5D mk1 or L glass?

[DickArnold]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"I hear all the arguements about the newer electronics in the 50d and so on, but there is something about the smooth tones and noise control in the 5d that really works well.Sometimes the spec sheets don't tell the whole story<strong>". <br /></strong></em><br /><strong><em></em></strong>Mercedes. Your above quote says it better than I can. When I made the first couple of pictures from the 5D I knew it was different. Below is a recent 5D, 70-200 2.8L. swim meet picture Flash fill used because of severe contrast. Unedited except for mild sharpening and cropping. <em>ISO 3200. 1/400. F9. </em></p>

</blockquote><div></div>

[doctorko]

<p>I presently own a 5D original, with a 24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/4L lens. I am EXTREMELY pleased with the results I've gotten. I am also pleased with the results I've gotten from tje 50 f/1.4 lens and 85 f/1.8 lens. The 5D will not disappoint you.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>I note that Photonet has now reduced the posted picture density from 200 to 100k. The above picture was a RAW capture and I did not use noise reduction software.</p>

[peter_j2]

<p><strong>Richard:</strong> Sell your 450D and all of your lenses.</p>

<p>Since you mainly prefer Canon zoom lenses, may I recommend the EF 17-40 f/4L USM and EF 70-200 f/4L IS USM. Put the 17-40 on your 5D and the 70-200 on your 50D. You can decide if you need to add a EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and/or a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro. All of these lenses are great for the 5D's image critical sensor.</p>

<p>If you purchased all of the equipment recommended used (most of it I own except for the macro which I am contemplating on buying), you will be spending about $3700 CAN (filters excluded). You can get a new 50mm Canon hood from ebay cheap. The "L" lenses comes with a hood.</p>

<p>May I also recommend the excellent Sigma line of multi-coated UV filters.</p>

[evphotography]

<p>I say sell it all and go with the 5D and for landscape go with the 17-40L and 70-200 f/4L with the 50mm f/1.4 for a gap lens. The 17-40L performs very will at 20-30mm when stopped down for landscape use. At 17mm it is soft in corners and edges and at 35mm it is little soft as well. But I look at it this way, you are basically getting three primes in one lens. The only primes that might out perform the 17-40L at the wide end is the 24 f/1.4L and only by a very small amount that only is probably noticeable when pixel peeping at 100%. Another really good lens to compliment that setup is the 35mm f/2, it is a very very sharp lens when stopped down and outperforms the 17-40L by a fair amount at the 35mm range.</p>

[john schroeder]

<p>Bodies come and go; But glass is forever. Buy the glass!</p>

[peter_j2]

<p><strong>John Schroeder:</strong> "But glass is forever."</p>

<p>Not really. Here are some examples of new glass to keep up with the newer bodies:</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L II USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II </li>

<li>Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 200mm f/2.0 L IS USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 1.4x II </li>

<li>Canon EF 2x II </li>

<li>Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM </li>

<li>Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM </li>

</ul>

<p>Canon will continue to discontinue current lenses in their attempt to maintain a leading edge in DSLR field.</p>

[bluta]

<p>I say that YES, it would be pointless to get a 5D without a good glass! I would advice you to buy the L glass. I know that 5D and all other full frames are a temptation, especially to guys that never had one before, but after all it all comes down to good glass.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Peter Jung: I agree with John Schroeder, glass is "forever". The differences between the lenses you list and their predecessors is extremely minimal other than those that add IS which is not necessarily a good thing.</p>

<p>I doubt you could tell the difference between shots taken with my 20+ year old manual focus 200/2 and 400/2.8 and todays current samples. I suspect in 20 years time the manual ones will still be functioning, not so sure about the autofocus and IS ones.</p>

<p>Having said that, still get the 5D first.</p>

[richard_lyman1]

<p>Peter and Eric- I like it! Just get rid of the whole system and start over! I've actually been thinking of doing just that. I will keep the 50D though, it has it's drawbacks but it's a great camera, and as you suggested Peter, it would be a wonderful companion with the 70-200 f2.8. Then I have the glass and the 2 great bodies, and I can add as I see fit. In retrospect had I known more about cameras and how obsessed with and important too my life photography would become I would have bought higher end gear in the first place, I was in a better situation to do so then, but hey, what can you do.</p>

<p>I'm a little concerned about the process of selling all this used gear. It's all under a year old, but a recent visit to e-bay had me doubtful as to how much I can recoup. Obviously I'm going to take a pretty decent loss, but some of the prices on there are a lot less than half of what I paid originally. At those prices it kind of paints things in a different light. I'm not sure how to set a fair and competitive price for the buyer without getting completely hosed on the deal. Also I'm not sure where to sell it. Perhaps here in the classifieds, or Craig's list.</p>

[wayne_campbell]

<p>

 

