slovegren

Most of my photography is travel photo shoots. Mostly I use the kit lens which is an EFS 18-135 mm zoom lens. I rarely enlarge anything larger than 7” by 10”. I have published several books using Lightroom 6 software. Been generally very pleased with the results. My question is would I get noticeably better quality of photos if I switched to a more expensive camera body and a higher quality lens? New to this website and this is my first post. Steve

amersfoort

You don't say what your current camera is so not too sure how much of a step up the 80D would be.

Old saying in photography "what is behind the camera is usually more important than the camera used".

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

No. The EF-S 18-135 is specifically designed to maximize the sensor size of the EOS 80D with IS support. The only differences you could accomplish, beyond spending a lot more money unnecessarily, is to work at wider apertures and / or higher ISOs. Canon doesn't have full-frame lenses that match to the zoom size of 18-135mm, so you'd immediately give up the flexibility of this lens. The zoom lens options won't be any sharper, just might offer some weatherization options in rain and snow. They might offer some constant apertures, say f/4 at 105mm rather than f/5.6 at 135mm. But, the IS support of your 18-135 should offer the ability to shoot slower, say in the 1/50 sec range, letting you hold the ISO lower.

The EOS 80D camera body at the industry standard 24MP also will be difficult to add pixels to a noticeable level. A jump to 30MP will give more cropping options, especially for distant wildlife. But, to 'see' more details from more pixels, you need to double the the pixels as well as change to lenses designed specifically for these mega- megapixel sensors, and now you're in the just-coming-to-market new cameras and lenses, paying the 'new' & 'best camera' price premiums.

Visual difference options you can accomplish come from shooting technique and / or prime lenses. Are you shooting in RAW? Are you extensively processing the your images in LR, whether JPEG or RAW? Are you stepping down the max variable aperture of the 18-135 for the focal length being shot? Are you not going too small on the aperture to avoid diffraction, say no smaller than f/11? Are you using the advanced AF capabilities of the EOS 80D, such as selectively placed off-center AF points and / or the expanded AF cluster?

A prime lens, even the cheapo EF 50 f/1.8, will provide a visual difference. Finding the prime focal length that fits your visual style / need can be the hardest choice. You give up all the zoom flexibility. Many can't. But, with the 24MP sensor, you might find the right prime gets you close enough and you can crop to the image you want. There's aren't many options for a prime outside your 18-135 zoom. So, you might sort / filter your images in LR by the focal length and see if a focal length you tend to use the most has a prime available at that focal length.

Hip Coyote

Hey Steve! Welcome. I am always in the camp of using the best quality lens possible. In my Olympus world the pro lenses do look better. I can see it right away. As CHG mentioned, that may not make a difference in your case. But, if my photo interests were limited to what you mentioned , I might look at more travel friendly system, such as the high quality Sony compact cameras and skip the multiple lens stuff. In fact I may be headed that way as well.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

The 80D is an excellent camera, I mostly use mine with a Tamron 150-600 G2 for birds. I keep it setup on a tripod to take pictures out the door overlooking my backyard feeders and water dishes/bird baths. I also own a 90D but it is too sensitive to camera motion with those tiny pixels on the 32.5MP sensor. But on a sturdy tripod with good light like table top macro setup or bright sun=high shutter speeds it gives outstanding detail. My loved old 7DII is great for carrying around after birds at the park, or the 80D, I use both for that and am waiting for a new version of the 7DII, I don't care if it is a 7DIII or R7 as long as it has all the features and choices for action/wildlife photography.

I also have a 5DIV which is outstanding for wide and ultra-wide angle work like landscapes or dim light.

You say you do travel photography and turn it into books. You are pleased with the images you get. Is there something you want to do better that would require either a longer lens (more reach) or that requires wider angles. They make 8mm and 10mm ultrawides that will work on your 80D. I had a Tamron 10-24 that was great. My daughter fell in love with it for Cosplay and Anime events so I gave it to her. It had been in her camera bag for 6 months anyway. So I just made it official and gave here the box etc. and said Happy Birthday.

In short, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Unless you just have GAS* and some money burning a hole in your pocket then go to the camera store and have fun. You might look at the better Super Zoom/Bridge Cameras. Like the Sony RX10 mk4, it is great, I got to handle one a guy I met has. But I can't come up with enough reasons to spend $1700 on one with all the cameras I already own.

