paul_richardson6 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hello. I presently have an EOS 30D. Lovely camera but it has a CCD which produces only 16 highly saturated colours on the LCD display due to a gremlin. Perfect output, but knackered LCD. Anyway, that's life... I would like to upgrade and am willing to spend around ?2000 on a new body. Could anyone please explain why Canon have released the 1D MarkIII, which is more expensive than the 5D, but comes in at a lower output resolution, the megapixel thing. Would you, presuming you know a bit about the cameras go fot the 5D or the other. I mainly do portrait and wedding photography and am trying go get to grips with the whole digital thing, so please forgive my ignorance. By the way, if anyone wants a 6 month old 30D with the problem described above, and no receipt then please email me with a reasonable offer of at least 20 pence. It's in mint physical condition and has taken about 5000 exposures since new. Many thanks, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdanmitchell Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Quick answer. It is not always all about MPs. The new camera has a very fast and deep burst mode, for example. It is more or a "hardened" body with environmental sealing. It is optimized for certain professional applications such as journalism and sports photography. (Not that you couldn't use it for other things...) "Better" is not always better, if the better is not the better you need. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_richardson6 Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Thanks for that Dan.. You were quick with the response! I'm really sorry chaps, but looking down the board I notice that someone else has already asked the question. Thanks a lot, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aappelphotography Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hi Paul, <br/> how about getting it fixed by Canon? You could invest the savings into glass ...<br/> Please, forgive my ignorance, but what actually do you find inacceptable at the 30D that you need to spend 2000 on a new body? (I mean if the LCD would work correctly, what hinders you taking the pictures you want to?) <br/> The 5D is full-frame, 12 MPX, the 1d Mark III "only" got 10MPX, but is weathersealed, shoots at 10fps and you can boost the ISO to 6400 ... <br/> What I would buy? The 5D, it is still a lot cheaper and I would prefer the fullframe sensor for the wideangle coverage (no crop factor)...<br/> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Not sure you are going to be able to upgrade on a new body at $2000 since the next jump from 30D is to the 5D which is closer to $2500-2700. If you do want to upgrade your best shot is at a used 5D for around $2000-2300. 30D is a great camera and you haven't mentioned anything other than the LCD that doesn't fit your needs. As Dan mentioned, megapixels don't tell the whole story. The 1D MKIII will be the latest and greatest dSLR beast however it has features that not everyone will need or want. At a cost of ~$4000 the 1D MKIII will be a moot point for most of us. Sounds like you need to decide between a new/used 5D or keep your 30D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_richardson6 Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hi Andre. The reason for not getting the camera fixed through Canon is that it was bought through Ebay, and I have not been able to get a receipt from the person I bought it from (lost his email and had my account closed for trying to sell my body parts). All I know is that it was brand new and purchased from a Jessops within the UK. The cost of fixing it I imagine would be pretty high with no warranty! Hence the reason for biting the bullet and getting a new one. JOHN WHITE ---------- I had a good friend called John White who died a few months ago. You havn't returned from the grave have you? Don't forget John that in the UK, ?2000 is virtually double $2000. Cheers, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_richardson6 Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Just noticed that my pound sign is coming out like a question mark. Sorry! Too add, the reason for considering the 5D is that I like the idea of being able to crop an image (if needed), yet still having the resolution to produce a reasonable size print if requested by the customer. Having worked with film for so many years, I feel somewhat like a duck out of water, but hopefully I'm getting there. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon_hickie1 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hi John. Have you factored in that you would also need new lenses? You could always jump ship and go with a Nikon D200 plus the magic 18-200 and be within your budget! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_austin Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "Too [sic] add, the reason for considering the 5D is that I like the idea of being able to crop an image (if needed), yet still having the resolution to produce a reasonable size print if requested by the customer." Be aware that the pixel density of the 30D and 1DIII are both higher than the 5D, so even though it's higher resolution, your images might suffer if you crop too aggressively. Here's the pixel density of the various models: 1DIII: 7.2 microns 5D: 8.2 microns 30D: 6.4 microns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
