Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 24 Oct 2012 (Wednesday) 20:04
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

First DSLR purchase - help

 
Gromit256
Hatchling
7 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Oct 24, 2012 20:04 |  #1

I appreciate that this issue has already been discussed in various guises but I’m specifically interested in feedback relating to the Canon 5d Mk ii and Mk iii.

I don’t own a DSLR, - therefore I have neither a collection of lenses nor any allegiance to either Nikon or Canon. Having said that – I prefer the feel of the Canon and I like the simplicity (for a novice) of knowing what’s likely to be an excellent lens as opposed to a ‘good’ lens… Red ring etc. …Nikon lenses all look the same to me. I have chosen not to look at the 7d despite all it’s good qualities. I made this decision because I would like to get into full frame and as this is my first DSLR purchase I see the 7d as a temporarily measure that would only finacially further delay the inevitable (FF).

I have an interest in pursuing a number of photographic styles (from a hobbyist’s point of view) – landscape, architecture, general family and motorsports (I’m not expecting to have any of my photos published in F1 magazine, so I can live with the challenge of getting a few acceptable shots when I do finally have the appropriate lens(es) in the future).

So, my dilemma (given that I am not rolling in money and have a family that also have wishes) is - should I buy a 5d Mk ii and say the 24 – 105 kit lens or should I buy the 5d iii and say the 50mm 1.4? The second option is obviously more expensive but perhaps the added cost (albeit reduced from getting the 24-105 with the Mk iii) is worth it when thinking long term?

By all accounts the Mk iii is a much better camera and as I don’t plan to replace any DSL purchased for at least 6-8 years I feel that it’s probably more future proof than the Mk ii.

…But if I were to buy it now then all I can likely afford is the body and say a 50mm. With just this combination am I effectively buying a gold watch to go mud wrestling? With the exception of motorsports will that lens provide enjoyment for a year or so until I can buy more suitable lenses? (This is a big question for me!!)

If I buy the Mk ii (remember this is not an upgrade but a beginning commitment to photography as a hobby) then is this may be a disappointment. Will I regret not buying the Mk iii. Already I understand that the AF system is dubious at times on the Mk ii but should to accept this older tech in preference for a lower cost outlay and a better general-purpose lens such as the 24-105?

People say lenses are more important than the camera body and generally I’d agree with that but I want my camera body to me moderately acceptable for 6-8 years at least – so keeping that in mind is the body an equal priority for my initial purchase?

I first started looking at buying a camera (and lenses) about 2 years ago but the complexity of doing so and the complexity of lens and costs) put me off as became quite frustrating.

Any suggestions would be very greatly appreciated.

I live in Japan, but if you have any thoughts that camera equipment is cheaper to buy in the land that makes the stuff then you’d be very badly mistaken. Prices here are significantly above those found in the US and HK – that includes physical shops and the Internet retailers (especially amazon)!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Daship
Senior Member
765 posts
Joined Dec 2010
     
Oct 24, 2012 20:17 |  #2

I was in the same boat as you. I researched it for 2 weeks, and I just pulled the trigger on the 5D MII and 24-105 lens today. I had a 7D and the focus was awesome but I think I will be fine with what the 5D MII has to offer. There are lots of reviews out that show the MII is sharper then the MIII at lower isos, I see it with my own eye viewing images on these forums. I got the MII just because I believe it is sharper and has better IQ then the MIII. I plan on loading magic lantern on it so I can do the HDR stuff that the 5D III has.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brasher
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Atlanta
     
Oct 24, 2012 20:19 |  #3

5d MKII. Plenty of camera. Save your money for bigger and better things. The user makes good images, not the camera.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tsamarin
Senior Member
535 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 62
Joined Jun 2007
Location: California's Central Coast
     
Oct 24, 2012 20:23 |  #4

For what it's worth, I just moved to a 5D2 and now understand why the 24-105 is so often paired with this camera. It's just hugely useful. Even with fast lenses, I rarely shoot larger than f/4 due to DOF considerations and the high ISO quality of the camera gives a lot of flexibility.


30D/ 5D2/ EF 85mm f/1.8 / EF70-300mm/ EF 100-400L/ EF 24-105L/ EF 17-40L/ 430 EX/ 055X PROB/BH-55 & CPL1
http://tsamarin.zenfol​io.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Copidosoma
Goldmember
1,017 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton AB, Canada
     
Oct 24, 2012 20:23 as a reply to  @ Brasher's post |  #5

5DII and 24-105 would be an outstanding combination that you likely won't outgrow for a looong time.

