"Feel like" going into digital

[justin_nurman]

I have been following the development of digital camera for quite

sometime and now pretty much "feel like" jumping into it to join the

crowd. My understanding is having an almost instant feedback will

really help my learning curve.

 

What I need to know is which body will suit me best with my

interests. I currently shoot with EOS30 with 17-40, 50, 85, 200 and

28-135 (all Canon). I like portrait, landscape and street photography

(in this order). After some searching, I find out that I can get 30D

for about US$1500, 20D for US$1200 or 5D for US$2700. Which one do

you guys think will be the best option given my interests? If it's a

5D, do you think I should wait a bit further as the price has been

going down from US$3400 over the past 6 months? Appreciate your help.

Cheers, Justin.

[jurigab]

Dear Justin, i think that if you like to take landscape pictures with your eos 30 and 17-40 (wonderfull lens!) Eos 5D is best choice!

Also eos 30D is a good camera, but if you buy one of it, probably you had to buy also a new lens (like Canon ef-S 10-22) TO HAVE THE SAME RESULT (in term of wide angle) THAT YOU HAVE WITH YOUR eos 30 + 17-40. So i think that an Eos 30D (1500$) plus 10-22 (700$) is almost like an EOS 5D that will give you full frame and better quality, and you can continue to use your 17-40 that is much better than the 10-22.

(I hope that my english is clear enough ). Bye

[jim_larson1]

Hmmm. The 5D is better than the 30D, well. . .<p>. . .. <big>DUH</Big>. . . .<p>

In terms of cameras, the 5D is essentially a 12mp full frame version of the 30D. The only real difference between these two cameras is literally the sensor. As such. . . is 12mp and full frame worth DOUBLE the cost? ($1400 vs $2900). I dunno. I tend to say <b>heck no</b>

<p>

Now one factor with a reduced frame camera is the fact that you practically need to buy a $689 (B&H price) 10-22/EF-S to retain wide angle with 30D. That brings the cost delta to $2100 ($1400 + $689)vs $2900. That is still a heavy delta.

<p>

A note on the 20D: The 30D and 20D are practically the same camera. Same sensor. Same AF system. Primary difference in terms of usability is the 2.5" LCD screen. As the 20D leaves the store shelves, the 30D will drop to current 20D price levels. Many were disappointed that the 30D has the same sensor and Digic II chip as the 20D.

<p>

As for the 5D price: The 5D is a landmark camera in that it sells for less than half the cost of the full frame 1Ds. Will the 5D drop in price futher? I think it is inevitable. But it will be truely be driven by market forces.

[dmanthree]

Besides the size of the sensor, the most pronounced difference between the 30D and 5D is frame rate; 3FPS versus 5FPS. If you don't need the higher frame rate, and can afford the 5D, it's a no brainer. Like the first responder said, in order to get a true wide angle lens for the 30D, you'll have to spend a bit of money, which closes the price gap between the two cameras. They're roughly comparable in physical size, with the 5D being a little larger, so if size is critical, get the 30D.

 

Bottom line, I believe that FF is Canon's future, but for the forseeable future, cropped digi cams and EF-S are here, and still a safe buy since there's always a need for smaller and lighter cams.

[mark u]

At this point I'd wait at least a few weeks... The 30D has only just hit the stores outside the US, and when it finally ships inside it, it will take a little while for the prices to start dropping. I've noticed that relatively few buyers have been prepared to pay top dollar for it in those countries where it has been released, preferring to wait for prices to soften - take up seems to have been much slower than with any other recent Canon DSLR. So far as the 5D is concerned, US pricing is currently significantly higher than in other markets. Canon seems to be doing some testing of demand response to lower prices in markets such as Europe. Lower prices seem likely to follow in the US in the not too distant future.

[gary_ferguson1]

I use a 5D and a 1Ds Mk II. For handheld shots printed to A3 the 5D gives nothing away to the 1Ds Mk II. If your budget can accomodate then I'd recommend it without reservation.

 

Actually I'd argue even if you have to stretch and trade in a lens or two to afford it, the 5D is still the more sensible economic choice. Because with the 5D Canon finally have a product that's relatively future proof. There may be a bigger buffer, a faster ISO speed, and a few more pixels in a year or two; but really the 5D is at the stage where you're unlikely to see any meaningful future benefits in the final print.

[robert lee]

It sounds like the 5D will suit you better; the extra resolution, FF, and lower noise sensor should all be more useful than a faster frame rate.

 

"In terms of cameras, the 5D is essentially a 12mp full frame version of the 30D. "

 

Not really. The sensor package is quite different. Just work the numbers. The 8MP 1.6x sensors are more densly packed than the 12MP FF, which probably accounts for much of the 5D's better high ISO performance.

[jim_b5]

Justin, what the guys are saying about the relative merits of the two cameras is true. As Jim Larson points out, because of the large cost difference between the 30D and the 5D, the 5D may not be the best value. Contrary to GBL, testers say that the 10-22 and the 17-40 are similar in overall physical and image quality.

 

The show-stopper for me (I'm wrestling with jumping to digital and have a very similar camera/lens setup) when considering the 30D vs 5D is my lens selection. Currently, for indoor and wide to close-in outdoor work I use my 28-135 a lot. For other outdoor work I mainly switch between my 17-40 and 70-300 DO (I have a 50 1.4 as well, but seldom use it ). I find this range of focal lenghts extremely versatile for my unposed family and street work - my two primary photographic activities and ones that require quick zooming/framing to get the shots.

