to 5D or not to 5D

PCPhoto

ok - have been talking with another person on Boards ... who's starting out in photography.

she has a good grasp of photography in general and is moving up to a DSLR:
Budget of approx €800, my advice is a secondhand 5D.

she can borrow lenses or buy a nifty fifty to get started....anyone else got a suggestion for camera? (I think she prefers Canon)

another suggestion made was a 50D.

5uspect

If you're going xxD and higher secondhand is the only way to go on that budget.

Going full frame from the outset is an interesting idea. Many start with crops and work spend their way up. Starting with a 5D would be a great start for anyone.

I would +1 the secondhand 5D but also get her to at least look at the entry level SLRs like the shiny new 550D and a 17-85 or similar.

Certainly the difference in build quality and brightness of the viewfinder should sell the 5D.

AnimalRights

I voted 1, I spent a fortune to get to a FF.
If I could start all over again I'd prefer the steep learning curve with a FF.

Morrisseeee

The 5D Mk 1 is a great camera, but............for someone starting out with a DSLR.........I just think the money would be better spent on an entry level model, + some lenses, + some accessories !! Eg, for €800 you could buy an Olympus E620, couple of lenses, a bag and some filters.

Thecageyone

A 550D with full warranty plus extras might be better. \full frame is a bit wasted unless you can invest a lot in ff lenses really, no?

digitalbeginner

5D MkI without a doubt. I think you should always buy the camera you can grow into. I spent a fortune on cropped sensor cameras before opting for the 5d MkII. I had a loan of the 5D MkI from Canon just before the MkII came out and I was stunned at the clarity, colour and sharpness (with a 24-105 f/4 IS) it produced. My cropped sensor shots just don't match up.

If you're mad into photography I'd even suggest selling the family jewels to get a 5D MkII. It will last forever and it's hard to see what compelling features would turn up in a replacement, apart from 1 million ISO that is :-)

Dave

joepenguin

My 40d may be looking for a new home as a mate is looking to offload a practically unused 50d which i am thinking about. If he lets it go for less than the going rate ill sell my 40 (otherwise wouldnt bother as they seem pretty much the same bar megapixels?)

As you say the nifty fifty would be a great lens to add to it although i cant help but think it would be a little more versatile on a full frame?

So my answer (based on excessive ebaying!!) is a 5d (which will be well used, but the 1d's in this price range are battered) or an xxd and invest the change in decent glass. a nifty fifty and 70-200 f/4 can be had for under 400 if you keep your eyes peeled (based on seeing a fifty for €50 and a 70-200 for €340 over the last few weeks, you'd also get a kit lens non is for 30 notes or so)Although typically they will cost 500 for the pair if you dont hold out for a deal.

btw im fairly new to dslr photography but have spent a fair bit of time sussing out the second hand market.

squareballoon

I had a 400d for 2 years before buying a 5D. I think I was frustrated with my 400d most of the time but definitely learnt lots from it. Within a month of getting my 5D I had discarded every shot I had taken with my 400d from my portfollio and website.
If you have the money go for FF.

magicbastarder

she should get whatever camera she finds more comfortable to handle. the quality of photos she produces will depend very little on what model she settles on in the end.

smash

If she's going to go for a 5D MKI, I'll be selling mine in the next 2 weeks. She can take it for a test if she wants.

Mycroft H

TBH i'd say its a little pointless going for something so expensive to start with - not really enough money for lenses or accessories.


Go for a second hand Sony A700, Nikon D80 or Canon 40D and there should be some left over for a decent second hand lens

ThOnda

5D is aging, but the camera is capable of more than I could every try, although that I reach it's limitations. But only because I want to use it for something it hasn't been designed for.

I don't know what is the price of 7D that might be better value for the money (including the warranty), but if I was thinking now about camera, 7D would be the hot candidate. Image quality (and size) is close, but has video. And it's a bit faster. And has the warranty what I find to be a very nice feature for such expensive piece of gear.

Tiriel

Thanks pcphoto for posting the poll and for all the replies, I'm still confused as to which would be the best way to go, very tempted with the 50D so I think it's between that and a second hand 5D at the moment. Though the 550D is also a contender.. or a second hand 40D and better lenses.. the confusion ensues.

Steve06 I just might be interested if you are selling on a 5D in the near future, I will send you a pm if you don't mind

Reading up on so many forums the arguments between going 5D or 50/550D are quite pointed towards going full frame straight off. Budget wise I would be limiting myself to a nifty 50 for a while.. though that could be no bad thing anyhow!

