Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Which Canon combo?  (Read 12385 times)
RedRebel
Guest
« on: August 02, 2006, 02:55:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Some advice needed....

Currently I own a 350D + 17-85 IS lens. I mainly use this camera for city, landscape and occasional indoor (museum) shooting during holidays.

I don't have any problems with the image quality of the 350D, but I don't like the ergonomics. It's small, and much settings are hidden in menu's, also the view finder is small. The lens is not bad (I like the IS), but it's CA and lack of contrast in more difficult light situations annoise me.

So I am thinking to upgrade to either a 30D or a 5D. The image quality from the 30D will do for me, but I am a bit reserved to stick with a 1.6 crop or switch to FF. Spending to much money on lenses based on 1.6 crop sensors is not such a good idea I think.

But I wonder which camera you would shose and which two zoom lenses you would add to it. I think about it to travel with no more than 2 zooms (walk around and a longer zoom )and maybe add one prime to it.

So which camera would you shoose and which 2 main lenses would you add. I don't wan't to travel with a half a dozen of lenses.


Regards
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2006, 03:10:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Some comments on the 17-85.

It is CA prone but that does clear up by about 24mm.  RAW Shooter did an excellent job of automatically removing CA.  Hopefully that will end up in lightroom.

As to contrast, lookup "local contrast adjustment" in the articles on this site.  That should take care of any contrast issues.  I'm also curious about the difficult light reference.  Did you get the lens hood for the 17-85?  If not you'll want to buy one.  That reduces flare which helps contrast.

My biggest problem with the 17-85 is the f google to f google-plex f stop range.  It is one dark lens.

If you stick with the crop cameras the 30D is a nice choice.  A canon 55-200 USM II (get the II version.  The older version was pretty sad.) is a nice complement.  It is a nice sharp lens.  It is a bit lacking in contrast but the local contrast adjustment takes care of that nicely.

If you want to ditch the 17-85 the combination of 17-55 f2.8 IS and 55-200 USM II would be a nice 2 lens combo.  The 17-55 would also give you a much brighter lens and faster focusing.

Add a 35f2 or 50f1.8 to whatever you get.

I don't have a 5D so I won't comment on that.

Quote
Some advice needed....

Currently I own a 350D + 17-85 IS lens. I mainly use this camera for city, landscape and occasional indoor (museum) shooting during holidays.

I don't have any problems with the image quality of the 350D, but I don't like the ergonomics. It's small, and much settings are hidden in menu's, also the view finder is small. The lens is not bad (I like the IS), but it's CA and lack of contrast in more difficult light situations annoise me.

So I am thinking to upgrade to either a 30D or a 5D. The image quality from the 30D will do for me, but I am a bit reserved to stick with a 1.6 crop or switch to FF. Spending to much money on lenses based on 1.6 crop sensors is not such a good idea I think.

But I wonder which camera you would shose and which two zoom lenses you would add to it. I think about it to travel with no more than 2 zooms (walk around and a longer zoom )and maybe add one prime to it.

So which camera would you shoose and which 2 main lenses would you add. I don't wan't to travel with a half a dozen of lenses.
Regards
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72416\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Letcher
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2006, 04:55:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Remember, you usually get what you pay for.

Get as much camera as your budget permits. Buy one good zoom lens. It doesn't cost any more to go first class, you just can't go as far......
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7121


WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2006, 05:02:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I like compact, comprehensive cost-effective solutions that deliver high quality. When I decided to "go digital" in Fall 2004, the choices I considered acceptable (re pixel count and image quality for my print size range up to A3) were a second-hand Canon 1Ds, a new Canon 1Ds Mk 2, or a Canon 20D. The 5D did not exist yet. I bought the second-hand 1Ds because it produces very high quality captures, full frame at 11MP, and it was half the cost of the newer Mk2 (for 25% more resolution and other up-graded features). If I were making the same choice today, I would buy a 5D. I know people who own them, seen the results, and they are stunning. Cleaner images than my 1Ds, and people I know who own both the 1Ds Mk2 and the 5D say the 5D has the cleanest image. The 5D is a well-built camera (not a bullet-proof tank like the 1 series, but still really well-made) and much lighter. It is larger enough compared with the Rebel 350 that you won't have those ergonmic problems. It also has GREAT viewing screen compared with other Canons.

