Don't worry, I would not buy that lens. I was using it as an example of the current situation.
Seems kinda strange to me that part of your decision is on the availability of lens you wouldn't want. As much research as you have done in looking at switching systems, I would be willing to guess you do the same amount of research on a new lens or equipment purchase. Waiting on mail order vs running in a frenzy to the local store would work for that kind of enlightened purchase. ..after all it ain't exactly like collecting baseball cards.
Do you really need that sort of up to the second support of new products? I mean I would think even a house builder finally gets his tool box somewhat to his liking and can build just as nice of a house even without the latest and greatest hammer.
No offense and can understand your needs for a different body... To me it would seem to be cheaper in the long run to try out a D2xs and see what you think. You already have some nice lenses for it.. especially the 70 - 200 VR. ...or even possibly think of using film in very low light. An F100 would be pretty easy to find at a low cost and why I still keep mine around.
Then again, I am about half awake and just now attempting to allow caffeine to flow into the system... So if I am outta line.. please forgive, ignore, delete, or backspace my thoughts away from your screen.
:hide
Currently that is out of my budget. I am thinking of getting into the line with the 5D and buying the lenses that I want. Then wait a bit and upgrade the body and keep the 5D as a backup.
Doc
I think (and certainly hope) that the 5D will be your "alternate" camera, and much more than "backup".:D
It is my own plan to acquire a 5D within a year, and then alternate between the 1D MKII and the 5D, with a dRebel XT as a true "backup" cam. That implies that I will keep crop lenses for the XT, which may not work on the other bodies.
The lack of availablity was used to illustrate a point. Nikon has a major supply problem that is effecting not only the lenses but all of the accessories as well. I needed a remote release a few months ago quickly for a project. I could not get it locally and even B&H did not have it in stock. A few weeks ago I got an email from B&H that they finally arrived. No, I do not normally need things right away and yes I do a lot of research before making decisions. I actually have a reputation for researching and analysis.
Given the way Canon is running things, they announce something and have it on the store shelves by the time I make my decision.
Why would I want to go with a D2xs? I have considered it. But it is not full frame and I read that the ISO noise is still a problem.
IF, and When Nikon decides on producing a full frame camera the supply situation will only get worse. There will be a flood of people dumping their crop frame camera and D lenses.
Also, consider this. Say I have a job to do and the day before my camera develops a problem. I need to be able to get it fixed or pick up another one fast. Getting either repaired locally would be a big problem. But, I could walk into a local store and get a replacement Canon in one day.
Film? Not an option. I cannot see that working for me. I cannot put most of my photos online for printing at SM much less taking them to someplace for printing. And no it is not porn. With digital I can print if needed but usually I provide the customer with the electronic file.
You use the analogy of home building... Ok. I do construction work on the side. Lets use that analogy. In this case hammer and nail = film. It works but is slower and time is money. An air nailer is equivalant to digital. But it depends on a compressor to work. A compressor needs electricity. I can either run a generator or have access to power at a site.
An alternative is Paslode. It uses small flamable gas cylinders and a battery to fire the nail into the board. The Paslode is cordless and other than recharging the batteries needs no electricity. I can get the Paslode cylinders locally and I keep a supply of them and batteries ready to go.
Some of the locations I have had to build are off the grid and getting power in always takes weeks. I can either haul in a compressor and generator or I can use the Paslode. Usually the Paslode comes into play because getting to the site itelf can be limited and getting the compressor and generator are a problem. The Paslode also has the advantage that you can move around the job site quickly without having to reroute the air hose everytime you move from area to area.
Also, if the Paslode breaks, I can go buy a new one locally. I can get an air nailer as well but it is still limited to power/air access.
Seems kinda strange to me that part of your decision is on the availability of lens you wouldn't want. As much research as you have done in looking at switching systems, I would be willing to guess you do the same amount of research on a new lens or equipment purchase. Waiting on mail order vs running in a frenzy to the local store would work for that kind of enlightened purchase. ..after all it ain't exactly like collecting baseball cards.
Do you really need that sort of up to the second support of new products? I mean I would think even a house builder finally gets his tool box somewhat to his liking and can build just as nice of a house even without the latest and greatest hammer.
Man, I just don't understand why you'd take the hit of changing systems when you already have glass that will last you years and years. But hell, lemme know if you decide to unload that stuff. I drool every time I think about that 70-200 VR.
Well I suppose in the old old film days, people were using 35, 50, 85, so I can see where one might want the break at 85 (and indeed consumer zooms go to 85), but for some reason the top line zooms always broke at 70mm, so I guess it may have been an optical issue.
The way I meant it was from a practical stand point. With a 5D, a 24-70 f/2.8 and a 70-200 f/2.8 I am either continually banging up against the 70mm stop or changing lenses almost as often as I would with primes. If there was a 35-105 f/2.8 I could handle a lot of events with just one lens, but as it is I am stuck with packing two at the minimum. Personally I have chosen to go with the 24-105 when the light is good and primes for low light.
