50d vs. 5d vs 5d mkii

[dansutton]

<p>hi. i'm a young (25) enthusiast with no real bills and i'm getting back into photography as my passion. currently i'm persuing my bachelors in mathematics and really like the hobby. I've got the canon xs with a 50mm/1.8 mki and 28-135/3.5-5.6 (both are EF mounts) and i was thinking about upgrading my camera. I'm looking to sell it to a friend of mine with the 18-55 kit lens for $300 ( I quoted this amount before i realized how much i'm taking a hit on it, but he's a good friend). And i'm wondering what camera i should get. The obvious answer is that already, i've got more camera than talent, but if i'm sinking in a couple hundred dollars, i'd rather spend that principal amount on a really good camera and basically never worry about it again than keep spending a large amount of principal each time i want to upgrade. It really seems like a good 40d/5dmki market right now, but i'm wondering if it's not worth it to just save up an extra month or so and go the 5dmkii. I'm also heavily leaning towards a kit with the 5dmki with the 24-105L as those L's are really beckoning; further, if i'm sinking a lot of capital, wouldn't it be better to go for the kit where i can get the lens for around 700-800 in the package rather than buying it outright. I was just wondering if any of you had faced similar decisions and which route you had taken: did you regret not spending a couple hundred more on that initial purchase, or are you glad, in retrospect, that you went with, say, a 40D with a nice lens, and got just as good photographs as you would have with a more expensive camera. Just for the recap, it seems to be 40d/50d/5d mki/5d mkii. Thanks for any that respond.<br>

dan</p>

[dansutton]

<p>And just for a little concreteness, i've got some numbers from amazon to ballpark the ranges of the cameras:<br>

50D (body) 1077.66<br>

50D with 28-135 : 1,235.64 (new) essentially same used<br>

40D: 849.88 (new) 649.95 (used) body only<br /> <br>

5D mkI 2000.00 (new) 1349.00 (used) --both body only <br>

2549.95 (new) 2198.00 (used) with 24-105/f4L<br /> <br>

5D mkII 2699.00 new body 3499.00 body + 24-105 (these are from adorama, as amazon was about 1000 more expensive on both counts for some reason)<br /> </p>

[sattler123]

<p>Well, you didn;t tell us what you'd use the camera for - makes a big difference in any advice we could give you.</p>

[allen thomsen]

<p>That is a very sweeping question. for the very best images possible in conjunction with very good L lenses the 5dmkii is hands down the winner. And you wouldn't need to worry about upgrading for quite some time. if money is no object it's a no-brainer.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>One basic question, (regarding use, as Juergen mentioned) is: Do you need / want the wide FL? <br /><br />What I mean is: whether you keep your 28 to 135 or you buy the 24 to 105 - Do you want the wide angle, or not? (assuming you will be only using the one zoom lens and the Prime, for a while)<br /><br />That decision begins to separate the APS-C and 135 format decision, IMO.<br /><br />WW</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Most often your better off spending the money on the lenses. The body is basically a computer and they drop in value quickly as new features mount. However lenses do not change much so a good lens you buy today will probably be good in 10 years.</p>

<p>Since it sounds like your just learning I would move to a 40D. For the money its the best value. You will learn much quicker with the better control layout compared to your rebel and a 40D with a good L lens will give you very high quality. </p>

<p> </p>

[JohnMWright]

<p>My best purchases have always been on the lenses and a tripod with a good ballhead. You can't get the best out of a lens without a way to hold it steady.</p>

<p>Unless you want specific features in the newer bodies I'd stick with what you have until you feel it really limits you.</p>

 

[images_in_light_north_west]

<p>40D and 24-105, based on the fact that you are just getting in to this, cost is much lower you get good glass and good photos, remember though if you want to produce real nice images you will need to spend time and money behind a decent computer with the right software, maybe lightroom and CS3 or similer. Now if your passion is wide angle you might consider a used 5DI around $1400. Best though, you let us know what you like to shoot.<br>

Ross</p>

[tdigi]

<p>IMO there is a bit difference in learning with a 40/50D body over a rebel. My first camera was a 300D and while it took good photos the control was really lacking. When I went to a 40D I really learned to quickly make adjustments and use the manual settings since they are all right in front of you. This could just be me and maybe I just was learning more but I really felt the more advanced layout helped. </p>

[jim_larson1]

<p>I would say the useful life of a lens is 12+ years.</p>

<p>Useful life of a body is 4 years. (not that the body breaks. . but the fact is that in four years you will <em>replace</em> the body with a newer model).</p>

