5D or 30D plus EF-S lenses

[kevin_totts]

I am sure I am not the only one having this dilema at present!

 

Currently I have the following kit:

 

EOS3, Vivitar 19-35, Canon 28-90, Canon 70-200IS, Canon 100-400IS

 

Typically my shooting is mainly around my travels and have come to

appreciate the merits of the L lenses particularly the 70-200.

 

I was considering a 30D with 10-22 and 17-85 IS (both EF-S lenses)

which roughly is the cost of a 5D body.

 

Since my short lenses are the weak link in my set up; my concern is

if I went for the 5D will the combination of FF and poor lenses

produce poor/soft shots?

 

Short term I guess I would get better results from the 30D and new

EF-S lenses; am I correct in my thinking?

[bobatkins]

Probably. Your existing wide lenses aren't very good.

 

I suppose you could get a 5D and a 17-40/4L or 24-70/2.8L or 24-105/4L IS if you were prepared to spend a bit more money.

[kevin_totts]

Thanks Bob, I was just reading your reviews!

 

My middle ground may be to get the 30D plus obligatory 10-22 plus an L lens (perhaps a 24-105), but then thats getting close to the price of a 5D plus24-105.............HELP

[bobatkins]

Do you need full frame? Do you make prints larger than 11x14 very often?

[John Crowe]

I think the 17-40/L and 70-200/2.8 L are going to get most of the pictures you could want to take. In my opinion not much lost between 41 and 69mm. So spend a little more and get the 5D and the 17-40. You could grab a 50/1.8 for about $75 while you are at it.

 

 

If an occasion comes along and you absolutely have to take only one medium range lens then take your 28-90 and live with the results until you can afford something else. You will still get the shots and quite likely they'll still be fine for 4x6 or 5x7 or emailing to family and friends.

 

 

You are so close to going FF that I really recommend that instead of getting involved with some of the expensive EF-S lenses. The two big zooms you have would also be very nice on the 5D. Good luck.

[kevin_totts]

Bob, to be honest I am in a bit of a transition stage from film to digital.

 

I have been fortunate to be in the postion to purchase the 3 and L lenses but they have not exactly been overused in the last 12 months.

 

I guess my thoughts are that it would be nice to get a fast and/or L lens in the 28-70 range which could be more cost effective with a 5D due to the fact I could retain my 19-35 in the short term (and not need the 10-22)

 

Weight is also a concern, as I typically day trip with body, 19-35, 28-90 ans 70-200 which as you know is quite a weight already!

[fxdonny]

If I were you, I'll get the 30D and 10-22, but NOT the 17-85/4-5.6 IS. Instead I would sell the 28-90, and get 24-85/3.5-4.5. If you got extra monies to burn, then 24-70, instead of 24-85.

[daniel_taylor]

"I think the 17-40/L and 70-200/2.8 L are going to get most of the pictures you could want to take. In my opinion not much lost between 41 and 69mm. So spend a little more and get the 5D and the 17-40. You could grab a 50/1.8 for about $75 while you are at it."

 

What John said. You're stuck in the trap of thinking that you need every mm of focal length between one extreme and another. You don't.

 

A 5D and 17-40L would be a great match to your two L telephoto lenses, and pretty much cover all your needs except extreme low light. A $75 50mm will cover that. You don't "need" anything in the missing range that walking a few steps can't accomplish.

 

No offense, but I sometimes think it's funny when I see photographers trying to organize a lens purchase that covers every mm from x to y. Do you realize that you could accomplish pretty much everything you want with 3-4 good primes? Not saying you should only buy primes, but you don't need to spend tons of money trying to cover every mm twice over with L zooms.

 

The 30D is a great camera. But if I were choosing between it and the 5D, I would go for the 5D. Even if that ment I was missing a few mm in the middle or (gasp) had to buy a prime.

[palfy]

"Weight is also a concern, as I typically day trip with body, 19-35, 28-90 ans 70-200 which as you know is quite a weight already!"

 

Looks like you seem to leave your 100-400 at home a lot. If you do not think that you need it, sell it (I know it's a crime to sell an L lens :)) and spend the money to get a 5D and the 24-105L. I have both -- you won't regret it. In fact, when I have to go really light that's all I take - 5D plus 24-105. Covers 85% of my day-trip or even extended needs. Awesome combination.

