Wondering what to buy. 30D, 5D. ?

[david_halterman]

I am planning a major Canon investment and am having trouble deciding which path to take. On one

hand, I almost purchased the 30d, a wide zoom, and several mid primes. On the other hand, I thought

about the 5d, and the 50 1.4. My budget is around $2500 and with the double rebate, this could be done.

I have read so many posts that I feel sick to my stomach that I am not out shooting, rather parked behind

this screen reading people argue about what is better than what. I want to shoot great portraits, so the 50

1.4 will be in there regardless. Landscapes, portraits, low light are what I am about. I may also be doing

some stringer work for a local paper. I want to immerse myself into the field and let my specialty spring

from that.

 

My problem here is that no matter what you get, it seems that it will always be something better right

around the corner. I am sure that early 2007 will see something in between the 30d and 5d. I want to

make a purchase that I will be happy with, get many years of use out of, and not have to feel obligated to

get the newest, most expensive thing out there. I am really leaning to the 30d option. I mean, remember

years ago when 6 MP was a lot? Half of the threads on here wouldn't exist if not for the constant need for

upgrade. Is anyone fully stocked and happy? Why wouldn't a 30d with great glass suit my needs for a

while? I know many of you will respond, "get the 5d, FF is the way to go, yada yada yada." But soon won't

the 5d be obselete? I am not rolling in the cash, but plan on making this a big investment, a career

starting investment. Dan will probably go on about the 5d, all L lenses, and so on. Geoff will rebuke

Dan's comments and Yakim will quote me several times and give some good advice. Other than that I

hope your advice can be broad and informative. I am not buying this gear to brag about how a 100% crop

shows so little noise, or "I have 12.8 MP and you only have 8". I know all about the 1.6 crop factor and

don't see that as a particular hinderance.

 

So should I go with my gut and the 30d; really skimp on glass and get a 5d; wait until next year and get

the coolest, newest body out there; or just give up alltogether. My brain is in a bind, can you undo it for

me? Regards...

[aleskoubik]

The 5D is an amazing camera. Will it be obsolete next year? Yes, of course it will or I would hope it will. But it doesn't change the fact that it takes a killer pictures with all my favorite wide angle lenses. I hope my 5D will last for many years. I love that camera!

[dmanthree]

Get the 5D with the best glass you can afford within your budget, and then save for more

glass. Regardless of what comes out next year, or the year after, the 5D will still be

producing high quality images. consider this: even if something does come out next year, it

is very unlikely that it will offer a quantum leap in image quality, only something incremental.

Go for the 5D and start shooting. You'll love it.

[j_smith6]

ok, I responded

[lovcom_photo]

Get the 5D and be happy for the next 5 years. It provides the cleanest images of any DSLR, and is lower in noise then the 30D.

 

Get wide fast non-L primes to fit your budget. Get the 24-70L if you can, although F2.8 is often not fast enough. 2-3 lenses will make for a great kit. The 5D has the brighter view finder, and as you do want to do lots of low light shooting this is important.

 

In the end if you go with the 30D, well, it is a great camera too.

 

It sounds as if your decision is for the next several years, so you may as well get the 5D.

 

If you have room in your budget just for one great fantastic lens, then get the 5D body and the 35L...this lens is very versitle...I can shoot an entire wedding with it, and as for travel, I could get 95% of all travel shots with it...it is razor sharp wide open, fast quiet AF, and is smaller and lighter then the 24-70L. You get F1.4 through F22.

 

Get the 5D for $2,200 after rebate, then the 35L will put your around $3,300...nost sure if a rebate is available for the 35L but if it is then the total will be even less.

 

ARGUMENT FOR THE 30D: If getting the 5D leaves just enough money for BS lenses, then do not get the 5D...get the 30D and get the best lenses with the $ saved. Better to have awesome lenses with the so-so body then a great body with so-so lenses. The 30D is a great camera, but the 5D provides a bit more quality, finish, and cleaner images. You will say wow to the difference.

[peter_hughes6]

Well here's some advice from someone with NO DSLR experience. But I have a 30D sitting under the tree with two lens. I also read everything possible and my head started to explode. I stopped and did a weeks worth of pondering the info. Here are some important conclusions I reached:

 

-DSLR bodies will constantly be improving so buy what you need now and be prepared to trade up.

- Lens cost more than bodies ( in general ) so buy good lens.

- Get something going now and learn, or sit on the sidelines.

 

I bought a 30D I was going to buy an XTi but thought the 30D would be a bit more rugged.

- I bought a 300 f2 L IS that will fir 1.6 or FF ( safe investment )

- I bought a 17-55 2.8 ef-s that will not fit a FF. Why? well I felt it was the best matchup for the 1.6 body. In the future I will have the 30D with a decent lens as a backup. ( I have a Ae1 A1 F1 manual body and I do use them )

After the 25th I will at least be shooting with a 2.8 in low light and shooting 300mm with an L lens.

This setup is a bit over budjet but perhaps the 17-85mm IS could be substituted.

I needed to do something to move forward. I was tired of having my negatives lost or botched.

Hope this helps from another new guy with 30+ years experience.

