Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Which Canon combo?  (Read 12255 times)
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 04, 2006, 10:33:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm on hold with them now trying to find out when it's coming. I'm cool spending a bit more if necessary. I can't imagine how they do this at this.

OK, it IS gray market! For the US version, they want $2599. Canceled order (not that its a bad price but I feel like bait and switch here). I'll spend the correct amount and buy from a reputable company.
Logged

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

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 04, 2006, 11:31:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Andrew, makes sense - correct me if I'm wrong, but I think "grey market" in this context means that the camera is not imported by Canon USA and therefore does not come with a warranty valid in the USA. And if that is the case, it does raise the question about where the camera was imported from, whether it is brand new and has a warrany valid in some other part of the world, or whether it is second-hand refurbished, etc.
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
RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2006, 11:44:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Indeed, upgrading to a 5D with a 24-105 is very expensive and much more costly then buying a 30D, with or without the 70-300DO. But buying a 30D as an inbetween step would be very costly.

But I wonder what you say about the comparisson between the 17-85 and the 24-105.... do these two lenses have similar optical qualities? If that is true, than the only serious advantage of the 5D over the 30D would be (for me) its large view finder, which is litle on my 350D.

To be honest I haven't compared the viewfinders from the 350D with the 30D, I only see that the view finder of the 5D is just as large and bright as my old canon EOS 300 film camera.

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

But you did ask this:
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,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72525\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2006, 01:48:51 PM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion the 24-105 and 17-85 lenses are essentially of equal performance.

The 20/30D viewfinder is significantly better than the 350D, though still not as large as the 5D
Logged

RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #24 on: August 04, 2006, 02:08:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In my opinion the 24-105 and 17-85 lenses are essentially of equal performance.

The 20/30D viewfinder is significantly better than the 350D, though still not as large as the 5D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72597\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's an interesting opinion, because for me the CA in the very wide end (17-24) of the 17-85 is it's weakest point. The lens has a nice range, is quite sharp and has a very good IS. I will never buy a lens without IS as my primairy lens.
Logged
oldcsar
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #25 on: August 04, 2006, 02:37:21 PM »
ReplyReply

In response to the 30D viewfinder, it's quite good compared to my Rebel/300D. It's larger, and brighter.
Logged

Craig Arnold
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 06, 2006, 03:39:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's an interesting opinion, because for me the CA in the very wide end (17-24) of the 17-85 is it's weakest point. The lens has a nice range, is quite sharp and has a very good IS. I will never buy a lens without IS as my primairy lens.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72599\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I use the 20D and 17-85 + 70-300 DO.

I find DXO optics to be a brilliant complement to this combination. I suspect I may have got a bit lucky with my 17-85 because I've hardly ever had any CA from it.

At any rate DXO does a great job of correcting the flaws of those two lenses.

I do have a 5D + 24-105 in mind as a possible upgrade, but perhaps I'm being silly. I don't print a lot of photos bigger than A4, and very few bigger than A3.

It might be better to spend the money on the EF-S 17-55 f2.8, and a if there is a 50-150 f2.8 coming that sounds very interesting too.
Logged

thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 06, 2006, 08:13:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess I'll file a minority opinion & say a smaller DSLR is probably a better choice for travel than a 5D.  

First, be sure you need it.  Whether for travel or other uses, I don't recommend a 5D to anyone who doesn't also run a large-format printer.   If you make small prints (up to 13x19) & aren't addicted to cropping, then you won't gain that much advantage over an 8MP 1.6 DSLR.  

Second, a 5D with a 24-105 (let alone a 24-70) isn't a delight to carry.  I was talking with another 5D user about this recently as we both planned trips to Europe, & neither of us was delighted at the prospect of shlepping our 5D/24-105 for days on end (in my case, the British coast-to-coast hike).  

Finally, the 5D takes time to get used to, so don't buy one for travel without allowing for a retraining cycle beforehand.  If you've been shooting with a 1.6 sensor for very long, you're programmed to previsualize the greater DOF of shorter focal-length lenses.  Allow time to re-program the internal computer to work with smaller apertures &/or shallower DOF.
Logged
spidermike
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123


« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2006, 02:53:46 PM »
ReplyReply

When entering the digital arena, I went straight for the 30D. My wife had the 350D and, like you, I liked the image quality but found the ergonomics irritating: I preferred the larger LCD of the 30D, along with the brighter viewfinder and the simpler-to-access functions.

