Camera upgrade. add [extra mad money]

[ElFenix]

I have an additional $5.3K from income tax return, along with my budget of $2~$3K for a new body.

What set up can I get for $7~$8K.

holy crap change your withholding!



edit: if you're still used to how canon and it's lenses work then you might as well stick with canon. there's really no reason to switch. plus you've got some decent canon lenses already. remember that nikon focuses and zooms backward from canon.

get a 5DII.

 

[ElFenix]

Negatory. You don't loose DOF at the ACTUAL focal length. You'll loose DOF at the GIVEN Field of View (which I find it to be just confusing marketing terminology)

To make things Easier, just think what a crop sensor is:

Cropped. Your image that you take, but cropped. Your bokeh Remains EXACTLY the same as you would see in a full frame 35mm, but just less coverage.

Sure you can convert all you want, and give it equivalent values, but one thing is 100% certain: you just have a high MP "Tighter-cropped" image.

Canon backs this with their sensor comparison chart. There's no zoom, (unless you count it as "digital zoom") as optically, you're seeing the SAME image, just smaller, but higher MP to blow up to a bigger size. That's where Pixel Density comes to play.

SP12 is right on the nose. You're thinking in terms of Field of View. Which EXACTLY means: Because it's cropped, it "should be a longer focal length, and the bokeh SHOULD increase dramatically because of the longer focal length but it doesn't so we'll have to increase the f-number".

Remember 3 things affect DOF: Aperture, Focal Length, and focus point (Distance between subject and the camera)

yes, the image thrown by the lens remains the same regardless of what camera you mount it on. but i'm interested in the final result, not an intermediary.

so, why wouldn't you think in terms of field of view? you don't get the dof that was lost on the edges because there wasn't a sensor there.

a 200 f/2 on a 7D would be equivalent to a 320 ~f/3.2 on a 5DII in terms of noise, dof, and fov, assuming the same focus point from the same position. your reach will be higher on the 7D due to the higher pixel density.

this is the same problem you run into with 4/3 cameras. yes, there are f/2 zooms available for the system, but when used as intended they only match the dof and fov of equivalent length f/4 zooms on 135 size cameras.

That's not 'quite' how it works. The DOF stays the same between different sensor formats. The difference is the framing. To get the same framing for shot on a 50mm, you'd have to stand 1.6x the distance from your subject away. As we all know, the further the distance the greater our plane of acceptable sharpness is.

You still get bokeh, but very much only at the effective focal length.

if you move you then have a different image. what kind of basis for comparison is that?

 

[mchammer187]

There are rumors about a new FF camera from canon

5D Mark III which will have be 28 MP FF, AF system of the 7D for ~3K if you are to believe the rumors

www.canonrumors.com

 

[Sp12]

Q3 2011 I believe. Canon's supposedly gone back and redesigned their sensor to catch up to and pass everyone else.

 

[xchangx]

Second the D3s, paired with the 70-200 2.8 it's an awesome camera.

http://www.michaelchangphotography....-Men-vs-Troy/DSC8179/1184135923_j6QN3-L-1.jpg

That's ISO 4000 straight out of the camera (JPG) no crop, no nothing.

 

[iGas]

Second the D3s, paired with the 70-200 2.8 it's an awesome camera.

http://www.michaelchangphotography....-Men-vs-Troy/DSC8179/1184135923_j6QN3-L-1.jpg

That's ISO 4000 straight out of the camera (JPG) no crop, no nothing.

That is a great shot.

Here is my wish list to add to the lens collection that I have (will get rid of the 100-300 for sure, and the 20mm prime as well).

17~40mm f/4L USM
MP-E 65 f/2.8 1-5 x Macro
70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM or 70-200mm f/4L IS USM (weight factor)

It is going to be a tough wait or the 5D MkIII & Sigma SD1.

 

[xchangx]

This is all going to depend on what you want to shoot. Sports? Landscape? Birds?

To be completely honest, it's the glass that is more important than the body. Sure my D3s is nice, but it's what I need to get the job done (high ISO) since a lot of the gyms I shoot are poorly lit.

 

[finbarqs]

You can do anything/everything in post! So whatever you get, just make sure you know what you are doing, unless you're a pixel peeper.

Unless you're talking about the SD1, I have to agree with xchangx. Lens is pretty important. But there are some cheap awesome quality lens sold by canon and nikon you can get!

 

[iGas]

You can do anything/everything in post! So whatever you get, just make sure you know what you are doing, unless you're a pixel peeper.

Unless you're talking about the SD1, I have to agree with xchangx. Lens is pretty important. But there are some cheap awesome quality lens sold by canon and nikon you can get!

I agree that lens are more important than the body, however I don't know anything regarding APSC lenses or 4/3. I have some understanding of 1/2 frame minox, 35mm cameras, medium format as well as large format (had a 4x5 Linhof when I was young) is that the larger the film plane the better the colour saturation, grain density and resolving power isn't as critical as smaller format.