5uspect

To reiterate a bit. The first thing you'll notice between a x(xxD) and a xD is the viewfinder.
The 1D, 5D and even the 7D have humungous bright viewfinders. The xxD and xxxDs are smaller and it's difficult to go back to using one when you've used a xD.

As Thonda said the 7D is a great choice. You get many of the advantages of full frame without the main advantage of full frame. However you're looking at around £1000 for a 7D body.

AnimalRights

Yep the viewfinder on the FF was amazing, I couldn't go back to using my 40D dark one and sold it.

kelly1

Hello, I don't want to hijack this thread, but is there really a big difference in IQ between FF and cropped?

5uspect

FF has narrow DoF, much better noise performance and makes use of the full image circle of your lens.

Sleepy

If you go full frame, keep an eye out on ebay for the Canon 28-80 USM Mark I (it's the one with the metal mount). I picked one up for under €50 and, while it's not up to L series or even the 50 1.8 in terms of sharpness, it compares favourably against the kit lenses on the crop sensors for small money.

http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox2.htm#28-80Anchor

kelly1

5uspect wrote: »

FF has narrow DoF, much better noise performance and makes use of the full image circle of your lens.

Thanks, I aware of the above but does that necessarily translate into better IQ especially if shooting on low ISO? Lenses are generally sharper in the middle so your crop sensor cuts out the "unsharp" parts of the image.

jpb1974

Lenses are generally sharper in the middle so your crop sensor cuts out the "unsharp" parts of the image.

Aye... that's what they say... that full frame sensors will show up the shortfalls of low quality lenses.

I've a 5DII but I never really noticed the difference to be honest... I never was one to really go looking for the problems though.

Some articles -

http://digital-photography-school.com/full-frame-sensor-vs-crop-sensor-which-is-right-for-you

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/full-frame-advantage.htm

magicbastarder

kelly1 wrote: »

is there really a big difference in IQ between FF and cropped?

no, unless you start getting anal with a magnifying glasses.

Fajitas!

getting anal with a magnifying glasses.

Kinky.

Tiriel

Sleepy wrote: »

If you go full frame, keep an eye out on ebay for the Canon 28-80 USM Mark I (it's the one with the metal mount). I picked one up for under €50 and, while it's not up to L series or even the 50 1.8 in terms of sharpness, it compares favourably against the kit lenses on the crop sensors for small money.

http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox2.htm#28-80Anchor

Thanks for that, will keep it in mind for sure!

Sleepy

Like I said, it's no substitute for really good glass but it'd be a handy walkaround lens to have until you'd saved for some nice glass.

TBH, I've not had too many situations where I've missed not having pro glass. Sure, I'd love to have f1 on all my lenses but in terms of IQ, they're all fine for my purposes (max size I print would be about A4).

Tiriel

Sleepy wrote: »

Like I said, it's no substitute for really good glass but it'd be a handy walkaround lens to have until you'd saved for some nice glass.

TBH, I've not had too many situations where I've missed not having pro glass. Sure, I'd love to have f1 on all my lenses but in terms of IQ, they're all fine for my purposes (max size I print would be about A4).

That's exactly what I need really to be honest, I don't normally print many at all at the moment, most go into storage and some online I guess. I'd imagine that once I am at the stage (if ever!) that I will be printing to a larger scale than A4, I hopefully will have added to the glass collection!

magicbastarder

Sleepy wrote: »

TBH, I've not had too many situations where I've missed not having pro glass.

the benefit of pro glass is more in the larger max apertures they usually imply rather than image quality.
how often have you looked at a photo and thought 'if it wasn't for the minor chromatic aberration, that'd be a great shot'?

Sleepy

True, but there are *relatively* cheap options in most focal lengths with f2.8 or so...

Steve Reddin

kelly1 wrote: »

Hello, I don't want to hijack this thread, but is there really a big difference in IQ between FF and cropped?

Hi Kelly1, just as you, I'm not trying to hijack the thread here, but in a nutshell, yes there is a difference in quality and a fairly major one at that.

I'm not sure this is the place to go into a long winded explanation of the inner workings of the camera sensor, but basically a larger sensor means (1) a greater number of photosites and (2) physically larger photosites at that.

An easy way to prove that bigger photosites are better is to compare the image taken from a 12.1mp compact to a 8mp DSLR.

In theory because it has a greater number of photosites, the compact should take a better photograph. In reality as each individual photosite is smaller and there are just more crammed onto a smaller sensor, the compact falls short in every situation outside of your basic 12pm sunny day.

