Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands for deals, including promoted items.
forum threadbabsiebummy posted Yesterday 04:43 PM
forum threadbabsiebummy posted Yesterday 04:43 PM

Canon Refurbished Camera Deals - EOS Rebel T100 EF-S 18-55MM F/3.5-5.6 III Lens Kit $199 & Others

$199

Canon
9 Comments 1,123 Views
Get Deal at Canon
Good Deal
Save
Share
Deal Details
Canon seems to be having a good deal on some of their refurbished cameras + lens kits. Standard shipping is free, 14 calendar days to request an RMA from date of delivery for defective items (seems really small of a window).

Refurbished EOS Rebel T100 EF-S 18-55MM F/3.5-5.6 III Lens Kit $199 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...lens-kit-1

Refurbished PowerShot V10 (Black) $219 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...ershot-v10

Refurbished EOS Rebel T7 EF-S 18–55mm f/3.5–5.6 IS II Lens Kit $249 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...i-lens-kit

Refurbished EOS Rebel T7 EF-S18–55 II + EF75-300 KIT $329 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...75-300-kit

Refurbished Speedlite EL-5 $179 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...dlite-el-5

Here's the list of refurbished in stock: https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/di...=price_asc

There's some other deals to be found (I think) in the refurbished in stock items. My experience purchasing from Canon refurbished years ago is they ship in canon cardboard boxes, but I've had no issues with my refurbished lenses or cameras from them (albeit mine were always under the $1000 price point).
Community Notes
About the Poster
Deal Details
Community Notes
About the Poster
Canon seems to be having a good deal on some of their refurbished cameras + lens kits. Standard shipping is free, 14 calendar days to request an RMA from date of delivery for defective items (seems really small of a window).

Refurbished EOS Rebel T100 EF-S 18-55MM F/3.5-5.6 III Lens Kit $199 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...lens-kit-1

Refurbished PowerShot V10 (Black) $219 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...ershot-v10

Refurbished EOS Rebel T7 EF-S 18–55mm f/3.5–5.6 IS II Lens Kit $249 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...i-lens-kit

Refurbished EOS Rebel T7 EF-S18–55 II + EF75-300 KIT $329 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...75-300-kit

Refurbished Speedlite EL-5 $179 https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/...dlite-el-5

Here's the list of refurbished in stock: https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/di...=price_asc

There's some other deals to be found (I think) in the refurbished in stock items. My experience purchasing from Canon refurbished years ago is they ship in canon cardboard boxes, but I've had no issues with my refurbished lenses or cameras from them (albeit mine were always under the $1000 price point).

Community Voting

Deal Score
+3
Good Deal
Get Deal at Canon

Leave a Comment

Unregistered (You)

9 Comments

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Yesterday 08:24 PM
2,983 Posts
Joined Sep 2019
Yesterday 08:24 PM
LavenderPickle7682Yesterday 08:24 PM
2,983 Posts
Buying DSLRs in 2025 is like buying a typewriter in 2025.

Sure, it'll take perfectly fine photos, with effort. But unless you have a background in photography (who has time for that?), then your photos will be amazingly lackluster compared to even the most basic $30 smartphone. There's so much computational photography going on in every "modern" camera -- welcome to what decades of improvements can bring. Sometimes, the future is good.

Where with one button press, I can have a perfectly exposed image -- AND it tastefully uses HDR to properly expose both the highlights and shadows. And you can do it in silence. On a device you can fit into your pocket. While uploading/backing up automatically to multiple services. And in three years, you get a new & better one when you upgrade your phone - something you were going to do anyways!

DSLRs? Not so much. You have a mechanical shutter and mirror flap -- it's loud and has multiple wear points from moving parts. The megapixels of some of these older DSLRs are actually quite low, compared to even budget mobile phones. DSLRs have next to zero computational photography quality-of-life features, so you need a 1970s-esque education in calculating exposure....instead of worrying about "just simply taking the photo".

DSLRs are obviously big and bulky. Socially obtrusive. Banned in most areas as "professional" cameras, though you can get FAR better results 99% of the time from the latest "I"-Phone!!!

