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

clownwilleatme

Jul 30, 2025 03:50 AM

77 Posts

Joined Jul 2006

Jul 30, 2025 03:50 AM

clownwilleatmeJul 30, 2025 03:50 AM

77 Posts

lol, lmao

Last edited by clownwilleatme July 29, 2025 at 08:55 PM.

PurpleBanana2098

Jul 30, 2025 04:56 AM

7 Posts

Joined Dec 2024

Jul 30, 2025 04:56 AM

PurpleBanana2098Jul 30, 2025 04:56 AM

7 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.

3

LavenderPickle7682

Jul 30, 2025 08:03 AM

3,014 Posts

Joined Sep 2019

Jul 30, 2025 08:03 AM

LavenderPickle7682Jul 30, 2025 08:03 AM

3,014 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

2

PurpleBanana2098

Jul 30, 2025 02:53 PM

7 Posts

Joined Dec 2024

Jul 30, 2025 02:53 PM

PurpleBanana2098Jul 30, 2025 02:53 PM

7 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.

3

1

1973Rockit

Jul 30, 2025 04:14 PM

4 Posts

Joined Aug 2024

Jul 30, 2025 04:14 PM

1973RockitJul 30, 2025 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.........

4

LavenderPickle7682

Jul 30, 2025 06:45 PM

3,014 Posts

Joined Sep 2019

Jul 30, 2025 06:45 PM

LavenderPickle7682Jul 30, 2025 06:45 PM

3,014 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!!!

3

Dannixrevolution

Jul 30, 2025 07:35 PM

453 Posts

Joined Nov 2021

Jul 30, 2025 07:35 PM

DannixrevolutionJul 30, 2025 07:35 PM

453 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

1

LavenderPickle7682

Jul 30, 2025 08:16 PM

3,014 Posts

Joined Sep 2019

Jul 30, 2025 08:16 PM

LavenderPickle7682Jul 30, 2025 08:16 PM

3,014 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!

1

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 30, 2025 11:54 PM

179 Posts

Joined Jun 2022

Jul 30, 2025 11:54 PM

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 30, 2025 11:54 PM

179 Posts

Quote from LavenderPickle7682

:

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!

I'm not familiar with the shape of 1dx but the 5dmkIV was fairly common at bild expo this year.
That said, the problem with this post is that today's cheapest canon crop mirrorless camera, r100, has similar dynamic range before iso 300 with FF DSLR 5dmkIV. There was huge difference in price between 2000d($549 2018)and 5dmkiv($3499 2016), and for the same quality upgrade it is between $249(T7 kit refurb) and $329(R100 kit refurb). Why are you not paying for the $80 upgrade in image quality that was costing almost 3k?

LavenderPickle7682

Jul 31, 2025 12:03 AM

3,014 Posts

Joined Sep 2019

Jul 31, 2025 12:03 AM

LavenderPickle7682Jul 31, 2025 12:03 AM

3,014 Posts

Quote from Seed-Slay-Slick

:

I'm not familiar with the shape of 1dx but the 5dmkIV was fairly common at bild expo this year. That said, the problem with this post is that today's cheapest canon crop mirrorless camera, r100, has similar dynamic range before iso 300 with FF DSLR 5dmkIV. There was huge difference in price between 2000d($549 2018)and 5dmkiv($3499 2016), and for the same quality upgrade it is between $249(T7 kit refurb) and $329(R100 kit refurb). Why are you not paying for the $80 upgrade in image quality that was costing almost 3k?

I have no idea, why don't you ask those who put on that expo?

That's the problem with this generation. They're asking the right questions, but seemingly have no idea that they're asking them to the wrong person.

1

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 31, 2025 12:05 AM

179 Posts

Joined Jun 2022

Jul 31, 2025 12:05 AM

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 31, 2025 12:05 AM

179 Posts

Quote from PurpleBanana2098

:

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.

For the scale of your spending guidance, it is better to look for some second hand nikon crop later than D5300. I think with the $300-350 you are spending here, you could even get FF D750+50mm f1.8 G if you are lucky, because of the z5II and z6iii release.
note: I'm recommending nikon d5300, d5500, d5600, d7500, (d750, d800,d810 if you are lucky) on the second hand market. Way better value than those in this deal post.

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 31, 2025 12:13 AM

179 Posts

Joined Jun 2022

Jul 31, 2025 12:13 AM

Seed-Slay-Slick

Pro

Jul 31, 2025 12:13 AM

179 Posts

Quote from LavenderPickle7682

:

I have no idea, why don't you ask those who put on that expo?That's the problem with this generation. They're asking the right questions, but seemingly have no idea that they're asking them to the wrong person.

I'm not against DSLR like you, I'm against the great majority of DSLRs before the last gen DSLRs. The $80 vs $3k question was not for you but those rebel T7 lovers, obviously.

PurpleBanana2098

Jul 31, 2025 01:32 AM

7 Posts

Joined Dec 2024

Jul 31, 2025 01:32 AM

PurpleBanana2098Jul 31, 2025 01:32 AM

7 Posts

Quote from Seed-Slay-Slick

:

For the scale of your spending guidance, it is better to look for some second hand nikon crop later than D5300. I think with the $300-350 you are spending here, you could even get FF D750+50mm f1.8 G if you are lucky, because of the z5II and z6iii release.note: I'm recommending nikon d5300, d5500, d5600, d7500, (d750, d800,d810 if you are lucky) on the second hand market. Way better value than those in this deal post.

Sure, there's better values to be had, but this deal is direct from canon, and my recommended lens is new from amazon, no luck required. It can be difficult as a beginner to have comfort buying used gear.

dave421

Jul 31, 2025 03:20 AM

100 Posts

Joined Aug 2008

Jul 31, 2025 03:20 AM

dave421Jul 31, 2025 03:20 AM

100 Posts

Quote from LavenderPickle7682

:

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!

Yeah it's completely absurd for someone to spend $300 to learn how a system works when they can just jump right into $1k+, right? You realize there are people that are interested in photography that are looking for a starting point, right? I'm a photographer and my son is interested in the hobby. Should I just buy him a $1500 R6m2 and a $3000 RF85 1.2 instead of buying him a capable t7 that he can learn on and still take amazing photos with?

It's quite clear that you know almost nothing about cameras. Cameras today are more capable and smaller/quieter but they don't produce photos that are any better than yesterday's cameras. Photography is pretty simple when it's boiled down. It's capturing light. You can do that with a Canon R3 or you can do it with a Canon Rebel XT. You gain some abilities like better low light performance or faster burst speed but the basic formula is the same. Light enters a lens and gets recorded on a sensor. 90% of a good photo (pre-editing) is the lens, not the body. And there's still a ton of pros using 1Dx-II/IV or 5DII-IV.

Video is a different story but that's not what these are for. People still take still photos. Have any picture frames in your house? How about the background on your phone? Ever seen a TV screen showing videos at art museums? But omg, you might actually have to EDIT them to get the best results. The horror.

Seriously, you're over here arguing someone interested in gaming needs a $4k custom built rig with 128gb RAM & a RTX5070 or they may as well stick with their phone when they just want to play Minecraft.

2

1

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

$199

Community Voting

Leave a Comment

32 Comments

Leave a Comment

Related Searches

Popular Deals

Trending Deals