[WM]

Get the 5D. The image quality is in a different league altogether. Of course it will be obsolete next year with 5d MkII or 3D or some other marketing gimmick, but the 5D will keep you happy for years. The full frame is also amazing. I would not bother with the EFS lenses unless you are planning to use 1.6x crop cameras long term and not go full frame. Having said that, I also have a 1.6x crop camera to use on long telephoto and works beautifully with the extra reach that provides. If I was only going 1 camera and one lens, it would be the 5D and 50/1.4 (or 50/1.2L if the budget allows). Go on, get the 5D....it is Christmas after all. Hahaha ! All the best and happy shooting.

[lucafoto]

What they said!

 

The 5D is awesome, but needs the L glass to reach it's full potential. The 24-70mm was my first lens with my 5D and I have no regrets, except how the L glass bug has worked on my wallet.

[peter_hughes6]

That should have read 300mm f4 IS L lens. Day dreaming again.

[jon_austin]

Is anyone fully stocked and happy?

 

Yes, I am for one. But that doesn't mean that if you had *my* kit, *you'd* be happy with it.

 

I have a 20D, 3 L zooms (17-40, 24-105, 70-200/2.8 IS), a 1.4x TC and two primes (50/2.5 and 85/1.8). Also a 420EX. Every time I think I want to buy another lens, I realize I don't really need it. I'd like to add some L primes to my kit, and I can easily afford it. But when I think about it, I realize I'd only be buying toys to add to my collection, not tools I need to do any specific kind of photography. So I decide my money is best spent elsewhere (or simply saved).

 

I looked at the 30D when it came out, and decided that it didn't offer enough over the 20D to make the upgrade worthwhile for me. I also looked at the 5D, and I'm currently of the opinion that its successor will be the model that makes me want to upgrade to FF. (When I do upgrade to FF, I'll probably also want to buy the 135/2.0 L to provide the similar FoV as the 85/1.8 does on my 20D today. And I'll probably also sell my 17-40.)

 

I recommend that you consider any body you purchase as a tool you'll use for at least two-three years, and then decide which body best fits your needs for that time horizon. If it continues to serve you beyond that, all the better. But by then, the available feature sets in the new models may induce you to upgrade. With lenses on the other hand, buy the best you can afford (however you define "best" and "afford"), because the better they are, the more likely you'll want to continue to use them with the newer bodies you eventually buy.

 

As for Ales Koubik's comment, "The 5D ... of course ... will [be obsolete next year];" I don't think so. Superceded by a newer model, yes, almost certainly next year or the following year. But it won't be obsolete for years to come, if ever.

[m_barbu1]

If your stringer work (or any other part of your shooting) won't put you in a position of needing more than 200mm worth of focal length, get the 5D. However, be prepared to spend a considerable amount of money, if you'll subsequently want fast telephoto lenses. To get close to the field of view and aperture of a 30D with a 200mm f/2.8 lens, on a 5D, will run you around $3800 (just for the lens, on top of whatever you already spent on the 5D and other lenses).

 

On the flip side, without going into EF-S lenses, you're looking at an equivalent of 25mm being the widest you can practically get on a 30D.

 

I would expect that to be your deciding factor. If it truly isn't, then I would calculate how much it will cost you for the lenses you need, before deciding how much you can afford to spend on the body.

[peter_rowe]

David,

I know you are anxious to get out there but I think it best you should wait. It's winter time now and maybe not the best to be taking photos. Yes, there will always be the next model around the corner but you don't want to compound that issue by purchased at a time when your options are clearly about to be enhanced/replaced. The 30D is about to be replaced and a FF companion to the 5 is highly likely. Based on competitive pressures Canon needs to make sure these are not simple incremental improvements like the 20D -> 30D was. There are a lot of new features appearing in the DSLR market such as sensor cleaning, sealed bodies, increased resolution, better signal/noise management, better dynamic range, in-camera IS and more. Now is a particularly active time and you don't want to jump right before this at least starts playing out in the Canon DSLR world. Canon are likely to make a giant leap in the next generation so the timing plays against making a decision now. IMHO of course!

[pto189]

I second Peter. You budget isn't enough for a 5D and lenses. You will hear from Canon by February 07. Many new Canon DSLRs will hit the market expecially the successor of the 5D. Just be patient and wait. You still can buy the 5D by then the same price or even lower without rebate.

[mark u]

I think the chances of the 30D being replaced well ahead of the 5D are very high - the 30D is really only a warmed over 20D, which was announced way back in August 2004, and it faces some strong competition in the market (I consider my father's D200 to be a much more desriable camera than a 30D, for example), whereas there is no current competition for the 5D, which was announced a whole year later. If you're not convinced that you should go for the 5D, then I would wait until the spring to see what Canon plans to show at PMA. If you lean towards the 5D, then I suspect you will find that it even when it is replaced (maybe a year from now) you will have less of a feeling of buyer's remorse - it's a fine camera.

[KenPapai]

Canon really only has two obsolete DSLRs, the D30 and the 1Ds. The D60 is nearly totally obsolete as well.

 

Cameras starting with the 10D and newer just blow away those old dogs (any DSLR over 4 years old).

