Trying to decide....

macmassey

If I can afford a Canon EOS 5D, is there any reason to purchase it over the Nikon D300? And what about the Canon EOS 40D? I am an amateur photographer who is HUNGRY for better equipment. This would be my first SLR purchase. I have shot the heck out of my point and shoot Panasonic Lumix FZ20, using manual settings and trying hard to learn. I am eager to get a higher end camera in the SLR family but want to bypass the Canon Rebel level cameras. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

ziggy53

macmassey wrote:

If I can afford a Canon EOS 5D, is there any reason to purchase it over the Nikon D300? And what about the Canon EOS 40D? I am an amateur photographer who is HUNGRY for better equipment. This would be my first SLR purchase. I have shot the heck out of my point and shoot Panasonic Lumix FZ20, using manual settings and trying hard to learn. I am eager to get a higher end camera in the SLR family but want to bypass the Canon Rebel level cameras. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

All of the above are amazing tools in the right hands. What you need to do is decide what qualities are important to you, as well as any particular lens ranges that might help in the decision.

Look at your current photos, and try to see any patterns in your shooting style. Remember what you found troublesome or impossible with your current equipment.

Try to give us as much information about your desires photographically, and we can better answer your question.

Arvan

if i hade a chanse to buy a new camera again i would buy some canon model.

Why?.

Well if you look for the market in canon lenses/accesories and all that stuff it´s just plain and simple the biggest.

I must say i rather prefer something else then a canon when it comes to looks and comfort and all that. And then it´s allways fun to have something "rare".

But as i see it...to skip the 400D/k10D class is kinad stupid. ( not saying that you are ofc ) Still it´s very importat with good lenses rather then a good camera. You won´t be dissapointed with the quality of those 10+ mpixel cameras!.

Imo the best way when starting photography is to buy for example a used 20D+ a bunch of nice quality lenses or perhaps a 30D. Supernice stuff to get going with.

Why not nikon in this range? well for me it´s simple..I hate the UI on the 40 series and they are to small and with no autofocus motor..And no batterygrip!. If you can live without that it´s a good camera as you might know!.

So what am im trying to say?. Well imo its better to get a couple of lenses and a 30/30 even 40D insted of that 5d wich costs alot more.

In the end. It´s all about the lens ( well not all but the lens is much )

Just flipping my coins here.

I hope you find this a bit helpfull..Allthough there are many MUCH MUCH more experienced people then me arround here.

Best luck // Arvid

claudermilk

Here's a question for you: What is it that you want the 5D for? It's an expensive body & is not the be-all end-all camera some would have you believe. While I'm perfectly willing to accept it's a great camera, there are some things it's not well suited for.

What is it about your Lumix you find limiting? Those would be the features you would want to concentrate on looking at when shopping for a DSLR.


I can understand wanting to skip the Rebel level bodies & the number of used 20Ds and 30Ds available at about new Rebel prices makes that a perfectly valid option. My 20D still works well, even being two generations obsolete.

macmassey

ziggy53 wrote:

All of the above are amazing tools in the right hands. What you need to do is decide what qualities are important to you, as well as any particular lens ranges that might help in the decision.

Look at your current photos, and try to see any patterns in your shooting style. Remember what you found troublesome or impossible with your current equipment.

Try to give us as much information about your desires photographically, and we can better answer your question.

I really like shooting landscapes but for obvious reasons my point and shoot Lumix camera (while actually a very nice camera) doesn't give me the depth of field I need. Also it's limited to 5 megapixels and I want to be able to make large prints. I have no particular generational preference to Canon or Nikon and in fact, I understand that Panasonic now has a Lumix in the SLR family. But, the big 3" LCD of the EOS40d and Nikon 300D is a huge draw for me as are the available megapixels. I also have a great deal of interest in getting into wildlife photography so hopefully one of the cameras is just as adept at that as it is for landscape photography.

macmassey

claudermilk wrote:

Here's a question for you: What is it that you want the 5D for? It's an expensive body & is not the be-all end-all camera some would have you believe. While I'm perfectly willing to accept it's a great camera, there are some things it's not well suited for.