I like full-frame: large, bright viewfinders, larger pixels for the same pixel count, better for wide-angle, therefore more flex with lenses. For lenses I use the new 24~105 L zoom and the less new 70-300 DO. Both of them are image-stabilized, both are very compact, both deliver high quality images (the 24~105 L being better than the 70~300 DO), and with these two relatively small, light-weight high quality lenses I cover the whole gamut from 24mm to 300mm. These lenses aren't cheap (about USD 1250 each) but well worth it. Their one drawback is aperture (f4 or f5.6). So I also bought a 50mm f1.4 for those very low light situations where tripod etc. just doesn't cut it. This is very manageable kit to travel with. I've done two intensive overseas workshops with it and it performed well and conveniently for me.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
jimhuber
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2006, 08:13:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Yep, what he said: 5D + 24-105L & 70-300DO if you can afford it.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2006, 08:24:21 PM »
ReplyReply

That's a huge money jump from a 350D that he likes other than the ergonomics.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7121


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2006, 09:20:51 PM »
ReplyReply

You're right, but the 5D is on Red Rebel's radar, so I didn't hesitate.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1078


« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2006, 10:30:00 PM »
ReplyReply

it depends on what kind of travel you're doing

if it's people, architectuure, and landscapes, the 5D and 24-105 + 70-300DO is the way to go, but if these lenses are too pricey, then it's not worth having the 5D

i use a pair of 20Ds for travel which also includes wildlife and shots from dive and cruise boats.  given the high ISO noise performance of the 20D, i really don't have complaints about the 17-85.  i bought a 70-300DO before the new 70-300 was available and love the compact size for inconspicuous travel shooting even though the images may not be significantly better.  these 2 lenses will deal with 80-90 percent of travel situations.  if wildlife is anticipated i take the 100-400 and keep the 70-300 as a backup (which saved me once).  i sometimes take a Sigma 12-24 which very rairly gets used.

i did some tests with the 5D and decided it didn't make a significant difference for what i do -- if you're biased toward short, the 5D is the way to go (with adequate lenses), if you're on the longer side, i'm very happy with what i get from the 20D -- if i do things right, 13x19 prints are no problem.
Logged
Nigelfrommanchester
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 49



WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2006, 04:02:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I have a 350D and a 5D. I bought the 350D as my transition into digital and then sold all my film cameras as soon as I'd used it. I then invested in a 5D with the proceeds. I'm happy with both.

With the 5D I use a 28-70L most of the time and get great results. It is my camera of choice and I have a lot of primes to use with it when I can carry them. However, there are places it either can't go or I won't take it.

With the 350D I mainly use the 10-22mm and the 35/2 or 85/1.8. I can fit this into a Lowepro 60AW pouch that either velcro's to my belt or bag, or hangs over my shoulder. I'm happy to go pretty much anywhere with this (and have).

I'm happy printing files from both to A3+. On uncropped images I don't see a huge difference in the prints unless there is lots of detail there. Even then sharpening can do a lot to make the print impress.

Where the 5D does win is ability to crop, viewfinder, and noise at higher ISOs. I also like using the grid screen as with the EOS3 and 1V (though it seems more of a fiddle to fit).

After years in photography, and a few expensive mistakes, my advice is now very simple: what you want is nice, but what you're prepared to carry around is what gets used.
Logged

Nigel Atkinson
nigelatkinson.biz
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2006, 06:23:23 AM »
ReplyReply

i had the 20d, with the 17-85is. it was a great combo, although somewhat limiting. after upgrading to the 5d, i invested heavily in lenses, 24-70, 70-200, 100-400. the 70-200 is actually an incredibly versatile lens, unfortunately it isnt the easiest to travel with. i would strongly recommend going with the 5d, it really was a "step up" from the 20d. as for lenses, it all depends on budget. if you are willing to spend, the choices are quite clear. a 5d with a 24-70 is a great all-round combo for street/travel photography (a bit heavy though).
amnon
Logged
Letcher
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 03, 2006, 06:26:18 AM »
ReplyReply

You say the 5D has a cleaner image than the 1DsII. Do you mean that the 5D has less noise at high ISO's? Or, do you mean that it has higher resolution?

