Which Canon?

[Stub Mandrel]

Looking at Ebay there are a confusion of used Canon Eos bodies for sale, with seemingly little correlation between the model and the price (or even whether they work properly or not and price).

I understand that they make a good choice for DSOs because there is easily obtainable software. I'm still just 'testing the market' (tyre kicking) but are there any models to avoid or any that are particularly worth going for?

[Sarah and Colins Astro]

We use a Canon 550D which works well but depends how much you want to spend and what you want to use it for. We also have a QHY5 camera which is  a fair bit cheaper but gets great images of Jupiter and the Moon and we also use it as a guide camera (not tried it on anything else yet due to us having cloud for so long)!

[Tinker1947]

A 600D will work well.........

[PeterCPC]

Just make sure that it has live view.

Peter

[JamesF]

Different models produce different levels of noise in the image and it's probably desirable to have one of the lower-noise ones.  The 450D and the 1100D are fairly good in that respect.  I think the 650D is too, but I'm not 100% sure I've remembered correctly.  Gary Honis has done reviews of many of them and posted them on his website.

I'd be inclined to avoid anything earlier than the 450D purely because Canon are dropping support for the older cameras now.  I've made sure I have a copy of all the drivers I might ever want for my 450D just in case they do the same with the DIGIC III cameras.

Live view is very useful, and you may or may not find additional features such as  the swivel display and the movie modes worthwhile depending on how you see yourself using the camera.

James

[JamesF]

Here's the page of reviews: http://dslrmodifications.com/DSLRcomparison.html

This one might be particularly useful: http://dslrmodifications.com/T4iReview/T4iReview.html

In respect of the noise levels, the 450D, 550D and 600D look good, with the 1100D not too far behind.

James

[ecuador]

First, you need at least 450D or later. Second, there are some that have special features that might be of interest. For example, the 550D is the only one that has an 60fps 1:1 video crop mode (actually the 60D does too - but it is more expensive), so if you want to do planetary imaging as well with it, it might be your best bet (since it is also cheap - under 200 including lens). However, if you won't ever use it for planetary imaging, it is probably not the best, I think for example my 450D has a bit less noise than my 550D up to ISO 800 and if you can go to even newer ones like 650D/700D then you'd of course be even better off. Also, the 600D has a flip-out screen, so it might be useful if you plan to use it on stand-alone (no PC) sessions, since pointing an SCT or refractor at zenith won't put the camera display in an impossible position.

[Stub Mandrel]

Thanks all, there's an awful lot of food for thought there.

Much appreciated.

[dph1nm]

Keep an eye on the pixel size - the earlier models generally have larger pixels which is better for imaging at longer focal lengths.

NigelM

[wxsatuser]

Take a look on MPB.

You will get 6months warranty and you can trust the descriptions.

[sharkmelley]

In my experience there's really not a lot of difference in image quality as you go from 350D all the way through to the 600D.  Most users of this range of cameras (i.e. the Canon entry level) tend to be constrained by thermal noise. Unfortunately as each camera as released, the thermal noise increases as fast as the improvements in Quantum Efficiency (ability to collect photons) so the signal to noise overall remains unchanged.  This is mainly due to the fact that more and more pixels are packed onto the chip and more and more functionality e.g. video is added, which generates heat.  So go for the camera that suits you best e.g. liveview, flip out LCD, video ability, thickness of wallet etc.  I've only ever bought second hand off eBay.

One advantage of the newer cameras in this range is the reduced read noise - this is great for short exposures but makes no difference to long exposure deep sky imaging.

I actually have a modded 550D sitting unused because in all honesty I can't see the improvement over the modded 350D for deep sky imaging.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not tarring performant cameras like the Canon 6D and 7D MkII with the same brush.  My comments are restricted to the entry level range.

However, just to be contrary, I've just bought (brand new!)  a full frame mirrorless Sony A7S to finally replace my 350D.  But that's another story - not for the faint of heart - a fantastic camera but in many respects a can of worms.

Mark

[ecuador]

I've got a modded 550D sitting unused because in all honesty I can't see the improvement over the modded 350D.

Wait, you can't see a benefit from using a camera with liveview compared to using one without? What exactly are you using the 350D for?

[beamer3.6m]

I've got a modded 550D sitting unused because in all honesty I can't see the improvement over the modded 350D.

Mark

Any chance you want to donate this to the Beamer3.6m astro charity - JOKE!

Agree with the rest of your post though.

[Stub Mandrel]

MPB??

[sharkmelley]

Wait, you can't see a benefit from using a camera with liveview compared to using one without? What exactly are you using the 350D for?

I use it mainly for long exposure deep sky imaging sitting on the end of a scope.  The only advantage in liveview that I can see is when you're in the middle of nowhere without a laptop - liveview will then help you focus. But you won't achieve critical focus with liveview.  Try it for yourself - even if you use a Bahtinov mask to focus with liveview on the camera's own LCD; compare it with Bahtinov Grabber on the laptop.  I'll bet you aren't critically focused.

Mark

[Stub Mandrel]

What about the 400D (dubiously also known as the 'Rebel Kiss' in other lands). there seem to be lots of these about. Would a duff LCD make much difference if I always used it with a laptop, or does that limit the ability to use the controls?