[kevin_totts]

Thanks for the responses.

 

I think my awareness of L lenses coupled with the bad press over the 17-85 EF-S is my biggest dilema.

 

I am travelling to Turkey in 7 days time which has re-kindled my interest. I have an order with a company in Hong Kong which will be despatched tomorrow for the 30D + 10-22 + 17-85 so I need to make my mind up.

 

Has anyone had experience between the 17-85 and 24-105?

 

My body choice (to retain wide angle) is either (30D + 10-22) or (5D). In terms of cost this is about another 50%.

 

If a chose the 30D I sill have the chocie of a middle lens and would would prefer the 24-105 as it is both L and IS.

 

To summarise:

 

Cheapest: 30D, 10-22, 17-85

 

Middle: 30D, 10-22, 24-105

 

Expensive: 5D, 24-105

 

 

Any other views out there?

[robin_sibson1]

I have a lot of lenses - far too many, probably - and can put together a variety of selections to go in my bag depending on what I am doing. My normal combination with the 20D is 10~22 and 24~105. Image quality is nowhere less than very good over a 10-to-1 range between the two lenses. The only downside is that 22/24mm is not always the ideal changeover point, and I can imagine circumstances where a more limited range would be delivered more conveniently by the 17~55. But the combination suits me very well, so that gets my vote if you go for the 30D.

[eleta]

Hi, I have just moved to digital and bought a 5d and 24-105 f4L lens. Best thing I ever did. It is fantastic. I am selling the lens' that i used with my EOS 3 as I am now totally sold on the L lens. I shall have to save a bit before i get another lens, but the 24-105 does cover the majority of what I shoot. If you get the 30d it will allways niggle you that you could have got the 5d but if you chose the 5d you will not regret it (just feel abit poorer!)

[bobatkins]

On the other hand I'd guess the 5D will be replaced in the EOS lineup before the 30D is...

[jim_larson1]

I too think you are looking at this a bit wrong.

 

As others have said. . .you don't need to cover every mm of the range. Also, the 10-22 is NOT mandatory on a 30D . . .unless you find that you use that Vivitar 19-35 alot. The vivitar and the 28-90 won't hold up well with either dSLR choice.

 

If you think you will EVER get a full frame digital camera. . or think you will continue to shoot film, forget about the 17-85/IS. It won't fit.

 

As for kits. . the 17-40/4L is an awesome lens on any camera. Why don't you just buy one? If you get the 5D, however, you will want a zoom in the 40-70 range to cover the gap. The 28-90 won't do. BUT a 28-135/IS will fit the bill nicely!

 

If you do go with a 30D. . .then I suggest that you just get the 17-40/4L and 50/1.8. You really will have a good setup. The 28-105/IS will also add good flexibility to this kit as well (image stabilization is good for travel).

 

Bottom line: On your trip, leave your two current "L"s home. Too big. Get a 30D, with a 17-40/4L, 50/1.8, and a 28-135/IS. Also bring your EOS 3.

 

If you go whole hog. . .then you want the 10-22/EF-S and 24-105/IS with a 30D, and a 17-40/4L and 24-105/IS with a 5D.

[patricks]

If you are coming from a EOS3 I think you will find the viewfinder of the 30D very disappointing. Also the 5D has better high ISO performance.

[jon_austin]

Another vote for the 5D + 24-105. I have this awesome lens (on a 20D), and it's now my main lens (replaced a 24-85). I also have a 17-40, and have not felt the need for anything wider enough, so I'm not even tempted by the 10-22.

 

If I were you, I'd sell the Vivitar and 28-90 lenses, and maybe the 100-400, bite the bullet and get the 5D/24-105 combo.

 

I love my 20D, but plan to replace it (or "demote it") when the 5D successor that sells for $2,000 is released. It won't be long.

[igor_f1]

I'm thinking about replacing my 24-85 on 24-105 4L

Is it make really big difference (Iﾒm just an amateur), or it's better to save and take 28-135 IS?

[pto189]

As Bob said, just get the 5D and one of the three lenses: 17-40, 24-70, or 24-105. Sell whatever you want to sell except the 70-200 IS.