DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> WIDE angle, low noise @High ISO, and $4k to spend
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 46, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/14/2005 04:08:12 PM · #1

If you were me, what would you do?

What I'm looking for:
*Wide angle - equivalent to my 17mm on a full frame sensor
*Low noise/useable prints at ISO 800 to 1600
*Something that won't be obsolete as soon as I buy it.
*Image quality
*Resolution greater than my 300d (no brainer there)

What I have tucked away ready to spend.. $4,000

Options I am considering...
Buy an EOS 5D to use with my existing EF 17-40 lens
Buy an EOS 20D AND and EFS 10-22mm lens and save the extra money.

I'm torn. I want the 5D for full frame, but the latest review says the high ISO noise is comparable to that of a 20D. I also want the 5D for build quality because I do a lot of underground construction photography, but it's not weatherproof like the 1Ds, so why bother spending the extra cash? Also, the 5D is only 3fps and the 20D is 5fps.

What would you do? I'd be interested to hear your opion on the 5D versus the 20D....and the pending 40D(?) replacement to the 20D in February (per all the dpreview forum speculation and rumors... like anyone really knows.)
 11/14/2005 04:15:58 PM · #2
Hmmm...
I personally think I would go for the latter, the 20d and the 10-22mm. I just made the jump from the 300d to the 20d and am SO happy with it thusfar. So...get the 20d and the 10-22mm. Pocket the money you will save. Then, in a few months when the latest & greatest comes out, use your pocketed money and sell the 300d and get that one too LOL
 11/14/2005 04:16:31 PM · #3
Bear in mind that with your 70-200mm lens, you have effectively a 320mm lens on the 300D or the 20D. If you go to a 5D, you have chopped that down to 200mm, so assuming you use the full zoom with any regularity you are going to need to buy a 300mm lens if you get the 5D. In other words, get the 20D and buy the 10-22mm, or get the 5D and buy the 300mm.

So you'll save a LOT of money by buying the 20D. Obsolete certainly isn't an issue IMO; the 20D is a good enough camera to be useable for a long, long time. It would take a quantum leap of some sort to make it obsolete, and the 5D certainly isn't that. Whatever obsoletes the 20D, will obsolete the 5D as well.

Robt.
 11/14/2005 04:25:52 PM · #4
The 5D gives you a higher resolution and the possibility of going wider than 16mm without a fisheye. The 20D is cheaper, faster, and has a built-in flash for emergencies. Personally, I'd go with the 20D unless you need REALLY wide angle.
 11/14/2005 04:42:43 PM · #5
Thank you so much for the quick replies. I truly appreicate your honest answers.
 11/14/2005 04:46:19 PM · #6
I'd get a d200, a Nikkor 10.5mm and be done with it ;-)...spend the rest on lighting so you don't need to use that high of ISO.
 11/14/2005 05:03:41 PM · #7
I can't buy lights for the stuff I shoot on a regular basis. like this subway station under construction in LA...


Plus I like Canon. Nothing against Nikon, but my glass is Canon and I like my Rebel and little point and shoot A95. No reason for me to switch companies.
 11/14/2005 05:12:08 PM · #8
Originally posted by tunnelmuck:
I can't buy lights for the stuff I shoot on a regular basis. like this subway station under construction in LA...


Plus I like Canon. Nothing against Nikon, but my glass is Canon and I like my Rebel and little point and shoot A95. No reason for me to switch companies.


If this is what you shoot mostly, then maybe a 5D would be better. I hear the hi ISO is better than the 20D. What about a tripod, do you use one?
 11/14/2005 05:15:08 PM · #9
Most of the time i will use a tripod... most of my portfolio shots were done like that. but on that particular day, I had to go handheld at ISO 800 and 1600 with a 300D and a f/4 17-40 (I know....not very useable). I couldn't carry my tripod because I had to climb up and down about 60-ft of ladders.
 11/14/2005 06:14:36 PM · #10
anyone else want to offer his or her opinion? or maybe another option that I might not have considered?
 11/14/2005 06:55:46 PM · #11
I have the 20D and the 17-40L I'm getting the 5D for christmas, I just don't find the 20D good enough for the wide angle.. I might keep it for my 70-200L IS...

the 5D looks really promising, all the reviews I've read say it's great, even when compared with the 1Ds II, and only looses by very little ;)
 11/14/2005 06:59:53 PM · #12
Check the results of the 5D with the lens you mentioned... apparently ALL wide angle lenses vignette pretty badly with it and the 5D is very unforgiving of any lens defects. You may get much better results with a 20D at the equivalent focal length.
 11/14/2005 07:03:56 PM · #13
One of the photogs I work with uses a 20D and I asked him what he was going to do with the new 5D out. He said glass is forever and is buying the 100-400 and a new wide angle.

Can't argue with him, he gets awesome photos with that 20D and the only thing that NEVER gets cheaper is glass.

Buy the 20D and great glass and then, in a year or two, get a 1Ds markII when they are selling for $3,995 :-D (They have already come down $1,000 since the 5D came out :-O )

Message edited by author 2005-11-14 19:04:31.
 11/14/2005 07:18:27 PM · #14
Originally posted by tunnelmuck:
I couldn't carry my tripod because I had to climb up and down about 60-ft of ladders.

