Jump to content
Fly Tying
Sign in to follow this  
Salmo22

Canon 5D

Recommended Posts

BestBuy seems to have a good price on the Canon 5D with a Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens.

 

First; what are your thoughts about this camera/lens combo?

 

Second; what flash, filters, accessories would you get for this combo?

 

Third; what do you think of using PhotoShop CS3 and Lightroom for managing and editing the digital images?

 

Finally, what is/are the advantages to shooting digital images in the RAW format?

 

Thanks.

 

PS - I'm old to shooting Velvia on 4x5 view cameras; however, I'm very new to shooting digital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im a nikon guy but im going to try to put in my two cents.

 

i would get an external flash,

 

ask your self is the lens fast enough for you?

as far as filters go, a high end uv filter to protect the glass of your lens is the most important

a polarized filter would be nice(but not a must) that is the filters i would get most filter effects are in cs3

 

and how much postprocessing are you going to be doing.

 

adobe photoshop elements is very cheap compared to cs3

(its what i started out on, and it has a very nice work flow system)

 

just my 2 cents

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like CS3. I'm going through some books now so I can really take advantage of what it has to offer. CS3 with the bridge lets you open JPEGs with RAW so you get the advantage of doing major tweaks there then you can really finetune after. CS3 also has a really nice B&W feature that lets you tweak each individual color play with contrast and all kinds of stuff. Still waiting on my book for doing B&W in CS3 to really get into it, but even without the book I'm getting decent results.

 

The RAW advantage is you get much more control over your image when you get it on your computer. That is also kind of its disadvantage. All that control means you gotta spend some time on your computer doing what the camera would do for you automatically. JPEG will probably work for most stuff, then switch to RAW when the light is golden and everything falls into place.

 

Switching from 4x5 to digital is going to be a system shock for you. First thing you will have to get used to is you no longer are limited to a few sheets of film. Just blasting away shot after shot doesn't cost anything. My brother kind of taught me that lesson. I photographed a football game his foster son was in and at the end of the game I had maybe 50 images. A few weeks later my brother borrowed my camera to shoot a game and came back with close to 300 images and said he deleted some of the really bad ones there.

 

When learning how your camera works you might want to shoot mostly JPEG simply because they are a smaller file and shoot tons of photos in all kinds of situations knowing you won't keep most the images but are just getting really familar with the camera. Then when you are comfortable with the camera begin with some RAW files and jump on the computer to learn how to really get the most oout of shooting RAW.

 

Once you play with some RAW files and some JPEGs youcan decide if the control you have is worth the time you spend.

 

Oh and the hologram is your friend! Don't trust what you see on your display for exposure.

 

If you do get CS3 most your filters will be in CS3. Something to protect the lens might be all you need. Like benjamin said you might want an external flash.

 

Throw in a tripod and you will be good to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned external flash is a must in some applications, the one on your camera is only good up to 40ft. I would get one that pivots, turns etc. You will need this for “bounce” photo shoots.

 

As for the 5D, it's a very nice camera. It's a full frame camera and not bad in price. I got the 40D just because of the speed of shooting. I'm not sure about the lens, but I would stay with IS USM lenses. You can go to the Canon USA site and look at images taken from the lens and read what is said about the lens there.

 

Filters, also with today’s software you can add any filter type to a pic you want. What I would get is a Hoya Multicoated Skylight (1B) filter. It's glare resistant and only around $30.00, don't leave the store without a lens protector/filter.

 

The software that comes with Canon cameras is actually pretty awesome and all you need for post processing. The only thing you really need the other stuff for is if you want to start playing with photos doing layouts, add ins etc.

 

I'm new to this as well, but from what I see with RAW, you can change every aspect of the photo and it's pretty awesome. Again, the Canon software does this beautifully, and they even have a tutorial on their site to help you out if you need it.

 

All in all, getting the camera at Best Buy is good, they are pretty much local everywhere you go. Some of your extras you can get at an online place like B&H Photo (they are awesome as well) and chances are you can get the same thing for less. Hope this helps.

 

Ashby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BestBuy seems to have a good price on the Canon 5D with a Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens.

 

First; what are your thoughts about this camera/lens combo?

 

Second; what flash, filters, accessories would you get for this combo?

 

Third; what do you think of using PhotoShop CS3 and Lightroom for managing and editing the digital images?

