Reasons to get 5D over 30D

ScottE wrote in post #2285163
Doesn't that depend on lens choice?

You used the 15-30 and 24-70 on the 5D, but could have had much the same coverage by using a 10-22 and 17-55 on the 20D.

You used the 70-200 and 35 f/2 on the 20D, but could have had much the same coverage by using a 70-300 and 50 f/1.4 on the 5D.

My choice is to stick to one system and buy the lenses that work best with that system.

Well, the 10-22 doesn't go as wide on the 20D as the 15-30 does on the 5D. And I found myself using every bit of that width at times. AAMOF you just can't get as wide coverage on the APS-C as you can on the FF in either rectilinear or fisheye. And there isn't a 70-300 f/2.8 IS out there. I had 1.4x and 2x TCs along as well, and needed every bit of them too; wouldn't have had AF with the 70-300s that are out there. I get bodies for the same reason I get lenses - I assess their strengths as they fit into my shooting needs, and choose the mix that'll do me best for all-round work. If that means different sensor formats, no biggie. I want dual bodies for that once-in-a-lifetime trip anyhow. If anything (including one of the lenses) had failed, I would only have lost a little bit at one end of things.

Madweasel wrote in post #2284245
...I was trying to resist arguing here

Then you should have...

YOU know what I meant by it, and so does the OP... and all I was stating was my opinion.

I would "prefer" my EF lenses that were designed, and who's focal lengths are based on, the standard 35mm frame dimensions(Or full frame), to "Act" as they we designed.. I don't want a 50mm lens to "Act" as a 80mm lens (As far as FOV is concerned, of course).

But for me, money was a factor, so I'll work with the crop camera.

Ok... So I'm wrong, your right... Feel better?

Now go read a technical manual or something why I continue to work on my art.

Jon wrote in post #2286227
Well, the 10-22 doesn't go as wide on the 20D as the 15-30 does on the 5D. And I found myself using every bit of that width at times. AAMOF you just can't get as wide coverage on the APS-C as you can on the FF in either rectilinear or fisheye. And there isn't a 70-300 f/2.8 IS out there. I had 1.4x and 2x TCs along as well, and needed every bit of them too; wouldn't have had AF with the 70-300s that are out there. I get bodies for the same reason I get lenses - I assess their strengths as they fit into my shooting needs, and choose the mix that'll do me best for all-round work. If that means different sensor formats, no biggie. I want dual bodies for that once-in-a-lifetime trip anyhow. If anything (including one of the lenses) had failed, I would only have lost a little bit at one end of things.

Jon, 10 mm on a 20D is the equivalent of 16 mm on a 5D. Most of us consider 16 mm to be wide enough for our use and wouldn't consider an extra mm to be significant. For example the widest EF zoom lens Canon produces is th 16-35 but many people purchase the 17-40 instead, not considering the difference between 16 and 17 to be significant enough to worry about. Obviously my style of photography is not the same as yours, so 15 mm may be important, and even limiting, to you.

You are correct, the is no 70-300 f/2.8 zoom, although Sigma does make a 120-300 f/2.8 zoom, but it is very big, heavy and hardly ideal for travel. That is the reason many people prefer an EF-S system when using telephoto lenses.

My point is that I would rather travel with one system, whether it is full frame or EF-S. I carry two bodies when I travel, just in case one fails, but I want the second body to be backup for the first, with all my lenses. I used to travel with two 35 mm film cameras and a set of lenses that covered super-wide to telephoto. Now I travel with two EF-S cameras and lenses that cover the same range, except the telephotos effectively go longer.

I hope your trip to Greece is not a once in a lifetime experience, but that you will be able to make many more trips.

Scott

^^15mm is still 15mm. 1 extra MM over the 10-22 on the 20D. Also the 10-22 wouldn't be able to mount any of his non EF-S cameras(5D, D60). So unless Jon is loaded with money, i doubt he'd want to poor money into the lens, even as good of quality as it has.

And Sigma's 120-300 is not ideal even for hand holding. That's where 70-200 IS would be more ideal.

You will always have a compromise in systems, unless you ahve unlimited budget and storage. So if something goes wrong, something goes wrong.

Gooble

Sports, Birds, Wildlife = 30D
Portraits, Landscapes, Buildings = 5D

Or just spend of your first holy communion money and buy the both!

gooble wrote in post #2283734
Can any 5D owners give me a short list of reasons to get the 5D over the 30D?

I am currently the owner of a Rebel XT. I have only had it for a few months and while it is a very capable little camera I am not satisfied with several features, namely:
-viewfinder too small
-LCD is too small
-manual focusing difficult because of focus screen and small viewfinder
-body too small and almost unusable without grip
too name a few. I think I will probably get a 30D but am wondering if the 5D is worth the premium.

Short list? FULL FRAME

I have to agree with Mr. Marklin.

LCDs are the same size on both cameras.

If you want full frame, then the 5d is what you want. The wide angles are pretty unbelievable when you compare the 30 to the 5.
Operation wise, the 5d is buttery smooth, whereas the 30 you will have to make some effort to hit the shutter. I think the color and contrast out of 5d looks way better, but you would have to compare on your own, as this is subjective.