 

I do not have an answer for you EXCEPT -- which ever option affords you to buy the best EF lenses. Those you need to think

about having forever (more than 6 years).

 

I am waiting until Canon announces the 5D successor before I upgrade. I'll never want a 1.6 (APS-C) sensor ever again.

Best of luck and HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

[lovcom_photo]

Mark U, the 30D is a better DSLR then the D200...the D200 is too noisy at ISO 800 and faster. What good is a sealed camera body with great ergos if it produces more noise then the Canon?

[desmond_kidman]

Having a 1Ds2 and access to 5D I can tell you that it's not true you need L glass to show what these can do. The 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are fantastic and up to par. The 28 2.8 is certainly good enough to make great images despite the fact of not showing the ultimate of the camera's potential. I have the Zeiss 21, 28,50, 85, 100 lenses for comparison, along with some L glass, and I can tell you that shooting with the 3 Canon non-L's I mentioned does not bother me at all.

 

Why don't you wait until spring just to see what comes out (unless you just need it before then). You might try to rent or borrow a 5D with a couple of the lenses I mentioned to see for yourself.

[david_halterman]

Wow...I took my dog for a walk, and you all really jumped on this. I know I should just wait,

its only a few months, but I have the bug like no other. I agree that limiting to L lenses

simply leaves you broke and unhappy, unless you are pro I suppose. I have no desire to

stock up on L lenses, just fast, sharp primes and maybe a wide zoom. Maybe the

17-40L....affordable L, but slow. Anyone have anything bad to say about the 17-40? Most of

my low-light will be portraits and such. Do I really need a fast, wide zoom?

[dogbert]

"My problem here is that no matter what you get, it seems that it will always be something better right around the corner."

 

I think you have hit the nail on the head with this comment. There will always something you haven't got that looks better than what you have. Even many L lens owners start lusting after Zeiss glass after a time.

 

I once read the secret to happiness was not lusting after more stuff, which is ultimately futile, as there is always more stuff to get. Rather try to be comfortable with what you have got.

 

My suggestion is start of slowly. Buy what you are comfortable with but really concentrate on learning to use it well. Most of the photographers that I admire, while typically owning a full array of professional gear, tend to do most of their work with only a couple of lenses. That is they get noticed and successful for being the best in the game at working just one or two techniques, rather than trying to be all things to all people.

 

From the work that you sound like you want to do one reason to steer towards the 5D would be the veiwfinder. Though admitedly it is a bit outrageous paying extra thousands just to get a viewfinder we all took for granted a few years ago in the film days. If you can live with the viewfinder of the 30D there is no strong reason to jump to a 5D.

 

As it is Christmas I am declaring peace on Dan's outrageous claims

:)

[RobertChura]

I have the 5D and the 17-40L I am very happy and have no need to upgrade

except more lens for a long time. I usually shoot landscapes, objects, and sometimes people with a 180 macro.

[dogbert]

"Most of my low-light will be portraits and such. Do I really need a fast, wide zoom?"

 

For this you need fast primes. Given you are on a budget, think about the 28/1.8 or 35/2.0, a fast 50 and the 85/1.8 and your good to go.

 

If it were me, I would get the 28 /1.8, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8, all USM, similar good build quality, very manageable size and weight wise, good optics and a common 58 mm filter size.

[david_halterman]

Geoff, you are very noble

[mark u]

Others may hold a different view, but I find that the 30D viewfinder is totally inadequate (especially for macro work where manual focus is almost essential, or portrait work at wide apertures where focus is also critical, or for landscape work where you need to be able to see what is actually in the frame rather than find you included some undesirable element when you come to examine the shot later, or for sport where it certainly helps to see that AF tracking is following the subject you have in mind to shoot), among other things - so I consider the 30D is not a camera I would buy, since I would end up with too many poorly framed and poorly focussed shots. Frankly, that renders its high ISO performance rather moot, and I would prefer the D200 any day. Maybe I'm spoiled by still having some OM gear with big, bright viewfinders alongside my full frame Canon gear, but it's certainly a major reason why I wouldn't be content with anything less than a full frame camera (or maybe at most 1.3 crop) from Canon's current lineup.

[lovcom_photo]

Geoff, I didn't know we were not at peace. Having differences in opinion can be peaceful...it's what makes most of us civilized.

 

So what outragious claims have I made? Please don't hesitate to hold back.

 

I have/had all the equipment mentioned in this thread, so I have first hand knowledge. It seems most of yours are found on othe websites, review sites, etc.

 

Please do share your own first hand, hands-on opinions ;-)

 

As always, peace to you, before, during and after Christmas.

[david_halterman]

What does everyone think about this. Get the 30d, and then 28 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and some

reflectors, tap this creative keg in me that is about to explode and really work on my

technique, maybe sell a few prints, and upgrade in 2008 to Full-Frame, which I am sure by

then will be the standard. This way I could begin with my new years resolution, have great

lenses that I wouldn't have to replace, and still have a great Canon body that I am only paying

$1,000 bucks for that would serve well as a second-body! I think I have untied the knot with

this idea. WHAT DO YOU THINK? Bob...any suggestions?