Jump to content

Which Camera


herbert_archie

Recommended Posts

Basically I've only had that camera and I've done a few weddings (not claiming to be a

professional though) and I've been told I'm committing suicide by not having two cameras so

I figured I might as well move up and get a better primary body, but can't afford the 5d. Plus,

I don't do enough work to warrant that purchase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the 30D. My reasoning was the larger photosites provide inherently lower Hi ISO Noise. I saw color patches, on the web, that show that the 40D has to turn on noise reduction to equal the 30D Hi ISO low noise. Haven't seen any comparisons of actual pictures but I've seen many great pictures by the 30D.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree.

 

I just recently bought a second 30D body (and relegated my 10D to backup duties). It was used and cost $800 US, compared to, what, $1300 US for a 40D body alone?

 

Don't get me wrong. 40Ds are darned nice, and I'll probably upgrade to a pair of them sometime next year after the dust settles. I'd really like to have the improved AF and viewfinder, in particular. The larger LCD would be great for histogram review and reading menus. I'm not sure if I'd use Live-view much. I think there are a lot of nice improvements over 30D, in fact, although the dust removal doesn't do much for me.

 

As the digital SLR industry is maturing a little, the pace and degree of improvements are slower and smaller, more incremental in nature. IMHO we'll be seeing more refinements and far fewer earth-shaking upgrades.

 

The 30Ds are doing just fine for me for now. Resolution isn't an issue, I can make fine prints up to 16x20. They are quite capable cameras.

 

Either camera would be a big step up for you.

 

Depending upon what you've got already, lenses will likely go a lot further expanding upon your creativity and potential.

 

I'll probably put the $500 I saved towards a 12-24/4 Tokina, in fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have the lenses you need to do (justice to) weddings, i.e. one of the most important days of people's lives? If you are to continue and/or progress as the prime/only photographer at someone's wedding then you owe it to them to do the best job you can on the budget you have. You need a lens around 30mm (say Sigma f/1.4) on a crop body to get all those indoor, low light candid, daylight shots of preparation and reception. You need someting like a 24-70mm for the general outdoor shots. You need a 'reasonable' flash (maybe a 430ex) and you need a 2nd body ... I know a few (getting less) photographers who shoot weddings professionally with a 20D and a 30D or two 30Ds, a few who use a MkIII and many who use a 5D. I would assess your wholistic requirement for what you want to achieve to an 'acceptable' standard (to you and your clients) (be it weddings or other things), look at your finances and find out where the biggest gap is. Simplistically I would say, get the 30D (I have one, it's a fine camera) and a lens. Have a look on the wedding forum for their recommendations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank, "I saw color patches, on the web, that show that the 40D has to turn on noise reduction to equal the 30D Hi ISO low noise."

 

Having both a 20D and 40D, I agree with Martyn. "the 40d wipes the floor with the 30d." Well, that may be an exaggeration, but the image quality is improved, and specifically, digital noise has changed for the better. Perhaps not by leaps & bounds, but it is better. It's also a far nicer camera to shoot with.

 

Hebert, if money is a serious issue, get a 20D and some good glass. The difference between the 20D & 30D is not significant, and almost nonexistent as far as image quality is concerned. If you can't afford a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, then get a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. That, and an 85mm f/1.8 is all you really need to do weddings. Wider and longer lenses are nice, but you don't really *need* them.

 

Before you ruin someone's wedding from random broken equipment...

 

Along with your two camera bodies, make sure you have at least 2 normal range lenses, and 2 capable flash units. Then make sure you know how everything works, and know it well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem I have with showing you proof is I dont have any high iso shots to hand with the 30D, reason being I soon learnt not to go above iso800 as the pictures would be useless.

 

I can show you high iso shots from the 40d

 

http://picasaweb.google.com/martyngreswolde/40DTestFile?authkey=8IhllwxvjqA

 

Tell me you can get an ISO1600 shot this clean from a 30D.

 

Let me stress, this image ha no PP from the original RAW. only change was to bring it to 8bit, sRGB and Jpeg level 7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always leave high ISO noise reduction off. I need at least some of the larger buffer, and the NR cripples it's use. It doesn't seem to do that much anyway.

 

BTW, I find the digital noise of the 20D/30D to be just fine, and perfectly usable for weddings. I just found the 40D to be better. I kept reading that they were very close, and that the 40D was only slightly cleaner, but found it to be more than "slight." It's a nice improvement, and along with all the other refinements & features makes for a considerably nicer camera overall. It also feels better to hold & shoot with. But none of that is as important as getting better glass, and backups if you do weddings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...