Magically, the easiest way to get an equivalent of 35-105 f/2.8 is to buy the 24-70 and put it on a 1.6 crop body. Generally I like full frame much more than I like 1.6 crop, but that is one place where I am tempted by the crop bodies.
IF, and When Nikon decides on producing a full frame camera the supply situation will only get worse. There will be a flood of people dumping their crop frame camera and D lenses.
I think given your situation that Canon will suit you nicely.
I've just never been one join in on the bleeding edge in technology.. I think those that do end up paying the R&D money to see which technology rules. ..to me it is more of a ping pong match no different than pc processor wars. (yeah.. I like pc's too.. so I am truly evil)
I've never bought any DX lenses which IMHO were kind of a weird concept anyway seeing how I still have a wonderfully working full frame Nikon 35mm film camera that I use..
When Nikon produces a full frame digital, I will already have some awesome lenses to use on it and still be able to use my D2Hs for races photo's. So low light hasn't really been an issue to me ..and I figure by the time they have worked the bugs out of the full frame mega/giga pixel Nikon whatever.. I will have a few more lenses to boot and still be way ahead on $$ besides keeping all my other toys.
....but then again I live where I don't have issues getting camera equipment... or electricity for that matter.
I love Nikon, and it pains me to think about it, but I'm considering switching from my D200 to 5D as well for weddings. I'm going to wait and see what the Fuji S5 Pro has to offer before I jump ship. It may be the ideal wedding camera, the great skintones, high DR, high ISO performance of the Fuji sensor, and the build quality and ergonomics of the D200. It is frustrating though lately with Nikon having to wait months for a battery for your D200, when Canon always seems available. I'd love to see Nikon upgrade some of the "old" prime lenses too, they are fantastic but it seems overdue.
I love Nikon, and it pains me to think about it, but I'm considering switching from my D200 to 5D as well for weddings.
While I am not happy to hear that you are in the same delima it does help to know that others are in the same boat. I read a thread a few days ago on DPreview that was dedicated to D200 users that were switching to the 5d. That was pretty interesting to see a few others having the same throughts.
I also read an article about the advantages and disadvantages of the full frame sensor. While I understand the logic of the article I think that the writer may have missed a few key points that are important to me. Check out the article here: http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html
While I am not a scientist, it is not hard for me to figure out that that a larger sensor has its advantages. And, it is important to note that it is not just the term full frame. In my mind the more you try to focus an image on a smaller area, the more problems you will have with sensor overload. I also know from my stage lighting days that it is easier to get light into focus exactly in a large area than it is with a spot light. The tighter the spot area, the tighter the tolerance when focusing.
I think I have made my mind up to go with the 5D. I have not pulled the trigger yet as I need to scrape enough money together to get the 5D and a lens before selling my Nikon gear. I cannot go without a camera. Oh and the cool part, one of the local stores I mentioned earlier rents lenses for Canon. That is something that I know I cannot do with Nikon. I can see renting a 400 or 500 for events. That is something that I would never be able to do locally with Nikon.
The writer of the full frame wars had something of an agenda...
I bought into the 5D first and foremost for the bright viewfinder. The mirror in a full frame camera has 1.6*1.6=2.56 times more area than a crop camera. That larger area captures 1 1/3 stops more light than a crop body, so given an equal quality prism in both cameras the full frame body will have a brighter viewfinder. That is simple geometric optics, no room for debate.
Similarly, of course, 1 1/3 stops more light also hits the sensor which means in principle means that a full frame sensor ought to have 1 1/3 stops less noise at high ISO. However, that one is a bit more complicated because on a real sensor there is space between the pixels that is not gathering light. The actual light gathering area on any of these sensor is, as far as I know, unpublished. What that means is the only real way to compare specific cameras is to look at shots and compare, which in the end is probably the right answer anyhow. That said, in the long when all the manufacturing complexities of big chips have been worked out, full frame clearly has the higher potential. Whether you want to take that into account on a current purchase decision is up to you.
The other major IQ difference between full frame and APS shows up when you start looking at lenses. While that Full Frame Wars article spends a lot of time talking about "legacy lenses," the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of professional lenses produced by both Nikon and Canon today are designed for full frame. There are few of key compromises that come about when designing a lens where the format of the sensor is important:
1. Center sharpness vs. edge sharpness. All lenses are shaper in the center than they are in the corners. Many people argue that this means crop cameras generate better images because the crop the soft corners of the image. This argument is silly. Compare a 12.7 megapixel full frame camera to a 12.7 megapixel crop camera. On the crop camera the pixels are 1.6 times closer together which means that your crop camera magnifies any softness in center sharpness 1.6 times. Top flight lenses specifically designed for crop cameras have to be sharper in the center than lenses for full frame cameras to give the same image quality. The best lens for particular format will make the tradeoff between center sharpness and edge sharpness in a way that is optimal for that format.
