New camera

[DeathPrincess]

I'm looking for some advice, because theres too many variables.

Ok, I had been putting up with using an old fujifilm for a long time, then I needed a new HD digital camera, and got a Panasonic HDC model, that took even better photos. So I have been using that for a long long time to take stills. But I have really outgrown it as a camera. It's great for research shooting, and simple basic photos, but it lacks some of the options that a dedicated still camera has (mainly lenses).

I've always been intrested in the Cannon EOS range. But their numbering has caused me some confusion. The two cameras i'm looking at are the 7d and the 5d mark II.

Now, the 7d is slightly more expensive and newer, but has lower pixel size. The 5d seems to be used by "professionals" more, has a higher mp sensor but is cheaper, though they both seem to have nearly identical features. So out of the two, i'm not sure which is "better". The naming scheme for the "d" range is confusing two, higher and lower numbers seem to get better and worse, rather than like intel chips where a 980 is better than a 920 and so on. But the EOS 500 is worse than the 550, but the "best" is the 1d...

I know its never that straight forward, but I'd like something that;

had good low light shooting,
had decent sized photos (for image manipulation)
did full 1080p filming (not essential, but i've seen great stuff shot with a 5d.
was robust (do lots of travelling)
was high quality

I don't mind going for other cameras other than the 5d mark II and the 7d, but as long as they have the same or better quality, and also can shoot footage at the same quality.

Then of course there is the lenses. What would you suggest as a good general purpose lens to get me started?

Thankyou for reading all of that!

 

[northrop]

I think you're looking at the wrong cameras.

First of all, 5D MkII isn't cheaper than the 7D. Actually, it's almost double the price of the 7D. Secondly, the 7D is equipped with with an 18MP crop-sensor, compared to the full frame 21.1MP sensor in the 5D. Something tells me, you've been looking at the MkI 5D instead.

Anyway, both cameras are excellent and capable of taking clear and detailed images, but before listing all the differences between the two cameras (or crop vs. full frame in general), you need to answer this question: What's your budget?

 

[bexamous]

I just in process of writing a real long reply and realized there is no way I'd cover everything... so I'm not going to try.

You should really go to POTN and read those forums for a bit. So much information on there, including a ton of threads comparing 7d and 5d2. Body is just the beginning. Really lens selection is going to be even more important. And it all really matters on what kind of pictures you plan to be taking. I'd go to POTN and just start looking around on there.

Also, if you really don't know what you want, I wouldn't get either the 7d or the 5d2. Go buy a Canon t2i kit (~$1000 i think) and try that out for a bit. It can take amazing pictures, the kit lens is a little slow (not good for low light), but you can use the popup flash. Maybe guy a 50mm f1/.8 lens with it ($100 lens) and use that indoors. You can do a ton with that combo. Later on if you want more, you sell the t2i for minimal loss and put it towards a 7d/5d2/whatever.

Oh yeah, and the prices you are looking at are wack. The 5d2 is more expensive than a 7d. 7d kit is ~$1700 and 5d2 kit is ~3300. The 5d2 kit however does come with a much nicer lens, the 7d kit lens is junk. Still just comparing price of bodies the 7d is much cheaper.

 

[SilverMK3]

Generally speaking, yes, the lower the number the better.

The 500D, for example, is in the Digital Rebel range of consumer-level cameras. Within this three-digit range (ignoring the 1000D), the higher the number the better/newer the camera. For example: the 450D (XSi) was the flagship Rebel until the 500D (T1i) came along, which was soon replaced by the 550D (T2i). All of the cameras in this range have an image sensor 1.6X smaller than a full frame 35mm camera and are physically smaller / more compact than their bigger brothers.

The 50D, for example, is in Canon's enthusiast range of cameras. Within this two-digit range, the same rule applies: The higher then number, the better/newer the camera. For example: The 50D was just supplanted by the new 60D body, just as the 50D was preceded by the 10D, 20D, and 40D. (the D30/30D causes confusion). All of the cameras in this range also have image sensors 1.6X smaller than full frame 35mm cameras, but the camera bodies themeselves are considered full-sized.