What is it about your Lumix you find limiting? Those would be the features you would want to concentrate on looking at when shopping for a DSLR.


I can understand wanting to skip the Rebel level bodies & the number of used 20Ds and 30Ds available at about new Rebel prices makes that a perfectly valid option. My 20D still works well, even being two generations obsolete.

That's a really great question...why DO I need a 5D. I really don't. And it is quite a bit more expensive. Especially considering I am not a professional photographer, just a serious amateur who loves taking pictures. My Lumix FZ20 is really a good camera. It's limited to 5 mpixels and only goes to F8 and ISO 400. But as a point and shoot, it has taken some spectacular photos for me over the past 2 years since I got it. I like its heft. I have big hands and it's a heavy camera. The manual functions have been very helpful in my learning curve. Also limiting though, is I can only use a wide angle and a telephoto via an adaptor of sorts and the choice of lenses is very limiting. So moving to an SLR makes sense to me. Higher Fstops, higher ISO, more available lenses and alot more megapixels. Seems the 30D or 40D as well as the Nikon D200 or 300 may be well suited for me.

ziggy53

For landscapes, especially vista landscapes with a very wide field of view, the Canon 5D can make some sense. The new Canon 16-35mm, f2.8L II is a pretty amazing lens for full-frame and, on the 5D body, is hard to beat for the really wide stuff.

I have the Canon 17-40mm, f4L which is one of the bargain "L" lenses that will also do a pretty nice job.

Nikon has a 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED AF-S DX for its crop bodies with a similar field of view.

Many folks like the full-frame format for wide and superwide and ultra wide. Sigma makes an ultrawide zoom that goes 12-24mm (F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM) and fits the Canon 5D.

Some folks do have problems with the 5D and moisture. I am not sure how widespread the problems are, but I've seen a couple of DGrinners mention the problem on their cameras.

macmassey

ziggy53 wrote:

For landscapes, especially vista landscapes with a very wide field of view, the Canon 5D can make some sense. The new Canon 16-35mm, f2.8L II is a pretty amazing lens for full-frame and, on the 5D body, is hard to beat for the really wide stuff.

I have the Canon 17-40mm, f4L which is one of the bargain "L" lenses that will also do a pretty nice job.

Nikon has a 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED AF-S DX for its crop bodies with a similar field of view.

Many folks like the full-frame format for wide and superwide and ultra wide. Sigma makes an ultrawide zoom that goes 12-24mm (F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM) and fits the Canon 5D.


Some folks do have problems with the 5D and moisture. I am not sure how widespread the problems are, but I've seen a couple of DGrinners mention the problem on their cameras.

I really appreciate all your time in responding. It's very helpful. Do you think something like the newly released Canon 40D can get great results with vista landscapes and wide fields of view? Would the Canon 16-35mm, f2.8L II fit on the 40D?

kini62

macmassey wrote:

I really appreciate all your time in responding. It's very helpful. Do you think something like the newly released Canon 40D can get great results with vista landscapes and wide fields of view? Would the Canon 16-35mm, f2.8L II fit on the 40D?

I'm surprised you were not able to get the DOF you needed for landscapes with the FZ20. It has more DOF at F8 than any DSLR at F22 at the same FL.

The biggest problem I would think with the FZ20 and landscapes is the not so wide 30something starting point.

Yes the 40D will work fine for landscapes.

Yes the 16-35 will work on the 40D but will be about 25-26mm instead of 16.

The Canon 10-22 or less expensive Tokina 12-24 would be better for landscapes if you want wide.

If landscapes is your primary concern, you could save some money and get the Xti (same 10mps), but no live view which some find useful for landscape photography.

Another choice if landscapes is going to be your main "focus" is the Oly E410/510( both 10mp and live view) and the super nice, but expensive 7-14 (14-28) lens. Or wait for the E-3 (semi-pro, weather sealed, live view with flipout screen)

Only way to get wider is to use the Sigma 12-24 on a 5D or 1Ds and then the Sigma is not going to be as good on the edges.

