5D or 20D?

[djpatrick7]

I am in the market for a new digital SLR. I have read that the 20D

is a wonderful camera. I have also read that the full-size 5D is

WONDERFUL. The info I got was that the 5D has an exceptional setting

for portraits. I am thinking about setting up a small studio for

portrait work in my town. Is the 5D worth the extra money? If so, I

had rather spend a little more now than upgrade later.

Which would be the better camera for me?

[disneyry]

You can take great portraits with either camera.

 

The 5d will only be with the extra money if you put quality glass in front of it. That means L-series lenses. If you've got the money, go for it. If you don't, then buy a 20d and get the best glass you can afford.

[beauh44]

Hi David, You can take excellent portraits with either camera. The 20D has a newer replacement that was just announced btw called the 30D. It's an evolutionary change, not revolutionary. It should be a little less expensive than the 20D and has the same sensor.

 

The 5D is almost twice the price. It has 12 megapixels as opposed to the 8 megapixels of either the 20D or 30D. The big difference is that the 5D has a full-frame sensor. This means the sensor is the same size as a 35mm piece of film, therefore the lenses you use will not change their field of view (or have a "crop factor").

 

In addition you should get a much brighter viewfinder with the 5D, obviously more megapixels and perhaps a little less noise at higher ISO's - although that won't be a big deal in a studio.

 

If you check out http://www.dpreview.com you can find reviews of all three cameras. Good luck!

[bbond]

David, don't forget to consider the 30D that comes out in March (I believe). There has been TONS of discussion on it in this forum if you want other poster's opinions regarding the differences between it and the 20D (and the 5D for that matter).

 

I own a 300D and when I upgrade (in the next year hopefully) I'll be seriously considering the 30D.

[bbond]

Dangit, guess I type slowly...

[conraderb]

David - this might sound harsh, but there ain't no exceptional setting for portraits on ANY camera. What there is on all cameras are your basic controls, and then there are your lenses, and then there is YOU.

 

It ALL depends on whether or not you use 'idiot' mode or actually know what you are doing.

 

Depth of field?

 

If you have a specific need - ie. shots in low light, then the 20D and 5D are both very strong performers.

 

The digital rebel XT is also pretty good for high ISO noise, I hear.

 

$3000 is a lot of money to blow if you are expecting a miracle portrait mode.

 

Is this your first digital SLR?

 

If so, could I recommend teh Digital rebel XT with a 50mm 1.8 as a decent starter portrait package?

 

If you are pretty experienced, might I suggest a gently used 20D with a 50mm 1.4? Sharp lens and fast, and great for single person portraits. The 20Ds are going for around $1000 these days - and a $300 50 1.4 and you are in business.

 

Digital workflow is a whole new ballgame, mind you.

 

Conrad

[savas_kyprianides]

Rebel XT is good, so is 20D and expected to also be good is the 30D. If you are

experienced, then go with where your heart and budget allow. If inexperienced and new to

DSLR and think you might stick with it, some here might agree to go with a lower cost

body, such as the Rebel, and buy the nicest lenses you can afford. It is the lenses that will

stay with you should you choose to get another camera body some years down the road.

Make no mistake, skilled hands can make a Rebel XT sing. The portrait mode you are

referring to might be part of the picture modes that Canon is offering in the 5D and also in

the upcoming 30D. This is not something that alllows the camera to automatically take a

great portrait - It is a setting that provides an alternative look to a portrait. An

enhancement of sorts, if you will. The photographer still has to do all that precedes

pressing the shutter.

[tom_m2]

You did budget for the studio flashes, background, lighting, and studio space?

 

Purely technically, I think the 5D with primes would be the obvious choice for studio portrait work.

[awindsor]

I object to Ryan's claim

 

"The 5d will only be with the extra money if you put quality glass in front of it. That means L-series lenses."

 

The 85/1.2 may give slightly better bokeh than the 85/1.8 but both are certainly quality glass. In my experience the non-L primes are better than the L-zooms.

[digitmstr]

The 5D, which has an effective resolution of 12.8 vs the 8.2 of the 20D, will have a clear advantage over the 20/30D in studio work. No doubt about it.

 

In addition, the DOF will be shallower on a FF camera thereby making it an ideal portrait tool. Of course, the 20/30D will do fine. I have taken many portraits with the 10D prior to upgrading to the 5D and I can't find anything "wrong" about the look of my old pictures (except maybe the way I took them, of course ;p...).

 

In all seriousness though, the difference in quality between my old 10D images and those produced with the 5D is obviously very, very significant.

