View Full Version : Help Canon 5D owner wannabe
Been thinking I want the full frame and low light performance of the Canon 5D. Bad news is I know next to nothing of Canon DSLRs, certainly not enouh to make an educated buy decision. Would greatly appreciate some help in picking out a starter kit. I'd use it mostly for sports and nature photography, some of it in low light.
My guess is I would want to cover the 24/28-300mm range to get started. What lenses, preferably under $1.5K total, should I look into? I don't really have a budget, will make it up as I go but I'd of coure prefer to spend as little as possible.
For example, is this kit (http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-EOS-5D-Digital-SLR-3500-3-LENSES-8-GB-More_W0QQitemZ290191621069QQihZ019QQcategoryZ43454 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) a decent one?
saxshooter
12-16-2007, 18:56
No. Those two lens are really nothing to write home about!
If it is sports/nature that you want to do, they why do you need a FF digital SLR? The Canon 40D, for $1200, is an excellent camera and will give you a little extra reach with its 1.6 crop.
I've been eyeing a 5D myself, but you will want to put the best glass that you can in front of that excellent sensor. Many do so with fixed focal lengths, and the L series zooms.
No. Those two lens are really nothing to write home about!
- I was afraid that was the case :(
If it is sports/nature that you want to do, they why do you need a FF digital SLR? The Canon 40D, for $1200, is an excellent camera and will give you a little extra reach with its 1.6 crop.
- I've looked at the 40D and it really sounds like a fast AF performer and v. good camera in its own right. But, well, I've seen what a FF dslr can do and want one :)
The 5d is an excellent low light camera - the new nikon d3 may be a little better actually, but still costs over twice as much.
For lenses, and a large coverage, have a look at an 50 1.8 mk2, an 85 1.8, 17-40 f4L, and possibly a 70-200 f4L for the longer end. Theres no shame in buying second hand either. You might possibly be able to get all these for under 1.5Kus if you buy carefully.
All are superb lenses.
saxshooter
12-16-2007, 19:19
I concur with the 70-200 f4 (non-IS version), which is a little over $500 with the current rebate. Would be an excellent complement on a 5D with an RF kit. I'd get one of those if I ever got the 5D (or its impending replacement -- the camera is over 2 years old and I'm optimistic. Although some believe that a replacement may be further down the road since the $8k 1ds III is just arriving).
Something to keep in mind with second hand Canon gear -- if you know its provenance, then OK, but I've professional experience with Canon EOS glass for the past 11 years and know that they do wear out and "lose sharpness" with years of use.
can't go wrong with a 1dmkii/n and 70-200/2.8 is.
RF-Addict
12-16-2007, 19:39
I use the 24-105 f4 L IS on my 5D and it is practically glued to that body. It covers 90% of the focal lengths I use most often. It is the perfect "walk-around" lens for the 5D.
If I were in your shoes I'd get the 5D kit with that lens - saves you a bundle!
In addition get the very cheap and very plasticy, but very good 50 f1.8 for $80.
Later on you can always get a longer zoom - you will want the best glass on that body because the 5D does not do well with inferior glass - I had to learn that the hard way.
erikhaugsby
12-16-2007, 19:40
For lenses, and a large coverage, have a look at an 50 1.8 mk2, an 85 1.8, 17-40 f4L, and possibly a 70-200 f4L for the longer end. Theres no shame in buying second hand either. You might possibly be able to get all these for under 1.5Kus if you buy carefully.
All are superb lenses.
Funny. Substitute the f/4 for a f/2.8 on the 70-200 and you've got my exact kit. The only thing I feel I'm missing is a fast 50 equivalent (which wouldn't be an issue if I had a FF camera and not a 20D).
erikhaugsby
12-16-2007, 19:42
Additionally, word on some of the camera forums is that Canon is putting out a new 5D (5D MkII? 7D? Nobody's sure yet.) within 2 months.
Granted, these are just unconfirmed rumors. However, considering how long the 5D has been on the market I wouldn't discount them completely.
My advice is to wait until the end of January/February to see if Canon introduces anything before you buy a new camera.
I don't know how large you will print, but an 8mp dslr will print very well at 13" x 19". A 6mp dslr will also print well at that size. I have Canon 300D, 350xt, 20D and 1Ds Mark II, Pentax K100 and Nikon 1DH. BTW the Nikon 1DH (2.7mp) will print well at 13" x 19" also. I got mine brand new at Broadwayphoto.com new in August 2007 for $732. The battery charger new at at KEH.com and three 2500mha batteries at battery barn for $25each.