 

Finally, what is/are the advantages to shooting digital images in the RAW format?

 

Thanks.

 

PS - I'm old to shooting Velvia on 4x5 view cameras; however, I'm very new to shooting digital.

The 5D is an incredible camera. Combined with the 24-105 L, you will have a nice beginning point. The lens is a great "L" glass walkaround lens. Wish it was faster than f/4, but it has IS, so that should give you about 2 additional stops.

 

This is not really a sports camera. It's large full frame only shoots at 3 fps. The 40D is a better sports and birding camera.

 

As for flash, it works great without a flash. Very low-noise high ISO camera. If you want to use flash, you need to purchase one, as this camera does not have an on-board flash. It's a pro-grade camera.

 

Filters -- polarizing would be cool. I have uv filters for all my lenses, but there are many pro's that do not agree with protecting lenses with uv's. Many believe the uv filter degrades the exposure quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First; what are your thoughts about this camera/lens combo?

 

For the money, its a fantastic body. Second only to Canons 1DSmkII and 1DSMKIIs, each about 5 to7g more. Again, for the money its arguably the best Landscape, Portrait, Macro body on the market. Beware, people are anxiously awaiting its successor. Probably available late summer, early fall.

 

The lens is great. Thats a relative term though. For someone whos never owned the top end lenses they may think its the best thing since sliced bread. Rightfully so. For people who regularily use and buy the best lenses many seem to think it falls a wee bit short. Not quite tack sharp and if memory serves me right it suffers from from CA or Vignetting a wee bit. Shouldnt be an issue to anyone but the pickiest of picky people. That said, an alternative is the 24-70 f2.8. Personal bias I spent a couple months hemming and hawing over which of those two lenses to buy, eventually deciding on the 24-70 f2.8 L. You might want to see what kind of deal you can get on those two, or just the 5D body and get a 24-70 separately.

 

6 of one half dozen of the other. Would depend really on whether you value fast glass or IS. I prefer fast glass for the extra DoF options and the ability to freeze motion in low light which IS cant do and is useless for.

 

 

Second; what flash, filters, accessories would you get for this combo?

 

How deeps your wallet? Seriously, there are no ends to what you can buy. A good flash is almost a must. The Canon 580EX II is their top model but if you want to save some coin you can look at the 430 EX or even Sigma's Super 500 DG (about half the cost of the 580 EX) and almost as good. Cable releases run $90.00 Id add that next. Spare batteries can be found for $20 from 3rd party but Id watch those. Canons Bateries run about 120 but a good alternative are Energisers for about $65. After that a good Tripod if you dont own one. Dont get a "starter" the 5D with grip and a heavier lens would outgrow most tripods in a hurry. No need to buy Gitzos off the bat but a nice sturdy Manfrotto will do.

 

Filters: A Hoya CP to start. Yes PS can replicate but its far, far better to take the shot with the CP or ND. Warming/Cooling filters can be done is PS. UVs...Theres two schools of thought on UVs. I persoanlly dont use them unless Im at a beach or some other location where wind blown grit is a real possibility. Chances are anything else a UV will protect against ( bangs, falls, etc ) would be honoured by your insurance if you have Riders (you should). To me UV filters are just a way for stores to pad their bottom line. 77mm UV fliters will run close to $100.00.

 

Third; what do you think of using PhotoShop CS3 and Lightroom for managing and editing the digital images?

 

How deeps your wallet? Now that you've bought a 5D +24-105, + spare batteries + cable release+tripod+filter+flash+Sandisk 4gig memory cards. Were upto what?

 

You can use Canon porpietary safotware (DPP)to convert your RAW images.

You can buy Elements to get ACR and 80% of PS

You can buy lightroom

You can buy CS3.

 

If your wife is still letting you sleep on the couch Id go straight to CS3.

 

Finally, what is/are the advantages to shooting digital images in the RAW format?

 

Better question. What are the disadvantages to shooting RAW. Other than increased storage space

NONE!

 

Jpegs?

Where do start the list is long. They are lossy, you cant adjust WB, you cant adjust exposure, and so on and so on.