Comfortable & balance is very important to me as I have some what large hands. AF and brightness of the viewfinder are becoming more important to me now as my eyes aged. Next important thing is colour saturation & low flares, sharpness is next on the priority list, and then resolving power (pixels).

That why I was looking at FF cameras due to my limited knowledge, I would absolutely jump on APSC & 4/3 board for the weight saving, if it can deliver all of the above.

 

[xchangx]

Still need to know what you plan on shooting. Plus you mentioned that comfort is important... Have you held a 1d body + a 70-200? Is that too heavy for you? I know a lot of people that don't like the heaviness. I, on the other hand love it.

 

[ElFenix]

I agree that lens are more important than the body, however I don't know anything regarding APSC lenses or 4/3. I have some understanding of 1/2 frame minox, 35mm cameras, medium format as well as large format (had a 4x5 Linhof when I was young) is that the larger the film plane the better the colour saturation, grain density and resolving power isn't as critical as smaller format.

Comfortable & balance is very important to me as I have some what large hands. AF and brightness of the viewfinder are becoming more important to me now as my eyes aged. Next important thing is colour saturation & low flares, sharpness is next on the priority list, and then resolving power (pixels).

That why I was looking at FF cameras due to my limited knowledge, I would absolutely jump on APSC & 4/3 board for the weight saving, if it can deliver all of the above.

unfortunately 4/3 cameras basically save no weight over equivalent spec APS cameras (E-5 weighs only 2 oz less and is the same size as the 7D, and is heavier and larger than the K5). the other problem is that 4/3 may not have much life as an SLR format going forward. panasonic certainly isn't going to make SLRs and i think olympus may not be updating bodies or releasing much new glass. so, while the current glass is excellent, the system is limited and isn't going to get bigger.

5D2 weighs slightly less than a 7D, and a couple ounces less than a D300s. both those APS cameras have extensive weather sealing, though. D700 weighs another 6 ounces more than the D300s.

the 5D2 isn't the sports shooter that the 7D and D300s are, or the D700 for that matter. it's AF system isn't as advanced (for lack of a better word), as those others, lacking cross type points in particular. it's raison d'être is that it delivers superior IQ (D700 also has very good IQ, also having a 35mm sensor). the 5D and D700 also have noticeably larger viewfinders due to being 35mm cameras.

 

[iGas]

Still need to know what you plan on shooting. Plus you mentioned that comfort is important... Have you held a 1d body + a 70-200? Is that too heavy for you? I know a lot of people that don't like the heaviness. I, on the other hand love it.

I now mainly shoot family & friends at parties, as well as nature and macro. I have had my fair share of lugging around heavy big gears in the past and those days are long over now, hence I prefer middle of the road for weight, fast lens, fast focus but not too heavy. And, I haven't play around with a 1D & 70-200mm.

 

[xchangx]

Ok, in that case then get a 5dmk2. Full frame definately has a different quality to it. Almost 3d like.

For shooting parties, if you want to shoot more candid shots then go with the 70-200, otherwise a 24-70. Canon has an awesome 100mm macro that a friend of mine uses a lot.

 

[ElFenix]

Ok, in that case then get a 5dmk2. Full frame definately has a different quality to it. Almost 3d like.

For shooting parties, if you want to shoot more candid shots then go with the 70-200, otherwise a 24-70. Canon has an awesome 100mm macro that a friend of mine uses a lot.

there is nothing candid about any flavor of the 70-200


i'd keep the 17-40 for that. the 5D kit lens, 24-105 f/4L, may also be good for that. the less 'HEY I'M A CAMERA LOOK AT ME' the better. the 35 f/2 is a rinky-dink little lens but it'd be perfect for candids in tighter quarters.

 

[finbarqs]

I have no idea what people are talking about the 3D likeness... Unless they're talking about depth of an image, I can't see anything that surpasses the a Foveon Sensor as this "3D" like.

As far as color saturation goes, NOTHING beats film. Why? because the photo lab and film will process the image for you, thus giving you NO photoshop work required! But when you shoot digital, you're the lab, and YOU have to do the work. Unless you like shooting JPEG's, color saturation is always done in post. You don't want to shoot with a Preset on serious projects as it will NEVER be as good as what you can do with a post program such as aperture or PS.

 

[twistedlogic]

I have no idea what people are talking about the 3D likeness... Unless they're talking about depth of an image, I can't see anything that surpasses the a Foveon Sensor as this "3D" like.

The only thing I can think of is the look of a fast short prime on FF, something not possible with a crop sensor. The tonal transitions and dynamic range also help the "3D" look, much like film, .

 

[iGas]

Played around with D7000, D700, 5D MkII, and 7D. And, I love the feels of the Canons much more than Nikon (could be bias), however the Canons were heavier than the D7000.