Personally, I wouldn't get hung up on the cropped sensor/FF debate. If the 350D is sufficient for your cityscapes that is all you need to know - it doesn't seem to have limited you so far (from what you say)! Remember: the term 'Full Frame' is only a point of reference for those who are adapting from film to digital. It is not intended to denote superiority.

Lenses: if you get the 5D, you will probably have to upgrade your lenses anyway to get full benefit of the higher spec. camera - so why not upgrade those first and carry on using the 350D as long as you can bear it. Then you can decide if you need the full functionality of the 5D.
If you want to see what the 350D can do with good lenses then this website will help (personally I think the quality is impressive for what is considered an 'entry level' DSLR)

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/galleries/nyc...eron.htm#photo1
The 30D will better this performance. Do you need more than this?

Then there is the gambler's view: buying the 30D and selling after a 2 years because you really wanted teh 5D after all will lose you $500 (by which time you can buy a second-hand 5D). But buying a 5D and realising you don't use all the functions (or, worse, hate the weight of it and stop taking pictures!) can be even more expensive. (I like that argument   )
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 07, 2006, 04:15:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Threads like this naturally generate alot of contradictory advice, pointing to the real difficulty of giving people advice about what to buy. I think the most useful kind of advice would be about knowing how to decide what you really want. There is no one camera that will meet all of your criteria - always there will be trade-offs - model Z will be better than X for feature A but worse than Y for feature B, etc.

So I would start by asking myself what are the most important things to me: for example, and without pretending to be exhaustive:
- budget (what's my range including all the implications down the road - e.g. lenses - and these will depend on what you shoot, what body you buy and how particular you are about optical quality);
- pixel count (i.e. how big to print, what's my minimum PPI quality standard and will I crop the images0
- size and weight of the camera (what range works for me);
- size and brightness of viewfinder (is a big bright viewfinder important to me or not);
- settings and features and their accessibility (how much of what do I need, and how easily accessible do I want them to be under shooting conditions), etc.

As I say, you can conjure up more such questions depending on what matters to you, and think about your preliminary answers. Then go to a shop where they will have the patience to let you handle and toy with every model that fits somewhere within the range of your priorities so determined, and decide based on your own impressions from handling them what gives you the most comfort and confidence.
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
Jay Kaplan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 178



« Reply #30 on: August 07, 2006, 07:52:33 PM »
ReplyReply

If travel is your prime use for the camera and size/weight is a major consideration think about this.

I was at my local camera shop buying a battery for my first generation Spotmatic and asked to see the then new 20D. Just looking at it, it appeared quite large to my eyes. Since I thought my Spotmatic was relatively small, I put both cameras side by side on the counter. They were practically the same size much to my surprise and seemed to weigh almost the same. The height, width and depth as I recall were very close. What a shock, all that technology in a package not that much different from a camera purchased new in 1968.

Now as to the viewfinder, the Spotmatic seemed to have a brighter viewfinder, but I was enchanted with the 20D. No I didn't buy one, still saving my lunch money and my only complaint about the Spotmatic is that the batteries we have to use today just don't last that long. And the only electrical device in the camera is the thru the lens meter!
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8217



WWW
« Reply #31 on: August 07, 2006, 08:41:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If travel is your prime use for the camera and size/weight is a major consideration think about this.

I was at my local camera shop buying a battery for my first generation Spotmatic and asked to see the then new 20D. Just looking at it, it appeared quite large to my eyes. Since I thought my Spotmatic was relatively small, I put both cameras side by side on the counter. They were practically the same size much to my surprise and seemed to weigh almost the same. The height, width and depth as I recall were very close. What a shock, all that technology in a package not that much different from a camera purchased new in 1968.

Now as to the viewfinder, the Spotmatic seemed to have a brighter viewfinder, but I was enchanted with the 20D. No I didn't buy one, still saving my lunch money and my only complaint about the Spotmatic is that the batteries we have to use today just don't last that long. And the only electrical device in the camera is the thru the lens meter!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72775\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I loved (and miss) my Spotmatics. But now I've gone over to the Dark Side and have a 5D, which has a very nice viewfinder (unlike the tiny tunnel on the 10D it replaces).

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #32 on: August 09, 2006, 03:36:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I think topics like this are very intersting for the marketing department from Canon....


