Best use of funds?

Ok, I've got this problem eating away at me. I am currently shooting with the 50d. I love the features. The image quality...not so much. I shoot landscapes, travel stuff and a lot of horses in their environment which I print and sell through a couple local galleries. I have wanted to go full frame pretty much since I switched to digital but it's expensive.

I can now afford the 5D2 but I'm second guessing the investment. You can see my lens selection in my sig line and it's ok but not anything special. Should I take the plunge and go for the 5D2 or put that money into upgrading glass? If I bought the 5D2 I would probably sell off the ef-s lenses and the 50D to purchase glass anyway. Will the improvement in IQ with the 5D2 be that noticable over the 50D?

Bob

honestly i think that i would spend the money on glass, find out if that will make you happy, if not then you can always choose to get a new camera after that because the lens that you get would work on both cameras if you are getting a nice lens. if you get a 5d2 then you will have to get new lenses right away, cameras lose value more than lenses do so i would go for something that would have better value in case you dont like your decision.

Rent one and see what you think.

Hot Bob wrote in post #8572157
Ok, I've got this problem eating away at me. I am currently shooting with the 50d. I love the features. The image quality...not so much. I shoot landscapes, travel stuff and a lot of horses in their environment which I print and sell through a couple local galleries. I have wanted to go full frame pretty much since I switched to digital but it's expensive.

I can now afford the 5D2 but I'm second guessing the investment. You can see my lens selection in my sig line and it's ok but not anything special. Should I take the plunge and go for the 5D2 or put that money into upgrading glass? If I bought the 5D2 I would probably sell off the ef-s lenses and the 50D to purchase glass anyway. Will the improvement in IQ with the 5D2 be that noticable over the 50D?

Bob

Hi Bob,

What is it about the IQ that you aren't happy with? I ask this because I find the IQ to be pretty good after PP...

Ian

PS - Other than the Sigma 18-125 OS, which I have no knowledge of, you have very good lenses and they should be able to produce the goods IQ wise.

No Question.. DO IT!

I went from the 50d to 5d2, and still can't believe the IQ. The first thing i noticed was the colors..Wow.. the dynamic range is a huge difference.

I also don't get the issues people have with the autofocus, I never had a problem, it's extremely close to the 50d's (I use center point)

You can have a really nice setup if you sell:

50d - $950
10-22 - $600
18-125 - $200
Tot: $1750

Purchase:

Tamron 28-75 2.8 = $375
Canon 85 1.8 = $360
Canon 135L 2.0 = $1000 (or 35L for a little more)

Tot: $1725

That would give you 12-200 with 2 fast primes

The Tamron is great with the 5d2.. here's a couple from the other day

twoshadows wrote in post #8572406
Hi Bob,

What is it about the IQ that you aren't happy with? I ask this because I find the IQ to be pretty good after PP...

Ian

PS - Other than the Sigma 18-125 OS, which I have no knowledge of, you have very good lenses and they should be able to produce the goods IQ wise.

I think it's the noise that bothers me the most. I try to expose to the right most of the time but I still am not pleased with the noise I see in the shadows. I also don't like the limited aperature range with this camera. I'd like the flexibility of being able to stop down another one or two stops.

As far as the Sigma 18-125mm OS, I have to say I didn't really expect a lot out of it but, it turned out to be a very nice lens. It is quite sharp and has very good contrast. I'm sure there's some distortion but with the things I shoot, you would never notice. It would be nice to have a little faster glass in that range though.

Bob

Hmm...

I love the IQ of my 50D with the Tammy 28-75mm.

If it's the noise that's bothering you, I'd suspect that the 5DMII will be better than the 50D. If you get faster lenses and shoot wider, then of course you can use lower ISO on the 50D and reduce noise this way as well.

Hot Bob wrote in post #8577939
I think it's the noise that bothers me the most. I try to expose to the right most of the time but I still am not pleased with the noise I see in the shadows. I also don't like the limited aperature range with this camera. I'd like the flexibility of being able to stop down another one or two stops.

As far as the Sigma 18-125mm OS, I have to say I didn't really expect a lot out of it but, it turned out to be a very nice lens. It is quite sharp and has very good contrast. I'm sure there's some distortion but with the things I shoot, you would never notice. It would be nice to have a little faster glass in that range though.