Just becasue it isn't the newest kid on the block does not mean that it is any worse than it has been in the past. Have a look at the 5DII thread/threads and see what it is capable of. If that isn't good enough for you then maybe consider the 5dIII.


Gear: 7DII | 6D | Fuji X100s |Sigma 24A, 50A, 150-600C |24-105L |Samyang 14 2.8|Tamron 90mm f2.8 |and some other stuff
http://www.shutterstoc​k.com/g/copidosoma (external link)
https://500px.com/chri​s_kolaczan (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gromit256
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
7 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Oct 24, 2012 21:39 |  #6

Thank you to those people who have time out of their day to provide helpful advice - it's is greatly appreciated and very useful




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Oct 24, 2012 23:34 |  #7

I agree that the 5DII will likely be the best of the two options you have mentioned. What I don't understand is the feeling that you have to commit to a specific body for 6-8 years. Tech is changing and you will likely grow out of whatever you buy. The older the body is, the faster you will outgrow it.
I would understand if depreciation were a huge factor. You don't want to invest $2000 in a camera and then come in 2 years later and take a $1000 loss to sell it and buy something else. But the higher-end cameras don't depreciate that fast. Buying refurbished or used improves that depreciation factor even more. Gear at this level is usually built like a tank but is often pampered by the owner. I bought a 7D refurbishef for $1069 through the Canon Loyalty program 2 years ago and the going price for a used one in similar condition is about $900. That's less than $100 per year depreciation.

I'm not trying to move you to a 7D. I just wanted to put that little perspective on things for you. If you eventually want a 5dIII but need more than the glass you could buy with it now, then get the 5DII and get the glass you need then plan to upgrade when you can better justify the cost difference. By 2 years from now you will have lost $200 or so in depreciation but the 5DIII will likely be $200 or so cheaper as well by then so you won't be losing anything at all by going this route.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,738 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 297
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Oct 25, 2012 00:08 |  #8

Start off with too much camera and you'll end up breaking it before you learn how to use it completely. I'm half joking.

A lot of people in your position leave photography as quickly as they come in. I wonder sometimes whether the decision between crop and full frame might have made any difference at all. In all likelihood, they were afraid to learn. It sounds like you've done some homework, which is a good thing.

If I were you, I'd get a 5D2 if it doesn't take away from your family obligations or goals. The 5D3 will be too much camera for you. I say that unapologetically. You'll be happy with a 5D2 because it's a great camera. The only thing that the 5D3 really has over the 5D2 is AF performance... but for someone starting out, the advanced AF system is a bit much to handle. I'm even having to learn it coming from the 7D.

What I will say is that a crop body is an excellent body to learn on. Many people find no advantage in going full frame, so they never leave crops. It's just a matter of preference.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gromit256
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
7 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Oct 25, 2012 00:38 as a reply to  @ Nathan's post |  #9

I think the trend shown in each of the replies has been rather overwhelming in favour of the Mkii. When it comes to photographic equipment (and skill) I am very much a complete ignoramus and hence everyone's comments have been very useful. I would rather learn from experienced users than make a multitude of avoidable errors. I take on board the comments about maybe the canon 5d iii being too much of a camera for me at this stage.... What can I do to overcome/reduce AF issues if choosing the MKii? Is it really that bad or are people to spoilt with the new systems that its blown out of proportion?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
modchild
Goldmember
Avatar
1,469 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Lincoln, Uk
     
Oct 25, 2012 05:09 |  #10

IMO the AF system of the 5D3 has been simplified from the 5D2, if you read the manual and set it how you want for the style of shooting you want it's easy to use. It took me a lot longer to get my 7D AF system how I wanted it than I did with the 5D3. Admittedly, the 5D3 is more complex and has a lot more features (I still haven't used them all after 6 months) but if you are shooting the basics then the 5D3 is excellent.

The AF system of the 5D2 is fine for most things, but motorsports, wildlife, BIF etc are difficult to get although you are able to get them. The 5D3 can be used for everything without any problems. If you could afford a 5D3 and a decent lens, like the 24-105 f4 L, to go with it then I'd say to do it. If you can't afford to get the 5D3 without a decent lens then save a bit longer until you can. Buy once, buy right. When I got my 5D2 the 5D3 hadn't been announced otherwise I'd have waited to get the 5D3.