I routinely make 30" x 40" prints from RAW files with my 1DsII. Will the 5D actually give me a better print?
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7121


WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 03, 2006, 06:41:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You say the 5D has a cleaner image than the 1DsII. Do you mean that the 5D has less noise at high ISO's? Or, do you mean that it has higher resolution?

I routinely make 30" x 40" prints from RAW files with my 1DsII. Will the 5D actually give me a better print?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72466\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

To be precise, I said that owners of both have told me they find the 5D produces less noisy images than the 1Ds2. Not that the latter makes noisy images. I believe the statement must apply to the higher ISO levels, because below say ISO 640 it would surprise me if anyone could actually see DIFFERENCES in noise between these cameras under most usual shooting conditions. The 5D cannot have higher resolution than a 1Ds Mk2 because the former is 12MP and the latter 16 MP and both have the same sensor size; recall resolution is measured in PPI.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
KenRexach
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2006, 08:44:53 AM »
ReplyReply

The 5D and the 24-105mm IS is a perfect travel combo IMHO. Remember the 24mm on the 5D is wider! than the 17mm on the 350d/20d/30d.
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 03, 2006, 09:49:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I own or have owned most of them.  First, the 5D is an excellent camera and would make a great choice.  However, depending on location(s), I sometimes prefer to have two bodies, one with a wide zoom and another with a mid-range zoom, so I do not have to stop and swap lenses.  Swapping lenses for a specific shot is not something I regularly do when traveling and rather make do with what is on the camera.  I also like a pop-up flash on my travel camera -- helps a lot in those dark rooms or for a face fill in bright outdoor light.

While the 5D and 20D or 30D would make an ideal pair of bodies, the interchangeability of lenses becomes problematic if you need to go wide often.  However the 10-22 on a 20D and a 24-105 on a 5D would be pretty ideal -- though then the body I want the flash on when I need it is the 5D...

So, at least for me, a pair of 20/30D's and three lenses is ideal -- 10-22EFS, 17-85 EFS IS (but I am looking into the 17-55 f2.8 EFS IS) and then the 70-300IS, DO or regular, your choice.  

There is also rumor of a 50-150 f2.8 EFS IS from Canon this fall -- if so, that would be the ideal tele-zoom for my travel

The final consideration for me is value -- a decent 20D is pretty inexpensive relative to a 5D and as such almost "disposable" by comparison, so I worry not about where or in what conditions I use them.  

SIDEBAR NOTE: I have traveled with the 1Ds2. While it produces great images, IMO one must use a tripod and critical focus to realize its full potential. Since travel for me means mostly hand-held shooting with zooms, the resolution gain over the 5D is likely not present in most images and does not warrant the extra weight.  In fact, for the same reason, I feel that the image quality gains of the 5D over the 20/30D are minimal at best when shooting zooms hand-held.  (And as Ray has pointed in other threads, the smaller pixel-pitch of the 20/30D can be advantageous in certain situations -- like when your longest lens isn't long enough.)  Ergonomics, build-quality, viewfinder, menus and features are certainly other valid considerations for using the bigger bodies.    

Hope this helps,
Logged

RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2006, 01:26:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Well thanks for the usefull comments..

For me -just like most of us- a 5D is an expensive tool, but making wrong choices and buying stuff that stays at home or doesn't perform as I wan't or expect is also waist of money.

For me the range from wide angle to medium zoom, such as a 17-85 IS or a 24-105 IS is almost ideal. Ofcourse there are situations I would like a longer zoom, or situations in which I would like a real fast lens like the 50f1.4. But I think that 70% of my shots are made with a 17-85/24-105 type of lens with IS.