You could take a CF card to your local shop and try both to see what you want and if it fulfills your needs. Good luck.

is there much difference in picture quality? I was also thinking of this 2 cameras but the most important thing to me would be the image quality....

Glyyde wrote in post #2288053
is there much difference in picture quality? I was also thinking of this 2 cameras but the most important thing to me would be the image quality....

Depends.

In terms of high ISO(1600, 3200), the 5D will win.
In terms of posting photos on the web, no.
If you print big(above 8x10), you'll see differences. Or if you crop a lot and still want to print fairly big, you will see differences.

Go into a camera store, and hold them both in your hands.
I don't care what features the 30D has, that 5D is one sexy camera to hold. I was playing around with the entire Canon range at the recent EOS event in London, and the 5D was my pick of the bunch. That's enough for me to buy it

grego wrote in post #2287439
^^15mm is still 15mm. 1 extra MM over the 10-22 on the 20D. Also the 10-22 wouldn't be able to mount any of his non EF-S cameras(5D, D60). So unless Jon is loaded with money, i doubt he'd want to poor money into the lens, even as good of quality as it has.

Exactly. A system means that everything works together, not necessarily that everything's identical. I can use any of my lenses on any of my cameras any time I'm out. And with 2 sensor sizes, each lens can serve dual purposes, so I have a certain amount of redundancy in case a lens goes bad. In fact, I could have even left the 24-70 behind if I'd been super-pressed for space/weight.

grego wrote in post #2287439
And Sigma's 120-300 is not ideal even for hand holding. That's where 70-200 IS would be more ideal.

Not to mention that it never would have made it through Heathrow with the carry-on restrictions in place. Or if it did, I wouldn't have been able to take anything else. :{)# And then there's IS.

grego wrote in post #2287439
You will always have a compromise in systems, unless you ahve unlimited budget and storage. So if something goes wrong, something goes wrong.

And with 2 sensor sizes, each lens can serve dual purposes, so I have a certain amount of redundancy in case a lens goes bad. In fact, I could have even left the 24-70 behind if I'd been super-pressed for space/weight and only missed the FF lengths of 48-70 mm. Worst case - if the 15-30 had died, I still had FF equiv. coverage of 24-280 mm, neglecting the TCs. 15-98, and again a TC or two had I really needed the reach, if the 70-200 went down. Plus two f/2 primes for one.

I own both cameras at question here....and my 5D is the preferred camera for any type of shooting unless i absolutely need the 5 fps that the 30D offers. What I like about the 5D is that it is full frame and your lenses will perform how they are supposed to perform, which also means you need good lenses for this camera. 12.8 megapixels is also a wonderful thing to have for cropping capability. for weddings i can get several shots out of one for using different crops. the viewfinder is much larger than the one on the 30D, the grip feels better in my opinion and the shutter noise is softer and quiter than the loud click on the 30D. I love both cameras but the 5D is AMAZING!!!

Jon wrote in post #2289996
And with 2 sensor sizes, each lens can serve dual purposes, so I have a certain amount of redundancy in case a lens goes bad. In fact, I could have even left the 24-70 behind if I'd been super-pressed for space/weight and only missed the FF lengths of 48-70 mm. Worst case - if the 15-30 had died, I still had FF equiv. coverage of 24-280 mm, neglecting the TCs. 15-98, and again a TC or two had I really needed the reach, if the 70-200 went down. Plus two f/2 primes for one.

I defintely love the two sensor sizes I have. If my 30D had stronger AF, i'd be perfect(although I do have the urge to want to upgrade just for the accuracy purposes). My 16-35 can be pretty damn wide or be good normal zoom range. My 70-200 can give me just a little extra. And then my Sigma 120-300 can give me super long reach if need be.

I defintely find the difference very suitable for use with the 70-200 2.8 IS during bball games on the 1DMKII.

options are always good.

I was in this same dilema not that long ago when upgrading from my digital Rebel; at the same time I'm also still using an Elan 7e 35mm body.

Originally I wanted something that best encompassed the spirit of the Elan in a digital body.

The 5D for me was the original choice being FF was a huge factor, but the similarities for me ended at about that point.

5D greatest assets:
FF 12.8MP sensor.
Slightly larger hand grip
C function: user programmable dial feature.

30D assets:
5fps vs. 3fps of the 5D and newer Rebel's
built in flash: I still find this useful.
However, build is very close to that of the 5D...so too are many if not most every menu function/feature.

In the end I choose to save some cash and go for the 30D. As much as I wanted the 5D the extra kick in resolution was not really needed for my needs. My prior 6MP Rebel had been plenty in all honesty, so 8MP was a plus.

Given the addition of many digital specific lenses that really takes some of the wind out of the classic FOV sails IMO. I haven't had too much trouble adjusting between crop and non-crop formats.

For me it all comes down to resolution if you need very large prints or extensive cropping ability then that should be the primary reason to choose a 5D over a 30D.

I still use the internal flash at times, a real time saver.