Simply put, size matters

Of course, I'm in no way suggesting that the whole 'look, we've just created a compact camera with 50mp' is a marketing ploy...I'd never suggest that...

Hope this helps a bit

Steve

magicbastarder

Steve Reddin wrote: »

An easy way to prove that bigger photosites are better is to compare the image taken from a 12.1mp compact to a 8mp DSLR.

i suspect that given the context of her question, a better comparison would be between a FF DSLR and a DX sensor DSLR; e.g. between the D700 and D300, and you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference in the majority of cases.

comparison here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d700/sharpness-comparison.htm

Steve Reddin

magicbastarder wrote: »

i suspect that given the context of her question, a better comparison would be between a FF DSLR and a DX sensor DSLR; e.g. between the D700 and D300, and you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference in the majority of cases.

comparison here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d700/sharpness-comparison.htm

I was really just using this as an example to exaggerate the situation to illustrate the difference that sensor size can make.

Interestingly enough, the comparison you have linked to does take the image at midday; as I'd said this is the time you will see the least difference as each photosite is in its safe zone.

Steve

AnimalRights

Ken Rockwell is not the full shilling tbh.

Steve Reddin

AnimalRights wrote: »

Ken Rockwell is not the full shilling tbh.

Hmm...his compass certainly does point Nikon on all his recommendations...I'm not sure if that means he's missing a few pence but it certainly suggests he might not be as unbiased as he'd like to make us believe...

Steve

Thecageyone

AnimalRights wrote: »

Ken Rockwell is not the full shilling tbh.

He talks an amazing amount of crap alright.

he praises cameras to the hilt, but soon as the replacement comes out he goes back to update, telling you not to bother, it's old, crap - get the new version ... or a D40 :rolleyes:

Tiriel

So a 5D then ya?!:D

Steve Reddin

Cork_girl wrote: »

So a 5D then ya?!:D

oh God yea, sure it was hardly ever in doubt

Thecageyone

Cork_girl wrote: »

So a 5D then ya?!:D

Sorry, I'm a Nikonian now ...

Defo - 5d is a kick-ass looking camera. The MK II is getting a bit boringly whored to death, almost every image I see in the magazines nowadays is taken with one. Bit of a trend. I bets the original takes as good a shot.


On the other hand, good ol' Ken thinks I made the better decision with the D200 -

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/5d-d200.htm

"Are you a tripod guy or do you live for lenses wider than 19mm? Get the Canon 5D.

For everyone else, get the Nikon D200."

of course, that was 3 years ago, I'm very late catching up

Tiriel

Well the budget is set now and it just depends on what comes on stream and when! Here's hoping

Thecageyone

Best of luck

I know what it's like searching high and low for the cam you desire. Worse than buying a car!

magicbastarder

AnimalRights wrote: »

Ken Rockwell is not the full shilling tbh.

assuming he's not lying about the conditions of the test, his opinions don't really enter into it.

i think he's great fun. he's overopinionated, which can be amusing.

AnimalRights

magicbastarder wrote: »

assuming he's not lying about the conditions of the test, his opinions don't really enter into it.

Would you buy a Camera on his recommendations?
He flip flops more then a bloke selling footwear.

magicbastarder

AnimalRights wrote: »

Would you buy a Camera on his recommendations?

course not.

jpb1974

Would you buy a Camera on his recommendations?

Never... sure we all know by now that you only buy the one that fits nicely in your hand <insert rolling tumbleweed>

Thecageyone

If we actually listened to Ken, we'd all have a D40 and save a fortune.

jpb1974

When buying a camera the best advice I could give is:

Downgrade the car
Shop in Lidl
Put the Dog out to Stud
Go on the rollies
Replace domestic cleaning products with banking soda and lemon homebrew
Slip a bottle of Vodka in your jocks when you go out

And buy the biggest, meanest mofocker camera you can get. It puts all other arguments to rest. If you're hands don't fit the camera get new hands, or find someone to hold it for you.

magicbastarder

REAL photographers simply coat their hands in light sensitive emulsion and created pinhole cameras by cupping them in the correct manner.

DaireQuinlan

magicbastarder wrote: »

REAL photographers simply coat their hands in light sensitive emulsion and created pinhole cameras by cupping them in the correct manner.

And then develop them in the baking soda and lemon juice.

Fajitas!

And fix them with their own bodily fluids.

Wait, where's MB's magnifying glass???

magicbastarder

it's off being cleaned/sterilised.