Well I made a decision and I went for the 5D with 24-105 and 70-300DO.

I must admit that I have had some *sleepless* nights about this subject...

>Full frame or not
When I have a look at my computer stuff, I see a lot of things that are still working but simply can not be used anymore because it's outdated and incompatible with newer stuf. I dont wan't this to happen with my lenses, although I must admit that it seems that Canon is serious about EF-S.

However if you want to have the full bennefit of Canons (L) lens line up, then full frame is the way to go. a 24-105, 16-35 f2.8 or a 24-70 f2.8 are simply not made for cropped sensors. a 16-35 or 17-40 f4.0 are very wide lenses on a FF sensor, but just normal on a cropped sensor. a 85/f1.2 prime is a nice portraid lens on FF but becomes a bit long on a 1.6 crop body....just some examples.

So when you are more orientated on wide angle -like me- then FF is a good idea is my opinion...but who am I  

>Weight
Yes a 5D with 24-105 is larger and heavier then a 350D + 17-85 IS. But the weight difference between a 30D and a 5D is very small and a 17-55 f/2.8 is about as heavy as a 24-105 L.

If you wan't a more professional camera, the weight of your gear will increase quite a bit.

I personaly like the beefy feel of a 5D or 30D. Both camera's have about the same size and weight and you realy have to look twice to see the difference between the 5D and 30D. When I am on a day trip, I always cary a small back pack, so 1 kg more or less is not an issue. BUt I admit I will not add those white L lenses to my gear, because it's to expensive and heavy.

>Viewfinder
Never look through a 5D view finder if you do not intend to buy a new body. The difference compared to a 350D or even 30D is huge. Using the 350D it's almost impossible to use manual focussing because everything is so dark and small. The 5D however is bright and large, so it alows you to see what you are doing when playing with the DOF for example.

>Sensor
I have the 5D only a few days so I can not say much about it. The amount of detail on you screen is huge. The ISO performance is very good it seems. I did some tests, shooting images from my beige coloured computer housing, especialy the shades (standard colour for computer cases). This colour makes noise easy visable. At ISO 50 there is no noise at all even when viewed at 200%. Even the levels at ISO 1600 are very low and depending on your demands and how large you print still very usable. ISO 3200 can save your day, but with a quality penalty.

>Focusing
I am to unexperienced to judge about this, but my 35 f/2.0 prime was a dog on my 350D. 75% of my images were soft because of inconsistent focussing. I had to stop down to at least f2.8 and for safety even to f4.0 to get a bit realiable results. When using this lens on the 5D, each image is sharp, time after time..... If this a full frame issue or a better AF control, I don't know... you may tell it. These FF lenses were made for FF film cameras, not for 1.6 crop bodies.

>Computer power
I am running a 3.2ghz P4 system with only 1 GB memory and I don't have any problems with the larger files. Ok it's somewhat slower but not significant. The jpegs are around 6mb while raw files are about 12-15MB. Only my Epson P2000 photo viewer is having a hard time with these files. The P2000 works ok, but scrolling through the images takes much more time.

>Functionality
The 5D lacks shooting modes like landscape or portraid, but I use Av or or M mode more and more. I like to know what I am doing, but the 5D more or less forces you, more than a 350D or 30D.
Just like the 30D it has spot metering, which is helpfull I think.

>Money
...uh other subject please...
I sold my 350D  + 17-85 for E900,-. The 5D with 24-105 IS costs E3599 and I get E300 back from canon. Currently there is also a E100,- cashback for the 70-300 IS DO.

It's still a lot of money, but considering this is a full frame profesional camera makes things a bit less painfull.

The prices over here (Netherlands) are; 350D (E659,-) 30D (E1199,-) 5D (E2675,- excl E300,- cashback)

>Lenses
Both lenses are very well built, both seem very sharp. The IS on the 70-300 IS DO is extreme good, but as expected this lens seems prone to flare, much more then the 24-105. Using the 5D this will already show up when looking through it's view finder, so you will not be surprised when you arive at home. Until now I couldn't detect any weird things about the DO. It's center sharpnes and contrast is good, but it is softer in the corner. The 24-105 shows some vignetting at the wide end when used wide open. The DO doesn't show any vignetting.

But for the rest I can not give more comments about these lenses since I have to take them into the field first.