2. Mirror clearance. A full frame 35mm lens need about 35mm worth of clearance between the sensor plane and the back element of the lens for the mirror. If you think about building a 16mm focal length lens with 35mm of clearance, you have to imagine there are some compromises involved. A crop body only needs 22mm of clearance. You don't have to be a lens designer to see that a 16mm lens with 22mm of clearance is going to be better than one with 35mm of clearance.
3. Finally, there is the case of the best optics. The best lenses made are diffraction limited. This means that the diffraction pattern generated by the aperture is the limiting factor in the resolution of the lens rather than the glass. Once you are diffraction limited you only have two options for increasing resolution: increasing the sensor size or widening the aperture.
The overall message here is that the best lens for a particular sensor format is the one designed specifically for that format. Using 35mm lenses on APS format sensors is a compromise that degrades image quality.
The Canon strategy to me makes perfect sense. Release a few APS format zooms in the popular ranges but keep the depth of the lens catalog in full frame. This gives you competitive image quality in the first time buyer DSLR market with a clear advantage to upgrading to full frame. You buy 35mm lenses for your APS camera now and later when you upgrade to full frame magically they all look better.
However I think Nikon's position is untenable in the long run and something will have to give. Having a full line of 35mm lenses but no 35mm bodies does not make sense and run can't be viably competitive in the long run. Either Nikon is going to have to fully commit to the APS format and discontinue their full frame lenses or they are going to have to release a full frame body for the top end of their line.
Even though I am in the Canon camp today, I sure hope Nikon gets it together to release a full frame DSLR. If they don't, I am afraid that eventually that 1 1/3 stops difference in light will catch up to them and they will have to cede the bulk of the pro market to Canon. As photographers, we will all suffer if there is only one viable vendor for pro gear.
3. Finally, there is the case of the best optics. The best lenses made are diffraction limited. This means that the diffraction pattern generated by the aperture is the limiting factor in the resolution of the lens rather than the glass. Once you are diffraction limited you only have two options for increasing resolution: increasing the sensor size or widening the aperture.
...
Either I am misunderstanding your message, or you are talking about something else. Modern lenses are "not" diffraction limited at large aperture, only at smaller apertures, and then the degree of the diffraction effect depends somewhat on the size of the pixels.
Most modern lenses actually "improve" their ability to resolve at more middle apertures. Comprehensive tests corroborate empirical results that you can try for yourself.
A good article on how pixel size affects image diffraction is here:
Thank you Ziggy. Like I said, I am not a scientist but I do like science. That was exatly what I was thinking about. The interactive chart that allows you to pick your camera and then look at the Airy disk given by each f stop is spot on. Sweet. The only thing I would have liked to see would be the D200 on the chart. But given the D70 and the D2x I can figure it out.
Thank you Ziggy. Like I said, I am not a scientist but I do like science. That was exatly what I was thinking about. The interactive chart that allows you to pick your camera and then look at the Airy disk given by each f stop is spot on. Sweet. The only thing I would have liked to see would be the D200 on the chart. But given the D70 and the D2x I can figure it out.
The thing to take away from this is that there is no one best camera.
All camera/lens/lighting systems have qualities, parameters and capabilities. Some may be better at solving a larger group of problems than others, but none are good at everything. Full frame (24x36) cameras have some very interesting attributes, but so do digicam p&s cameras and medium format imagers. They can all have a purpose and place, depending on the photographic opportunity and the desired results.
Another thing to remember is that all modern lenses use f stops designed to represent the "effective" light transmissive properties of the lens for exposure purposes. It may be different from the physical f stop aperture diameter of the lens, and usually is. The reason is that, especially zoom lenses, have so many elements and groups that loss is inevitable, compared to simple lens designs. This means that the f stop which should be used for DOF calculations may be around 1 stop, or more, wider than the effective f stop used for exposure.
Remember too that DOF is based on the concept of COC (circles of confusion) which is very "subjective" and ethereal by nature, as is the "Airy disk" concept. Don't take this calculator, or any other calculator referring to these things, as more than a guide and starting point for your own tests.
I thought I might give an update. I pulled the trigger this morning. A 5D and a 70-200 F2.8 IS USM are inbound from B&H. I put a few items on ebay over the last weeks to raise enough money to buy the 5D. Once I get it I can put the D200 and the rest of the Nikon gear up for sale.
This has been a tough decision for me. Now that it is done, I am starting to drool over some of the longer lenses. I will have a little cash after the first of the year and the 300 f2.8 and the 400 f2.8 are calling to me.
Thanks to those of you who gave advice. Now the 'L'coholic syndrome starts.
