Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 13, 2005, 8:18 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Haven't been on for a while. Busy summer. Missed you all. Been thinking about the Canon 5D

I have the 20d and really like it, and have thought how nice it would be to have a 2nd camera. The 5d may be just right. Thought I would aske your opinion

The thing I seem to like about the 5d is that it allows full use of regular lenses. Had been wanting the 10x20, but the 16x32 at F2.8 seems like a much more useful lense.

That brings up my realy thought for the 5d. Was thining the 5d with the 16x32, 24x70 and 70x22 all at F2.8 might make a real killer combination. Thought you guys might tell me what I was overlooking. Seems like I cold cover a lot of low light situations, and everything from landscape to short telephoto and portraits.

Thanks for sharing
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 14, 2005, 9:49 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

From all I've read, the 5D is a really amazing camera for the money. It lacks some things that the Canon pro bodies have, but it's also cheaper and lighter than those. Sounds like a fair trade off... if you need all the 1Ds Mk's features you spend the big bucks, if you don't you consider the 5D.

I don't know about its low-light capabilities (Canons cameras have a tendencyto have a fair amount of dark-noise in their images) but the 5D is quite good at landscapes and portrait work. Depending on what you do for landscapes many people like the 70-200 f4 as a hiking landscape lens. You can't always get to where you want to take the image you want. But a little zoom can help that. And optically that lens is really very good.

I don't know those lenses you're referring to. None of those seem to be Canon lenses. Are they from Sigma? I can't comment on their quality, but the 5D really demands really good glass or you'll see the imperfections on them right away.

For a portrate lens, you might want something that covers between 50 and 80mm. It is my understanding that in that zoom range is the normal range used for portrait work.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2005, 1:23 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
SlapNTickleJr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 151
Default

The 5D with the BG-E4 attached, 16-35 f/2.8L, 24-70 f/2.8L, and the 70-200 f/2.8L with or without IS and/orteleconverters,would be a great kit for most everything, except for serious sports photography. The lenses are stellar and all use the same 77mm filter thread. The 5D is IMO the perfect amount of resolution for most shooting as well; including low light. Throw in a 580 EX or two, some fast primes like the 50 f/1.4,85 f/1.8, and the135 f/2and you could have a lot of fun times.
SlapNTickleJr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2005, 5:00 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Eric, I messed up on the lense designations, I meant the Canon 16x35, the 24x70 and the 70x200 all in F 2.8.

My thinking was these lense would be great in most any light, and the larger sensor would be better for landscapes and wide angle photography, while not really giving up anything in the telephoto area.

What I really don't know is what it gives up to the 1d. I beleive the N series is 8.2 mps and smaller sensor. I am assuming the full sized sensor should be able to make the best use of the full sized lenses. The lenses were made for the full sized setup and should give optimum performance.

The 20d is a great camera for the price and IMO doesn't seem to give up much to the 5d except the full sized sensor with wide angle use. Availability of wide angle lenses for the 20d is very limited, althouth the 10x20 is not bad. Only real draw back with that lense may be low light use.

SlapNTickle; you really know how to make a guy hurt. LOL Can you share with us how you like your 5d and what other lenses you are using.
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2005, 10:04 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

I have both cameras. I shoot mostly with the 5d because I do a lot of event photography (portraits). It is incredibly easy to use, especially if you're already used to shooting with the 20d. I used to keep away from any type of in camera filtering or effects. However,I find the picture mode (including monochrome) features so useful that I have a hard time using the 20d. It's literally like changing film types. The buffer seems to be endless. You do have to get used to the large image sizes and the fact that a 200mm zoomis 200mm not effectively 300mm. The noise levels are very low all the way up to 800. I can't say enough good things about the camera. Unfortunately, this camera will really show up flaws in cheaper lens, especiall wide angle. On the other hand, it really allows a goods lens to show what itcan do. The attached photo was taken with the 50mm lens: F1.8, 1/100, ISO 1600. I downsized the image for the web so it really doesn't do justice to the original 13 mega-pixel image. No flash was used.
Attached Images
 
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2005, 9:53 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

wsand......... Thanks for the reply. I could not pull up you photo but your qualitiy description was useful.