DSLRs are single use devices. They mostly don't do video (or they do it so poorly, you're seriously wasting your time with them in 2025). They can't automatically upload and backup themselves -- you need to connect them to a computer (or worse, take out the memory card and put it into a specialty card reader -- and that card is ONLY compatible with that camera too).

Yes, DSLRs can give you more options in terms of zoom. Except most zoom lenses are really REALLY bad in quality (just look at reviews of canon's EF 75-300 lens - bundled in some of the above)...so you're either using GIANT national geographic lenses or you're stuck with prime (non-zooms). Wait, isn't that what we call the same thing on one's phone, a non-zoomable lens? You're not going to be hauling around several pounds of camera body and several pounds of several-thousand-dollar lenses with you on a daily basis, right? I mean, if so, then you're not buying this stuff via slickdeals.

And the above are entry-level kits. The worst possible lenses, worst possible bodies. Nothing "worthwhile" or "noteworthy" about them -- not weather/dust sealed, not waterproof, not durable, etc.

Now, some "mirrorless" cameras mitigate the above concerns -- but for the average person/most people, they too are entirely the wrong thing to use. It's like suggesting a national news broadcast studio to someone who simply needs a 1080p webcam for Zoom.

[and the icing on the cake? Mobiles excel at wide-angle lenses....whereas on DSLRs and mirrorless, they are quite expensive. Even if you do use a DSLR/mirrorless camera, it's not uncommon for pros to whip out their "I"-Phone for a wide-angle shot, non-ironically.]
1
1
5
Today 03:50 AM
77 Posts
Joined Jul 2006
Today 03:50 AM
clownwilleatmeToday 03:50 AM
77 Posts
lol, lmao
Last edited by clownwilleatme July 29, 2025 at 08:55 PM.
Today 04:56 AM
6 Posts
Joined Dec 2024
Today 04:56 AM
PurpleBanana2098Today 04:56 AM
6 Posts
Quote from LavenderPickle7682 :
Buying DSLRs in 2025 is like buying a typewriter in 2025. Sure, it'll take perfectly fine photos, with effort. But unless you have a background in photography (who has time for that?), then your photos will be amazingly lackluster compared to even the most basic $30 smartphone. There's so much computational photography going on in every "modern" camera -- welcome to what decades of improvements can bring. Sometimes, the future is good. Where with one button press, I can have a perfectly exposed image -- AND it tastefully uses HDR to properly expose both the highlights and shadows. And you can do it in silence. On a device you can fit into your pocket. While uploading/backing up automatically to multiple services. And in three years, you get a new & better one when you upgrade your phone - something you were going to do anyways! DSLRs? Not so much. You have a mechanical shutter and mirror flap -- it's loud and has multiple wear points from moving parts. The megapixels of some of these older DSLRs are actually quite low, compared to even budget mobile phones. DSLRs have next to zero computational photography quality-of-life features, so you need a 1970s-esque education in calculating exposure....instead of worrying about "just simply taking the photo". DSLRs are obviously big and bulky. Socially obtrusive. Banned in most areas as "professional" cameras, though you can get FAR better results 99% of the time from the latest "I"-Phone!!! DSLRs are single use devices. They mostly don't do video (or they do it so poorly, you're seriously wasting your time with them in 2025). They can't automatically upload and backup themselves -- you need to connect them to a computer (or worse, take out the memory card and put it into a specialty card reader -- and that card is ONLY compatible with that camera too). Yes, DSLRs can give you more options in terms of zoom. Except most zoom lenses are really REALLY bad in quality (just look at reviews of canon's EF 75-300 lens - bundled in some of the above)...so you're either using GIANT national geographic lenses or you're stuck with prime (non-zooms). Wait, isn't that what we call the same thing on one's phone, a non-zoomable lens? You're not going to be hauling around several pounds of camera body and several pounds of several-thousand-dollar lenses with you on a daily basis, right? I mean, if so, then you're not buying this stuff via slickdeals. And the above are entry-level kits. The worst possible lenses, worst possible bodies. Nothing "worthwhile" or "noteworthy" about them -- not weather/dust sealed, not waterproof, not durable, etc. Now, some "mirrorless" cameras mitigate the above concerns -- but for the average person/most people, they too are entirely the wrong thing to use. It's like suggesting a national news broadcast studio to someone who simply needs a 1080p webcam for Zoom. [and the icing on the cake? Mobiles excel at wide-angle lenses....whereas on DSLRs and mirrorless, they are quite expensive. Even if you do use a DSLR/mirrorless camera, it's not uncommon for pros to whip out their "I"-Phone for a wide-angle shot, non-ironically.]
I agree with your overall assertion that phone cameras can take great pictures, but SLRs have always been niche products for hobbyists. Like any hobby, you'll need to put in some time to learn what you're doing. Of course you're not going to take your camera, 14mm f2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.8, 135mm f2, and 200mm f2.8 lenses everywhere with you, but wherever you do take them, you'll get better photos than someone with a phone. This is a good beginner camera and deal, but get rid of the kit lens and throw on a $100 35mm f2.
Today 08:03 AM
2,983 Posts
Joined Sep 2019
Today 08:03 AM
LavenderPickle7682Today 08:03 AM
2,983 Posts
Quote from PurpleBanana2098 :
I agree with your overall assertion that phone cameras can take great pictures, but SLRs have always been niche products for hobbyists. Like any hobby, you'll need to put in some time to learn what you're doing. Of course you're not going to take your camera, 14mm f2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.8, 135mm f2, and 200mm f2.8 lenses everywhere with you, but wherever you do take them, you'll get better photos than someone with a phone. This is a good beginner camera and deal, but get rid of the kit lens and throw on a $100 35mm f2.
LOL....you almost had me there until you finished with "throw on a $100 35mm f2".