Bob

Well Bob, I can understand about the noise . It can be ugly. The only thing I can tell you is that a little NR does wonders for the files. it's especially true of the 50D because much of its noise is chroma (Uglier than luminance, but not as damaging to the detail).

Still, it does sound like the 5DmkII is more for you .

Goodluck in whatever you decide,

Ian

I'd really consider selling everything but the 70-200 2.8 Sigma which I've heard is a good lens, get the 5DII and a 24-70L or 35L and 135L, three awsome quality lenses on that camera.

I'm not against 1.6 crop cameras but for what you are doing, I think full frame would be a huge blessing. The tonal detail in horses needs to show beautifully, the better it's done the more money your going to make, also for landscapes full frame is a big asset. I can also imagine there will be cases where some horse portraits i.e. a horse running free with a wonderfully blurred green background, could warrant as large a print as you can make and the dollars should match in size. Horse people are wonderfully crazy, and I love that kind of crazy.

You will find with a full frame camera that the 24-70 is a wonderfully versatile lens combined with the longer zoom you already have.

Hot Bob wrote in post #8577939
I think it's the noise that bothers me the most. I try to expose to the right most of the time but I still am not pleased with the noise I see in the shadows. I also don't like the limited aperature range with this camera. I'd like the flexibility of being able to stop down another one or two stops.

As far as the Sigma 18-125mm OS, I have to say I didn't really expect a lot out of it but, it turned out to be a very nice lens. It is quite sharp and has very good contrast. I'm sure there's some distortion but with the things I shoot, you would never notice. It would be nice to have a little faster glass in that range though.

Bob

What do you mean limited aperture range of the camera? The lens limits aperture, not the camera body.

matonanjin wrote in post #8582836


What do you mean limited aperture range of the camera? The lens limits aperture, not the camera body.

Diffraction limits the useable aperature range and the 50D limits me to about f/8.

Bob

Do you have any special noise reduction software that you use (Noise Ninja, for example, or one of the others)? I would hold off switching everything around if you haven't tried a really good noise reduction program or plug-in. Just my $0.02. I still also think renting and trying things out is a good idea, since then you will have some first-hand knowledge of the differences. On the OTHER hand (heh), since you are selling your work through a local gallery, you really might want to go ahead and go full-frame. You know you are gonna do it at some point anyway, so why not now?

As much as I love my 50D, if you are selling landscape shots you may want to NOT invest in any more EF-S glass. Maybe pick up a 17-40L or a 16-35L (the 17-40L is very reasonably priced as Ls go). See if that helps. If not, the 17-40 makes a fabulous landscape lens on FF.

As far as the diffraction smaller than f8, I've read that that's only an issue at the pixel level, and not so much an issue in real life viewing, maybe someone could comment?

Get rid of the 18-200mm

I always recommend that a photographer base his or her lens battery on a really top-line mid-range zoom lens. Your 18-200mm lens is certainly NOT TOP-LINE!

The 18-200mm MIGHT" be a decent lens for someone to mount on a Rebel camera to shoot vacation pictures with no expectations of making prints much larger than 4x6 or for sending pictures of the kids at the beach to grandma by email but, it is certainly not a lens that I would pick for my mid-range zoom if I wanted to sell prints.

The MINIMUM I would be using is the Tamron 28-75mm and more probably an "L" lens (or the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS for a 1.6x camera).

I would venture to guess that you would see a great increase in general image quality if you switched from the 18-200mm lens to a 24-70L or a 24-105L. These would be great also if you definitely decided to go to full frame.

There is one point that I'd like to make. A camera like to 50D (or 30D or 40D) is quite capable "if combined with top-line glass" or producing excellent imagery. If you are already getting excellent imagery with this camera and great glass "and you want to increase the quality", then, by all means go to full frame.

However, if you are not getting good quality imagery from your 50D it is time to either switch lenses or become more adept at handling your equipment "or both".

Just switching to full-frame is not a panacea for achieving great imagery.

One final tip: I don't know if you are using a solid tripod for your landscape shots but, a tripod will do wonders for improving the technical quality of any photographer's imagery.