The 7D is an awkward fit, it is positioned, featured, and priced as a professional camera, but it still uses a smaller 1.6X crop sensor. This is Canon's pro-sumer level camera with the latest and greatest autofocus algorithms and noise reduction techniques. Professional features at a consumer price.

The 5D has always been Canon's flagship full-frame camera. The MKII replaces the MKI or classic version. This uses a full-sized 35mm sensor and is the staple of professional wedding/portrait photographers. The image quality is epic.

The 1D is Canon's professional sports-photography camera. It uses a 1.3X crop sensor and insanely fast/accurate autofocus speed and burst rates. The MK IV is the latest and greatest.

Lens suggestions will depend on which type of body you choose and what type of photography you're interested in

 

[botw]

and if you are interested in video, bear in mind that DSLR video is much more difficult than any consumer video-cam you have ever used. Focusing is usually done manually and you have much smaller depth of field with which to work. The great stuff you have seen from the 5d2 (i.e. anything you see on TV) is usually done with all kind of focus-pulling and other accessories.

Best bang for your buck would be to get a T2i. Fewer bells and whistles than the 7d, but largely the same sensor and video capabilities. Otherwise, they are all great cameras - each with their own strengths - and some additional research should help you decide what you want out of your equipment.

 

[DeathPrincess]

Ok! sorry everyone for the late replies, but I was working on somethings, then had a load of visitors and had to do some extended research! Thank you for the replies!

@Northrop I mixed up the auction prices and the new prices or something. The budget is around $2000 for the body. I really want something that will last, as I have a habit of "outgrowing" things very quickly. I want something thats adaptable to what I want to do. I know there shall always be something better, but just something that will keep it's price, or be a "good" camera for a long time. Which is why I wanted to avoid a lower end type model. I don't mind going second hand, and have seen both for less than $2000.

@bexamous The low light thing is a problem. I really am looking for something that wont noise up too much in low light, which is what I use for 50% of the shots I take (because of dark surroundings, and shadowly on location type shoots where lighting is impractical because of no power etc, also i'm into...dark stuff). I'm wondering if the price premium for the 5d2 is worth it over the 7d (or even over the Ti2). the 21mps would be more useful for image manipulations/texture work, but 18mps of either one would be fine. It would be great to have a test run with them, but there are no decent higher end camera shops in this area. Ill check out the forums! The 7d can take EF and EF-s lenses, but the 5d can only take EF (according to wikipedia...) is there anything compelling in the EF-s range?

@SilverMK3 That system needs some work. You can't have higher AND lower be better! Needs unique identifirs, like names or something. The type of photography i'm into is mainly portraiture, but also some landcapes (I dont a load of travel) and a weirdly large number of insect shots. (I go places and take photos of spiders and moths...lots...).

@botw I couldn't use anything without manual focus for video! It drives me crazy when video cameras are going in an out of focus trying to capture something that is stationary! Though, it is sometimes nice to have the auto focus option if you need to do something remotely. The 5d impressed me because itss quality is much greater than several (more expensive) video cameras! The other camera is used for "scouting" type things, but it does take impressive shots by itself! It was also chosen because of the low light abilities, which is also why i'm intrested in using a DSLR, because of low light ability over dedicated HD cameras (which is usually pretty shocking). Thats probably my main concern. But how much better is the 5/7d over the T2i in low light, and what is the minimum lux? I need more research!

 

[Blue Fox]

The 5D has always been Canon's flagship full-frame camera. The MKII replaces the MKI or classic version. This uses a full-sized 35mm sensor and is the staple of professional wedding/portrait photographers. The image quality is epic.

The 5D has never been the flagship product. That would be the 1Ds. It has a full frame sensor like the 5D.