I recomment a Canon 350xt, 20D, 400D pr 40D from KEH.com or even a Nikon 1Dx or 1DH at KEH.com for arund $599 with battery and charger.
I recommend you purchase older Nikkor AI/AIS primes for very little money at KEH.com you can use them on the 1DH, 1DX and all of Canon's DSLRs with metering.
Also purchase Nikkon F mount adapters to Canon EOS mount for $26 each at Photdoto.com.
If your smart you can spend less than $1,200 and have a very good and complete kit. I know I learned the hard way and spent over $25,000 on Canon gear before I got smart.
Chris Lynch
12-16-2007, 21:13
5D:
28/1.8 USM
50/1.8mkII
100/2 USM
done
40D:
17-55/2.8 IS EF-S
28/1.8 USM or 35/2
100/2 USM and/or 70-200/4L
sienarot
12-16-2007, 21:47
I had almost sworn off digital SLRs until I actually used a 5D. The colour produced by this camera is what drew me back. A friend lent me one for a wedding I was to shoot. I was so impressed with it, I bought my own the following weekend. I've rarely touched my 20D since and I'm even contemplated selling it so I can upgrade my backup body for another 5D.
However, if you're planning on using this for sports, it's probably not the best choice. As others have mentioned, the 40D may be better suited for sports because of its 5FPS versus the 5D's 3FPS as well as the 1.6x crop. If your big concern is low light performance, the 40D's nothing to laugh at. I've seen it in action and it's quite comparable with the 5D in that area.
Been thinking I want the full frame and low light performance of the Canon 5D. Bad news is I know next to nothing of Canon DSLRs, certainly not enouh to make an educated buy decision. Would greatly appreciate some help in picking out a starter kit. I'd use it mostly for sports and nature photography, some of it in low light.
My guess is I would want to cover the 24/28-300mm range to get started. What lenses, preferably under $1.5K total, should I look into? I don't really have a budget, will make it up as I go but I'd of coure prefer to spend as little as possible.
I have a Canon 1DS, which is also a full frame camera. Contrary to a widespread opinion, it is of uttermost importance to use the sharpest lenses with a crop format camera but not with a full frame camera, which doesn't need much lens resolution to deliver sharp images. Inversely, a full frame camera needs lenses free from distortion and reasonably sharp over the whole field, which you won't get from a cheap zoom lens.
If you are on a budget, you'd better buy old manual focus lenses with a suitable EOS adapter: Nikkor (the 24/2.8, 50/2.0, 105/2.5 are all excellent), Pentax Super-Takumar (I recommend the 24/3.5, 35/3.5, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8), or the cheaper Russian, East-German or Ukrainian M42 lenses (Flektogon 20/4 or 35/2.4, Volna-9 50/2.8 macro, Helios-44 58/2, Jupiter-9 85/2 are honest lenses selling for dirt cheap prices).
If you need shorter or longer focal length, and especially fast lenses, I am afraid you will have to spend much more on recent lenses to get good quality and good correction of the aberrations.
Cheers,
Abbazz
Thank you everyone for the generous and detailed advice! I can see there is lots of exciting research that I need to do.
It sure sounds like a good idea to wait ‘till Spring to see if the new gear from Canon will further lower the price of the 5D body.
My lens budget was tentative, I definitely don’t want to get any dog glass (have a lot of that already :)).
I now use Pentax K10D (most of the time) and K100D Super (for low light and when I need to travel light). It seems the 5D/40D combo would be a nice way to replace the current kit.
To summarize what I’ve read here so far:
wait 2-3 months before buying a Canon body
consider getting these bodies instead of the 5D:
40D alone as it performs well under low light conditions
1D Mark II
350xt, 20D, 400D, Nikon 1Dx,Nikon 1DH
Canon lenses to look into:
17-55/2.8 IS EF-S
24-105 f4 L IS
28/1.8 USM or 35/2
50mm f1.8 Mk II
85 1.8
100/2 USM
17-40 f4L
70-200 f4L (non-IS version) - $500+ with the current rebate
70-200mm f/2.8L IS
Other lenses to consider (with adapters)
Nikkon F mount adapters to Canon EOS mount for $26 each at Photdoto.com
Nikkor 24/2.8, 50/2.0, 105/2.5
Pentax Super-Takumar 24/3.5, 35/3.5, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8
Flektogon 20/4 or 35/2.4
Volna-9 50/2.8 macro
Helios-44 58/2
Jupiter-9 85/2
saxshooter
12-17-2007, 10:22
Just curious, since you have the Pentax (I know it is 1.6x crop) are you using any of their very slim prime lenses? How are they?