 

"How much" that difference is worth it's up to you.

[mark u]

""How much" that difference is worth it's up to you."

 

Actually, I think it's up to your customers. Are you more likely to get more business shooting with one camera or the other, and will it justify the difference in what you spend financially? Could you price your work higher, or would that cost too much in lower numers of sittings? I can't tell you the answers for your town. You need to do some market research and make a business plan.

 

You also need to understand what else is involved in terms of the studio setup itself, as well as the computing and printing hardware and software side of things. Backup, a decent monitor, dedicated fast PC (and a backup), colour profiling hardware/software for monitor and print, image processing software etc. etc. will add several thousand dollars to your startup costs.

 

If you've not done studio portrait work before there is a lot to learn about lighting setups, how to pose your subjects, the use of props (toys for the children, different kinds of seating to suit different subjects etc,), the technical requirements for passport photos, etc.

 

You will probably have a lower risk venture if you buy some second hand medium format gear and send your film to a top pro lab for processing and printing. That way you'll avoid the sometimes harsh depreciation on digital related equipment (you can probably resell the MF gear for much the same as you paid for it) if you aren't able to drum up enough business to make it a paying proposition.

 

You need to do some market research and make a business plan.

[gaetano catelli]

"Is the 5D worth the extra money?"

 

if you are asking if the picture quality of the 5D is, like its price, 2 times greater than the 20D/30D, the answer is, in a word: noway.

 

if you're asking if the likely customers for a startup portrait studio would pay enough of a premium to have their picture taken with a 5D instead of a 20D/30D so as to make the 5D financially worth it, the answer, in a word, is: noway.

 

if you are asking if you would lose so much sleep knowing that the 5D has a sensor twice the size of the 20D/30D that it would be worth the peace of mind to get the 5D, only you know the answer.

 

but, if you choose the 20D/30D, you can get a dynamite portrait lens for under $80! of course, i'm talking about the 50mm f/1.8 II, which, because of the smaller sensor size of the 20D/30D, has the same perspective as an 83mm lens on a 35mm camera. you would then still have enough money left over (relative to the price of a 30D) to get the L lens zoom of your choice.

[djpatrick7]

Wow, thanks for all the replies. It sounds like I still have to make the decision. The main reason for the post is that I am also an amateur trumpet player. I bought into the starter models, moved my way up through to the top of the line Bach model by the time I was playing in college. I bet, all-in-all, I spent five to six thousand dollars on that progression.

 

I am serious about the photography. I have considered the price of studio lighting, backdrops, printing of photos, advertising, etc. While considering the camera, the first thing that hit my mind was - starter or best I can afford?

 

So, in your expert opinions, would I be better off spending the extra money up front, or should I move up though the models?

 

Again, thanks for all the help!

[cathyscholl]

"So, in your expert opinions, would I be better off spending the extra money up front, or

should I move up though the models?"

 

I may be reading something into this comment that's not there but it sounds like you are

suggesting that if you buy the more expensive camera now you won't need to upgrade

later like you did with your trumpets. Something to think about is why you wanted new

trumpets. The same feelings may apply to your cameras and don't for a minute think that

the cameras you are interested in now will be the only ones to choose from. Cameras

obviously are less like trumpets (although I know nothing about trumpets) and more like

computers. New and better ones keep coming all the time. Will you be happy to keep the

old one for years to come and not mind if something better comes along or would you

enjoy having the newest model, the 30D, at half the price of the 5D and have money left

over to buy another new camera later if you want.

 

FWIW I am getting a 5D in the next few weeks. There are rebates being offered on it in

Europe right now so maybe the US will have them too.

[gaetano catelli]

what Cathy said.

<p>

(btw, David, i'm sure you realize the typo i made in the last sentence of my post above. it should have read "you would then still have enough money left over (relative to the price of a <b>5D</b>) to get the L lens zoom of your choice.")

<p>

at the top line, <i>none</i> of the cameras under discussion are 'starter' cameras (like, say, a $300 point & shoot). and, at the bottom line, <i>all</i> of them will serve you well as a commercial portrait camera.

[peter_daalder]

David, if you've got money to burn, get yourself the 5D with one of the EF 85mm primes.<br>If you haven't got money to burn, buy a 20D with the EF50mm f1.4...<br>For practical purposes, I don't know whether many people (your potential subjects and clients) would order portrait prints larger than the common A3 size. The 20D is perfectly capable/adequate for producing these print sizes. Go for more detail with the higher 'pixel count' model(s) and you might well find yourself applying tricks like "gaussian blur" to hide certain imperfections in people's appearances (or the new Surface Blur Filter in PS CS2).<br>Think about it...