<p >Here is a photo I made with the Tokina 11-16/2.8 at an event in Baltimore back in January:</p>

 

Whoa...what kind of event was that? Looks like Jerry Colonna on goofballs!<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00T/00T24d-123891584.jpg" alt="" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="700" height="467" />

</p>

[peter_j2]

<p><strong>John Crowe:</strong> <em>"The differences between the lenses you list and their predecessors is extremely minimal other than those that add IS which is not necessarily a good thing."</em></p>

<p>Unfortunately, you are wrong.</p>

<p>I am going to presume you have never owned/tried the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM and the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM lenses. You can also clarify what you mean by <em>"not necessarily a good thing."</em></p>

<p>Canon just didn't add IS to the 70-200/4 and released it to the public for the added $400 increase. They also revised the optics. I traded in the non IS for the IS version. Trust me, the IS version is dramatically sharper. The IS makes hand held photography easier. The price increase was worth the upgrade for me.</p>

<p><em>"I suspect in 20 years time the manual ones will still be functioning, not so sure about the autofocus and IS ones."</em></p>

<p>Can you explain the reasoning behind your statement?<em><br /> </em></p>

[peter_j2]

<p><strong>Richard:</strong> <em>"I like it! Just get rid of the whole system and start over!"</em></p>

<p>Don't feel bad. I got rid of my Nikon film camera and lenses and switched to Canon full frame digital. I am not brand loyal. Just loyal to the brand that has the right tools for my purpose.</p>

<p><em>"I'm a little concerned about the process of selling all this used gear."</em></p>

<p>Don't be concerned. What has to go has to go. I recently sold a Lowepro camera bag and Canon Digital Rebel XT on Craigslist Toronto. Both items were reduced by 60% for a quick sale. I always believe in giving a little back to the next person who wants to 'inherit' my equipment.<em> </em> Otherwise, the ad would have sat for months. Time is money.<em> </em> It's the time I don't have.<em><br /> </em></p>

[taje]

<p>Just a quick one, but I believe it could be VERY IMPORTANT to point out, Richard, that EFS lenses WILL NOT even mount on the 5D. It seemed to me, from some of your sentences, that you were considering the option.<br>

That aside, before re-converting to film almost completely, I've used -and still own- a 5D with an EF24mm, EF50mm f1.4 and the 70-200 IS f2.8L. I understand your point about the full frame, but I believe good lenses will add more to the overall quality. High ISO? Not really. I mean, noise cuts back that quality much faster than lens quality. After 200-400 ISO noise gets visible on the 5D. You can surely still use the image up to much higher ISO, but that's not a great factor -at least to my view of photography-<br>

A 17mm is roughly a 28mm equivalent. That's a rather good focal for landscapes. Also 50mm is perfect for that. I really don't want to sound condescending, but I'll tell you because I've been involved in the wider and wider "race" in the past. Til you realize that landscape isn't at all about including the most you can. Rather the opposite. So my personal advice is still: go with good lenses. I would invest on primes, but that's personal. Nothing develops your brain as much as primes. Choose the lenses for their personality and perspective, not for their angle of view. You'll be satisfied :-)</p>

[pankaj purohit]

<p>I would suggest you to <strong><em>spend you money on the really good prime glasses</em> </strong> , and if you want to take advantages of full frame than you can<em><strong> buy an used canon 35mm SLR</strong> </em> , which you may find very cheaply and as you said you do mostly the landscapes, those will come far better on 35mm films in terms of dynamic range and color rendition (Taste matters). After that whenever you could arrange the enough money, then go for that future times new tools which would be definitely far greater than today's latest.</p>

[alan_cox3]

<p>Richard, I would always suggest you<strong> invest in good FF glass first</strong>. Get the 17-40, and some good primes for use on the 50D. Technique, software and practice will yield amazing results. Then you'll be ready for the 5D3 in a few years. I'm currently using 40D with 17-40, 70-200, 50, 85, and the 28-135 kit that came with my 40D. I've intentionally avoided crop lenses because I know where I want to be in five years. For a special trip in January I rented a 5D2 (but didn't buy). </p>

[markonestudios]

I recently tried out a 5D (admittedly, the 5DII) with a 20 f/2.8 lens. Wow! If you're after a fast wide prime, that lens is great! I also own the 17-40L and use it on my Xti as well as my film SLR. I find it to be a superb lens not only in terms of value for money but in terms of sheer optical quality. If you're shooting landscapes, I'm guessing you'll be around the f/8 - ish mark, so not sure RE your rationale for a fast wide. However, your needs may vary. I would defintely go for the 5D though.

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>My suggestion: get a Canon 10-22, and get your 17-55 serviced.</p>

[stamos]

<p>There are so many parameters to consider. Generally I did not regret buying L glass (specially primes) but many times I regreted buying camera bodies. Probably other people have different experiences (maybe the shooting style, different needs).</p>