30D 5D trying to decide...

[jhnyc]

Hi all,
this is my first post in the cannon forum, or in any of your forums for that matter
(I did post a hello in the intro).
I'm really stressing myself out trying to decide on my first digital slr.
I've read all the online reviews and have been looking at your forum for a couple of weeks.
I keep bouncing back and forth between the 30D and the 5D, and just to make it fun
once in a while I'll think about the 200D* :
One main concern is the cost factor. I'm comfortable spending the money on the
30D, with the knowledge that better cameras will come out after I purchase it.
I'm less comfortable spending the extra money on the 5D.
I also worry about getting the 30D and investing in the lens made for that format.
I know with the 5D you won't have to worry about replacing lens as cannon rolls
out new full frame bodies.
I've yet to see either camera in person yet, so I'm going to look at them today.
My ultimate goal for the camera is to be able to make large prints of my travel
and art shots. There are some samples of my work here, http://www.jonathanhale.com/art%20site/art.html
I know there are so many variables in choosing which body you want,
but if anyone has ideas they have not yet stated I'd love to hear them.
thanks,

-jonathan

[ohenry]

You don't have to buy lenses made for the 1.6 format (EF-S). The 30D will accept all EF mount lenses (same ones that the 5D and 1D series use). If cost is a factor, the 30D is a more logical choice over the 5D. It is a fine camera and you're not selling yourself short with its purchase. A camera body is the least important factor to me. The lenses are of much more importance because they will carry over to your next body (assuming you stay within the same company line of cameras). My suggestion is to buy the 30D now and, using the money saved, invest in better lenses. As your needs grow (as does your wealth), you can upgrade to a newer body sometime in the future......unless you want to go Nikon, then someone from the Nikon camp can offer some suggestions.

[JDArt]

I'd say anyone new to Canon in your shoes should go for the D30. It's less of a cash outlay and takes darn good pictures. Go look at Frank Doorhof's stuff in Model/Glam forum, and you'll see what a master can do with a 20D, its predecessor.

The EF-S lenses are a curse and a blessing. They really are lighter, which is nice, and there will always be advantages to the 1.6x crop sensor, even if you end up augmenting your camera stable down the road.

[lordarka]

Try to avoid falling into the trap of thinking that you will need to upgrade to a full frame camera eventually, or that Canon will by default produce nothing but full frame cameras in a few years. None of those facts has any bearing on what you can accomplish as a photographer. The 30D will get you fantastic images with a minimum of fuss; the 20D/30D were substantial upgrades that made these cameras more usable, and allow anyone to render fantastic images with them. The eventual release of FF successors has no impact on the ability of today's cameras to continue to generate great results. Look at what's out there today, and think about how the features of a 5D will help you, versus the added cost. A few key differences spring to mind;

- 5D has a full frame sensor.
- 5D has a more usable viewfinder
- 5D (supposedly) has better autofocus
- 5D has no pop-up flash
- 5D has 4.6 more megapixels

The degree to which you, as a newbie photographer, will benefit from or suffer for any one of these differences is something you need to determine for yourself. For example, I've been shooting for a while, and don't really feel the need to have FF, so long as I have a decent viewfinder. My 1D Mark II gives me that, as well as deadly reliable autofocus. The 30D is likely to have a comparatively small but nonetheless usable viewfinder, while the 5D's will be more expansive. Is that worth $1500? Are the extra pixels worth it?

There are good AF-S wides which will help you overcome the crop-sensor wide-angle dilemma, and if you really like shooting wide, I would recommend you pick up the 10-22 EF-S without thinking about whether you'll be able to use it with a non-existent full frame successor.

Arka C.

[JDArt]

The 17-55 AF-S kit lens that comes with some 30D cameras is quite good.

[Kevin Barrett]

Originally Posted by jhnyc

Hi all,
this is my first post in the cannon forum, or in any of your forums for that matter
(I did post a hello in the intro).
I'm really stressing myself out trying to decide on my first digital slr.
I've read all the online reviews and have been looking at your forum for a couple of weeks.
I keep bouncing back and forth between the 30D and the 5D, and just to make it fun
once in a while I'll think about the 200D :
One main concern is the cost factor. I'm comfortable spending the money on the
30D, with the knowledge that better cameras will come out after I purchase it.
I'm less comfortable spending the extra money on the 5D.
I also worry about getting the 30D and investing in the lens made for that format.
I know with the 5D you won't have to worry about replacing lens as cannon rolls
out new full frame bodies.
I've yet to see either camera in person yet, so I'm going to look at them today.
My ultimate goal for the camera is to be able to make large prints of my travel
and art shots. There are some samples of my work here, http://www.jonathanhale.com/art%20site/art.html
I know there are so many variables in choosing which body you want,
but if anyone has ideas they have not yet stated I'd love to hear them.
thanks,

-jonathan

Go with the 30D, save some money and concentrate on your photography. Regarding EF-S lenses, no problemo. There are "millions" of EF-S capable bodies out there in the marketplace. If you need to get rid of an EF-S lens, you'll have a ready marketplace.