I thought I might give an update. I pulled the trigger this morning. A 5D and a 70-200 F2.8 IS USM are inbound from B&H. I put a few items on ebay over the last weeks to raise enough money to buy the 5D. Once I get it I can put the D200 and the rest of the Nikon gear up for sale.
This has been a tough decision for me. Now that it is done, I am starting to drool over some of the longer lenses. I will have a little cash after the first of the year and the 300 f2.8 and the 400 f2.8 are calling to me.
Thanks to those of you who gave advice. Now the 'L'coholic syndrome starts.
Welcome to the light side.
That 300/2.8L will definitely make an addict out of you--if the 70-200 doesn't do it. I wish I could afford my own copy--I'll just have to settle for borrowing one occasionally.
Start practicing now: "Hi, I'm Doc and I'm an L-coholic"
Muahaha! Welcome... Welcome... To the light... Muahahaha!
If you can already admit that you're an L-coholic and not let that stop you, you'll be just fine.
I'm still up in the air myself, the Fuji S5 Pro does look interesting, better than the D200 for certain. Still, the sensor on that 5D is so big and so beautiful...
I'm sure you'll enjoy it. I'll be holding on to my 30D until the spring at least, but I suspect there will be some very interesting options staring to appear around that time. At least I hope so anyway, because if not, I have to sell a kidney and get a 5D myself.
I just need to start deciding now on either the 300 f2.8 or the 400 f2.8. There are so many advantages to both. I know that I can get the 500 and 600 in f4 but I love that DOF and bokeh of the f2.8s.
I think I have the wide end figured out. Wide is wide on the full frame so it is easier.
I need an intervention. I am so POed right now. I check the ship status on my 5d and lens that were supposed to be delivered today. Yep, you guessed it. UPS has taken an exception. They said no one was home. Yep there was no one at home. But when the driver went to the door to post the little sticky, he should have seen the 8x10 sign in the window saying to deliver it next door. That house is occupied 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
I normally have things delivered at work. But, I had some money sitting in the paypal account that I needed to use on the lens. B&H requires paypal packages to be sent to the confirmed paypal address. ie. home.
Delivery is an on going problem with UPS around here. They take exception for everything. None of it is ever legitimate. I put in a call to UPS and they have redirected the package to the local will call window. I have to pick it up tonight from them.
I guess that I will have time tonight to run by the local shop and check out the flash and the other lenses I was going to get from them.
The sad part is that Fed Ex is no better. USPS is too slow and the tracking options are horrible.
In defense of the driver, sometimes they can tell the relative value of the package, and they just won't risk a delivery next door. There are cases of "neighbors" planting signs, similar to what you describe, and packages being mis-delivered. In that case, it can cost the driver their job.
I have called the UPS 800 number to have a package re-routed to a commercial address, and that usually works fine.
I hope you get a satisfactory resolution to this delivery, and just in time for the Holidays.
I can understand that liability. But the sign is on the inside of the window in the house. It has been there for over a year.
I spoke with the terminal and the driver is new. He has a helper with him. The terminal person bet he did not even pay attention. I also have a standing redirect on file with UPS to have all packages to be taken next door. They asked me to fill that out the last time a package got returned. I have jumped through their wickets but this is nuts.
The terminal did call the driver and asked him to bring it by on the way home. I plan to have a talk with him. I would not be this upset if not for the history we have with delivery drivers in this area. This not only happens to me, it happens to everyone around here.
It would not be a big deal but I am not planning to be back at this house for several days.
I understand your frustration w/UPS (especailly given your history), but it may be B&H requiring the in person signature. I have had $600+ lenses left at the door but they seem to want the sig for those $1200-$1660 babies. Maybe a $1K threshhold.
Besides having it sent tothe Mailbox etc/UPS store, they have a same day will call service where you go to the local hub and pick up until like 9:00pm (assuming that isn't too far). Use the tracking # online to set it up, or call the phone # on the notice.
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
-Fleetwood Mac
I can understand that liability. But the sign is on the inside of the window in the house. It has been there for over a year.
I spoke with the terminal and the driver is new. He has a helper with him. The terminal person bet he did not even pay attention. I also have a standing redirect on file with UPS to have all packages to be taken next door. They asked me to fill that out the last time a package got returned. I have jumped through their wickets but this is nuts.
The terminal did call the driver and asked him to bring it by on the way home. I plan to have a talk with him. I would not be this upset if not for the history we have with delivery drivers in this area. This not only happens to me, it happens to everyone around here.
It would not be a big deal but I am not planning to be back at this house for several days.
The brown truck showed up 30 minutes ago. I went out to meet the helper and signed for the package. I went with him back to the truck to meet the driver. I introduced myself and explained to him what happened. I acknowledged to him that he was new and I could forgive that. But when I pointed out the sign on the door the helper got really sheepish. He realized he screwed up. I pointed out the houses where packages could be taken and asked that from now on they be dropped there if no one was home.