[peter_daalder]

BTW, for anyone who might jump in and suggest the 30D with an EF 50mm lens, over the 20D.<br>I wouldn't bother...

[djpatrick7]

Cathy,

You are right: The trumpet I finally ended up with was top of the line at the time I bought it. There have been small improvements over the past 15 years, but not enough improvements to make me need or want another.

 

With the camera, since I aspire to take portraits, the higher pixel count of the 5D would seem to allow me to do a bit more than the 20D. I can in no way afford the 1D (with lighting kit and other studio equipment), so I've been looking at the 5D.

 

Thank you again very much for your time and advice!

[jim_larson1]

<i>I reserved exit row seats for the return (more legroom)</i>

<p>

The topic of "progression" is an intersting one. But the comment above in that digital cameras are like computers is very appropriate. There is evidence to suggest that the "mega pixel race" may be slowing down. . .but I still maintain that significant improvements in dSLR technology will happen over the next few years. Just take a look at what was being offered 3-4 years ago to understand how much can change over time.

<p>

Therefore, I recommend buying on the "low end" now, and plan on buying not the 5D, but the 5D's replacement in the future. And no. . . it is not a given that you will be paying more in the long run. It is highly doubtful the 5D's replacement will cost $3000.

<p>

Regarding glass. . . lenses are more like trumpets. The technology is not moving very fast. It would be wise to spend money on lenses that will serve both your current and future cameras (this is a standard argument against buying any EF-S lenses)

<p>

The 50/1.8; 50/1.4; 85/1.2L and 85/1.8 are all fine lenses for portrait work. The only zooms that match them are the expensive "L" zooms (although the 85/1.2L is one of the more expensive lenses around. . .), which are in any case "slower". The faster primes are better suited for portrait work.

[curtis_grindahl]

I agree with the comments above that suggest regardless of what you buy initially you will

likely consider other cameras eventually. I took the gradual approach, beginning with a

Sony DSC-85, a fine digital camera but not an SLR. My experience motivated me to buy

the Canon Digital Rebel, the 300D. I used that for about ten months before moving up to

the Canon 20D. In December, I bought an excellent copy of the venerable Canon 1D, their

first professional level digital camera. Using it for a couple of months I realized the weight

was more than I want to contend with. I sold that camera and am waiting for prices to

soften a bit before stepping up to the Canon 5D. Along the way, my collection of lenses

has evolved as well as I discovered the joys of using quality lenses. I'll second the

comment above that not all great lenses are L lenses, though I own three of them as well.

The EF 50 f/1.4 and EF 85 f/1.8 are wonderful lenses which I expect to work equally well

with the 5D. Were I in your circumstances, as a beginner, I'd likely pick up a used copy of

the 20D which can be had for around $900 if you're willing to spend a bit of time watching

the Fred Miranda Buy and Sell Forum. I've bought many lenses as well as the 1D used and

couldn't be happier with the process. I've also saved a great deal of money. I swear that

every lens I own I could sell today for a profit. And remember that Canon offers triple

rebates once a year in the late autumn, at least it has the last few years. You can save a

great deal of money buying a carefully selected package. I wouldn't be surprised to see

the 5D included the end of this year. It will reach the point in its product cycle that a

replacement will be arriving soon, perhaps Spring of 2007.

 

Have fun and happy shopping. Whether you make any money or not this is a wonderful

hobby.

[claytonwallace]

David,

 

All the posts above have good info. In the end, it is up to you and your finances. I would absolutely have a business plan before getting in any deeper than you are now. I've been where you are now, and here is what I did:

 

I bought the 10D and shot the livin' beejezus out of it. I wore out the shutter, replaced it and continue to shoot with it. Now I really, really know a digital SLR and can make it perform for me when I need it most. Most of that education will pass to the next camera I buy (whatever model) and you cannot discount that experience. Whether you purchase a 20d, 30d or 5d, your best value is in your experience. Don't do anything with your finances that will jeopardize that. For example, if you spend high in camera (5d) and then cannot afford the lights and lenses you need most you just bought an expensive paperweight. Or, if you use all your resources to get the equipment and then cannot pay the printer, shipping costs, and tons of unexpected expenses, you are sunk. Worse still, you spend all your money, don't get enough clients fast enough (it takes time) and you have to focus on other sources of income than photography (like selling your trumpets ;( I guuess I'm recommending the 20d unless you have the money, though if you did you probably wouldn't have asked.