A local camera sales man told me today that Nikon discontinued the D700 (their factory has stop production), and I should wait to see what the replacement will be like.

 

[finbarqs]

you're talking about the shallow depth of field? Tonal Transitions and dynamic range... Meaning you're talking about gradients in color... which also will have to do with contrast of the image... which is again, controlled by light (or if you have a 14+ stop sensor)

So far, Fuji's S5 reaches an astonishing 13.5 EV of dynamic range...

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...brand)/Fujifilm/(brand2)/Canon/(brand3)/Nikon

AND it's on a crop sensor! But of course, the color depth is about 2 bits off... and low light... we can kiss that good bye...

But for dynamic range, fuji is the best... Not even medium format's (The all mighty PhaseOne P65) can reach it's 13.5 of dynamic range! Incredible! on an APS-C Sensor!

 

[GoSharks]

But for dynamic range, fuji is the best...

Um, no.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...rand)/Fujifilm/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Nikon

 

[ArizonaSteve]

D700, spend the rest on top quality glass.

 

[bigi]

It have been 20 years since the last time I purchase camera gears (EOS 10s & 630, and 5 lenses). And, now I'm ready to jump on the digital bandwagon.

I'm looking at getting a Canon EOS 5D or 5D Mark II. Are there much different in image quality between the 2 CMOS?

I'm not sure if I need video capability.

[add]

I have an additional $5.3K from income tax return, along with my budget of $2~$3K for a new body.

What set up can I get for $7~$8K.

There are many bodies to choose from now. This should be your secondary concern.
Choose your glass wisely. Choose it well and stick to it. This is the real investment.

Then decide on the body. Buy used and save money as you will upgrade bodies more often. Good lenses last and serve for very long time.

Many newbs drop shit load of $$$ for a body and get crappy one lens. You often see people buying 2-3K body and $400 lens.

Do not do it. Research/buy here: Fred Miranda Forums

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

why are you looking just at the full frame ones? The 7D is more advanced than the 5D MkII - has better low light capabilities, and has more focus points. But the 7D is APS-C

The 7D does NOT have better capabilities than the 5D2 in low light terms.

The 5D2 consistently can shoot with 1 stop better in terms of ISO noise. I'd say it's closer to 1.5 stops even. I have no worries shooting at ISO3200 or even occasionally 6400 on a 5D2. Anything past 1600 makes me worry on my 7D.

The focus points on the 7D are amazing though. I NEVER use the outer points on my Rebel, but on my 7D, I always use single point and go and select the right point. I typically resort to focus and recompose on the Rebel, and I imagine that's what a lot of 5D2 users do too because the center has 6 additional assist points.

As good as the 5D2 is, the replacement is coming really soon. I'd say late this year. It's almost a waste to get it now, but then again if you need it, go for it. The 7D is an amazing shooter too, and the earliest I see a replacement is this year too. However, something tells me that the 7D doesn't deliver everything I want. Full frame is still amazing and that razor thin DOF is nice to have sometimes. Maybe I just need to move to faster glass

The new 5D3 should have a better AF system. Once you move to a 7D or 1D AF system, I don't think you can go back. It's just too amazing having all crosstype sensors.

 

[finbarqs]

wow, Pentax K5! Is that the in camera HDR processing? But the D7000... yup. There we go. 13.9 stops of Dynamic range!

You know, it really all comes down to the photographer. Your vision is what makes it great. As cheesy as it sounds, we can do whatever we want to, with any camera we choose. Heck, you can get an entry level DSLR and take incredible shots that people with a 5D Mark 2, or a D700... or heck... a D3x can't do!

As long as you got it, equipment will come second. I guess this comes to the other question of: What do you plan on doing with this? Commercial Photography? Planning on making a business out of this? or just a hobby? If it's a Hobby, then you should settle then nothing but the best!

 

[GoSharks]

wow, Pentax K5! Is that the in camera HDR processing? But the D7000... yup. There we go. 13.9 stops of Dynamic range!

As you should be aware, that number does not come from any HDR processing, so yes, the K-5 is that good.

All sensor scores reflect only the RAW sensor performance of a camera body. All measurements are performed on the RAW image file BEFORE demosaicing or other processing prior to final image delivery. DxOMark does not address such other important criteria as image signal processing, mechanical robustness, ease of use, flexibility, optics quality, value for money, etc. While RAW sensor performance is critically important, it is not the only factor that should be taken into consideration when choosing a digital camer

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Learn-more/DxOMark-scores/Sensor-scores

 

[finbarqs]

TBH, I choose the body which best fit my shooting style, and what I need it for. The different features it carries, frame coverage, or Auto Focus accuracy, heck even video! Anyways, See what you want in a camera, then choose. Quality will almost come with any DSLR you pick these days!