I explained what had happened in the past and let them both know that I was on to the tricks. That is when they asked me if I was related to one of the employees, calling him by name. I said I was. They realised then that I knew what was going on and that I was not going to tolerate exceptions that are not legitimate. We spoke a little more and he asked if I knew his uncle who lives in the area. I do. So we have bit of a relationship now. He promised to keep an eye out for my packages.
I now have the battery charging and I am reading through the manuals. I love the build of 70-200 f2.8L IS. I am not saying that there is anything bad with the Nikon VR but this thing is built like a tank.
Either I am misunderstanding your message, or you are talking about something else. Modern lenses are "not" diffraction limited at large aperture, only at smaller apertures, and then the degree of the diffraction effect depends somewhat on the size of the pixels.
Most modern lenses actually "improve" their ability to resolve at more middle apertures. Comprehensive tests corroborate empirical results that you can try for yourself.
A good article on how pixel size affects image diffraction is here:
You're right. I was thinking about my work with astronomical telescopes when I wrote that. Camera lenses are more complicated.
I did some playing with that chart. It looks like APS-C sensors will start reaching the limit of useful resolution at around 15MP. The equivalent pixel pitch on full frame is about 40MP. What this means to me is if you are mostly shooting with supertele lenses, APS-C will be a superior format until full frame gets to 40MP which is likely a few years off.
However, personally I am mostly a people photography person these days and most of my images are candids. On a full frame sensor when I have enough light I tend to shoot in the f/2.8 to f/5.6 range to get reasonable depth of focus on my subject with some background blurring for separation. While good performance at f/2.8 demands professional quality lenses, there is a fairly wide selection of lenses which perform quite admirably on the 5D at f/2.8.
However, if I were to go to an APS-C sensor, I would want my working apeture range to go 1 1/3 stops wider to get the same DoF. At that point, I am looking for lenses that perform well from f/1.8 to f/3.5 and my options have suddenly been restricted quite a bit. Zooms are now out of the question and most primes are looking soft at f/1.8 particularly on the higher pixel pitch of an APS-C sensor. The 35/1.4L, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are all showing their limitations on the 5D at f/1.8 and the will be looking 50% worse on 10MP APS-C sensor.
In an ideal future unfettered by cost and other practical concerns, I'd have a 40MP full frame sensor which could potentially give me the best of all worlds. In reality, I think if I start taking more sports or wildlife pictures I'll be getting an APS-C body. Thankfully, at least both bodies will be able to share lenses.
I had forgotten about this thread. I have since moved way beyond this. The camera is a dream in low light. The sensor discussion was well justified in my opinion.
As for moving beyond... I moved about 500mm f4 beyond. :ivar
Comments
Seems kinda strange to me that part of your decision is on the availability of lens you wouldn't want. As much research as you have done in looking at switching systems, I would be willing to guess you do the same amount of research on a new lens or equipment purchase. Waiting on mail order vs running in a frenzy to the local store would work for that kind of enlightened purchase. ..after all it ain't exactly like collecting baseball cards.
Do you really need that sort of up to the second support of new products? I mean I would think even a house builder finally gets his tool box somewhat to his liking and can build just as nice of a house even without the latest and greatest hammer.
No offense and can understand your needs for a different body... To me it would seem to be cheaper in the long run to try out a D2xs and see what you think. You already have some nice lenses for it.. especially the 70 - 200 VR. ...or even possibly think of using film in very low light. An F100 would be pretty easy to find at a low cost and why I still keep mine around.
Then again, I am about half awake and just now attempting to allow caffeine to flow into the system... So if I am outta line.. please forgive, ignore, delete, or backspace my thoughts away from your screen.
:hide
good luck in your adventure!
jww
I think (and certainly hope) that the 5D will be your "alternate" camera, and much more than "backup".:D
It is my own plan to acquire a 5D within a year, and then alternate between the 1D MKII and the 5D, with a dRebel XT as a true "backup" cam. That implies that I will keep crop lenses for the XT, which may not work on the other bodies.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Given the way Canon is running things, they announce something and have it on the store shelves by the time I make my decision.
Why would I want to go with a D2xs? I have considered it. But it is not full frame and I read that the ISO noise is still a problem.
IF, and When Nikon decides on producing a full frame camera the supply situation will only get worse. There will be a flood of people dumping their crop frame camera and D lenses.
Also, consider this. Say I have a job to do and the day before my camera develops a problem. I need to be able to get it fixed or pick up another one fast. Getting either repaired locally would be a big problem. But, I could walk into a local store and get a replacement Canon in one day.
Film? Not an option. I cannot see that working for me. I cannot put most of my photos online for printing at SM much less taking them to someplace for printing. And no it is not porn. With digital I can print if needed but usually I provide the customer with the electronic file.