 

Unless your pressed for storage space there isnt a good reason not to shoot RAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my $.02 worth: I made the complete switch to digital 10 months ago, after a couple of decades of medium format and years of 35mm before that. Being averse to wasting money, I did a ton of research before deciding on a system. I read everything I could find and talked to everybody I could tie down and interrogate. My fields are street photography/urban landscape/abstract photography, with the occasional traditional landscape and portrait thrown in just for fun. My business has long been making large prints (mostly 16X20, sometimes larger) to be exhibited (and occasionally sold LOL) as fine art. The choice eventually narrowed down to the Canon 1Ds Mark II and the 5D. Full-frame was a no-brainer, since resolution and IQ in general are big factors in what I do, and I don't need a high-speed continuous mode. From my research, it seemed the resolution the 5D offers comes close to the 1Ds Mark II, and noise control is superior, so I went with the 5D. (and saved $5000) I also picked up a 24-105mm to get started, with the idea that it would be a nice walkaround lens. All I can say is that the 5D has exceeded my expectations. The IQ just blows me away - at least the equal of anything I ever got from my Pentax 6X7, and probably better. (and it doesn't weigh six pounds LOL) I've heard a lot of pros and cons on it, but the 24-105 is a fine lens in my experience, tack sharp with no more distortion or vignetting that one would expect from that type of zoom. (lens quality can vary a lot from copy to copy - lenses often need calibration when they come from the factory, which can be the reason behind a lot of customer dissatisfaction) I do mostly B&W, but when I do shoot color, the colors I'm getting with the camera/lens combination are just gorgeous. I shot large JPEGs while I was getting the feel of the camera and blowing a lot of shots, but I eventually switched to RAW for the reasons mentioned above. My plan is to add a 70-200mm zoom, a 100mm macro, and a 50mm f1.4 and I'll be set for a long time. If I were going to do the kind of work that Graham and John and some of the other guys do, I probably would have gone with one of the high-speed Nikons or Canons, but for my purposes, the 5D is a gift from the gods. Canon will probably replace it in the not-too-distant future, since it's an old design by today's standards, but I have no plans to upgrade. (How good does it have to be?) That could work in your favor, as the price on the 5D is dropping. The best review of the 5D I've heard came after I bought one. I showed up at the beach, camera in hand, in Sept. and ran into a friend of mine who's a highly respected landscape photographer - he shoots with a 5X7 inch Deardorff, has a book to his credit and has taught photography on the college level for many years. My first thought was : "Oh boy, here it comes." I was expecting a nose-in-the-air crack about playing with toys, or something of that nature. Instead, the first words out of his mouth were: "Wow, you got a 5D! You would not believe the stuff the kids are doing with that camera!" I damn near fainted. Sorry about rambling on, but I can't say enough good things about the 5D. If its design suits your working needs, it's got as much bang for the buck as anything out there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im at a point where Im most likely going to buy a 5D myself.

If/when some assignments come in starting this spring Id feel alot better doing them with a second body. It will be a backup and/or for landscape/people candid shots with the 24-70 mounted. While I have the 400 mounted on the 1D for action/tele

 

2) it will become my macro body

 

3) I wouldnt mind at all if the impending replacement keeps driving the price down, But damn id like to get an assigment or two in first. The wallets only so deep and ive been on the couch alot with all this stuff

 

:)

 

Long story short.

The 5D is a remarkable body

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the feedback - great information.

 

Let me give you a little more background about where I may be headed with the D5. My father is a retired pro. He specialized in portraits and weddings, with the occasional commercial assignment. For about a 10 years period he owned a Cessna 206 and did lots of aerial work. I worked for him for several years doing weddings and portraits. Back then, we were shooting with medium format Bronicas, Hasselblads, Mamiyas, etc.

 

To help supplement my income, I am seriously considering getting back into the wedding/portrait game. I get a lot of requests from many of my Dad's old clients and could get working quickly. I also have some opportunities to shoot commercial work for developers of retail projects. For fun, I will likely continue my landscape work.

 

It seems that the 5D's full frame and IQ would be most helpful for the type of work I'd primairly be pursuing. Since sports/action photography is not my thing, I don't get too worried about the speed of the 5D. With this additional information, do you still think the 5D would be a good weapon? Also, what single lens do you think would be most productive for my portrait/wedding gigs?

 

Thanks again for your feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biased opinion bsed on my personal taste and preferences.

 

1) Get the 5D.

In time you can decide if the income is worth upgrading to its replacement due later tis year.

