kittybuddha Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I'm seriously considering swithing from Nikon to Canon. Here's a hypothetical question: If money were no object, what would be the ideal Canon system for shooting beauty, fashion & commercial? Why should I switch from Nikon to Canon? I've also been thinking of going to Medium Format but understand that the Canon sensor is pretty close to MF. Is this true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 Get either/or both the 1D3 or the 5D cameras. #1 - Nikon has nothing on Canon's top offerings; no sensor size response for either of those bodies from Nikon. #2 - Canon at ISO 400 and faster blows away the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucecyr Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 B&H has the Hasselblad H3D-39, 39.0 Megapixel, SLR Digital Camera for less than $32,000: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=5517&A=details&Q=&sku=463797&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_coy Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I think that for fashion or beauty and commercial I'd go with the 1Ds Mk II instead of the newest. Higher pixel count will help, and you really don't need the super high speed of the Mk III. Its more aimed for sports than fashion. As for the MF, the Canon isn't bad compared to MF, but MF will still have higher quality and higher resolution for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 >>what would be the ideal Canon system for shooting beauty, fashion & commercial?<< Currently, the 1DsMK2 - However, it is possible that in Sept a new version of that camera (the Mk3) may be coming out (or at least announced for release in the winter of 08). If you need it now, get the 1DsMk2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kittybuddha Posted April 14, 2007 Author Share Posted April 14, 2007 Thanks, everyone. If I purchase Canon I think it will be the 1DsMK2. I just read a review of theMK3 & it's only 10 MP's. What about lenses? What are the ideal lenses for Beauty & Fashion? I'd like to have at least two high-quality zooms in the 17-70mm & 70-150mm. I'd also like the best fixed focal length portrait lens. Is it 100mm or 135mm? Thanks for all your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mars c Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 It might only be 10MP. But it has larger sensor, which is capable of producing cleaner ISO 1600 and higher , than any 10mp camera on the market today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcolwell Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 You should have two bodies, so a 1DsII and 1DIII would do the trick. For lenses, you should get 24-70/2.8 L, 70-200/2.8 L IS, 50/1.2 L, 85/1.2 L II, and 135/2 L. I don't have the f/1.2's (yet), but I have the others and they're great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 You can't do a straight comparison of MP when the crop factors are different. Be aware that Canon produces bodies in three crop sizes, 1x (full frame), 1.3x, and 1.6x. You can't assume that a full frame body will get the best quality since, for instance, the much newer and lowly XTi is a 1.6x body with 10MP. If you can use a shorter, sharper, and faster lens on the XTi the results may very well be superior to using the longer, less sharp, and slower lens. ie: an 85/1.2 L on an XTi may very well outperform a 135/2 L on a 1DsII (each giving approximately the same image cropping). Of course the XTi is not nearly the camera body that the 1DsII is, I am merely using it as an example of various results you will get from the various crop bodies. It's easy to compare among Nikon bodies since they are all 1.5x. The big problem with the 1DsII is that it is way out of date by DSLR standards and while the sensor of the 1DIII is not much of a change over the 1DII, I think the 1DsIII will make a substantial change in sensor and should (better) be out within a year. Not sure why you feel it necessary to leave Nikon but the decision would depend also on how much you already have invested in bodies, flash, and lenses. Of course the "if money were no object" scenario could eliminate this problem but there is one area that Nikon seems to excell and that is with their flash control systems, which may affect your decision. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 If money were no object then I'd be ordering a couple of digital backs for a medium format system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_barbu1 Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 With respect to going medium format, although that would undoubtedly yield the higher quality image, there may be other benefits of 35mm (speed and portability, to name two) that make it a better photographic system for the purposes of fashion photography, depending on the specific situational needs. I can't imagine you would want to set up a medium format system for runway shooting, for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 >> I'm seriously considering swithing from Nikon to Canon. Why? >> Why should I switch from Nikon to Canon? Why don't you tell us why you are thinking about this? Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_lubow Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 In my opinion you should switch unless you have a huge stash of glorious Nikon lenses. The low light shooting ability of the Canons far exceeds the Nikons, which have embarassingly bad noise. You have tons of options for different crop factors. You have a better variety of lenses, and they are cheaper across the board. I have used both, and like both. But I think Canon is no longer in the same league as Nikon. The two are no longer in competition, but aimed at two very different sorts of shooters. If I shot ONLY telephoto stuff in bright sun, the D2X would attract me. 12 megapixels crammed into a 1.5 crop sensor is great. But the moment you go to a higher ISOs, you are screwed. You might as well use film, as the quality will be better. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_lubow Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 Oh, forgot to say...the ideal system. I think I would love to get a 1Ds Mk. II for that stuff, but since you mentioned beauty and fashion and such, I would go for the 5D instead, since you won't be very hard on the camera in those situations. The 5D is less than half as much. As for lenses, that depends a lot on your preferences. Then again, Mamiya RZs are soooo reasonable used it would be hard to get a digital camera instead. Even Hassies are cheap, if you don't mind 6X6, usually cropping down to 6X4.5. I prefer to just go with 6X7 and crop in camera. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 >.You can't assume that a full frame body will get the best quality since, for instance, the much newer and lowly XTi is a 1.6x body with 10MP.<< 10MP on a 1.6 sensor will never look as good as 10MP on 1.0 sensor. That's a fact. When cramming Mps in smaller sensors there are other issues that come into play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kittybuddha Posted April 15, 2007 Author Share Posted April 15, 2007 The main reason I want to switch - other than the fact that most of the top fashion & beauty photographers shoot Canon (and MF) - is the CMOS sensor. I've read several articles on the superiority of Canon's CMOS over the CCD. A couple of articles I've read said that Canon's CMOS full-frame sensor is very close to MF digital. Also, I really like large prints & thought that the 16.7MP on the 1DSMKII would be ideal for this. I'm still seriously considering Medium Format but can't decide on whether I should sink a ton of money (around $35,000.00) into a MF digital system & compromise on a lighting system or go with the Canon system (around $15,000.00) which would leave money for a top of the line lighting system like Profoto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 You've read several articles and that made you want to switch? Are you serious? I suggest renting a similar body and a similar top lens from each company for the weekend, thoroughly test them and see how much of these differences stated in these articles you can actually see. Happy shooting,Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_lubow Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 If you are going to go with medium format, I say just go with a film system, which will give you plenty of money left over for your lights. $35,000 is way too much for anything that is out there right now, in my opinion. No camera system is worth that much...except maybe an 8X10 Sinar complete with all accessories and a closet full of lenses. If you go with a medium format system and shoot film for now, you can always invest in a digtal back later, too. Medium format systems give you options like that that you can't get with a fixed back camera like a Canon. Medium format stuff is cheap right now. Might as well take advantage of it. There are working medium format cameras that are 40 years old plus. See how usable a 1Ds Mk. II will be in 40 years. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kittybuddha Posted April 16, 2007 Author Share Posted April 16, 2007 Good point, Keith. The problem is that I just got into photography a few years ago & started with digital. It's taken me quite awhile to learn the workflow, etc. I know absolutely nothing about film photography & don't really want to take the time to learn an entirely new medium at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_lubow Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Well, shooting film is no different than shooting digital, except if you are in love with instant viewing you will need to shoot Polaroids. But since no one is going to convince you of that, the Ds gives an incredibly beautiful file that can be enlarged a lot...just try to do all of your cropping in camera (as with anything, but especially 35mm format). Even the 11 megapixel full frame Mark I is great, as long as you keep the ISOs low, which you could definitely get away with given that you will probably be using strobes 95% of the time. The almost 13 megapixel 5D sounds perfect for what you want, in my opinion, unless you really need the four extra megapixels of the Ds. You don't need to shoot fast and you don't need to have a really tough camera, but you want full frame, so the 5D is perfect...except it'll probably be replaced in not too long...still a great camera, though. Keith 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