You use the analogy of home building... Ok. I do construction work on the side. Lets use that analogy. In this case hammer and nail = film. It works but is slower and time is money. An air nailer is equivalant to digital. But it depends on a compressor to work. A compressor needs electricity. I can either run a generator or have access to power at a site.
An alternative is Paslode. It uses small flamable gas cylinders and a battery to fire the nail into the board. The Paslode is cordless and other than recharging the batteries needs no electricity. I can get the Paslode cylinders locally and I keep a supply of them and batteries ready to go.
Some of the locations I have had to build are off the grid and getting power in always takes weeks. I can either haul in a compressor and generator or I can use the Paslode. Usually the Paslode comes into play because getting to the site itelf can be limited and getting the compressor and generator are a problem. The Paslode also has the advantage that you can move around the job site quickly without having to reroute the air hose everytime you move from area to area.
Also, if the Paslode breaks, I can go buy a new one locally. I can get an air nailer as well but it is still limited to power/air access.
Ziggy, Alternate, Backup, Second Body. :ivar
http://help.smugmug.com
Fred.
http://esiggins.smugmug.com
The way I meant it was from a practical stand point. With a 5D, a 24-70 f/2.8 and a 70-200 f/2.8 I am either continually banging up against the 70mm stop or changing lenses almost as often as I would with primes. If there was a 35-105 f/2.8 I could handle a lot of events with just one lens, but as it is I am stuck with packing two at the minimum. Personally I have chosen to go with the 24-105 when the light is good and primes for low light.
Magically, the easiest way to get an equivalent of 35-105 f/2.8 is to buy the 24-70 and put it on a 1.6 crop body. Generally I like full frame much more than I like 1.6 crop, but that is one place where I am tempted by the crop bodies.
I think given your situation that Canon will suit you nicely.
I've just never been one join in on the bleeding edge in technology.. I think those that do end up paying the R&D money to see which technology rules. ..to me it is more of a ping pong match no different than pc processor wars. (yeah.. I like pc's too.. so I am truly evil)
I've never bought any DX lenses which IMHO were kind of a weird concept anyway seeing how I still have a wonderfully working full frame Nikon 35mm film camera that I use..
When Nikon produces a full frame digital, I will already have some awesome lenses to use on it and still be able to use my D2Hs for races photo's. So low light hasn't really been an issue to me ..and I figure by the time they have worked the bugs out of the full frame mega/giga pixel Nikon whatever.. I will have a few more lenses to boot and still be way ahead on $$ besides keeping all my other toys.
....but then again I live where I don't have issues getting camera equipment... or electricity for that matter.
good luck!
jww
Nikon shooter: D200, Tokina 12-24, 17-55 2.8, 70-200 VR 2.8, 50 1.4 :click
While I am not happy to hear that you are in the same delima it does help to know that others are in the same boat. I read a thread a few days ago on DPreview that was dedicated to D200 users that were switching to the 5d. That was pretty interesting to see a few others having the same throughts.
I also read an article about the advantages and disadvantages of the full frame sensor. While I understand the logic of the article I think that the writer may have missed a few key points that are important to me. Check out the article here: http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html
While I am not a scientist, it is not hard for me to figure out that that a larger sensor has its advantages. And, it is important to note that it is not just the term full frame. In my mind the more you try to focus an image on a smaller area, the more problems you will have with sensor overload. I also know from my stage lighting days that it is easier to get light into focus exactly in a large area than it is with a spot light. The tighter the spot area, the tighter the tolerance when focusing.
I think I have made my mind up to go with the 5D. I have not pulled the trigger yet as I need to scrape enough money together to get the 5D and a lens before selling my Nikon gear. I cannot go without a camera. Oh and the cool part, one of the local stores I mentioned earlier rents lenses for Canon. That is something that I know I cannot do with Nikon. I can see renting a 400 or 500 for events. That is something that I would never be able to do locally with Nikon.
http://help.smugmug.com
I bought into the 5D first and foremost for the bright viewfinder. The mirror in a full frame camera has 1.6*1.6=2.56 times more area than a crop camera. That larger area captures 1 1/3 stops more light than a crop body, so given an equal quality prism in both cameras the full frame body will have a brighter viewfinder. That is simple geometric optics, no room for debate.
Similarly, of course, 1 1/3 stops more light also hits the sensor which means in principle means that a full frame sensor ought to have 1 1/3 stops less noise at high ISO. However, that one is a bit more complicated because on a real sensor there is space between the pixels that is not gathering light. The actual light gathering area on any of these sensor is, as far as I know, unpublished. What that means is the only real way to compare specific cameras is to look at shots and compare, which in the end is probably the right answer anyhow. That said, in the long when all the manufacturing complexities of big chips have been worked out, full frame clearly has the higher potential. Whether you want to take that into account on a current purchase decision is up to you.
