5d or 5dmkII upgrade

jedi6

With the price of the 5D going down recently I am considering upgrading to it. However I want to get some feedback to see what you guys think. I am currently using a 40D that is having issues and will be returned. So do I go with the 5D and save around $1,000 or do I wait for the 5DmkII? I currently am shooting portraits and stock in studio. While it would be nice to be able to shoot video I don't know how much I would use it. Also does anyone know if the price on the 5D will go down more as my budget is somewhat an issue as well? Please let me know what you guys would do.

Thanks,

Mike

ziggy53

Mike,

The higher pixel count of the 5D MKII might be a selling point for customers and might be a differentiator for comparing you with competitors. Many customers are still attracted by the illusion and marketing of high pixel counts. Unless you are shooting for a magazine spread or doing a lot of extreme enlargements, it probably isn't a real factor. If your budget is stretched by the 5D MKII then the original 5D might need to be considered.

One of the local pros, a friend of mine, shoots portraits with the 5D and does splendid work with it. I doubt that she would realize any practical benefit going to the 5D MKII other than cropping options. Lights, lenses and posing technique are far more important.

Lenses will probably change going from the 1.6x crop to FF imager. Be sure to take that into account as any current lenses will take on a new FOV on the FF body.

What issues did you have with the 40D?

jedi6

ziggy53 wrote:

Mike,

The higher pixel count of the 5D MKII might be a selling point for customers and might be a differentiator for comparing you with competitors. Many customers are still attracted by the illusion and marketing of high pixel counts. Unless you are shooting for a magazine spread or doing a lot of extreme enlargements, it probably isn't a real factor. If your budget is stretched by the 5D MKII then the original 5D might need to be considered.

One of the local pros, a friend of mine, shoots portraits with the 5D and does splendid work with it. I doubt that she would realize any practical benefit going to the 5D MKII other than cropping options. Lights, lenses and posing technique are far more important.

Lenses will probably change going from the 1.6x crop to FF imager. Be sure to take that into account as any current lenses will take on a new FOV on the FF body.

What issues did you have with the 40D?

With the 40D I kept getting errors and random lock ups.

I was also considering the 50D but noise is a huge issue for me so that is why I am primarily wanting to go with a ff camera. I will have to sell my 17-55 f2.8 IS lens but that is ok. I agree it would be nice to have more megapixels for those clients that want 20x30s.

Tango

glass glass glass......

oh, and a 5d is no slouch

Robinivich

For stock photography, from what little I know, 21 megapixels is likely a serious advantage over 12. The image size I believe is a big criteria for acceptance to some of the bigger agencies, and 21 puts you a healthy distance from the legions of 10 and 12 megapixels. This is, however, not that huge a photographic advantage in reality.

Personally, having shot with my beloved 40d, it'd also be hard to step back a few years in features, I know, it's silly, but there it is.

But also remember, that $1000 could be put towards a really nice lens!

jedi6

Thanks guys I appreciate all the input.

Robinivich wrote:

For stock photography, from what little I know, 21 megapixels is likely a serious advantage over 12. The image size I believe is a big criteria for acceptance to some of the bigger agencies, and 21 puts you a healthy distance from the legions of 10 and 12 megapixels. This is, however, not that huge a photographic advantage in reality.

Personally, having shot with my beloved 40d, it'd also be hard to step back a few years in features, I know, it's silly, but there it is.

But also remember, that $1000 could be put towards a really nice lens!

I agree with you about losing some of the features that I am used to. I am thinking more and more about just waiting for the 5DmkII. That is another problem though is I, like many others, don't like waiting. :haha
As far as lenses is concerned I was going to get the 24-105L kit lens. I have heard good things about it and then when I can afford it I really want a 70-200 f2.8 IS. Should I be aware of any issues with using the 24-105 for portraits and stock?

Thanks

Manfr3d

There are also other benefits the new 5D has:

+ faster shooting
+ faster buffer
+ liveview
+ better iso performance
+ savable camera configurations
+ af adjust
+ larger and crisper lcd to check & show your work
+ longer battery life
+ udma card support

You can also set the camera to 11MP and 5MP and get even more out of one or more of the above (less noise for example).

For me its a no brainer for "only" 1000€ more than a used 5D.

Swartzy

Well.....I on the other hand was going back and forth over the same thing....wait for the MKII or.......well...honestly, the 5D is a great camera. FF at almost 13mplx.....with today's pricing....no brainer. At this juncture, it is really about the glass. Many world class shooters are using the 5D and the results are stunning. Quite honestly, I think the tools available today are more than enough to do what you want to do for stellar results.

I was thinking of shooting a wedding at 24mplx per image....um, forget about it...it isn't necessary...just how big do you want the print anyway? I have a 3' x 4' print on my wall from a 7 mpxl point & shoot. The deals are out there as people are unloading some quality equipment in leu of the new model. I just picked up a 5D, w/grip, w/2 batteries, w/eye piece extender, w/ the original unopened strap, all boxes cards, software....under 10,000 actuations...and absolutely MINT....The transparent covers were never taken off the screens......$1400.00. I'd say that camera will be in service for quite awhile. I also shoot a 40D...image quality is wonderful.

Pindy

I find the 21MP spec of the mkII to be the least important of anything. I am buying the camera on low light sensitivity alone and getting the great LCD and the rest as a bonus, as I see it.

Candid Arts

Pindy wrote:

I find the 21MP spec of the mkII to be the least important of anything. I am buying the camera on low light sensitivity alone and getting the great LCD and the rest as a bonus, as I see it.

everything everyone said, and also it's got the new processor. DiGiC 4 versus the 2 that the 5D has.

I really wanted the 5D mkII, but no way I could afford it. I went with the 50D from the 40D, and I LOVE it.

The 24-105 L lens is an amazing peice of glass. That is my primary lens for everyday shooting.

For me, for doing portraits, I prefer my 50mm 1.4, but would have loved to get the 50mm 1.2L, but couldn't spend the money at the time.

I would personally say wait to get the 5D mkII, but you really can't go wrong with the original 5D, it is and will be an amazing body for a long time.

Moogle Pepper

One of the things that I am looking forward to with the mk II, is that, since I am a traveler I don't need to look for a camcorder anymore. Sure most P and Ss shoot video too, just not on the scale of the Mk II. I see it now as a great way to create something after traveling without having to lug around a good DSLR and Camcorder.

jedi6

Thanks for everyones opinions on this it has helped.

I just saw the new screen on the 50D and wow does it look great even compared to the 40D. While that is not of huge importance I think I would miss having a 3" screen, especially one that looks as good as he 50D. I really think I am just going to wait and get the 5D Mark II at this point. It just has so many additions and features that I can't pass it up even though it is more expensive. I think it will be well worth the price.

Also the 24-105L IS lens will be great to start with as well and will be a nice addition.