Spendin' da Moneyz!

t5Nitro

t5Nitro

New member
Alright, well this summer I need (want) to buy something (again).

It's up to you guys to pick for me. :)

Current setup:

Canon 30D
24-70f/2.8L
100mm f/2.8
430EXII SpeedLite


I was interested in buying one of the following:

Canon 5DMkII
70-200f/2.8L
17-40f/4L

And then I'll also be buying a remote shutter for sure. Which one would you recommend?
 
70-200 f/2.8 (IS) all the way!
I put IS in parentheses because while the 24-70 doesn't really need it IMO, the 70-200 really benefits from IS. That said I would take the f/2.8 non-IS over the f/4 IS.
 
I dunno, I'm pretty fond of my IS (even on my F4 version). I had the 70-200mm F4 IS version and was fine with it (also had/have the 70-200F4 non IS which was upgraded because as TS said it is of benefit in this focal range). I only upgraded to the F2.8 for my Chrurchill trip where it was a once in a lifetime and I didn't want to miss anything (didn;t want to take any chances - in retrospect it didn't give me any advantage as the light was good and any action was slow). The F2.8 version is WAY bigger if weight means anything to you (and I like to hike and used to not take a tripod a lot until I got my small one for such occasions). The F2.8 for me thus far has only benefited me with it's ability to focus maybe a tad faster (some cameras have extra focus points enabled with the 2.8 version that are not with the F4 version). The F4 was fine and I can not really think of any time I wanted f2.8.

Tough call, but I like to go light when I can. I can gain 2-3 stops of stabilty if I don't have a tripod. I only gain one stop of light with the 2.8 and I can bump ISO easily if the need arises. Truth is I rarely shoot wide open anyway. I usually try and be at the sweet spot of f8-f11 if I can so aside from better focusing the speed is a moot point for me. Now if I was doing portraits, maybe the 2.8 would be nice (oh, but I have that one (lol)). Tough choice, depends on YOUR needs.
 
I've become a Nikon guy because there is just so much more to Nikon, but if I were gonna go Canon.....you have made the same choice I would.

Good luck and enjoy......nice camera and good setup.
 
more to Nikon.....? Dont want his track to go off topic, but care to elaborate if T5nitro gives a nod?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14721123#post14721123 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by IPT
more to Nikon.....? Dont want his track to go off topic, but care to elaborate if T5nitro gives a nod?
Click to expand...

Yes please elaborate, cause Canon has 5 letters and so does Nikon...so there isn't more...?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14721117#post14721117 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Patrick12
I've become a Nikon guy because there is just so much more to Nikon
Click to expand...
Yeah that's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. In fact everything I remember you ever saying in this forum has been very silly.
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14721123#post14721123 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by IPT
more to Nikon.....? Dont want his track to go off topic, but care to elaborate if T5nitro gives a nod?
Click to expand...

:lol: ^^

So the 70-200 over the new full frame body? I'll look into that one some more.

Those were my main two choices. I just couldn't decide which I'd enjoy more of.

Thanks.
 
There is a big difference between the prices of those two options. Really, it depends on what your doing with it. If you are shooting in narrow spaces and want a wide view, or are taking wide landscapes (and can't stitch frames together due to motion like the northern lights) then the FF body may be it for you. I upgraged from a cropped sensor (10D) to the old version of the 5D mainly because of the full sensor alone. Especially since I do a lot of Aurora images and missed the width. being able to go wide is nice.

For wildlife, to isolate any subject, or compress the foreground and background together then a 200mm or long zoom is nice. As usualy, "it depends" on your needs and shooting style.

Really, you'll be happy either way and in just a matter of time you'll get the other. That being said, the 70-200 will stay with you. If you get the 5D you'll be wanting to upgrade that some day. I see your a student. Assuming limited funds I may go for rthe lens then once you graduate and make $$$ there will be the new and improved 5D.xxx that'll you'll be able to afford and you'll have nice line up of lenses covering just about most focal lengths you'll want.
 
Very true. Just say money doesn't matter then.

I was interested in both of course. I was thinking though that the FF body might offer more with the larger sensor to get more out of my lenses. I also figured it might handle higher ISOs better? Would it?

In either case you're probably right and I'll end up with both I guess. Just depends what I need right now I suppose.

Thanks for info.
 
unless you shoot professionally there is no need to buy a 5D mkII

Save a thousand bucks and get a plain 5d and enjoy.
 
Traditionally FF cameras deal with noise better than a like crop sensor camera because the pixles have more elbow room. There are many factors which contribute to noise though. I wouldn't say so much that the full frame sensor gets "more" out of your lenses. Unless you mean it will capture "more" of a frame by appearing wider. Low quality lenses preform much worse on a full frame camera vs. a crop sensor camera. People with full frames don't buy the larger format camera to make their high quality lenses preform better as much as they buy high quality lenses to make the camera preform better...if that makes any sense. Poor lenses really rear their ugly heads on a full frame.
 
If you like to make large enlargments, or find you crop your images aggresively during the post processing then you'll fid the full sensor/increased MP of value. When I went from the 10D (which I think is of considerably lower quality than what your using now, but I am not up on the specs) I was stunned at the detail it captured when I blew things up (20x30). Since that upgrade my Medium Format gear has been sitting on the floor in the closet.

As TS was saying you need good glass when you get higer quality bodies. You won't get "more" out of your lenses, but, you may very well be able to see more details due to the increased amount of actual information that is captured. Again, I went from the 10D to the 5D so your upgrade may not be as dramatic.
 
I think the other benefit of full frame is the difference in background blur given the focal length vs effective focal length of a crop sensor. If you have a full frame camera with an 85mm lens and a crop sensor camera with a 50mm lens (roughly 80mm crop) taking a picture with the same framing, the one with the 85mm will have a very different background due to compression.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14735145#post14735145 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TikiDan
unless you shoot professionally there is no need to buy a 5D mkII

Save a thousand bucks and get a plain 5d and enjoy.
Click to expand...


While I generally agree that buying an older body to put more money into glass makes good sense, suggesting that you have to be a professional to get any benefit from the mkII is pure fiction. Don't get me wrong, the 5D is a great camera but the mkII took all of the good things from the 5D and amplified them.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14735145#post14735145 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TikiDan
unless you shoot professionally there is no need to buy a 5D mkII

Save a thousand bucks and get a plain 5d and enjoy.
Click to expand...
I agree with Doug...although many professionals use 5D(mkII)s for a light weight option, technically the 5D is NOT even a professional camera.

If you shoot professionally you are going to have a 1DsmkIII. It's a business expense, an easily justified one. If you are going to spend $200,000 on the rest of your setup (random studio equipment, lights, reef tank in the lobby, lenses, building, ect. ect.) what is $7,000 for the best available camera?

The 5D and 5DmkII are meant for very serious armatures, though they are good enough to be used by a respectable number of professionals.
 
Good advice although I just had to take 5 pictures for my class tomorrow and maybe I need to rethink that I need to learn how to use my camera (again). Maybe it's because there is nothing real artistic in my backyard to take a picture of. :lol:

Not really satisfied at all with what I took haha, but the teacher won't care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ssick92
I'm back! Pics from my new tank!
Replies
6
Views
2K
coral102
coral102
M
DSLR's and Lenses
Replies
14
Views
2K
Reef Bass
Reef Bass
Blazer88
Woohoo, new lens day.
Replies
6
Views
382
IPT
IPT
daniloronchi
How to take picture of our aquarium: photography course part I
Replies
8
Views
19K
RVANANO
RVANANO
B
Public Aquarium
Replies
1
Views
312
TitusvileSurfer
TitusvileSurfer
Back
Top