The other major IQ difference between full frame and APS shows up when you start looking at lenses. While that Full Frame Wars article spends a lot of time talking about "legacy lenses," the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of professional lenses produced by both Nikon and Canon today are designed for full frame. There are few of key compromises that come about when designing a lens where the format of the sensor is important:
1. Center sharpness vs. edge sharpness. All lenses are shaper in the center than they are in the corners. Many people argue that this means crop cameras generate better images because the crop the soft corners of the image. This argument is silly. Compare a 12.7 megapixel full frame camera to a 12.7 megapixel crop camera. On the crop camera the pixels are 1.6 times closer together which means that your crop camera magnifies any softness in center sharpness 1.6 times. Top flight lenses specifically designed for crop cameras have to be sharper in the center than lenses for full frame cameras to give the same image quality. The best lens for particular format will make the tradeoff between center sharpness and edge sharpness in a way that is optimal for that format.
2. Mirror clearance. A full frame 35mm lens need about 35mm worth of clearance between the sensor plane and the back element of the lens for the mirror. If you think about building a 16mm focal length lens with 35mm of clearance, you have to imagine there are some compromises involved. A crop body only needs 22mm of clearance. You don't have to be a lens designer to see that a 16mm lens with 22mm of clearance is going to be better than one with 35mm of clearance.
3. Finally, there is the case of the best optics. The best lenses made are diffraction limited. This means that the diffraction pattern generated by the aperture is the limiting factor in the resolution of the lens rather than the glass. Once you are diffraction limited you only have two options for increasing resolution: increasing the sensor size or widening the aperture.
The overall message here is that the best lens for a particular sensor format is the one designed specifically for that format. Using 35mm lenses on APS format sensors is a compromise that degrades image quality.
The Canon strategy to me makes perfect sense. Release a few APS format zooms in the popular ranges but keep the depth of the lens catalog in full frame. This gives you competitive image quality in the first time buyer DSLR market with a clear advantage to upgrading to full frame. You buy 35mm lenses for your APS camera now and later when you upgrade to full frame magically they all look better.
However I think Nikon's position is untenable in the long run and something will have to give. Having a full line of 35mm lenses but no 35mm bodies does not make sense and run can't be viably competitive in the long run. Either Nikon is going to have to fully commit to the APS format and discontinue their full frame lenses or they are going to have to release a full frame body for the top end of their line.
Even though I am in the Canon camp today, I sure hope Nikon gets it together to release a full frame DSLR. If they don't, I am afraid that eventually that 1 1/3 stops difference in light will catch up to them and they will have to cede the bulk of the pro market to Canon. As photographers, we will all suffer if there is only one viable vendor for pro gear.
Either I am misunderstanding your message, or you are talking about something else. Modern lenses are "not" diffraction limited at large aperture, only at smaller apertures, and then the degree of the diffraction effect depends somewhat on the size of the pixels.
Most modern lenses actually "improve" their ability to resolve at more middle apertures. Comprehensive tests corroborate empirical results that you can try for yourself.
A good article on how pixel size affects image diffraction is here:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Thank you Ziggy. Like I said, I am not a scientist but I do like science. That was exatly what I was thinking about. The interactive chart that allows you to pick your camera and then look at the Airy disk given by each f stop is spot on. Sweet. The only thing I would have liked to see would be the D200 on the chart. But given the D70 and the D2x I can figure it out.
http://help.smugmug.com
The thing to take away from this is that there is no one best camera.
All camera/lens/lighting systems have qualities, parameters and capabilities. Some may be better at solving a larger group of problems than others, but none are good at everything. Full frame (24x36) cameras have some very interesting attributes, but so do digicam p&s cameras and medium format imagers. They can all have a purpose and place, depending on the photographic opportunity and the desired results.
Another thing to remember is that all modern lenses use f stops designed to represent the "effective" light transmissive properties of the lens for exposure purposes. It may be different from the physical f stop aperture diameter of the lens, and usually is. The reason is that, especially zoom lenses, have so many elements and groups that loss is inevitable, compared to simple lens designs. This means that the f stop which should be used for DOF calculations may be around 1 stop, or more, wider than the effective f stop used for exposure.
Remember too that DOF is based on the concept of COC (circles of confusion) which is very "subjective" and ethereal by nature, as is the "Airy disk" concept. Don't take this calculator, or any other calculator referring to these things, as more than a guide and starting point for your own tests.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
This has been a tough decision for me. Now that it is done, I am starting to drool over some of the longer lenses. I will have a little cash after the first of the year and the 300 f2.8 and the 400 f2.8 are calling to me.
Thanks to those of you who gave advice. Now the 'L'coholic syndrome starts.
http://help.smugmug.com
Welcome to the light side.
That 300/2.8L will definitely make an addict out of you--if the 70-200 doesn't do it. I wish I could afford my own copy--I'll just have to settle for borrowing one occasionally.
