should i get a 5d if ive no L glass

[andrew_spence1]

<p>guys<br>

Should I get an EOS 5d and just use my present non L lenses.<br>

I know the standard well known advantages of full frame v apsc but do I really need L glass for a 5d<br>

I have the following lenses that I use on a 550d including its"" no good on full frame efs ""18-55 iii<br>

I was thinking I could just use the following lenses I have but im not sure it would be a good idea or not.<br>

Canon ef 75-300 f4-5.6 iii<br>

Canon,ef 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 7 blade<br>

I also have manual focus lenses that I use often <br>

Olympus OM 28mm f 3.5 <br>

Olympus OM 50mm f 1.8<br>

hellios 44-m4 58mm<br>

lens baby 35mm composer pro<br>

Tokina sd 28-70mm f3.5-4.5<br>

Tokina sd 70-210mm f4-5.6<br>

and that's it...............so far<br>

Ive got great results with all of these <br>

One part of me says a 5d isn't that expensive and it would be fun to use with these lenses and I should get one anyway,as full frame quality is bound to improve matters <br>

while another part of me says I would be wasting a perfectly good 5d with these lenses and I should get some L glass<br>

What do you think<br>

Regards Andrew</p>

<p> </p>

[dcstep]

<p>I can't see any of your images and you don't tell us what you want to do that you can't do with your current camera and lenses. Lacking compelling support, I say that a 5D would likely be a waste.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>You don't need L glass for a full frame DSLR. </p>

<p>The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a "prime" example of a dirt cheap lens that offers great image quality on full frame. 1000s of users are happy with their Sigma lenses and Sigma don't make L lenses.</p>

<p>If you want my advice, don't get a 5D if you expect better image quality. Buy a 5D if you want to enjoy shallower depth of field and use the outer glass of your full frame lenses.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>The short answer is Yes - in this day and age, and especially for 'fun w/ mf lenses'. Although if you do a lot of MF lens stuff you may also want to consider a focusing screen. The FF experience is about far more than MP, and frame rate and at the low cost of entry now, there is simply no good reason not too.</p>

<p>You will love having a VF you can actually, you know, view things through ;)</p>

<p>One of the things you won't find in many 'modern' DSLRs (most certainly including your 550D). That the 5D will give you is buttery smooth images w/o NR at low to mid ISOs. LOL I remember when I upgraded to my 5D2s from 5Ds - everything was going great until I looked at an ISO400 RAW at 100% - I was shocked(!) at how noisy it was... </p>

<p>And it's not just the 50/1.8 - the 40/2.8, the new WA primes which include improved edge to edge performance that a 550D (or any crop) completely misses...</p>

 

[ed_avis2]

<p>With the lenses you have, for the first time a 5D will let you take a reasonably wide angle photograph (using the 28mm Olympus lens for example).</p>

<p>There is no need for anything more expensive - many of the lenses you have will give sharp and contrasty images when stopped down to f/8. The fix-focal ones should be good at wider apertures too.</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>Why L glass? Lots of prime lenses are just as good or better than L lenses so if I were you I'd start with what you have, you can always expand your lens set later on, when the need arises.</p>

[tom_hamilton1]

<p>Get the 5D. Its the least expensive way to get into a full frame camera. And its a great camera. Its not called the Classic for nothing. You won't regret it.</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>There's nothing unique or special about the 5D, apart from the shift from crop to full frame, and what that'll do to the perspective of all your lens. I'm looking at my 5DIII right now, with a Canon 35mm f2.0 mounted. Not the new, pricier one with the IS: the old, trusty-rusty cheapy with pentagon bokeh. Great combo.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>No harm in getting a 5D. It's still a great camera and a good bargain.<br>

However, also keep your APS-C body--that way, you'll have the best of both worlds.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>The 5D doesn't have live view, which is going to make precise manual focusing a pain (and an inaccurate pain at that).</p>

<p>On the other hand it's cheap and for $300-$400 you can find out whether you like FF or not! I would not expect a "night and day" quality improvement over APS-C though.</p>

[james_elwing]

<p>Even though you don't have live view, the focusing screen set up should have a wider angle of view than your current 1.6 factor 550D, so should make optical manual focusing for your Olympus & Russian lenses easier, but live view focusing is desirable. I think 5D mark II & III have live view.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>I once had a 5D with no lenses at all !</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I think Bob's point on no live view- so difficulty in accurate manual focus is an important one. I have a 5D that I used only for about 18 months as a main camera before I replaced it with a Mkii which I used virtually uniquely for 4 years - mainly because I could see to focus it well- and IMO better than I get from AF. I wouldn't get a 5D now unless I couldn't see a way to affording a Mkii anytime soon or unless I was prepared to use only those lenses on which I could use AF. But that's just me and my eyesight.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>You can currently get a new EOS 6D for $1250 (after rebates). If the cost (~3x that of a used 5D) isn't an issue, it would probably be a better buy.</p>

[art_thomas1]

<p>The Canon 5D has about 61 lp/mm of available resolution. Most decent lenses that are non-L glass can resolve that moderate amount. It's true that a lens that resolves 61 lp/mm on film or a sensor used with a lens of 61 lp/mm will give a lesser result on the image. Still, going for extremely high resolution glass is not going to do much for your pictures because the sensor is going to be the weakest link. </p>

[neill_farmer2]

<p>I think the only problem with the 5D is that it doen't have a dust shaker on the sensor. If cleaning the sensor is not a worry then it would be a good low cost upgrade to FF. Otherwise a 6D is the way to go.</p>

[david_john_appleton]

<p>this may help you. its a thread in witch the OP has a 7D (7D has the same censer as the 550D) and how he likes the 5D over his 7D read his 1st post and his follow up post approx 15 down http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/42067097 <br>

I have a 5Dc and like some, i see a special quality in the 5D photos that i not see in its replacements ..many people say the 5D has "only" 12mp so will not print big, however when viewed on screen at <strong>200%</strong> the 5D looks better than many APS camera at 100% with a higher mp count so Logic dictates that the 5D will print bigger in real world ..i have a 16mp sony nex with a many years newer APS 16mp censer but if i need a poster size print i will pick up the 5D without hesitation <br>

just a note.. many people Believe that just become a camera will resolve more detail with its higher mp count the image quality must be better ,this is often not the case </p>

[mark_stephan2]

<p>Like you I didn't have any L lenses when I bought my 5D. I had a 50/1.8II and a 20-35/3.5-4.5 lenses. I only paid $400 for the body just to see what FF was all about and now I prefer it to my 40D (paid $200.00). After a few months I was able to sell some stuff on eBay to raise funds for a lens. I checked Adorama and they had the 24-105/4L for $619.00 for a refurbished lens. The lens is simply outstanding and it more than anything else makes FF enjoyable for me. So my conclusion is, if you can get a 5D for a really go price I say go for it. You can always pick up a L lens later.</p>