Let's take a look at prices, shall we? Maybe you THINK you can get one for $100....but welcome to the year of our gourd, 2025.

(All of the below are 35mm AF lenses, priced from MPB. Used condition, lowest price, functional -- but ignoring the condition or if it had moisture/fungal damage. In short, I'm being VERY generous by choosing the cheapest available.)

Canon EF - $300.
Nikon F - $229.
Sony E (f/1.8) - $199.
Olympus M43 (17mm @ f/1.8, which is a 35mm f/3.6 equivalent) - $149.

With the exception of M43, I'm assuming 35mm on a full frame. I'm not researching 22mm for APS-C equivalency.

These were first-party lenses. I'm also not looking into any third party lenses, as those can be hit or miss. I don't feel like doing all the research to suss out a "good" 35mm from all the absolute junk -- and to be honest, I've done enough of your homework proving $100 is a joke price meant to provoke me. Well done, it worked.
1
Today 02:53 PM
6 Posts
Joined Dec 2024
Today 02:53 PM
PurpleBanana2098Today 02:53 PM
6 Posts
Quote from LavenderPickle7682 :
LOL....you almost had me there until you finished with "throw on a $100 35mm f2". Let's take a look at prices, shall we? Maybe you THINK you can get one for $100....but welcome to the year of our gourd, 2025. (All of the below are 35mm AF lenses, priced from MPB. Used condition, lowest price, functional -- but ignoring the condition or if it had moisture/fungal damage. In short, I'm being VERY generous by choosing the cheapest available.) Canon EF - $300. Nikon F - $229. Sony E (f/1.8) - $199. Olympus M43 (17mm @ f/1.8, which is a 35mm f/3.6 equivalent) - $149. With the exception of M43, I'm assuming 35mm on a full frame. I'm not researching 22mm for APS-C equivalency. These were first-party lenses. I'm also not looking into any third party lenses, as those can be hit or miss. I don't feel like doing all the research to suss out a "good" 35mm from all the absolute junk -- and to be honest, I've done enough of your homework proving $100 is a joke price meant to provoke me. Well done, it worked.
You seem to be taking this personally. I'm not trying to provoke you. I'm just trying to help people find deals on things they are interested in. The YONGNUO 35mm f2 is well regarded and can be found for $100 (brand new $106 on Amazon right now). I have one. You didn't have to do the homework, that's what friends are for. All of the lenses I mentioned are available, for Canon systems at least, between $100 and $300, that's why mentioned them.
1
Today 04:14 PM
4 Posts
Joined Aug 2024
Today 04:14 PM
1973RockitToday 04:14 PM
4 Posts
Quote from LavenderPickle7682 :
Buying DSLRs in 2025 is like buying a typewriter in 2025. Sure, it'll take perfectly fine photos, with effort. But unless you have a background in photography (who has time for that?), then your photos will be amazingly lackluster compared to even the most basic $30 smartphone. There's so much computational photography going on in every "modern" camera -- welcome to what decades of improvements can bring. Sometimes, the future is good.Where with one button press, I can have a perfectly exposed image -- AND it tastefully uses HDR to