I assume because of the wider sensor, I can get better wide angle photos and have read as much. My thoughts are that I would prefer to spend money on the 16x35 F2.8 lense than the 10x20 with higher F stop. Alsothinkthe 24x70 F 2.8 would be better over the 17x85. especially in lower light. Seems like I am attempting to shoot in lower light more often than I like.

Obviously these lenses are more expensive and I am just trying to look ahead in time and making an assumption that the full size sensor will be around a long time yet. This is not to knock the smaller sensors at all, but to say that lenses for these are still in the early development stages. When they do come out, they seem to be as expensive as better quality Sigma or Canon glass.

My other thoughts were that perhaps I should look hard at the faster lenses F2.8 or better. Once again not to knock some of the wonderfull F4... lenses, but trying to be as versatle for lowe light as possible.

Was alsowondering what I give up in depth perception or other things beyond my understanding of light use of lenses by staying with faster glass.

By the way, what do you think of the print button on your camera. Seems like a usless button to me, would welcome your opinion.

Thanks for sharing.
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2005, 11:48 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

The print button seems really out of place and is taking up valuable space on a camera of this caliber. Since the camera leaves out some of the "beginner modes" settings on mode switch, having a dedicated print button seems contradictory. Especially, if this camera is supposed to be nearly "professional".

You'll find yourself rethinking your lens purchasing strategy with this camera. I've been thinking about getting a good 24mm prime (1.8 or 2.8). You can also look at 20mm or even a 35mm prime. There is a serious weight and quality (for the money) advantage if you can get by without a zoom. I find myself shooting a lot using available light indoors. I haven't heard of any major complaints or flaws regarding the camera, yet. When the 10D and 20D were released there were several firmware updates required soon after release. For example, the high ISOnoise levels on the 20D didn't live up to the advertised hype and a firmware update was required. I haven't been able to work with any raw images yet (my Photoshop doesn't work with the 5D raw images). But I find the jpegs images are better because the metering is better, almost like using a 1D or 1Ds. Having a real spot meter is awsome. Just remember to set it back to average or you'll mess up some portrait shots.

Email me at [email protected] and I'll send you a higher quality low light photo. I don't know why the attachment didn't work. It also seemed to change the format of the posts.
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2005, 9:31 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Hmm, I've been pondering this one and this would be my ideal setup to go with the 5D body...

1. 24-105 L f4 IS USM
2. 70-300 DO f4.5-5.6 IS USM
3. 35 L f1.4 USM
4. 580EX flash.

Under general conditions with medium-good light and poor light where flash is possible I would use the 24-105. This would account for probably 75% of all my photos.

The remainder would be split pretty evenly between the other two lenses, the DO for telephoto work and the 35L for indoor low light stuff without flash.

My kit has to remain light so the 3 lenses together weigh only 1.97kg which is very portable.

In particular I see very little reason to select the 24-70 over the 24-105.
1. The DOF of the 5D with focal length [email protected] is less than focal length [email protected]
2. The 5D has excellent high ISO performance to start with.
3. The IS works great for static subjects, and easily compensates for the loss of 1 stop.
4. For moving subjects in low light where you can't use flash I think you'd be better off with a prime anyway, I would choose the 35L, but equally there are options at 50 mm and 85mm.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2005, 7:59 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Great response guys.

Wsand...... for some reason your photo decided to open. Really a great photo with no flash. Perhaps you will send me the pic. info if I email you. Very impressive indeed.

Para...... Your choice of lenses appears very good. My choice on the other hand would still be to stay with fast lenses wherever I can. I just finished shooting my sons graduation using mostly a 70x200 F2.8 with flash and a slave flash at an angle from the students.

I learned a lot, and was amazed of the difference the 2.8 made even at longer ranges 30-50'. I was able to get several good shots of each student that I may have not been able to get with F4 or slower. Much to learn.

It seems, the shot I wish I had is never available when I have my cameraand flash available. I am luck to have just the camera at ready sometimes, and not often enough. Another reason I tend to like the faster lenses. One other thought is I tend to prefer the zooms over the fixed lenses as I am either too close or far away from my subject for that shot I want. Mayabe I am just too lazy to move, LOL. I am so glad the quality of zooms keeps improving.

Anyway, I still think your choices are very good, but maybe not ideal for me.

Would love to hear anything more you like of dislike about the 5d and or lense set up. Best wishes and merry Christ=mas you all.
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:15 AM.