I am assuming you meant 8" x 10" prints and not 7" x 10".

*Gear Acquisition Syndrome = I want a new toy/gadget.

slovegren

Thanks everyone for the response to my questions regarding my Canon EOS 80D and the kit lens. Very helpful and confirmed what I thought. Steve

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

My cousin's daughter has the Canon 80D and she and I went to Reelfoot Lake in Tennessee for some Eagle shots. I was using the Tamron 150-600mm G2 and she was using the Canon 70-200 f/2.8. I told her I would post process her images and I was amazed at what I could do with them after such a heavy crop. So just based on that I would say the 80D is a very capable camera as far as image quality. Of course it didn't hurt that she had a very sharp lens also.

saparoo Loc: Atlanta, GA

Years ago we were vacationing on San Juan Island and I had my Canon 60D with 18-135 lens. I photographed some eagles feeding in a meadow and this is one of the pictures. Loved that lens! Check out my profile, (saparoo) go to "Eagles of San Juan".
Sylvia

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

It will be very difficult to improve on the 80D without going to full frame and spending $$$$ .....

OTOH, you can improve on the 18-135 IQ with a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 but you will be giving up some versatility in the 71 to 135mm range.

Bottom line, the 80D and 18-135 can serve you well - but the Sigma lens is better and not expensive - if you are serious about the appearances of your work. Yes, I use the 80D and the Sigma lens.
.

MountainDave

I used a 77D for long hikes and climbs for years. It has the same sensor as the 80D. I found it was capable of outstanding images. However, I pretty much used only L series lenses, usually the 24-70 2.8L II. Better lenses will improve your images at the expense of weight, cost and convenience. I only just recently replaced the 77D with a RP which offers low cost, extremely light weight and full frame capability. I usually use the RF 24-105 4L on it which is fairly light and quite a bit better than the EF version IMO though the 24-70 is still a bit better. Larger apertures will also allow you to creatively experiment with more shallow depth of field.

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

I would stick with what you've got - it's a good combo. I have used a 70D and a 90D with the EFS 18-135 and I think that lens is the best one I've ever used. Versatile, great range and I don't think my images have been compromised in any way.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

As Paul (chg canon) says, the zoom you’re using is an excellent choice, but if you want the sharpest (and often lightest) lens you can get, fast primes are the answer. The following are excellent and some of Canon’s sharpest lenses.:

35mm f2 IS USM
50mm f1.4/f1.8
85mm f1.8
135mm f2L

All of these are FF lenses, so a good investment if you might consider adding a full frame body in the future.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A great list, of which there are easily another 10 EF / EF-S prime lenses to pump into this 18mm to 135mm range. The issue is: which is the most likely to be useful? My first prime lenses with a cropped EOS 7D were the EF 50 f/1.8 and EF 35 f/1.4L. On the wide side, consider too the EF-S 24 f/2.8.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I am still using my trusty 80D. I am curious to see if they ever come out with an R mount mirrorless APS-C camera to replace it, but I am in no hurry, my 80D works fine.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Hi Steve,

Your 80D is a 24MP APS-C DSLR with pretty good general specifications... unless you do heavy cropping or shoot in particularly challenging conditions, you're unlikely to see much improvement in image quality with an upgrade in the camera itself. There are some cameras with better AF systems if shooting fast action or heavily relying upon the AF system in other ways.... And there are some cameras that are more usable at high ISOs if you shoot a lot in low light conditions. But for more general shooting purposes, you wouldn't see much benefit from upgrading from your 80D.

Lenses are another story. While the Canon EF-S 18-135mm is a pretty decent and capable walk-around lens, it depends a little upon which version of that lens you have and you might be able to expand your capabilities with other lenses. The EF-S 18-135mm "STM" and "USM" versions appear to use identical optical formula, so should show little to no difference in image quality. However, between those two Canon claims the USM version is 2X to 4X faster focusing. That could make some difference if you are shooting fast subjects. There also is a third, older version of that lens... neither STM nor USM. That older version uses a slower, noisier and less accurate micro motor for focusing. It also uses an earlier, supposedly less capable optical formula. That 1st version of the 18-135mm is discontinued, so only the STM and USM are offered now.