 

For what it is worth, I'm saving for the 5d now and using the income I'm making from the 10d to pay for it (no 10d, no 5d, get it...) But if I had skipped the 10d and had the 20d instead, I wouldnt' be. I'm going to keep my 10d as a backup and shoot the 5D into the ground. Hope this helps. Oh, I have a posting that lists all my current equipment, if that helps. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EiKM

 

- Clayton

[tom_dix]

David,

 

I have both cameras. I primarily use the 5D with the 20D as a backup. I also use the 20D for sports/action0 The 20D has an advantage in sports photography, 5fps and more reach with the crop factor. The protrait difference is in a word "huge". The narrow DOF makes the photos pop and look much more film like. Much more detail also when blown up. Though I must say not all that noticeable in an 8x10. White balance is superior in the 5D. Having said that, it is very true that you need to look at total budget. Glass, lighting, BGs, strobes, CF cards etc. One note, the 5D requires very good glass, L-series or primes, ie 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 100 macro, but not the 501.8 or Sigma or Tamron zooms on the 5D. Problems with inexpensive glass show up most vividly in the corners, thus giving the 20D the nod with consumer grade glass. Best of luck, they are both great cameras

[x]

If you're shooting portraits you probably don't want the high sharpness that a 5D / L prime combination would provide. Every little imperfection would show up. Start with a 20D, maybe even with a zoom lens, and use the 100 ISO setting to minimise the amount of noise. Use Raw format and convert in Canon's own DPP converter for pleasing colour.

[don_kemper1]

Short answer: NO!

 

Long Answer:

Few things- a little different from other posts:

 

1. Don't know what size your studio is. A local photographer has a 20D and a 70-200mm f2.8 L lens that he can't use in his studio for portraits because of the size of the room- can't move the camera back far enough from the subject to use his favorite lens. He is considering the 5D for this reason. 70 x 1.6 = 112, so his lens is basically the equivalent to a 112mm lens at its shortest/widest setting. Since there is no focal equivalent factor with a 5D, he would not have to move any walls. Chances are your studio will be more forgiving and better sized.

 

2. OTOH, smaller sensors use the central "sweet spot" portion of whatever optics are in front of them, the easier part of the lens to make and avoids most of the optical problems inherent in the outer portions of lenses. Most lenses are designed for 35mm film sized image circles. Since a 20D/30D sensor is smaller, it will use a little less of the image circle. When you look at those MTF charts, you can ignore the outermost regions of the charts where the lines are turning down hill where the lens' performance is dropping off. Life will usually be better with "L" lenses, but look at the portion of the curves that apply to a 1.6 body for whatever lens you want to consider.

 

So if you are wanting more reach, to use shorter FLs that effectively put you into the portrait range, and aren't as concerned with wide angle photography, then the 20D/30D cameras would serve you well. If you want to do more wide angle photography or are afraid of backing down stairs or have walls in the wrong place, consider cameras with full size sensors.

 

3. If you take the 20D/30D approach with the plan to wait until later for whatever full size sensor camera that comes next, be careful to not get any "EF S" series lenses. Forget all the "sweet spot" considerations for "EF S" lenses, the "S" denoting the difference. There are only four of these lenses.

 

4. Having any doubt or reservations about glass, always err to the safe side! There no fix for inadequate glass! It's more important that sensor size.

 

5. Comfort vs. Plots & Schemes- Would you feel that you will be "settling" for less right now with a 20D/30D while you know you would really rather have a 5D? Would you think your customers would be settling for less? You might not be as comfortable using anything less than a 5D. If the plan to get a smaller sensor camera now and wait until the next major improvement in bodies to invest big bucks later is more to your liking, then you might not "feel" comfortable using anything more than a 20D for a while. If you are one of those creative types who are wired such that this sort of thing matters, then try to get your hands on a 20D, 30D and a 5D for a day at a camera counter. There are many photographers who have to feel totally comfortable with whatever they are using to get the best pictures.

 

Personally, I have a 20D and I shoot for a magazine where other photographers are using bigger sensor/more megapixel Nikons and the editor, photo editor, and myself are totally pleased with the 20D results. I have no fear or regrets with my weddings, landscapes, and stage photos. I bought my way out of wide angle problems with another lens.

 

One more thing, those quick settings- those are more for point and shoot photographers, like when your non-photographer friend wants to take a picture or two or you just want fast point-n-shoot snapshots. I think you will find the shutter priority, aperture priority, or manual settings more useful for serious portrait work. I could be wrong...

 

 

Don Kemper

[andreas_carl]

Not worth it - unless you also buy L glass...!