Just curious, since you have the Pentax (I know it is 1.6x crop) are you using any of their very slim prime lenses? How are they? Nope, just the 31mm and 77mm limited (not too slim :)). But I've seen some comparisons of the 70mm vs the 77mm and they seem close in image quality. Of course, there ain't nothin' better than the 31mm Limited... :D
I think you are making a wise choice if you choose a 5D. It is one of the very best digital SLR-cameras you can buy. But it is unforgiving regarding optical performance of lenses. I have a 1Ds II with ditto very large collection of lenses. My advice to you: Make it simple. And cheap. You get very far with this:
- 5D
- 35 mm 1,4L The best Canon wide angle lense for Full Fame Digital SLR-cameras. Very sharp & very fast. Draws streight lines.
- 200 mm 2,8L II + 1,4x Converter + 25 mm macro ring. With this equipment you have a fast photographic tool with a wide range of applications. From wildlife and portrait, to macro.
Been thinking I want the full frame and low light performance of the Canon 5D. Bad news is I know next to nothing of Canon DSLRs, certainly not enouh to make an educated buy decision. Would greatly appreciate some help in picking out a starter kit. I'd use it mostly for sports and nature photography, some of it in low light.
My guess is I would want to cover the 24/28-300mm range to get started. What lenses, preferably under $1.5K total, should I look into? I don't really have a budget, will make it up as I go but I'd of coure prefer to spend as little as possible.
For example, is this kit (http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-EOS-5D-Digital-SLR-3500-3-LENSES-8-GB-More_W0QQitemZ290191621069QQihZ019QQcategoryZ43454 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) a decent one?
Your comment about using it mainly for sports precludes the full frame high resolution sensor. As referenced by this rather redundant comment from only one post on the subject:
"Which is why both Canon and Nikon, for their top-of-the-line cameras, offer two variants, a sports body (the Canon 1D Mk III and the Nikon D2Hs) with lower resolution, larger buffer and higher burst rates, and a portrait version (the Canon 1Ds Mk II and Nikon D2Xs) with higher resolution."
Your comment about using it mainly for sports precludes the full frame high resolution sensor. As referenced by this rather redundant comment from only one post on the subject:
"Which is why both Canon and Nikon, for their top-of-the-line cameras, offer two variants, a sports body (the Canon 1D Mk III and the Nikon D2Hs) with lower resolution, larger buffer and higher burst rates, and a portrait version (the Canon 1Ds Mk II and Nikon D2Xs) with higher resolution." Maybe I should be more specific.. when I say "sports" I mean my kid's baseball and soccer games. Relative to the K10D which I use now, the 5D seems to have faster focus. I am not too worried about burst rates either...
imajypsee
12-18-2007, 06:55
and also use the K10D. I like the auto focus of the K10D better than the Canon bodies. If noise is a problem, I just run the photo through a noise reduction program.
Regarding low light and focus, the 40D needs a contrasty subject for the auto focus to lock on. The 5D is better in low light. If all you're doing is using the camera for your kids sports outings, then you should consider a used 30D. Better auto focus than the 40D (more noise at high ISO, but not much... I use that body as well). If the 40D is your camera of choice, be sure you get a FAST aperture lens as the auto focus in low light with an aperture of f/5.6 or smaller is very hard to achieve. My recommendation would be the Sigma 100-300 f/4.
The 5d is so cheap at the moment. You guys in the US can get it for under 2500...... I just bought mine last month for 3200aud. It might go lower, but it won't be much at all.
The 5d is so close to the d3 in noise performance it isn't funny. Preliminary reports suggest the 5d may have better image quality at low ISOs. considering it's 3-4 years old, thats pretty incredible. Focussing is excellent - no problems there. Even compared to my 1d, its still very good.
The camera is solid as hell and so easy to use - just buy a couple of cheaper primes for it and you'll love it. Full frame sensor marks a massive advantage over the crop sensor.