EOS 5D MkIII, EOS 70D, EOS 650D, EOS M, Canon 24-70 f2.8L MkII, Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII, Canon 100 f2.8L Macro, Canon 17-40 f4L IS, Canon 24-105 f4L IS, Canon 300 f4L IS, Canon 85 f1.8, Canon 50 f1.4, Canon 40 f2.8 STM, Canon 35 f2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Tamron 18-270 PZD, Tamron 28-300 VC, 580EX II Flash, Nissin Di866 MkII Flash, Sigma EM 140 Macro Flash and other bits.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Oct 25, 2012 05:17 |  #11

Gromit256 wrote in post #15166414 (external link)
I think the trend shown in each of the replies has been rather overwhelming in favour of the Mkii. When it comes to photographic equipment (and skill) I am very much a complete ignoramus and hence everyone's comments have been very useful. I would rather learn from experienced users than make a multitude of avoidable errors. I take on board the comments about maybe the canon 5d iii being too much of a camera for me at this stage.... What can I do to overcome/reduce AF issues if choosing the MKii? Is it really that bad or are people to spoilt with the new systems that its blown out of proportion?

The big thing to remember with the 5DII is to only use the centre AF point for anything out of the ordinary. So low light, or studio macro work etc don't get clever, stick to the centre AF point and you will be OK.

Yes, it will mean focus-recompose. Thats frowned upon by many but it does work.

I'm fascinated to read that the low ISO performance of the mk3 has not progressed. I have absolutely no interest in anything over ISO 800, but desperately want ISOs 25 and 50 without banding or other issues.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Oct 25, 2012 08:51 as a reply to  @ Lowner's post |  #12

Different people have different needs. I bought a 5DII and kept it for a few months and realized that I was still just shooting my 7D most of the time so I got rid of it. Although I have visions of the type of work I want to do which full frame would be good for, I rarely have time for it. Meanwhile the 5DII was simply not cutting it on what I was actually shooting which involved a lot of marching band, some concerts, and some plays at the school. Even when I would shoot portraits, I would end up using the 7D because I was more comfortable with it and I was impatient with the AF in darker environments on the 5DII. There isn't a lot that I can produce on the 5DII that I can't do on the 7D. If I was printing large prints a lot that would be different. But nearly everything I shoot ends up on the web or on my monitor which can't fully realize the benefit of full-frame. The narrower DOF for a given field of view doesn't really cause me concern because I'm not one who obsesses on this. I went through that stage 20 years ago.
And sure, I would love to have a 5DIII, but I can't cost-justify it and the 7D suits my shooting style best for the money I want to spend.
My point is, that since you haven't been involved in photography, you may be better off starting with a much less expensive crop camera so you can figure out what your styles and preferences are, and then put the money out for the camera that fills the gaps that need to be filled rather than the ones that you imagine are out there based on your limited experience.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
marzel
Member
231 posts
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Northern California
     
Oct 25, 2012 09:02 as a reply to  @ kfreels's post |  #13

Sound wisdom I say kfreels ;)

My advice: Go to a camera shop and play with them!

Definitely go Canon CLP regardless of your purchase (although you cant really get a 5d3 on there...). Figure out *your* photography first and then you'll have a better idea of what kind of camera will match you best.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gromit256
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
7 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Oct 25, 2012 22:43 |  #14

To add complication.... Should I hold out and see what the 6d is like compared to the Mkii?? Is it a replacement for the markii?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Oct 25, 2012 23:11 |  #15

Gromit256 wrote in post #15170372 (external link)
To add complication.... Should I hold out and see what the 6d is like compared to the Mkii?? Is it a replacement for the markii?

It fills a different niche. The %DII has been taken up a notch and the 6D is down a notch. It will cost you $2100. It has a higher max ISO and a center point that focuses down to -3EV which should be neat. The body is more like a 60D from what I can tell. It too will be a nice camera and worth the money for the right person. I'm sure there will be a lot of happy owners. Whether you would be one of them is impossible to tell because so far I don't think you really know what you'll be shooting mostly or how.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,621 views & 0 likes for this thread
First DSLR purchase - help
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rono258
769 guests, 207 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.