 

2) IF your planning on concentrating on wedding/portrait to earn some coin get the 24-70 f2.8 and the 85 f1.8

 

As mentioned I think you would appreciate the option to open the lens wider for narrower DoFs and creamier "bokeh" (god I hate that term) than having the extra 35mm focal range and IS. I dithered over which to get for 3 months. In the end the f2.8 won out. For portrait type photography thats a high premium. The 24-70 btw is noticeably heavier if that has any concern to you

 

the 24-105 retails for $1,300 and the 24-70 retails for 1,400.

 

The 85mm f1.2 L retails for $2,000 and the 85mm f1.8 $400.00

 

You can't beat or replicate fast glass, wheras you can zoom with your feet or use a tripod/monopod to get "zoom" or stabalisation respectively.

 

F1.8 no "guasian blur" added.

IPB Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with John. Sounds like a 5D and some fast glass would do the trick. Salmo, with your experience and a ready-made client base, (not to mention a mentor like your dad) sounds like you can make some real money. I seem to remember quite a few wedding/portrait pros posting on the Fred Miranda website forums. You might find some info there.

 

John, I share your aversion to the term "bokeh." All it means in Japanese is "blur" or "fuzzy." How it wound up in our lexicon is a mystery to me, but it looks like it's here to stay. I'd never even seen the word until I got back into photography in '06, and I've still never heard it actually spoken. Until I looked it up, I thought everybody was talking about some new digital process. It's a good thing it wasn't around in Ansel Adams's time or he'd have written a couple of of books on how to stamp it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"It's a good thing it wasn't around in Ansel Adams's time or he'd have written a couple of of books on how to stamp it out."

 

Lol I imagine some old school masters like him would create his own version of the fuzzies with a good smack upside the head with a tripod for anyone uttering it. The term does drive me nuts and leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth anytme I think it or use it :)

 

Troutgeek.

Kinda/sorta/not really, only because theres a potential buyer for it recently. If not for that by all means Im not sticky or generally worry about that stuff. The sales side of rghts is completly greek to me and I need to start boning up on it, although I guess a low res dl wouldnt do any harm

 

Im such a novice :) and ill getback to you when I check something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's a good thing it wasn't around in Ansel Adams's time or he'd have written a couple of of books on how to stamp it out."

 

Lol I imagine some old school masters like him would create his own version of the fuzzies with a good smack upside the head with a tripod for anyone uttering it. The term does drive me nuts and leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth anytme I think it or use it :)

 

Troutgeek.

Kinda/sorta/not really, only because theres a potential buyer for it recently. If not for that by all means Im not sticky or generally worry about that stuff. The sales side of rghts is completly greek to me and I need to start boning up on it, although I guess a low res dl wouldnt do any harm

 

Im such a novice :) and ill getback to you when I check something.

 

Hey Wulff, don't sweat it. I respect your wishes, but I'll definately bookmark this forum page for future viewing. Beautiful picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biased opinion bsed on my personal taste and preferences.

 

1) Get the 5D.

In time you can decide if the income is worth upgrading to its replacement due later tis year.

 

2) IF your planning on concentrating on wedding/portrait to earn some coin get the 24-70 f2.8 and the 85 f1.8

 

As mentioned I think you would appreciate the option to open the lens wider for narrower DoFs and creamier "bokeh" (god I hate that term) than having the extra 35mm focal range and IS. I dithered over which to get for 3 months. In the end the f2.8 won out. For portrait type photography thats a high premium. The 24-70 btw is noticeably heavier if that has any concern to you

 

the 24-105 retails for $1,300 and the 24-70 retails for 1,400.

 

The 85mm f1.2 L retails for $2,000 and the 85mm f1.8 $400.00

 

You can't beat or replicate fast glass, wheras you can zoom with your feet or use a tripod/monopod to get "zoom" or stabalisation respectively.

 

F1.8 no "guasian blur" added.

IPB Image

Wulff:

 

I love this photo. Going wide open to limit the DofF turned a shap-shot into a great photograph IMHO.

 

I visited Fred Miranda's site. What a great resource of info. I read an interesting thread about the merits of the 85mmL f1.2 vs. the 85mm f1.8. For get the cost differential for a moment, there appears you would really need to be careful shooting with the 85mmL opened all the way to f1.2. Anything that is not perfectly perpendicular to the lens would be out of focus. I've definately got some serious hand-wringing to do on the 85mm.

 

Thanks;

 

Jeff

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...