<p>If you think "today's bodies are good enough", then I suggest you dig out all those threads from 2003 that declared the 6mp 10D the penultimate camera that would never need to be replaced. However. . .lenses that were raved about in 2003 <em>are still</em> raved about in 2009.</p>

<p>At your stage, especially given the critisicms of the 50D, I would suggest getting a 40D and good glass. The 40D with 24-105/4L-IS is a powerful combination.</p>

<p> </p>

[alfaromeo]

<p>5D (I) +24-105</p>

[jimmer]

<p>If I were in your position, I think I would choose the 5d mkii for the full sensor size and image quality over the 40. I would have said the 5d classic as I love the photos from it, but the mkii addresses many of the issues the of the 5d such as dust on the sensor.<br>

Have you read all the reviews and compared on dpreview?<br>

I sense I understand your position, I am a math major with a hobby in photgraphy! Go for the mkii, then start building up the L lenses. </p>

[bellavance]

<p>My 5D sucked dust like a vacuum cleaner. This is one of the reasons I've sold it and ordered the 5D Mark II, which I'm still waiting for by the way... Canon Canada, when will you ship?</p>

<p>The 5D Mark II is better sealed and has a self cleaning sensor, all of this should help.</p>

<p>By the way, the 24-105 is a perfect general purpose lens for me. Extremely sharp, wide enough and long enough most of the time.</p>

<p>Pierre</p>

[dansutton]

<p>consensus seems to be the 40d plus good glass so far. I really like the viewfinder on the 5d mkii. coming from the XS it's like it swallows your eye and pulls you in. so bright and expansive, perhaps you can actually manually focus now, whereas on the XS, manual focus is just a gimmick. looking through the 5di, there is so much wasted real estate in teh view finder, as there isn't too much information presented to you. I want high ISO usability and that's leading me to the 5d's. I really like the wide angle, and that's why i want to leave the cropped cameras behind. I want my 50mm to have the field of view of a traditional 50mm. I really don't need the 21 MP but that seems to come along for the ride. The video seems extraneous, but i'm sure that that is one feature that i will grow to love: i saw some sample videos and was completely blown away. I was not expecting that quality. I don't know why: it does say 1080 but it really looks good. The only second thought that i have is that i can get the 40D and two or three L lenses for the price of the body plus the L lens. I was just wondering if you had any thoughts/comments/ruminations. I mostly shoot downtown walking around. Haven't really developed a real style as of yet.</p>

[bellavance]

<p>Then get the 5D Mark II and use it in one of the two smaller RAW modes.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>As others have said, camera bodies depreciate fast while lenses tend to hold their value. You could invest in a 5D markII and not worry about having to upgrade for a while, but it will depreciate substantially.<br>

Alternatively you could go for a body that has already substantially depreciated such as the 5D, which still takes great pictures and beats everything so far in the smaller APS-C format. Despite all the hoo ha about the 5D mark II the difference in image quality over the 5D is not that great. Combine it with a 24-105 f4L and 430EX and you good to go.<br>

I would probably go for the 50D over the 40D if you are thinking staying with the APS-C format, and just accept that the body will be worthless (but still taking great pictures) 2 years from now. Heck it was only six months ago that I upgraded from a 3 year old Drebel XT. And while the newer machines have better image quality the difference is pretty small. Whe it comes to making good photos its technique, lighting quality and being in the right place at the right time. Lenses count a bit but camera bodies contribute very little.</p>

[bellavance]

<p>True. If you can't (or won't) afford the 5D Mark II, a good used 5D with a new (I would never buy a used lens) 24-105/4L will give great (but a little dusty) images.</p>

<p>Dust can later be removed in Photoshop...</p>

[William Michael]

<p><em><strong>"I really like the wide angle, and that's why i want to leave the cropped cameras behind. . . . The only second thought that i have is that i can get the 40D and two or three L lenses for the price of the body plus the L lens. . . . I mostly shoot downtown walking around. Haven't really developed a real style as of yet."</strong></em><br>

<em><strong> </strong></em><br>

<em><strong>"I was just wondering if you had any thoughts/comments/ruminations."</strong></em><br>

<br>

Yes I do. Considering your answers, if I were you, I would buy the 5D or the 5DMkII that decision would be based on how much money you really have disposable - and NOT on some of the factors you mention you "like". The point is the 5D is a nice camera and will IMO serve you well for the tasks and learning you have described. <br>

<br>

I suggest then you start building a kit, of good Glass. I would buy the 24 70F2.8L (not the 24 105F4L IS). <br>