Another difference between the 18-135mm lenses only effects video. The USM version is designed to accept a separately sold, optional power zoom module (PZ-E1?). In fact, it's the only lens that can use that module. That's an accessory with little relevance for stills shooters, but that might be useful for video.

All three versions of the 18-135mm have IS. Whether it's the same in all three, I really don't know. You might be able to find some info in reviews (check out The-Digital-Picture.com... Bryan extensively reviews everything Canon).

All three EF-S 18-135mm also have a moderately "slow", variable aperture: f/3.5 (wide) to f/5.6 (tele). This may be a limiting factor too... both depending upon lighting conditions and in depth of field control. For example, a "faster" lens like the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM gathers up to 4X as much light (f/2.8 is a two stop larger aperture vs. f/5.6). Also, a larger aperture can blur down backgrounds more to better separate sharply focused subjects... which can be handy for wildlife, candid portraits where you have limited control over the background, etc. For example, a Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM lens not only gathers 8X as much light as your lens zoomed to 135mm, it also can create very shallow depth of field and very strong background blurs...

EF 135mm f/2L USM (at f/2 on full frame camera)


Of course, the EF 135mm f/2L lens ain't cheap and isn't as versatile as a walk-around zoom like yours. It's also relatively large and heavy, though only slightly larger and about 8 oz. heavier than your zoom. Also note that the 135mm f/2 lacks IS.

Some other lenses can give similar effects for less money. For example, on your APS-C format camera the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and EF 85mm f/1.8 USM both are excellent short telephoto portrait lenses with strong background blur/shallow depth of field potential. Neither have the premium build quality of the 135mm f/2L, but they are both quite a bit smaller, lighter and a whole lot more affordable.

EF 85mm f/1.8 USM (at f/2 on APS-C camera)


Other lenses may offer other advantages over your 18-135mm...

- EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM and EF 100mm f/2.8 USM are both true macro lenses able to focus much closer and render much higher magnification, if close up and macro photography interest you. There also is the EF 100mm f/2.8"L" "IS" USM that adds image stabilization and even more premium build quality.

EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro lens (at f/11 on APS-C camera)...


- EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM and EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM both offer much wider angle of view that can be useful for scenery and other things. While your 18-135mm goes moderately wide, while these two zooms going as wide as 10mm are pretty extreme. The 10-18mm is quite affordable, has IS and is reasonably compact and lightweight, but is pretty lightly built. The 10-22mm is an older, but still excellent lens that costs about 2X as much, but is better built and has faster (larger) apertures, but lacks IS. Not that IS is particularly necessary on ultrawide lenses. Image stabilization is nice on any lens, but tends to be a lot more useful on telephotos than it is on wide angles.

EF-S 10-22mm USM lens (at 10mm & f/11, on APS-C camera)


- Telephotos such as 70-300mm, 100-400mm zooms and/or 300mm and 400mm primes are invaluable for wildlife and sports photography. Of course there are even longer... 150-600mm, 500mm, 600mm and more. Prices might be intimidating though! Not to mention size and weight. There also are teleconverters that can be added for even more "reach", though they may only fit and work properly on certain lenses.

EF 300mm f/4L IS USM lens with EF 1.4X II teleconverter (420mm @ f/5.6 on APS-C camera)


EF 300mm f/4L IS USM lens (at f/5.6 on APS-C camera)


There can be other considerations effecting lens choices. For example, if you are a "street shooter" and want to remain pretty unobtrusive with your camera, a really small lens like Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM or EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "Pancake" lenses may be just what you're looking for. There also are specialized "Tilt/Shift" lenses for architecture and product photography (among other things)... Ultra high magnification macro lenses.... and much more.

Only you can say if any of these lenses might be useful to you. As you can see, what you choose depends a lot upon what you shoot, how you want to shoot it and what you plan to do with the shots. You've got a good "general purpose" zoom. Maybe that's all you need. In fact, you might be better served putting your money into other things... such as lens hoods for any lenses that don't have them (hoods protect the lens both from stray light and from physical bumps).... or maybe a good circular polarizing filter... or maybe a decent tripod.... or maybe for better organizing and post-processing software... or for another external hard drive to back up your images... or a monitor calibration device for more accurate image adjustments... or maybe to put gas in the car to go someplace you've wanted to take photos!