Lost It All In A House Fire, Now The Fun Begins!

[seanholloway]

<p>About one year ago I lost all my photography equipment, except my studio lights and backdrops, in a house fire.

This last year has Sucked, I capitalized the s on purpose. We've rebuilt the house, replaced the furniture, and finally

settled back in. Now the fun begins. I get to go on a shopping spree for all new photography equipment. Wow, how

things have changed. 21 megapixel D5s! All of these new features have really advanced. My most modern DS

LR was a 30D. I'm looking to spend $8-10,000 to build a good start. I photograph studio stills & portraits, wi

ldlife (birds mostly but whatever strikes my fancy on a hike), landscapes, and events. I have a couple questions. It se

ems to me the camera makers are chasing the megapixel numbers instead of features like processing speed and au

tofocus systems, like the good ole days. I'm seeing 3-5 frames per second on these megapixel mammaths. Isn't th

is overkill. My 8mp 30D took great resolution photos at 30 inches printed, but it was too slow. I blew up a 50mm st

udio portrait to 30" and could see the tiny fibers in the lace on the dress. I see no need for me to ever print larger th

an this. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of cropping some photos and retaining res, but isn't 21 me

gapixels a little bit overkill? Isn't that slowing things down too much? I guess it's fine, as long as there are al

ternatives. What's the middle ground. What's got good resolution for the tele crops, and the speed I want for those fr

eeby weddings I shoot. I'm looking at the D50 (so I can spend more on glass). What's this video mumbo ju

mbo? I don't want a camcorder. Where's the camera gone? Next question, 300mm 2.8L or 400mm 2.8L? Is th

e extra 100mm worth the $1500? I'm thinking 300mm with 1.4 extendor. Should I reconsider?</p>��

[jason_thurman]

<p>Why not get a 40D instead of a 50D and put even MORE money into glass? That takes care of your video problem too :).Anyway, you touched on makers packing too many pixels into the cams without focus on other things, and I think the 50D is an example of that. If a 30D suited you fine, you'll love the 40D. Understand that I don't have a 50D, never touched one, but I read things. A lot of things. The only thing I'd want it for is the microadjustment for the lenses. However, I think the overall image quality, expecially when it comes to noise, makes up for it on the 40D. I think that's all I'm going to say about that, others might have great things to say about the 50D, and maybe their right. I'm just telling you some stuff that other people have been saying about some stuff. Have a good time with your shopping.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Actually Nikon makes the D50. Canon's 50D is a class or two above it.</p>

<p>I had a 40D and 50D and greatly prefer the 50D due to the beautiful, bright and clear LCD. It's worth a couple benjamins more just for that. The extra rez is useful if you crop or make huge prints but not a big deal otherwise. As for 40D/50D noise, I find the same sized print, e.g., 12x18, to be cleaner and with less noise artifacts than the 40D. I assume it is because the 40D needs more up rezzing. For smaller prints there isn't much diff.</p>

<p>Some guys make a really big deal out of the 50D Direct Print button now being used for LV/MLU. In fact it isn't called a Direct pint button any more and has a icon representing LV on it...</p>

[dogbert]

<p>My 8 mp 350D did nice prints up to 13x19. My 12 mp 450D does them better (slightly). And my 5D does them better still (slightly).<br>

Bottom line is things have improved since the 30D, maybe not a huge margin, but they have improved. <br>

Can't comment from personal experience in relation to the 300/2.8 v 400/2.8 except that by reputation the 300/2.8 is supposed to be one of Canon's absolutely best lenses and is still supposed to be very good with the 1.4x. Smaller too. Though if you are going to be always shooting with the 1.4x then it might make sense to just bite the bullet and go for the 400/2.8.<br>

For birds you might want to consider the 400/5.6 as it is considered handholdable.</p>

[seanholloway]

<p>Thanks for the replies. You're right, Puppy Face, I meant 50D. Yes, the 40D is a contender. $300 more for glass sounds appealing. But so does more rez for cropping. What is "LV/MLU"? And the 400/5.6 is a good idea too, Geoff. I'm looking at the 100-400/4.5-5.6 for my hiking lens. You know, the lens to keep mounted for the surprises. But, I want one of those big-en's with the big hole for ambushing the critters hiding in the dark shadows too. What about the live view feature? How's that upgrade working for y'all.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>LV = LiveView. MLU = Mirrir Lock Up.<br>

Bob wrote a nice article comparing 40D and 50D rez:<br>

http://bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_50D_resolution_confusion.html</p>

[markonestudios]

"I photograph studio stills & portraits, wi ldlife (birds mostly but whatever strikes my fancy on a hike), landscapes, and events..."

<p>How about the 5D MarkII with 24-105L lens, then supplement with one of the longer telephotos? 24mm is pretty wide on a full-frame. I own this lens and shoot with a film SLR. I've found it has a very useful focal length and is not too heavy. On the 5DII, you'll also benefit from very clean files at high ISO, plus a nice bright viewfinder and big, high-res rear LCD. You never have to use video, so you could just ignore that it's there. Live View might be useful for your studio stills for optimal focus.

<p>Regarding image/file size, the 5DII has 2 smaller RAW format files, plus you could always shoot on medium/fine JPEG.

<p>I would then supplement this kit with a prime or two: 35 f/2, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 depending on where you see the most useful focal length. Add a 580 EXI or EXII flash, decent tripod, hiking camera backpack and you should be sorted. Not to mention protective filters for all your glass, and maybe a circular polarizer.

<p>If you can't make a decision, I can always give you my bank details, and you can wire the 10k to me ;-)

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>Megapixels schmegapixels. 21 mpix versus 15 mpix on the 50D means squareroot(21/15) = 18% more pixels in each dimension.</p>

<p>A full-frame camera gets you a bigger viewfinder, easier focusing, shallower dof at smaller focal lengths, and clean high iso. Great for portraiture, weddings, street, stuff like that. You can attach a 70-200/2.8 IS and shoot without having to back up through the doorway into the hallway.</p>

<p>A crop camera like the 50D is generally lighter and more portable, cheaper, and compatible with the excellent 17-55/2.8 IS which is the only f/2.8 stabilized standard zoom. As well the crop factor will help when shooting birds.</p>

[tombartlett]

<p>I've never tried the 400/2.8 but I have the 300/2.8 and 1.4x TC on a 30D and I think it's a great setup. My TC doesn't live on the 300 but its a frequent visitor.</p>