If you're dragging the camera around sites like that, then you should also consider the build quality and environmental sealing aspects of the body.
 11/14/2005 07:30:56 PM · #15
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by tunnelmuck:
I couldn't carry my tripod because I had to climb up and down about 60-ft of ladders.

If you're dragging the camera around sites like that, then you should also consider the build quality and environmental sealing aspects of the body.


If they would come out and say the build quality of the 5D was similar to the 1Ds then I would be definitely leaning towards it. I've handled the 5D and 20D side by side and sure the 5D feels "more robust" to quote the review on dpreview, but Canon makes no promises. therefore, I'd feel better risking a $1200 body over a $3300 body at work.
 11/14/2005 07:45:15 PM · #16
1DII and a sigma 14mm f2.8

Better weather sealing than the 5D, faster frame rate, good for up to 20x30 easily and amazing noise performance at ISO 1600 if you expose correctly.

Message edited by author 2005-11-14 19:46:14.
 11/14/2005 10:11:08 PM · #17
looks like I'm leaning towards the 20D now. Anyone else want to chime in?
 11/14/2005 10:39:03 PM · #18
Compromise, go with a 1D Mark II with the 1.3 crop factor. Also, as it's a 1D so I believe it's sealed which will be good if you are underground a lot. B&H has them for $3,800.

Tokina has a decent 12-24mm f/4 that's pretty decent. Use it for some gig photography. However, i think you'd be best off with a Canon's 15mm f/2.8 prime. ($550)

And if you might need a wider view add the 50mm f/1.8 prime for $70.

I think this would be a good route considering your budget and the fact you're in a lot of construction zones.

11/15/2005 12:55:35 AM · #19
1DII and the 50mm 1.8 was great for shooting low light. I took a load of images in a bar at ISO 1600 with it, with great results.

11/15/2005 07:45:09 AM · #20
I have no idea but I wish I had 4k to spend LOL.

11/15/2005 07:53:12 AM · #21
Im really happy with my 20D at high ISOs, a huge jump in performance from the 300D.

Im not sure about this (correct me if im wrong) but with a full frame sensor i think it might limit you to expensive lenses as a lot of the cheaper ones are optimised for the digital crop.

The Nikon D200 looks pretty nice though.
 11/15/2005 07:56:45 AM · #22
Originally posted by bear_music:
Bear in mind that with your 70-200mm lens, you have effectively a 320mm lens on the 300D or the 20D. If you go to a 5D, you have chopped that down to 200mm, so assuming you use the full zoom with any regularity you are going to need to buy a 300mm lens if you get the 5D. In other words, get the 20D and buy the 10-22mm, or get the 5D and buy the 300mm.

So you'll save a LOT of money by buying the 20D. Obsolete certainly isn't an issue IMO; the 20D is a good enough camera to be useable for a long, long time. It would take a quantum leap of some sort to make it obsolete, and the 5D certainly isn't that. Whatever obsoletes the 20D, will obsolete the 5D as well.

Robt.


IMHO, I have to agree with bear, he just makes sense!
 11/15/2005 10:41:11 AM · #23
Originally posted by superdave_909:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Bear in mind that with your 70-200mm lens, you have effectively a 320mm lens on the 300D or the 20D. If you go to a 5D, you have chopped that down to 200mm, so assuming you use the full zoom with any regularity you are going to need to buy a 300mm lens if you get the 5D. In other words, get the 20D and buy the 10-22mm, or get the 5D and buy the 300mm.

So you'll save a LOT of money by buying the 20D. Obsolete certainly isn't an issue IMO; the 20D is a good enough camera to be useable for a long, long time. It would take a quantum leap of some sort to make it obsolete, and the 5D certainly isn't that. Whatever obsoletes the 20D, will obsolete the 5D as well.

Robt.


IMHO, I have to agree with bear, he just makes sense!


there is a cheaper way, he could get the Canon 1.4x II for the 200mm to keep close to 300mm on the 5D
that way he would have the wide angle covered with his 17-40 and the long end covered with his 70-200 and 1.4X
 11/15/2005 10:52:38 AM · #24
Originally posted by Gordon:
1DII and a sigma 14mm f2.8

Better weather sealing than the 5D, faster frame rate, good for up to 20x30 easily and amazing noise performance at ISO 1600 if you expose correctly.


I imagine that the only drawback with this would be that the lens would not be weathersealed. To gain the best advantage of a weather sealed body, one would most likely need one of Canon's more recent L lenses. Yet more expense.
 11/15/2005 11:01:27 AM · #25
Originally posted by AJAger:
Originally posted by Gordon:
1DII and a sigma 14mm f2.8

Better weather sealing than the 5D, faster frame rate, good for up to 20x30 easily and amazing noise performance at ISO 1600 if you expose correctly.


I imagine that the only drawback with this would be that the lens would not be weathersealed. To gain the best advantage of a weather sealed body, one would most likely need one of Canon's more recent L lenses. Yet more expense.


Plus he loses both speed and sharpness.

R.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 07:20:11 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 07:20:11 AM EDT.