 

The problem with the 30D and other 1.6 sensor cameras is that they mess up the angle of view on your wide lenses too much. With a 30D you almost have to get both the 10-22 EF-S (equivalent to 16-33 full frame) and the 17-85 EF-S (equivalent to 27-136 full frame) lenses to replace the angle of view characteristics you currently have with your 17-40 and 28-135. If you were to buy a 30D and only get the 10-22, you would be forever switching between that lense or your 17-40 (now a 27-64) and the 28-135 (now a 42-216) when you wanted to move from wide to moderate telephoto - something I do indoors a lot with only one lense, the 28-135.

 

So for me, a 30D means also buying a 10-22 and a 17-85 and now we're getting fairly close to a 5D in cost. You'll get something for your 35mm body and the 28-135 and 17-40 if you want to sell them, but now you've bought fairly heavily into EF-S lenses and the 1.6 crop system. EF-S lenses will only work on 1.6 crop cameras - not the 5D or it's likely full frame replacement. Your other lenses will also have their fields of view changed on a 30D. In other posts, guys have suggested keeping the film camera for wide shots, but for me that defeats the purpose of going to digital and means carrying and juggling too much equipment.

 

How much do you want to spend and what compromises are you willing to make with your existing lenses? Do you care about the full frame and 1.6 crop divide in the Canon system? If you buy a 30D now will you want to buy full frame in the near future? In a year or so will Canon release new full frame sensors with improved dynamic range (see my post from a few days ago) and will that matter?

 

Yes, I want the 5D, but as an enthusiast who doesn't make money on photography, the price of the 5D is driving me nuts. At the end of the day, however, in digital I want to be where I am in film i.e. with my lenses covering the same angles of view. A 5D will get me where I want to be in one step without buying any new lenses or selling current ones (Well, if I had a 5D I would, of course, be lusting after the 24-105 :) ) . A 30D will force me into EF-S lenses - something I'm not crazy about. Either way is very expensive. I may end up staying with film for another year or so and waiting for full frame prices to drop or go to 1.6 crop if Canon doesn't move full frame to the 20D/30D price level.

 

P.S. C'mon, Canon, we know you're monitoring this forum. Lower the 5D price and we promise to stop making fun of the dedicated print button :)

[jim_larson1]

Personally, I would be real reluctant to ever get any EF-S lens if a full frame body would be a possibility in the future. The ONLY exception would be the 10-22/EF-S, which is not available as a normal EF lens.

 

With a collection that already includes a 17-40 and a 28-135/IS. I definately think that merely adding a 10-22 when going to an APS-C will be adequate. Adding the rather pricey 17-85/IS is very redundant to your other lenses.

 

And yes. . .the sensor in the 5D and the 30D/20D is DIFFERENT, but in practical terms the results are similar (aside from the obvious resolution and DOF impacts), which is why I consider the 30D a reduced sized and lower resolution version of the 5D.

 

BTW: Where can you get a 5D for $2700?

[sheldonnalos]

For me, the big issues on 5D vs 20/30D are:<P>

1. Big viewfinder. I have an EOS 3 and a 20D, and switching from the EOS 3 to the 20D is always painful. The 5D viewfinder is almost as good as the EOS 3. <br>

2. Depth of field control. The 1.6 crop cameras will have functionally about a stop and a third more depth of field for any similar shot (angular fov, distance, framing). While the optical rules behind this are complex, the net result is that if you like to shoot wide open for super shallow DOF with your 50 or 85, the look of those shots will be hard to replicate on a 1.6 crop.<br>

3. It reorganizes your lens lineup. That's something you have to think hard about how it affects your shooting. <p>

 

Sure there are other smaller things like more MP's, lower high ISO noise, the physical sound of the shutter (5D is softer sounding), size/handling, LCD size, etc, but the above are the biggies for me. I really want a 5D, and would buy one if I could afford it...

[pbizarro]

Do you shoot slide film? That would help your learning curve a lot, and it would be cheaper as well. I have learned exposure shooting slide film and evaluating the results with a good loupe in a light table.

 

If you know how to expose slide film, you will never have blown-up highlights in a digital camera.

 

And evaluating slides is much more reliable feed-back than looking at LCDs.

[justin_nurman]

I knew I am gonna get some valuable advice here, thx a lot guys. I am leaning towards 5D mainly due to FF and image quality (based on what I have read so far). The only thing that still put me off is the price. I know it has come down quite a bit since the launch but still...spending $2700 for a hobby is quite significant. And this is body only! I have not used a crop camera before, so adjusting the FOV with my current lenses will have to be considered then. I don't think I want to re-arrange my lenses nor do I want to invest in EF-S lenses, knowing for sure sometime in the future I will want a FF camera. Looks like you guys have helped me make my decision. I may have to wait for a few more months until the price settled further(less than $2000, hopefully). In the mean time, just continue shooting with my film camera and Reala/Provia! Thx a lot guys.

 

Btw, I travel quite a lot within Asia and as far as I know (from few sites), I can get 5D around $2700 in Hong Kong. Bangkok is a bit more expensive (>$3000), same with Singapore, maybe.

[myutmostphoto]

Justin, I think a lot would be determined by how much landscape shooting you do. If that is not a majority of what you shoot, I think you are fine with some of the suggestions given. If the majority of what you shoot is landscape, then I would have to steer you towards shooting slide film, specifically Velvia. You could do that with a 35mm, but medium, or large, format would be even better. I know some might disagree with me, but there is nothing out there, digital-wise that will touch the resolution you can get with say a 6X7 using Velvia. Don't believe me, look at the work of guys such as Jack Dykinga and John Kay.