Good luck

Gene

ziggy53

macmassey wrote:

I really appreciate all your time in responding. It's very helpful. Do you think something like the newly released Canon 40D can get great results with vista landscapes and wide fields of view? Would the Canon 16-35mm, f2.8L II fit on the 40D?

It will indeed fit, but you may not (or you may) feel that the field of view is wide enough.

For a crop camera, like the Canon 40D, look also at the:

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 HSM EX DC
Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro DX

Realize that these lenses are designed for crop cameras, and will not work properly on a full frame camera.

macmassey

ziggy53 wrote:

It will indeed fit, but you may not (or you may) feel that the field of view is wide enough.

For a crop camera, like the Canon 40D, look also at the:

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 HSM EX DC
Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro DX

Realize that these lenses are designed for crop cameras, and will not work properly on a full frame camera.

Thank you to everyone for your assitance, perspective and ideas! This digital grin is the bomb!

macmassey

kini62 wrote:

I'm surprised you were not able to get the DOF you needed for landscapes with the FZ20. It has more DOF at F8 than any DSLR at F22 at the same FL.

The biggest problem I would think with the FZ20 and landscapes is the not so wide 30something starting point.

Yes the 40D will work fine for landscapes.

Yes the 16-35 will work on the 40D but will be about 25-26mm instead of 16.

The Canon 10-22 or less expensive Tokina 12-24 would be better for landscapes if you want wide.

If landscapes is your primary concern, you could save some money and get the Xti (same 10mps), but no live view which some find useful for landscape photography.

Another choice if landscapes is going to be your main "focus" is the Oly E410/510( both 10mp and live view) and the super nice, but expensive 7-14 (14-28) lens. Or wait for the E-3 (semi-pro, weather sealed, live view with flipout screen)

Only way to get wider is to use the Sigma 12-24 on a 5D or 1Ds and then the Sigma is not going to be as good on the edges.

Good luck

Gene

Gene, with regards to DOF on my FZ20, would the ISO setting at F8 affect the DOF? That is something I don't always manually set when I manually adjust the aperture and shutter speed. Could that be why sometimes I seem to have good DOF and other times not? I really like that Leica lense, by the way. Also thanks for your ideas to look at the Olympus and giving the Rebel xti another look.

claudermilk

As usual, ziggy gets in there & says much of what I would have.

For landscapes the 5D is indeed very well suited. The 20D/30D/40D also works perfectly well there. For wide vista on the 5D I'd look to the 16-35 first, and maybe the 17-40 or Sigma 12-24. On the crop bodies I'd look at the Tokina 12-24 or Canon 10-22 (I've used both & own the Tokina). Another route is to follow the dgrin sickness & get a 24 TS/E and stitch frames, or similarly one of the 35mm primes (f1.4L or f2).

If you want to print larger, the 5D has an advantage over the others, followed by the 40D.

It does sound like your are bumping up against the limits of your current camera, which is a good sign it's time to look at stepping up to a DSLR.

Manfr3d

macmassey wrote:

If I can afford a Canon EOS 5D, is there any reason to purchase it over the Nikon D300? And what about the Canon EOS 40D? I am an amateur photographer who is HUNGRY for better equipment. This would be my first SLR purchase. I have shot the heck out of my point and shoot Panasonic Lumix FZ20, using manual settings and trying hard to learn. I am eager to get a higher end camera in the SLR family but want to bypass the Canon Rebel level cameras. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

I'm using a 10D and will upgrade my camera to a 5D (or its successor)
soon. Why? I dont need the pixels nor the better iso or larger buffer.
What I really want is the brighter, larger viewfinder of a full format camera,
so that I can actualy see what I am photographing.

Just something to think about

kini62

macmassey wrote:

Gene, with regards to DOF on my FZ20, would the ISO setting at F8 affect the DOF? That is something I don't always manually set when I manually adjust the aperture and shutter speed. Could that be why sometimes I seem to have good DOF and other times not? I really like that Leica lense, by the way. Also thanks for your ideas to look at the Olympus and giving the Rebel xti another look.

No- F8 is F8.

Good luck with your search.

Gene