I have one EF-S lens, the 10-22. I could put it on e-bay tonight and have it sold tomorrow without a hitch and not losing too much in the process. The 5D is a fine camera, but how different will your photos look taken with a 5D over a 30D? There is a DOF difference and the resolution difference is visually slight, but it's there.

However, in my opinion you would be better served buying better lenses at this point.

Kevin

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by Kevin Barrett

However, in my opinion you would be better served buying better lenses at this point.

Kevin

I second that.

There's great sense, too, in choosing *one* camera, getting the workflow for that down, and avoiding buying a second camera of a different model or type, even if it's Canon. Something that bugs me about all digital cameras from all manufacturers: the workflow is different for each.

[jhnyc]

thanks for the great input so far

I went to a store today and compared the two side by side.

I have to say I liked how the 5D felt in my hands and I also liked the viewfinder on the
5D. I know there is a battery grip for the 30D so that could help make it fit better if I went
with that body.

I tried out some of the EF-S lens, they definitely are very light and small, a plus when traveling.

JDArt it was your picture of the rose you posted that really got me thinking about the 5D.

It's nice to see that everyone is not pushing the higher MP and more expensive camera.

since lens choice was mentioned my wish kit for the 5D would be EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, and the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. For the 30D, EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM, and the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by jhnyc

JDArt it was your picture of the rose you posted that really got me thinking about the 5D.

Okay, I'll admit something to you. The 5D has that "something special" that I don't see all that often in a camera. It produces a signature Canon "smooth" file that puts shots like the one you referred to over the top.



I'm sure you can process in this look from other cameras, but I'm most attracted to cameras that produce this kind of thing with minimal processing. When printed, the photo above has a painterly quality to it. Not really something I did.

Now, I wish the 5D were faster. 3 fps hardly cuts it in some situations. If you spring for the 5D, it's a good cam, especially now that the prices have fallen.

[Paul Shields]

I suppose I should chip in, being a virgin 5D owner (for the second time, but it's a long dull story). As Jay says, it definitely has something. Not always obvious when viewing via the web (but even then, you can see it's charms). For prints, however, I've never seen such translucent 3-D like qualities before, from film or from digital. It really does print very well indeed, and for me that was the over-riding factor.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by jhnyc

thanks for the great input so far

I went to a store today and compared the two side by side.

I have to say I liked how the 5D felt in my hands and I also liked the viewfinder on the
5D. I know there is a battery grip for the 30D so that could help make it fit better if I went
with that body.

I tried out some of the EF-S lens, they definitely are very light and small, a plus when traveling.

JDArt it was your picture of the rose you posted that really got me thinking about the 5D.

It's nice to see that everyone is not pushing the higher MP and more expensive camera.

since lens choice was mentioned my wish kit for the 5D would be EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, and the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. For the 30D, EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM, and the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.

now you got me wondering...

For the 5D, you choose a 24-70/70-200 F2.8 setup, and add a macro with a fairly long working distance, and a portrait/lowlight lens.

For the 30D, you choose a not-known-yet-but-highly interesting 'new one', the 17-55F2.5 IS, which brings your 'range' to 27-88, and again you add a EF-S60 =FoV 100mm macro and 50mm = FoV 80mm portrait/lowlight lens.

?? the 30D setup has no cover from ~90 to 200mm equivalent?

Then: the grip-issue you mention: the size difference between a 5D and 30D is so little, that you got me wondering whether you didn't shoot/try the 5D and a 350D ). If the 5D without a grip 'suits', I would be very surprised if the 30D without a grip doesn't ??...

Further, I would advise you to (re-)consider the 70-200IS version, at least do some tests side-by-side, image-quality wise the IS is but a notch 'worse', but IS makes it a far more useable lens, IMHO...

Another comment: both lens sets you describe, be it put on a 5D or 30D, have all the potential a 'serious shooter', amateur or professional, could want... (with a small reservation for the unknown 17-55F2.8 IS )

And a last comment: in 3 to 5 years you will probably feel the need to update your camerabody, lenses could and probably will remain your friends for a far longer period... better concentrate more and spend some more on lenses than on bodies...

...and as always, all the above is just *my* €0.02 worth...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[jhnyc]

JDArt, and Paul, those are good selling points for the 5D.
I do a lot of large fine art prints now from a 645 format, if I could get
close with a digital slr that would be great.

Max@Home your right I did skip a few focal lengths for the 30D , I just was not
sure on those choices.