 

[northrop]

I'll take a quick stab at this

I mixed up the auction prices and the new prices or something. The budget is around $2000 for the body. I really want something that will last, as I have a habit of "outgrowing" things very quickly. I want something thats adaptable to what I want to do. I know there shall always be something better, but just something that will keep it's price, or be a "good" camera for a long time. Which is why I wanted to avoid a lower end type model. I don't mind going second hand, and have seen both for less than $2000.

Rule number one: camera bodies depreciate in value. It's actually a really bad investment. Lenses on another hand, can hold their values quite well, and in some rare cases, you might be able to sell your lens for more than what you paid for it new.
Rule number two: should another camera body be released, the camera you own will not suddenly stop taking pictures. Whatever camera you'll choose to buy, it will take the pictures with a great IQ on day one, and it will most likely take images with the same IQ on day 1000. The camera will be "good" for as long as it can meet your needs. Also, since you've mentioned a Canon 5D, it's really hard to "outgrow" a camera of this magnitude for some of the pro's, let alone for hobbyists.

The low light thing is a problem. I really am looking for something that wont noise up too much in low light, which is what I use for 50% of the shots I take (because of dark surroundings, and shadowly on location type shoots where lighting is impractical because of no power etc, also i'm into...dark stuff). I'm wondering if the price premium for the 5d2 is worth it over the 7d (or even over the Ti2). the 21mps would be more useful for image manipulations/texture work, but 18mps of either one would be fine. It would be great to have a test run with them, but there are no decent higher end camera shops in this area. Ill check out the forums! The 7d can take EF and EF-s lenses, but the 5d can only take EF (according to wikipedia...) is there anything compelling in the EF-s range?

Shooting at night, or in low-light environment is always a challenge. A tripod is probably your best bet for clear, sharp, and "noise free" images, assuming of course, a tripod can be used. Sure, increasing the ISO is a quick fix, but it's not free. If you're really anal about image quality, you'll find yourself jumping hoops and try to keep ISO as low as possible.

As for the EF and EF-s mount lenses... the 5D (or any other full frame camera) requires a lens that can cover its image sensor. Otherwise, all you're images would look like this:

source

That system needs some work. You can't have higher AND lower be better! Needs unique identifirs, like names or something. The type of photography i'm into is mainly portraiture, but also some landcapes (I dont a load of travel) and a weirdly large number of insect shots. (I go places and take photos of spiders and moths...lots...).

If you think the Canon's naming scheme is bad, have a look at Nikon's
Quick example, from "best" to "worst":

D3
D700
D300
D90
D5000

Anyway... for portraits and landscapes you'll benefit more from having a full frame cameras (they also do better in low-light environment, which seems like something you're interested in). For macro photography, a crop sensor might benefit you more, however.

 

[Filter]

first and formost get megapixels out of our head. they mean squat in DSLR market unless your priniting huge and i mean huge.

 

[TechHead]

The 5D has never been the flagship product. That would be the 1Ds. It has a full frame sensor like the 5D.

Yeah,but where's the 1Ds MkIV?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Pylon]

If you think the Canon's naming scheme is bad, have a look at Nikon's
Quick example, from "best" to "worst":

D3
D700
D300
D90
D5000

Even more messed up with the new introductions:
D3s
D700
D7000 (arguable)
D300s (arguable)
D90
D3100
D5000
D3000

 

[Pylon]

first and formost get megapixels out of our head. they mean squat in DSLR market unless your priniting huge and i mean huge.

I would agree with this quote. I use a Nikon D40 with 6 megapixels and it's more than enough for what I do. It suffices for pretty much all work that stays on the computer (largest common computer monitors max out at about 2560 x 1600, excluding rare ones like the IBM T221, while the D40 does 3008 x 2000). For printing, it's good enough for up to 12" x 18".

You can also argue more megapixels = better for cropping, but in most cases you should be getting a longer lens instead. There are occasional "grab shots" where it might be useful though (say you saw a rare bird far away and you have your wide angle or midrange zoom mounted, and there's no time to switch lenses).