During my holiday within a few weeks I will defenately have a lot of fun with this system, and hopefully also the years to come.


....by the way I find Micheal Reichmann reviews and opinions about photo gear very usufull. It's not so much about pixel peeping, but more about reallity...
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 09, 2006, 04:06:00 PM »
ReplyReply

RedRebel, congratulations and use it well. You went through exactly the right kind of thought processes and I wish you every success with this excellent, state-of-the-art combination.
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
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8217



WWW
« Reply #34 on: August 09, 2006, 09:11:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...
>Viewfinder
Never look through a 5D view finder if you do not intend to buy a new body.
...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72901\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So true! The main reason I just upgraded my 10D to a 5D was the viewfinder. The full-frame sensor was secondary. I already have 17-40 L and 70-200 L glass, and I'm now saving my pennies for the 24-105 (I don't have any IS lens yet).

I agree with Mark that your reasoning was superb. I hope your combo gives you great satisfaction.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #35 on: August 11, 2006, 03:52:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree with Mark that your reasoning was superb. I hope your combo gives you great satisfaction.

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72921\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks...

The more images I see from this combo, the more convinced I am about the quality of both the 5D and these lenses.

This camera handles easy, all controls and indicators you need, are at your finger tips and the ISO performance is stunning. When I look at the images at my 17inch monitor full screen (about 29%) I have a hard time to discover if the image was shot using ISO 400 or ISO 1600. I even have to look twice to see the difference between ISO 1600 or 3200... Only when viewing at 100%, you see that the increase in noise is very moderate up to ISO 1600, but becomes apparent at 3200.

Red
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #36 on: August 11, 2006, 04:18:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Glad you are pleased with it. Keep enjoying.
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
RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #37 on: September 13, 2006, 10:58:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I have just returned from a two week holiday to Tuscany Italy.

The 5D is a very fine camera. After upgrading from a 350D the following improvements are significant:
- The very large viewfinder makes framing an image so easy. It is easy to see if your subject is in focus and the allignment of images is a breeze
- The ISO performance is very good. I didn't hasitate to use ISO 800 or ISO 1600 inside very dark churches in Siena and Florance. Viewed on my 17 inch monitor there seems to be virtual no noise. Only when viewing at 100% some noise becomes appearant. I also went to the Ferarri Galeria in Maranello, and made lots of images from typically Ferarri red cars... Also then the high ISO levels can be used, but if you want postersize and clean images, you should limit the ISO level to about ISO 400. You won't actualy see real noise in the range of 400-800, but the intens red (or black) colours simply become a litle less intense at these higher ISO levels. It should be said that I shot everything using jpeg and I didn't do any further processing in Photoshop (yet).
- Compared to the 350D, the camera is more comfortable in use. When walking in and out churches, musea, narow city streets and arriving in a bright Italian sun, makes it necesarry to change ISO levels etc.. frequently. But al these controls are availble with a single button and a dial, I only had to dive into the 5D's menu system to format my memory card.

The 24-105 Lens is great. Compared to my (sold) 17-85 it shows almost no chromatic abborations and barrel distortions. The amount of detail and sharpnes is great. The only downside I discoverred, is the vignetting in the range of 24..35mm.

The 70-300 DO IS, wasn't used that much. But the optical performance and IS seems great. What was less pleasant is the the zoom was often very sticky at higher temperatures (25-30Grc). That's why I have sent it back for a check up.


After being using this camera for several weeks now, my shooting style seems to change also. I become more aware from what I am doing and I some times even tend to use the full manual shooting program instead of Av, Tv or even P mode.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #38 on: September 13, 2006, 08:46:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Rene, glad to hear that equipment continues to serve you well. With what you have, the next step is to advance into depending more on RAW capture and image processing using Lightroom Beta or Photoshop. It will give you much more control over image quality, allowing you to maximize the real quality that camera and lenses are capable of delivering.
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
RedRebel
Guest
« Reply #39 on: September 14, 2006, 04:13:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Your right, I have Photoshop CS2 but until know I am not very familiar with RAW image shooting and image processing. The same is true for using Adobe RGB or sRGB. I don't have a Photo printer yet, so I depend on a store that basically only processes sRGB.


...by the way, does RAW shooting increase the dynamic range (a little) ? During daytime, I continously have to pay attention, not to get blown out highlights.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad