mm IS canon lens, check out the following pictures, i'm sure most of them are taken using Autofocus, as manual focus using the small focus rings is PITA. i ve used the 18-55 fr 2 years and with decent light and correct af selection it's always spot on.
http://www.flickriver.com/lenses/canon/canonefs1855mmf3556is/

2. coz i've reading quite a lot about the canon 70-300 and everybody says it sucks a lot, primarily due to no IS

again what lens are you talking about? there is a canon 70-300 with IS and there is one 70-300 L lens, which are pretty good.. Any zoom lens is a compromise, and if you want the best quality you have to go for prime lenses. afaik, only the 75-300 lenses do not have is in older versions.

check out some images with the non IS 75-300

http://www.flickriver.com/lenses/canon/canonef75300mmf456iii/

3. maybe some landscapes, some bird and wildlife shooting

you can do a decent amount of landscaping at 18mm end of the kit lens, but for birding you need a fast lens with at 300+ focal length which will be around 460mm on a crop sensor like 600d/1100d.

4. Expenses:

you will be struck with gear acquisition syndrome at some point of time, read about it here.

http://www.f-stopeight.com/confessi...lenses-made-me-miserable-and-loose-thousands/

5. A bridge camera would suit your requirements:

Sensible, if you have second thoughts after reading point no 4.

6. Decide yourself:

So you can get either of the ones in your list and not go wrong because they are good products, and in the end, the person behind the camera matters most.

check out http://www.flickriver.com/ to see what kind of shots you can take with your available gear and get inspired.

Good Luck!!
 
Last edited:
Raghav_K said:
okay there seems to be a lot of wrong concepts here:

1. the KIT lens is crap at auto-focus:

what kit lens are you talking about?? if it's the 18-mm IS canon lens, check out the following pictures, i'm sure most of them are taken using Autofocus, as manual focus using the small focus rings is PITA. i ve used the 18-55 fr 2 years and with decent light and correct af selection it's always spot on.
http://www.flickriver.com/lenses/canon/canonefs1855mmf3556is/
Click to expand...


This wasnt me.

dafreaking said:
BTW, the KIT lens is crap at auto-focus.
Click to expand...
 
Raghav_K said:
2. coz i've reading quite a lot about the canon 70-300 and everybody says it sucks a lot, primarily due to no IS

again what lens are you talking about? there is a canon 70-300 with IS and there is one 70-300 L lens, which are pretty good.. Any zoom lens is a compromise, and if you want the best quality you have to go for prime lenses. afaik, only the 75-300 lenses do not have is in older versions.

check out some images with the non IS 75-300

http://www.flickriver.com/lenses/canon/canonef75300mmf456iii/
Good Luck!!
Click to expand...


[DOUBLEPOST=1383059406][/DOUBLEPOST]And I do admit apparently I've been wrong all along.

I meant 75-300 but kept saying 70-300 instead.
 
Last edited:
you do realize canon 75-300 was released in 2004 and and 55-250 was released 4 years or so later?

it's like comparing a 2004 santro to 2009 i10 and saying the latter it's better. Each has its own pro's and cons, and you can take good pics with any of them.

someone else here says:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx

though I don't think the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens is great in terms of image quality and features, we can't lose sight of the fact that it is very inexpensive IS tele-zoom Lens. There is a niche for this model. A casual shooter who is happy with their Canon EF-S 18-55mm II or 18-55 IS Lens and needs a tele-zoom for infrequent use could be happy with this lens. This is a light and small lens built to relatively tight tolerances that delivers decent center-of-the-frame image quality and Image Stabilization for a low price.
Click to expand...


for the record: i would ve never bought the 75-300, and i considered getting the 55-250 once, but decided against it. But i do have an even more crappy sigma 70-300 which i got as gift and it serves me well in certain occasions.
 
Raghav_K said:
okay there seems to be a lot of wrong concepts here:

1. the KIT lens is crap at auto-focus:

what kit lens are you talking about?? if it's the 18-mm IS canon lens, check out the following pictures, i'm sure most of them are taken using Autofocus, as manual focus using the small focus rings is PITA. i ve used the 18-55 fr 2 years and with decent light and correct af selection it's always spot on.
http://www.flickriver.com/lenses/canon/canonefs1855mmf3556is/
Click to expand...

Yup, 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS. I did mention in low-light it hunts a lot. If I wasn't clear well that is what I should have written. Don't get me wrong. It is definitely an ok lens to start of with. I can focus manually much faster in low light. Manual focus with stills is not ideal if you are shooting birds/wildlife or anything moving. Is the quality bad (of the lens)? Not at all. One should definitely get it as a beginner. You can't get anything as diverse as it for the 3k difference between a Body and Body+Kit.

I shouldn't write too much more as far as pictures go. I have clicked very few pictures with my camera. Have used it primarily for video. Would the 55-250 help me? At 55mm it is half a stop faster than the 18-55, but that's about it.
 
DSLRs are boring to use , they are heavy and difficult to maintain , If you are not a professional photog or a serious hobbyist specializing in some specific area of photography like macro photography or bird photography dslr is a sheer waste of money . if you are not into macro or bird photography take a look at RX100 its bit costly but worth it.
 
No sony for me.

Dont think very highly of the company(except PlayStation, which is irreplacable because of the developers making games for it)
 
AMG said:
I'm not a guy who likes to upgrade every 6 or so months.
Click to expand...
And what does that have to do with what I said? Are you saying that Canon is the most reliable? Or that canon doesn't come up with new models with minor increments.

What exactly are you smoking? I want some..
 
Last edited:
I'm saying that I dont want a bridge camera, coz if I get the hang of photography, I'll have to upgrade to a DSLR, and cameras arent exactly known to hold their value in the used market.


What are you smoking? Care to parcel some?

Payment will be made in bitcoins.
 
AMG said:
I'm saying that I dont want a bridge camera, coz if I get the hang of photography, I'll have to upgrade to a DSLR, and cameras arent exactly known to hold their value in the used market.


What are you smoking? Care to parcel some?

Payment will be made in bitcoins.
Click to expand...

And why do you think that Canon is the best? DSLM's are going to replace DSLR's very soon in any case.

Just get the 600D. It is magical. You just have to turn it on. Switch it to Manual and you will become a photographer.
 
Last edited:
I honestly dont get the cynicism, especially when I've not even started.
You dont think I deserve a DSLR. Fair enough.
But may I ask for the reason behind your having such an opinion?
Especially given the fact that I've not even posted a single image online.

Well, I may not become a pro overnight,but I may, over the years.
And hey, we all gotta start someday.
And to start, I want a DSLR instead of getting a bridge and looking to upgrade again after a year or so.

And mirrorless,cameras, okay, they're the future. Accepted.
Maybe I'll replace the 600D/1100D with a mirrorless, but at this point in time, the lens are prohibitively expensive, and not that much in abundance.
Lesser options, you see.

Anyways, we cool.
 
@AMG Ok I apologise for coming across as such a douchebag (my words, not yours) I would just recommend you try out these 2 models in a shop as well as the D3200 and D5200 from Nikon. D5200 might be a little more expensive. The 1100D should be more than sufficient for trying a DSLR out. As for deserving a DSLR or not, hey it's your money. You can buy what you want. I don't know your financial situation. I just feel that buying something just for a year seemed foolish. But hey to each his own.

You could have seen the following. If not, have a look, will probably help you make your decision.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stu...acr&x=-0.85652383245065&y=-0.9085714285714286

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-1100D-vs-Canon-600d

Sorry once again..and good luck with your purchase.
 
Back
Top