As for the grips I'm sure one would get used to whichever body you were using.
I'm just used to heavier med format bodies and the 5D felt weightier in my hands

[jimmyd]

my post-film photographer life has evolved thusly: 10D to a 20D to a 5D. I just purchased the 5D and I did so, primarily, to get into the full-frame dSLR world, i.e., it was less about megapixels and more about losing the 1.6x crop factor (as well as the benefits of a bright and easier-to-deal-with viewfinder).

btw, someone mentioned the "supposedly" improved auto-focusing of the 5D. i have to admit that this is someting i noticed about the camera immediately. to me, it certainly does seem to lock into focus quicker and more accurately.

altho the 5D is a more expensive entry into the dSLR world, one thing you probably should have at the top of your pros and cons list is the 1.6 crop factor. since you intend to shoot travel stuff with the camera, and i'm assuming that means a lot of landscapes, cityscapes, and those sorts of images, you might consider whether the 1.6 crop is going to be a problem for you when using wide-angle lenses. ya see, what the 1.6 crop means is that you're going to be quite limited in terms of achieving wide angle shots with just about any glass you mount to a 30D or a 20D.

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by jimmyd

ya see, what the 1.6 crop means is that you're going to be quite limited in terms of achieving wide angle shots with just about any glass you mount to a 30D or a 20D.

yes, and by contrast, 1.6 is actually good for nature shooters with long glass (that would be good if longer still)

[Rumpole]

I am sure without a budget constraint, 5D would be a better choice given that landscape is probably what you shoot most.

However, since you are buying a system from scratch, taking into monetary consideration, a 30D sounds like a better choice to me.* The worry over 1.6x factor on wide angles is substantially eased by the EF-S 10-22 lens, which has similar FOV to a 16mm on a 5D.* I used to own one with my 20D and although I cannot say it is of L-quality, it is close.* In fact, it is the only EF-S lens I had during my 20D days.

FWIW, given the available and viable alternatives, I would not invest too heavily on EF-S lenses as I think they are slightly over-priced.* Especially on the EF-S 60mm F2.8 Macro where the 50mm f2.5 Macro is slightly cheaper and the 100mm f2.8 Macro is only slightly more expensive, I would go for the EF rather than EF-S in this particular case.

Again FWIW, I would recommend the following combo:* 30D + EF-S 10-22mm + 24-70mm f4L + 100mm Macro + 70-200mm f2.8L.* That should cover a very large range in the context of landscape photography.* (It must be a co-incidence that I actually HAD that combination of gears..minus the 30D and plus the 20D* )

Just my 2p.

Cheers
KH

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by jimmyd

my post-film photographer life has evolved thusly: 10D to a 20D to a 5D. I just purchased the 5D and I did so, primarily, to get into the full-frame dSLR world, i.e., it was less about megapixels and more about losing the 1.6x crop factor (as well as the benefits of a bright and easier-to-deal-with viewfinder).

btw, someone mentioned the "supposedly" improved auto-focusing of the 5D. i have to admit that this is someting i noticed about the camera immediately. to me, it certainly does seem to lock into focus quicker and more accurately.

altho the 5D is a more expensive entry into the dSLR world, one thing you probably should have at the top of your pros and cons list is the 1.6 crop factor. since you intend to shoot travel stuff with the camera, and i'm assuming that means a lot of landscapes, cityscapes, and those sorts of images, you might consider whether the 1.6 crop is going to be a problem for you when using wide-angle lenses. ya see, what the 1.6 crop means is that you're going to be quite limited in terms of achieving wide angle shots with just about any glass you mount to a 30D or a 20D.

Question for jimmyd: you stated that you mainly use the 28-135IS lens for your work, on a 1.6x crop body.

Now that you have gone FF, you 'gain' the wide, and 'loose' the long end, your 'FoV 44-215' is a true 28-135 again...

Does this mean you are going to use another (longer) lens for your work, or do you step closer?

just wondering...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[jimmyd]

Originally Posted by Max@Home

Question for jimmyd: you stated that you mainly use the 28-135IS lens for your work, on a 1.6x crop body.

Now that you have gone FF, you 'gain' the wide, and 'loose' the long end, your 'FoV 44-215' is a true 28-135 again...

Does this mean you are going to use another (longer) lens for your work, or do you step closer?

just wondering...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

i've used the 28-135 a lot cuz it's a good, all-around, utility lens. obvious drawback for shooting glamour (which i mostly shoot) is the 5.6 minimum aperture when i'm zoomed in... not that f.4 is all that much better--i prefer minimizing the DOF. but i wasn't mostly shooting with the lens completely zoomed in. i was, for the most part, probably shooting between 85 and 100.

i have an 85 f/1.8 and i'm thinking that lens is going to be mounted on my 5D quite a bit. (the 85 1.8 is a lens used a fair amount by fashion guys i'm told.) i'm also thinking of buying the 135 "L" prime. and, yeah, i'd like to have the 80-200 "L" as well but that lens, to my thinking, would get greater use if i shot a lot outdoors which i don't as most of my stuff is shot in the studio.

of course, as you said, i can always step closer.