<br>

I secondly would look a fast, wider prime, like the 35L/1.4 or the 24L/1.4 more likely the 35 for your purposes.<br>

<br>

My next step might be the 100F2.8Macro: the kit would then be 5D 35L/1.4; 50/1.8; 100/2.8macro and 24 - 70L/2.8 I suggest you price that set, as a value for money comprehensive kit - depending upon where your interests send you, the 70 to 200L series could be the next purchase, rather than the 100 macro.<br>

<br>

In any event, I suggest getting either the 5D cameras; and the 24 to 70 and USE that combination before making any other purchases: - be open to where your photographic desires take your purchasing requirements. <br>

<br>

It seems to me that a fast and wider lens is the answer now, but as you have stated you have neither developed a style nor a specific desire. . . yet.<br>

<br>

WW <br>

<br>

WW<br>

</p>

<p > </p>

 

[bellavance]

<p>I had a 24-70/2.8L and sold it from non-use after getting the 24-105/4L IS for my 5D, but YMMV...</p>

[beautox]

<p>People who have more money invested in their camera than in their lenses are like people who have more invested in their stereo than in their music. Ideally you should have most of your money invested in lenses.</p>

<p>imho</p>

[William Michael]

<p>There are many threads on the EOS Forum, discussing the merits of and comparing and contrasting the 24 70 with the 24 105. <br>

<br>

I understand Pierre's point of view and I think can guess his usage and why the 24 105 is more appealing to him.<br>

<br>

I should have explained the "why" to my comment. I was emphasizing lens speed: I find F2.8 more useful in a zoom than the extra 35mm FL, and as IS does not freeze subject motion, and F2.8 allows for more Shallow DoF subject separation I would find the 24 70 more useful as a tool and as a "development" lens for you considering: <em >"I mostly shoot downtown walking around. Haven't really developed a real style as of yet." </em><br>

<br>

I trust that explains my rationale better. But as Pierre wrote, it is all about YOUR mileage - not my interpretation of it, even though I do believe you should seriously consider the 24 70 for your purposes - I have a base bias, toward lens speed.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

[sam_durrer]

<p>Dan,<br>

since you're ready to dump your body and lenses, have you given any thought at all to the Nikon lineup? The D90 fits right between the 40D and 50D as far as price goes, but offers some extras that you can't get for that money elsewhere. I won't bother you with the details, since you can read up on that on your own, but I've considered all the same cameras that you're looking at and so far the D90 remains the most appealing body.</p>

[bellavance]

<p>I loved my 24-70/2.8L but with the 5D, I prefer having a lens that can go to 105mm, even though I've lost one stop. The 24-70 was fine on my 20D though, because of the 1.6X factor.</p>

[dansutton]

<p>Re: Sam.<br>

That's funny that you mention the D90, as i have flirted with the idea. The only reason that I'm in Canon is because the XS seemed the better buy in the class with the D40 and D60. Beyond that, there really is no reason that I'm staying in the Canon line-up. I am only two lenses deep into the Canon system, so now is also a soul-searching time to possibly switch. I am familiar with the Canon layout, though. But, i think that i prefer the layout of the XS to that of the XXD line. But that's because i'm familiar with it, and would certainly shift to find the layout of the higher bodies much more intuitive after use. The argument goes with Nikon as well. There is a shop that deals almost exclusively in Nikon so i'm gonna have to go by there. But i am still drawn full frame and the d700 is nikon's offering, yet without video. But i hear that the AF is really good (51 points, but beyond that it, it is really good at tracking) and their evaluative metering is supposedly better (they call it, what, 1008 RGB metering or something similar?).</p>

[Nick D.]

<p>I would go with 5D, full frame, biggest pixel size, which will give you really good colors, <br>

if new 5D mark 2 can produce the same colors, yet to be seen, everything is trade off, all this <br>

hype about mega pixels coming to the end, smaller pixels lead to more noise and more spills,<br>

otherwise medium format would be dead by now.<br>

You can get 5D factory refurbished for $1500 with all warranties. Canon have line <br>

of affordable pro quality L glass with F4 max aperture, which Nikon doesn’t, trust me on that,<br>

Nikon D700 is much more expensive than 5D with the same sensor size, good new glass for<br>

Nikon D700 cost small fortune, do the math yourself.<br>

I am using Fuji S3 Pro and D300, first one is slow, second one has everything perfect, <br>

except colors and no matter how I try, I can’t get the same colors, information just not <br>

there.</p>