properly expose both the highlights and shadows. And you can do it in silence. On a device you can fit into your pocket. While uploading/backing up automatically to multiple services. And in three years, you get a new & better one when you upgrade your phone - something you were going to do anyways!DSLRs? Not so much. You have a mechanical shutter and mirror flap -- it's loud and has multiple wear points from moving parts. The megapixels of some of these older DSLRs are actually quite low, compared to even budget mobile phones. DSLRs have next to zero computational photography quality-of-life features, so you need a 1970s-esque education in calculating exposure....instead of worrying about "just simply taking the photo". DSLRs are obviously big and bulky. Socially obtrusive. Banned in most areas as "professional" cameras, though you can get FAR better results 99% of the time from the latest "I"-Phone!!!DSLRs are single use devices. They mostly don't do video (or they do it so poorly, you're seriously wasting your time with them in 2025). They can't automatically upload and backup themselves -- you need to connect them to a computer (or worse, take out the memory card and put it into a specialty card reader -- and that card is ONLY compatible with that camera too).Yes, DSLRs can give you more options in terms of zoom. Except most zoom lenses are really REALLY bad in quality (just look at reviews of canon's EF 75-300 lens - bundled in some of the above)...so you're either using GIANT national geographic lenses or you're stuck with prime (non-zooms). Wait, isn't that what we call the same thing on one's phone, a non-zoomable lens? You're not going to be hauling around several pounds of camera body and several pounds of several-thousand-dollar lenses with you on a daily basis, right? I mean, if so, then you're not buying this stuff via slickdeals.And the above are entry-level kits. The worst possible lenses, worst possible bodies. Nothing "worthwhile" or "noteworthy" about them -- not weather/dust sealed, not waterproof, not durable, etc.Now, some "mirrorless" cameras mitigate the above concerns -- but for the average person/most people, they too are entirely the wrong thing to use. It's like suggesting a national news broadcast studio to someone who simply needs a 1080p webcam for Zoom.[and the icing on the cake? Mobiles excel at wide-angle lenses....whereas on DSLRs and mirrorless, they are quite expensive. Even if you do use a DSLR/mirrorless camera, it's not uncommon for pros to whip out their "I"-Phone for a wide-angle shot, non-ironically.]
tell us you don't know squat about photography without telling us.........
Today 06:45 PM
2,983 Posts
Joined Sep 2019
Today 06:45 PM
LavenderPickle7682Today 06:45 PM
2,983 Posts
Quote from 1973Rockit :
tell us you don't know squat about photography without telling us.........
And yet, look at the market. DSLRs and Mirrorless are a shrinking market. Point and shoots are all but a distant memory. Everyone is using mobiles. That's the future, and if you think clinging to those antiquated vestiges of decades long past will make any difference...well, go ahead. Lol. It's your wallet!!!