images_in_light_north_west Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 The 5D will have a spring rebate and there are also hints to a price drop, see what happens. My upgrade path from my 30D is to the 5D at the moment, but wiil hold off a couple months to let the dust settle(not on my sensor I hope) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aubreyp Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hi Paul, There are probably many places in the UK that can fix your camera. It doesn't have to be Canon. I had the shutter and electronics on my 10D replaced recently by Precision Camera in the states for less than US$250. Surely the 30D is worth at least that to fix. The 5D/1D mIII argument depends on what you are shooting. I'd get the 5d if you are really into wide-angle landscapes, but the 1D if you concentrate on events/action or low-light. If money was no object I'd get the 1D mIII, since it's got a lot of good tech in it. -Aubrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppyDigs Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "Be aware that the pixel density of the 30D and 1DIII are both higher than the 5D, so even though it's higher resolution, your images might suffer if you crop too aggressively." While this is true, there is something else to consider. The smaller sensor of the 30D requires 1.6x more "enlargement" than FF to arrive at the same size print. Thus 13 x 19 prints from my 20D more readily show noise, artifacts, lens defects and hand shake than the same size prints from my 5D. Sometimes the light’s all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. - Robert Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Gotcha, well with $4000 available to freely spend I personally would go for 1D MKIII for action/wildlife photography and I don't do much ultra-wide angle photography. Seems like you'll have two fantastic options in the upcoming months with either the 5D or new 1D. As far as I know I was reincarnated from a slug about 31 years ago and not a couple months ago. However, you do have my deepest sympathies about the recent loss of your close friend. Have a great weekend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_richardson6 Posted March 10, 2007 Author Share Posted March 10, 2007 Thanks for your answers chaps. You have all been really helpful. Does anyone know roughly what the new 5D release date is? All my lenses are EF, so I shouldn't have any problems upgrading to the 5D or 1D MarkIII. Thanks again, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nolefan32 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 "Does anyone know roughly what the new 5D release date is? " There isn't one. Canon has announced only one new dSLR, the 1D Mk III. Anything else you've heard is just rumor and speculation at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick tom Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Hello...Have you tried contacting Canon about fixing it...perhaps the warranty card would be enough provided you have it...or maybe you can get a duplicate from Jessop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chema_perez Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 The Canon 5D had a price rebate and will be even cheaper this spring. That means a replacement is on it's way, why not wait until that hapends and get the futur 5D MarkII/7D for 3000USD or the super cheap (hehe) 2200USD 5D.see this : http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/7d.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry nguyen cuu - nomad Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I Shot with a 20D before going for a 30D, which I still have. I wanted to upgrade but waited for PMA announces. I just got the 5D because the 1D mk III is way beyong budget and I don't need the "extreme" features. For your needs, in particular wedding shooting, you'd best go with a 5D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_boysen1 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Well, if you're shooting wedding work, the Mark 3 might not be so bad, because from what I understand the extra low-light performance is huge, and all the weddings I've shot have included portions that felt to be in complete darkness. Also, the difference between 10 and 12 megapixels is pretty marginal, and unless you're printing posters, you won't likely be using all the pixels from your file in the final print anyway. Also, it creates 14 bit files, instead of 12-bit. 12-bit files have 4,096 levels of brightness per channel, versus the 16,384 in a 14-bit file, so you'll run a much, much lower risk of blowing out highlights, and will also keep much more shadow detail. What better way to compromise between the black tux and the white dress than to just get them both? Although, as others mentioned, for $2,000, this question is a moot point, since you certainly won't be finding any Mark 3's for that price for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourfa Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 "Also, it creates 14 bit files, instead of 12-bit. 12-bit files have 4,096 levels of brightness per channel, versus the 16,384 in a 14-bit file, so you'll run a much, much lower risk of blowing out highlights, and will also keep much more shadow detail." wait for the detailed tests to come out. it's just as likely that the highlights and shadows will be no different, with simply more tones in between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now