Lastly, think about this - when the new 5d comes out, is the current one going to take worse pictures? Comparing the 5d to the new 1d's, which aren't really improved with IQ, I don't think the next one will be all that much better - it's already at the pointy end of the scale. The new one will be more expensive as well.
I know many people speak highly of the 17-40 and yes I own one but I cannot recommend it. Mine is easily outperformed by the wimpiest of m42 lenses attached to the camera with a adapter. When shooting film I never noticed, but when shooting on a 5D every fault of the lens is brought into dreadful detail especially is lack of resistance to flare, its hard core contrast edge issues and its overall total lack of sharpness. I thought this might be sample variation but my friend has one too and can report the same problems, especially flare which on this lens is simply horrible.
Also I have had a poor experience with canon's 50 1.8 lens as it reproduces colors in a very poor way, also the build is so awful that it makes me cringe. I have the 50 1.4 and while its colors are first rate and its more solid, its still built like crap. I think I have been spoiled by the likes of Zeiss, Voigtlander and Leica, but really, you need to go handle these things before you buy.
One more gripe, my friend bought a 400D, what a pain in the neck to use after coming from dual wheel controls...
I highly recommend a 5D if you are willing to spend the big bucks for the right glass in front of it, but if you want to lay off the money a bit I would also highly recommend the 40D and the proper ef-s glass such as the 10-22 and 17-55. The 70-200's in canon line are also all great, dont snuff IS too fast though, its a life saver, I would never contemplate buying a lens longer then 80mm that didnt have it simply because it can save you more times then not when you are working for real, many of my best photos were taken with a canon 70-200 2.8 IS and even though its a heavy guy its worth its weight in gold. Frankly I think a good place to start is the 40D and the 17-55 2.8. Speed is important even if you dont think you will use it.
Now most people dont work in the conditions I do where taking gear to certain extremes comes into play, but you can rely on these things out there and thats what its all about.
I know many people speak highly of the 17-40 and yes I own one but I cannot recommend it. Mine is easily outperformed by the wimpiest of m42 lenses attached to the camera with a adapter. When shooting film I never noticed, but when shooting on a 5D every fault of the lens is brought into dreadful detail especially is lack of resistance to flare, its hard core contrast edge issues and its overall total lack of sharpness. I thought this might be sample variation but my friend has one too and can report the same problems, especially flare which on this lens is simply horrible.
Also I have had a poor experience with canon's 50 1.8 lens as it reproduces colors in a very poor way, also the build is so awful that it makes me cringe. I have the 50 1.4 and while its colors are first rate and its more solid, its still built like crap. I think I have been spoiled by the likes of Zeiss, Voigtlander and Leica, but really, you need to go handle these things before you buy.
One more gripe, my friend bought a 400D, what a pain in the neck to use after coming from dual wheel controls...
I highly recommend a 5D if you are willing to spend the big bucks for the right glass in front of it, but if you want to lay off the money a bit I would also highly recommend the 40D and the proper ef-s glass such as the 10-22 and 17-55. The 70-200's in canon line are also all great, dont snuff IS too fast though, its a life saver, I would never contemplate buying a lens longer then 80mm that didnt have it simply because it can save you more times then not when you are working for real, many of my best photos were taken with a canon 70-200 2.8 IS and even though its a heavy guy its worth its weight in gold. Frankly I think a good place to start is the 40D and the 17-55 2.8. Speed is important even if you dont think you will use it.
Now most people dont work in the conditions I do where taking gear to certain extremes comes into play, but you can rely on these things out there and thats what its all about.
Colin, very strange that you mention those problems with your 17-40 f4L..... I have one as well, bought new from Canon Australia and it has none of the aforementioned problems. No, it isn't the sharpest in the corners - I tested it against my superb zuiko OM 28 f3.5 and though the L was slightly better in the center, the OM was a bit better in the corners. Despite this, I find it to be excellent for such a zoom, and the overall sharpness I would rate to be excellent. The most interesting thing for me is that you mention yours flares a bit - I have found mine to be almost completely resistant to flare. I can point the lens almost directly at the sun, or have it appear in one of the diagonal corners, and the most I can get out of it is a tiny little internal reflection in the opposite corner of the frame. And I mean tiny. No loss of contrast or anything though.
