Best body for low light / high ISO performing arts work

[niqqunos]

Hi all,

I've decided that I want to upgrade my trusty ol' 350D and get something that will take better advantage of my f/2.8 (siggie 24-70 and 70-200mm) glass and perform a bit better under low light conditions.

Most of my work is live bands and I've been getting into some glamour type stuff, but even this I want to try and stick to 'darker' type shots - moody, atmospheric scenes.

I don't think I will be able to stretch my budget to a 5DmkII or better (as much as I'd love one!) so I'm basically deciding between a 40D, 50D or a 5D... I've seen a few 40Ds for around AUD$1000, 50Ds tend to be about AUD$1500 and a second hand 5D is close to AUD$2200.

So... given the price difference between them, which do you all think is the best body for high ISO low-noise (1600 and above) but also taking into account AF performance in low light conditions?

Is the 50D worth a 50% price premium for basically more pixels and better LCD?

Is the 5D really that much better than the other 2 for this sort of work for the price?

Bear in mind too that I am really just an amateur, but I would love to be able to take on professional work and know that I have the right gear for the job.

Can't wait to hear your opinions!
Thanks heaps for reading!

Dan

[zerovision]

Since your are anxious to hear from someone, i'll start. I have not worked with the 40D and 50D, but I have had the 5D for two years and the 70-200mm f/2.8. The 5D is great at handling low light noise at high ISO. I have the 1D mark III to compare it to. My 1D goes to 6400, but side by side the 5D seems to do a little better with noise.

Most people indicate that the FF sensor can handle the noise better. All three cameras should perform very well but I believe you should be able to find a 5D closer to $1400 rather then the $2200 you mentioned. The 50D would be my choice over the 40D even if it appears the only difference is the pixel amount. One thing to keep in mind is any pp cropping would be handled better by the 50D.

Good luck hope you find what you are looking for and I hope you get to be a pro.

[narlus]

5DmkII is great, no complaints from me.

edit - i actually read yr post now, and would recommend the 5D from the other two.

[Sibil]

........... which do you all think is the best body for high ISO low-noise (1600 and above) but also taking into account AF performance in low light conditions?


I can only speak to the 40D. I like the ISO 1600 performance of my 40D, but to my eyes, images fall apart, noise-wise, at ISO 3200.

I'd also love to hear which bodies perform well at ISO 3200 and above.

[ralliart_04]

i would say go full frame and get the 5D. it gained popularity with its noise handling and not to mention, it is an entry level to the full frame world. Good luck in deciding.

[DDCSD]

To get any real improvement over the 5D you'll need to move up to a 1DmkIII or 5DmkII. The 5D will likely be my next camera.

[blackshadow]

Hi Dan,

I think you'll find a used 5D should meet your needs admirably. I picked up a second hand one in January for $1050 AU and love it - it complements the 1D Mark III wonderfully. You should be able to find a good second hand one for a lot less than $2200.

[niqqunos]

Hey Rich,

Yeah I've been checking out eBay a bit recently to see how much I can find them for and I've seen a couple around for the $1500 mark.... you did well to get one for $1050! I bought a 40D last weekend for that much (display model from Bing Lee) which subsequently immediately came up with Err 99 so I returned it!

It must have been fate telling me to hold off and get something better for the money!

Cheers everyone for your words of advice... I think I'll save my pennies a bit longer and go for the 5D!

[niqqunos]

OK, I've gone out and got myself a brand spanking new 50D... decided for my requirements, it would be the best in the price range and I can't wait to get out and use it properly!

[zerovision]

Great choice. Looks like you have all the lenses you need for a long time. Hope you will post some pictures.

[niqqunos]

Great choice. Looks like you have all the lenses you need for a long time. Hope you will post some pictures.

I'm shooting my hero tonight actually - the great Victor Wooten!

He's doing a clinic in Sydney and I emailed the promoter who's bringing him out to ask if I was allowed to bring my camera in and offered use of the shots on his website. He agreed and in return he'll be using me for his future Sydney clinics with other bass players and cross-promoting me and my site.

I'll post some shots tomorrow when my jaw returns to its normal position after seeing Victor play! :)

[Moooney]

i was leaning towards a 5d for low light concert photography because of its high iso performance, as well as the fact that i wanted to go FF for my other shooting. how does the 5d perform as far as focusing and whatnot in low light compared to the 40/50d? would it be a significant upgrade to my xsi which struggles?

[narlus]

i have not used the 50D. the 40D i think is a bit better mostly due to the better accuracy of the outer points. probably not much different if you just use the center AF point.

in low light, it's visibly cleaner/crisper at 1600/3200 as compared to the XXD models.

[Moooney]

i think i am going to give my xsi another chance, using only the center focus point. i figured using the outer points would be more accurate than using the cross-type center point then recomposing, but now i'm kind of thinking that that might not be the case.

[alan_potter]

I'm also interested in feedback on this. I've recently come into a few pennies and am considering upgrading my 350D to a used 5D.

The things I don't like about my 350D are


its noise performance - I am normally shooting at ISO 1600
The small write buffer - I keep getting the dreaded "busy" message


So, am I likely to see a significant improvement in these (especially the high-ISO noise performance) from a 5D? And is the 5D likely to be better than the 40D or 50D in this regard?

Many thanks,

regards,
/alan

[Rock Photo Star]

I'm also interested in feedback on this. I've recently come into a few pennies and am considering upgrading my 350D to a used 5D.

The things I don't like about my 350D are

its noise performance - I am normally shooting at ISO 1600
The small write buffer - I keep getting the dreaded "busy" message
So, am I likely to see a significant improvement in these (especially the high-ISO noise performance) from a 5D? And is the 5D likely to be better than the 40D or 50D in this regard?

Many thanks,

regards,
/alan

I can't comment on the 5D as I've never shot it. I have shot the original rebel, XT, XSI, 20D, 30D, 40D, and 50D - all in concert situations.

I don't find iso3200 on the 40D or 50D that usable,in fact,I was very disappointed with iso 3200 on the 50D. As for iso1600, I don't think there is that much of a difference froman XT, which I've used for almost 3 years shooting concerts.

Many of the pictures in my photo exhibit (11x17 and 13x19) are shot on an XT.

I can tell you that the focus is better on the 50D and XSi than an XT. I didn't think focus on the 40D was that much better.

My next upgrade is either a 5D or 5D mkII or a Nikon, where I hear iso 3200 is quite usable on the D90 and above.

[Chosenbydestiny]

I've used all of the above and you're going to have to kill me before taking my 5D away from me at a concert or performance from now on, lol. I didn't like the 50D's noise handling as much as I liked the 40D. I still think (used) the 40D is the best deal out for a crop, and of course the 5D for full sensor.