Start practicing now: "Hi, I'm Doc and I'm an L-coholic"
Oh, and you can now start shopping at Andy-bay.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
If you can already admit that you're an L-coholic and not let that stop you, you'll be just fine.
I'm still up in the air myself, the Fuji S5 Pro does look interesting, better than the D200 for certain. Still, the sensor on that 5D is so big and so beautiful...
I'm sure you'll enjoy it. I'll be holding on to my 30D until the spring at least, but I suspect there will be some very interesting options staring to appear around that time. At least I hope so anyway, because if not, I have to sell a kidney and get a 5D myself.
I think I have the wide end figured out. Wide is wide on the full frame so it is easier.
Yep I will watch for Andy-bay sales now.
http://help.smugmug.com
I normally have things delivered at work. But, I had some money sitting in the paypal account that I needed to use on the lens. B&H requires paypal packages to be sent to the confirmed paypal address. ie. home.
Delivery is an on going problem with UPS around here. They take exception for everything. None of it is ever legitimate. I put in a call to UPS and they have redirected the package to the local will call window. I have to pick it up tonight from them.
I guess that I will have time tonight to run by the local shop and check out the flash and the other lenses I was going to get from them.
The sad part is that Fed Ex is no better. USPS is too slow and the tracking options are horrible.
Sorry, I had to vent.
http://help.smugmug.com
I have called the UPS 800 number to have a package re-routed to a commercial address, and that usually works fine.
I hope you get a satisfactory resolution to this delivery, and just in time for the Holidays.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I spoke with the terminal and the driver is new. He has a helper with him. The terminal person bet he did not even pay attention. I also have a standing redirect on file with UPS to have all packages to be taken next door. They asked me to fill that out the last time a package got returned. I have jumped through their wickets but this is nuts.
The terminal did call the driver and asked him to bring it by on the way home. I plan to have a talk with him. I would not be this upset if not for the history we have with delivery drivers in this area. This not only happens to me, it happens to everyone around here.
It would not be a big deal but I am not planning to be back at this house for several days.
http://help.smugmug.com
-Fleetwood Mac
Besides having it sent tothe Mailbox etc/UPS store, they have a same day will call service where you go to the local hub and pick up until like 9:00pm (assuming that isn't too far). Use the tracking # online to set it up, or call the phone # on the notice.
-Fleetwood Mac
Yep, you did all you could do.
Good luck and good shooting.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I explained what had happened in the past and let them both know that I was on to the tricks. That is when they asked me if I was related to one of the employees, calling him by name. I said I was. They realised then that I knew what was going on and that I was not going to tolerate exceptions that are not legitimate. We spoke a little more and he asked if I knew his uncle who lives in the area. I do. So we have bit of a relationship now. He promised to keep an eye out for my packages.
I now have the battery charging and I am reading through the manuals. I love the build of 70-200 f2.8L IS. I am not saying that there is anything bad with the Nikon VR but this thing is built like a tank.
http://help.smugmug.com
You're right. I was thinking about my work with astronomical telescopes when I wrote that. Camera lenses are more complicated.
I did some playing with that chart. It looks like APS-C sensors will start reaching the limit of useful resolution at around 15MP. The equivalent pixel pitch on full frame is about 40MP. What this means to me is if you are mostly shooting with supertele lenses, APS-C will be a superior format until full frame gets to 40MP which is likely a few years off.
However, personally I am mostly a people photography person these days and most of my images are candids. On a full frame sensor when I have enough light I tend to shoot in the f/2.8 to f/5.6 range to get reasonable depth of focus on my subject with some background blurring for separation. While good performance at f/2.8 demands professional quality lenses, there is a fairly wide selection of lenses which perform quite admirably on the 5D at f/2.8.
However, if I were to go to an APS-C sensor, I would want my working apeture range to go 1 1/3 stops wider to get the same DoF. At that point, I am looking for lenses that perform well from f/1.8 to f/3.5 and my options have suddenly been restricted quite a bit. Zooms are now out of the question and most primes are looking soft at f/1.8 particularly on the higher pixel pitch of an APS-C sensor. The 35/1.4L, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are all showing their limitations on the 5D at f/1.8 and the will be looking 50% worse on 10MP APS-C sensor.
In an ideal future unfettered by cost and other practical concerns, I'd have a 40MP full frame sensor which could potentially give me the best of all worlds. In reality, I think if I start taking more sports or wildlife pictures I'll be getting an APS-C body. Thankfully, at least both bodies will be able to share lenses.
I can already see the difference in the view finder even without batterys in it.
http://help.smugmug.com
well...?!
I'm waiting with baited breath.
I had forgotten about this thread. I have since moved way beyond this. The camera is a dream in low light. The sensor discussion was well justified in my opinion.
As for moving beyond... I moved about 500mm f4 beyond. :ivar
Doc
http://help.smugmug.com