With the 50 1.8, you have to remember the us price of one brand new is about $80, and for that price, the optics are unbeatable. Once again I'm not sure whats up with yours, because mine is almost exactly the same in optical quality as a 50 1.4, except for slightly worse bokeh.
shadowfox
12-19-2007, 08:07
This thread reminds me of this article by Ken Rockwell:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/olympus/trip-35.htm
Read it if only for a chuckle or two :)
That trip has an excellent lens Will, always has been.
Not too sure about Ken Rockwell though - I think his elements might be a bit de-centered.
jim_buchanan
12-21-2007, 11:19
I just recieved an excellent example of the famous Zeiss 28 f/2.8 Distagon for less than $300, for effective 45mm on my 400D. If one had a FF Canon or 5D, how much wider than 28mm do you need?
You can optimize the long lenses with 1.6X crop cameras, and optimize the short lenses with the Full Frame cameras.
B&H has the 5D plus 24-105 f4L IS at $2800 and change - great price for an amazing kit.
Cheers,
Kirk
ibcrewin
12-21-2007, 11:43
Just my .02 cents....
How about this.. Get a rebel xt, 70-200mm F/4, 50mm f1.8, and you'll still be under 1.5k... You can get the kit lens for the remaining balance but I think that lens is the "dog" lens you are trying to avoid.
Maybe some fast primes? 24mm f/2.8? 28mmf/2.8? will probably push you over the budget but will be worth it.. Alternatively, I think there are some sigma lenses that are pretty decent but again it might throw your budget.
Ultimately, stay away from the EF-S lenses. ONly because I believe FF will be more affordable in the future and you'll be able to get the 5D for under a 1.5K. If you plan on getting and keeping the 40D for a long time then please ignore.
I am a cheapo and this is pretty much where I am at.
navilluspm
12-21-2007, 12:11
Here is a question: Due to a possible move away from Lake Michigan up to Canada (Saskatchewan), I might sell all my SCUBA gear and have some spending money for a camera. My dream camera has been a Canon 5d.
I currently own a Contax SLR with 3 Zeiss lenses: 35/2.8, 50/1.7 and 85/2.8. I am happy using film and have a Minolta Scan Elite film scanner (2820 optical dpi). Would I really gain anything by getting a Canon 5d and using my Zeiss lenses on it vs. just using what I have?
I guess I mean it this way: what advantage would I have in using my lenses with a 5d over against film and a scanner?
(BTW - I am not a professional, do not publish anything, but just enjoy the art of Photography for myself. I rarely print above 8x10, but am willing to do so for that elusive special shot I want to hang on the wall. )
stefan_dinu
12-21-2007, 12:19
I can share you some of my experience with the system.
Body: I didn't use the 40D. I had an 20D before switching to 5D. I would never go back on a crop sensor. Is not only the full frame but the pixel count is near perfect. Even the fact that Nikon after two years comes with the same amount of pixels like 5d with their new D3 is a sign that this is a perfect number. And 12 is a perfect number anyway.
After using the 5D my impression is that it has less of the impersonal impression given by digitalization.
Lens:
What I have:
Sigma 20mm f1.8 (less used since I don't realy like wide-angle)
50mm f1.4 (superb lens): my workhorse
135mm f2: best glass i used in SLR world. High grademtf also. Very sharp and aberation free. Suited for portraits.
I was using almost all the possible lenses on the systems but I settled for primes.
If I have to recomand a lens kit for 5D in 1500USD margin I would consider:
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Canon 50mm f1.8 best for buck
Canon 135 f2 if you make portraits also
It would add up to 1400USD on BH.
With this kit I can do watherver I want.
If you wanna check up what 50mm and 135mm would look on 5D you can check my gallery here: http://www.stefandinu.ro (http://www.stefandinu.ro/)
All the pictures there are made with this combo.
B&H has the 5D plus 24-105 f4L IS at $2800 and change - great price for an amazing kit.
Cheers,
Kirk
The kit is a little over $2600 on Amazon...
thawkins
12-21-2007, 13:04
Just make sure your "D" camera is equipped with megapixels from the mine in south Australia. Some of the lower end cameras are loaded with megapixels from the Siberian mine. They are of much lower quality.
saxshooter
12-21-2007, 19:07
If I have to recomand a lens kit for 5D in 1500USD margin I would consider:
Sigma 30mm f1.4
The Sigma 30mm 1.4 cannot be used with larger than APS-C sized digital sensor. So it will NOT work with the full frame 5D, nor the 1D series cameras (both the 1.3x and full frame bodies).
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.