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Today 07:35 PM
451 Posts
Joined Nov 2021
Today 07:35 PM
DannixrevolutionToday 07:35 PM
451 Posts
Quote from LavenderPickle7682 :
Buying DSLRs in 2025 is like buying a typewriter in 2025. Sure, it'll take perfectly fine photos, with effort. But unless you have a background in photography (who has time for that?), then your photos will be amazingly lackluster compared to even the most basic $30 smartphone. There's so much computational photography going on in every "modern" camera -- welcome to what decades of improvements can bring. Sometimes, the future is good.Where with one button press, I can have a perfectly exposed image -- AND it tastefully uses HDR to properly expose both the highlights and shadows. And you can do it in silence. On a device you can fit into your pocket. While uploading/backing up automatically to multiple services. And in three years, you get a new & better one when you upgrade your phone - something you were going to do anyways!DSLRs? Not so much. You have a mechanical shutter and mirror flap -- it's loud and has multiple wear points from moving parts. The megapixels of some of these older DSLRs are actually quite low, compared to even budget mobile phones. DSLRs have next to zero computational photography quality-of-life features, so you need a 1970s-esque education in calculating exposure....instead of worrying about "just simply taking the photo". DSLRs are obviously big and bulky. Socially obtrusive. Banned in most areas as "professional" cameras, though you can get FAR better results 99% of the time from the latest "I"-Phone!!!DSLRs are single use devices. They mostly don't do video (or they do it so poorly, you're seriously wasting your time with them in 2025). They can't automatically upload and backup themselves -- you need to connect them to a computer (or worse, take out the memory card and put it into a specialty card reader -- and that card is ONLY compatible with that camera too).Yes, DSLRs can give you more options in terms of zoom. Except most zoom lenses are really REALLY bad in quality (just look at reviews of canon's EF 75-300 lens - bundled in some of the above)...so you're either using GIANT national geographic lenses or you're stuck with prime (non-zooms). Wait, isn't that what we call the same thing on one's phone, a non-zoomable lens? You're not going to be hauling around several pounds of camera body and several pounds of several-thousand-dollar lenses with you on a daily basis, right? I mean, if so, then you're not buying this stuff via slickdeals.And the above are entry-level kits. The worst possible lenses, worst possible bodies. Nothing "worthwhile" or "noteworthy" about them -- not weather/dust sealed, not waterproof, not durable, etc.Now, some "mirrorless" cameras mitigate the above concerns -- but for the average person/most people, they too are entirely the wrong thing to use. It's like suggesting a national news broadcast studio to someone who simply needs a 1080p webcam for Zoom.[and the icing on the cake? Mobiles excel at wide-angle lenses....whereas on DSLRs and mirrorless, they are quite expensive. Even if you do use a DSLR/mirrorless camera, it's not uncommon for pros to whip out their "I"-Phone for a wide-angle shot, non-ironically.]
You're over thinking it. The peak era of YouTube were filmed in these dslrs. Girls doing makeup videos in full HD with little to no photography knowledge. YouTube is dead comparatively but if a social media girl films her two minute reels on these $200 cameras her video quality on auto will still be 10x that of anything not a pro max or ultra
Today 08:16 PM
2,983 Posts
Joined Sep 2019
Today 08:16 PM
LavenderPickle7682Today 08:16 PM
2,983 Posts
Quote from Dannixrevolution :
You're over thinking it. The peak era of YouTube were filmed in these dslrs. Girls doing makeup videos in full HD with little to no photography knowledge. YouTube is dead comparatively but if a social media girl films her two minute reels on these $200 cameras her video quality on auto will still be 10x that of anything not a pro max or ultra
And the Hermes 3000 was the best typewriter during its peak era.

We're in 2025. Times change. Tech changes. But by all means, cling onto your carriages and horse whips.

Show me a modern professional that unironically uses today a Canon 5D mk II or Canon 1Dc for everyday, professional videography. Not happening. Let's even go with two of the best DSLRs -- Canon 5D mk IV or the Canon 1DX mk III. Still...not really happening. Anyone "serious" is already on mirrorless.

Now show me someone who uses the "I"-Phone 16 Pro/Max for professional work. You'd run out of space listing them. It's SUPER common. Many of your news broadcasts are using "I"-Phones for field work...not those clunky over-the-shoulder camcorders. Welcome to 2025!

And you can slip that "I"-Phone right into your pocket, unlike those cumbersome DSLRs!

Leave a Comment

Unregistered (You)

Popular Deals

View All

Trending Deals

View All