I agree that often changing lenses during the day is problematic when on holiday. I dont see my self changing my 17-85 for a 10-22 in the middle of a busy city, because the 17-22 range from the 10-22 lens is superior compared to the same range of the 17-85. Replacing the zoom for a fast prime when entering a museum is a different story.

I have also considered to buy 24-105 for my Rebel or future 30D, but that would be very unpractical since I use the range of 17-35mm very much.

I wonder (in a postive way) to hear that some of you recommend the 70-300 DO IS, I like that lens but some reviews are not so postive. But I will not take a 70-200 f2.8 IS with me for a city trip holiday, although I like the optics vey much.  It's a bit like buying a Ferrari for shopping, nice and fast, but highly unpractical.

So for me the choice is...
- accept the quality of the 17-85IS, buy a 30D and add a zoom eg 70-300 DO IS
or..
- get rid of the rebel with 17-85 IS and buy a 5D with a 24-105IS and add a 70-300 DO IS later...(to save money now) adding a 50 f1.4 prime is also a good idea for indoor shooting


Well I have to sleep on this...
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7121


WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2006, 01:56:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well thanks for the usefull comments..

I wonder (in a postive way) to hear that some of you recommend the 70-300 DO IS, I like that lens but some reviews are not so postive. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72493\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There is no need to wonder about these things. The quality of the same lens can vary from sample to sample. The one I received works well for me, so I am happy with it. Perhaps others have been less fortunate. As long as you buy your lenses from a reputable dealer who gives you a reasonable time period to test and exchange it (even several times with different copies) for any reason you are not satisfied with it, you should not run into un-fixable problems. The one thing I would strongly recommend is NOT to buy lenses from dealers who do not offer this option.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1078


« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2006, 03:04:11 PM »
ReplyReply

a lot of the 70-300DO problems were early production - i'm happy with mine (have tested it against the 100-400 -- it's not as good, but performance is as expected) which is about a year old.  it's probably not much better than the 70-300, but the short length really does make it a great travel lens

my advice is to get the 30D and 300DO now, keeping the 350 as a second body (carrying two bodies doesn't take up much more space -- i've been in a number of situations where swithcing lenses would have lost a lot of shots)

unless you're into making prints bigger than 13x19, you won't miss the 5D
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2006, 08:44:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I think both Mark and Steve have given you good advice dierctly above.

But you did ask this:

Quote
or..
- get rid of the rebel with 17-85 IS and buy a 5D with a 24-105IS [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72493\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

IMO (and I own both) you really don't gain much with the 24-105 on full-frame compared to the 17-85IS you already own on a good 1.6x crop camera.

Since you already own the Rebel and 17-85, I'd simply add a 30D and longer zoom for now and go with it.  If you find in 6 months you just have to have more megapixels or full-frame, then upgrade to the 5D.

My .02,
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9299



WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2006, 09:24:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yep, what he said: 5D + 24-105L & 70-300DO if you can afford it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72433\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Exactly my new system (from the Rebel XT with 17-85). Now the damn body hasn't arrived yet so I can't comment but I'm really looking forward to the 5D. I liked the Rebel but I suspect there's going to be a big difference in the newer body. I like the 70-300 very much due to size and capability. I have an OLD (circa 1994) 20-35 F2.8 and 80-200 F2.8 but don't think I'll use them that much (heavy, old but in good shape). Everyone I respect and asked told me the same thing about the 24-105 (get it, its great). Some of my buddies that shoot big time stuff seem to actually prefer the 5D over the 1DS and better.

Hope the guys I got the body from (CCI Camera City) are legit as I got it for $1640 which seems a bit too good to be true. But they had a lot of good reviews from customers. Gray market?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7121


WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2006, 10:22:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hope the guys I got the body from (CCI Camera City) are legit as I got it for $1640 which seems a bit too good to be true. But they had a lot of good reviews from customers. Gray market?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andrew, I hope this works for you, because often, as Jonathen Wienke once remarked in another threead: "If it's too good to be true, it is."

Anyhow, it would be great if you keep us informed about your success, because if it's indeed good, at that price even with my Canon 1Ds I'd be tempted.................

Mark
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad