Lens$'s versus Body$'s trade-off

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mardon, Nov 14, 2005.

  1. Mardon

    Mardon Guest

    Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens combination. I'm
    not sure what to tell her and the opinions of others would be appreciated.
    My dilemma involves the trade-off between the lens cost and camera body
    cost. I know that conventional wisdom says to put the money into the lens
    but I wonder if that is the case with my specific choice. I also know that
    the decision depends upon what kind of photography I want to do, so I'll
    recap that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been using film SLR's
    for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a Canon G2 and I've
    had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the PowerShot web site.
    I like to take pics of family events (for which I generally need wide
    angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need macro) and of car races and
    other action sports, for which I need telephoto. I have already decided on
    Canon equipment and I do not want any "S" series lenses. I have also
    decided that I do not want any primes. I know that 'no primes' may be an
    unpopular decision but I've had primes in the past and I find that I've
    hardly ever used them. I know primes give better quality for the money but
    I wouldn't use them, so it would be a waste for me to buy one. That said, I
    already plan on getting an EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8 Macro
    USM. That decision is made. What I'm unsure about is the telephoto lens &
    camera body combination. For the exact same price, I can get either (1) a
    D20 Body with a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I know this is a heavy lens,
    especially for the D20 body) or (2) a 5D body and no additional telephoto
    lens. What would others do, go for the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D
    body without the additional telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious
    telephoto capacity because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my
    longest lens. I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the
    20D body with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?
     
    Mardon, Nov 14, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mardon

    Scott W Guest

    Mardon wrote:
    > Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens combination. I'm
    > not sure what to tell her and the opinions of others would be appreciated.
    > My dilemma involves the trade-off between the lens cost and camera body
    > cost. I know that conventional wisdom says to put the money into the lens
    > but I wonder if that is the case with my specific choice. I also know that
    > the decision depends upon what kind of photography I want to do, so I'll
    > recap that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been using film SLR's
    > for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a Canon G2 and I've
    > had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the PowerShot web site.
    > I like to take pics of family events (for which I generally need wide
    > angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need macro) and of car races and
    > other action sports, for which I need telephoto. I have already decided on
    > Canon equipment and I do not want any "S" series lenses. I have also
    > decided that I do not want any primes. I know that 'no primes' may be an
    > unpopular decision but I've had primes in the past and I find that I've
    > hardly ever used them. I know primes give better quality for the money but
    > I wouldn't use them, so it would be a waste for me to buy one. That said, I
    > already plan on getting an EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8 Macro
    > USM. That decision is made. What I'm unsure about is the telephoto lens &
    > camera body combination. For the exact same price, I can get either (1) a
    > D20 Body with a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I know this is a heavy lens,
    > especially for the D20 body) or (2) a 5D body and no additional telephoto
    > lens. What would others do, go for the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D
    > body without the additional telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious
    > telephoto capacity because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my
    > longest lens. I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the
    > 20D body with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    > replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?


    Can you be happy with an effective focal length of 25.6mm for your wide
    angle lens, that would be the 16-35 at 16 time the 1.6 crop factor. If
    you can then I would say go for the 20D. If you want to go wider angle
    and will not buy S lenses (but the 10-22 s is very sweet) then a full
    size sensor might make more sense.

    You are right, any body will be outdated in just a few years.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Nov 14, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mardon

    Mark² Guest

    Mardon wrote:
    > Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens
    > combination. I'm not sure what to tell her and the opinions of
    > others would be appreciated. My dilemma involves the trade-off
    > between the lens cost and camera body cost. I know that conventional
    > wisdom says to put the money into the lens but I wonder if that is
    > the case with my specific choice. I also know that the decision
    > depends upon what kind of photography I want to do, so I'll recap
    > that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been using film SLR's
    > for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a Canon G2 and
    > I've had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the
    > PowerShot web site. I like to take pics of family events (for which I
    > generally need wide angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need
    > macro) and of car races and other action sports, for which I need
    > telephoto. I have already decided on Canon equipment and I do not
    > want any "S" series lenses. I have also decided that I do not want
    > any primes. I know that 'no primes' may be an unpopular decision
    > but I've had primes in the past and I find that I've hardly ever used
    > them. I know primes give better quality for the money but I wouldn't
    > use them, so it would be a waste for me to buy one. That said, I
    > already plan on getting an EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8
    > Macro USM. That decision is made. What I'm unsure about is the
    > telephoto lens & camera body combination. For the exact same price,
    > I can get either (1) a D20 Body with a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I
    > know this is a heavy lens, especially for the D20 body) or (2) a 5D
    > body and no additional telephoto lens. What would others do, go for
    > the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D body without the additional
    > telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious telephoto capacity
    > because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my longest lens.
    > I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the 20D body
    > with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    > replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?


    I have been very happy with the nearly *identical* set of lenses you
    describe:
    16-35 2.8 L
    24-70 2.8 L (which recently replaced my 28-135 IS non-L)
    70-200 2.8 IS L
    100mm 2.8 Macro
    1.4x

    If you want to do significant tele, I think you're right in that you may be
    frustrated without the 1.6 crop-factor.
    I've been considering the 5D myself (10D at the moment), but I realize that
    this would mean my desire for a fast 400mm lens would seriously
    increase...and I'm not prepared to spend $7K for the one I'd want...

    I think you'll likely find that the gap between 35mm and 70mm is too
    significant. You might want to consider either the 28-135 IS, or the 24-105
    IS L. If I had it to do over again, I'd likely switch my 24-70 for the
    24-105, simply because it's such a useful long-end range.

    The only time you'll wish for full-frame is when you want REALLY wide angle
    (which I would often appreciate), or when you simply need the high
    resolution for bigger enlargement.

    -Mark2
     
    Mark², Nov 14, 2005
    #3
  4. Mardon

    Backbone Guest

    <snip>

    > longest lens. I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the
    > 20D body with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    > replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?



    Hard to say - depends on your primary function - at 3 fps the 5D is better
    for portrait shooting - A 20D IMHO is better for all around. +sports
    photography! My partner has the 5D and all she can say is that she loves it
    However, she will also tell you that it's not for fast action photography -
    she shoots primarily jewelry!

    I like and use the 1D mark II as my primary and the 20D as a back-up.



    I'd go with the 20D +lenz because I shoot allot or sporting events - I
    require a faster fps then a 5D has to offer.



    You may want to model the same question over @
    news:alt.binaries.photos.original i.e. lots of 20D users as well as a few
    5D users not JUST a binaries group!
    --
    There are no words that can be heard unless someone listens....
    Remove *flaps* to reply

    <snip>
     
    Backbone, Nov 14, 2005
    #4
  5. Mardon

    Eatmorepies Guest

    "Mardon" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens combination.
    > I'm not sure what to tell her and the opinions of others would be
    > appreciated. My dilemma involves the trade-off between the lens cost and
    > camera body cost. I know that conventional wisdom says to put the money
    > into the lens but I wonder if that is the case with my specific choice. I
    > also know that the decision depends upon what kind of photography I want
    > to do, so I'll recap that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been
    > using film SLR's for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a
    > Canon G2 and I've had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the
    > PowerShot web site. I like to take pics of family events (for which I
    > generally need wide angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need
    > macro) and of car races and other action sports, for which I need
    > telephoto. I have already decided on Canon equipment and I do not want
    > any "S" series lenses. I have also decided that I do not want any primes.
    > I know that 'no primes' may be an unpopular decision but I've had primes
    > in the past and I find that I've hardly ever used them. I know primes
    > give better quality for the money but I wouldn't use them, so it would be
    > a waste for me to buy one. That said, I already plan on getting an EF
    > 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8 Macro USM. That decision is made.
    > What I'm unsure about is the telephoto lens & camera body combination.
    > For the exact same price, I can get either (1) a D20 Body with a EF
    > 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I know this is a heavy lens, especially for the
    > D20 body) or (2) a 5D body and no additional telephoto lens. What would
    > others do, go for the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D body without the
    > additional telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious telephoto
    > capacity because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my longest
    > lens. I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the 20D body
    > with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need replacing in
    > 3 or 4 years. Comments?
    >
    >


    I have a 350D and 4 L lenses

    16-35mm f2.8
    24-70mm f2.8
    70-200mm f2.8
    300mm f4 IS prime.

    and a 1.4x teleconverter.

    This is amazing kit for a hobbyist - I am very impressed with the quality of
    the pictures this stuff can generate. I can happily print up to A3+ prints
    on my Epson 1290s. Also - I find the 16mm wide angle to be wide enough for
    most things; I agree that you should avoid the S lenses. Go for a 20D body
    with an L lens or two. As you are moving from film you will be so impressed
    with the 20D and decent lenses that you won't want to upgrade the body
    until;

    a) Canon are selling a full frame sensor, 6 fps, 6400 ISO body for sub £1200
    ( $1800?).
    b) Mrs Claus has refilled her petty cash tin.

    John
     
    Eatmorepies, Nov 14, 2005
    #5
  6. Mardon

    jean Guest

    "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> a écrit dans le message
    de news:xvTdf.101$K26.79@fed1read02...
    > Mardon wrote:
    > > Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens
    > > combination. I'm not sure what to tell her and the opinions of
    > > others would be appreciated. My dilemma involves the trade-off
    > > between the lens cost and camera body cost. I know that conventional
    > > wisdom says to put the money into the lens but I wonder if that is
    > > the case with my specific choice. I also know that the decision
    > > depends upon what kind of photography I want to do, so I'll recap
    > > that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been using film SLR's
    > > for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a Canon G2 and
    > > I've had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the
    > > PowerShot web site. I like to take pics of family events (for which I
    > > generally need wide angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need
    > > macro) and of car races and other action sports, for which I need
    > > telephoto. I have already decided on Canon equipment and I do not
    > > want any "S" series lenses. I have also decided that I do not want
    > > any primes. I know that 'no primes' may be an unpopular decision
    > > but I've had primes in the past and I find that I've hardly ever used
    > > them. I know primes give better quality for the money but I wouldn't
    > > use them, so it would be a waste for me to buy one. That said, I
    > > already plan on getting an EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8
    > > Macro USM. That decision is made. What I'm unsure about is the
    > > telephoto lens & camera body combination. For the exact same price,
    > > I can get either (1) a D20 Body with a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I
    > > know this is a heavy lens, especially for the D20 body) or (2) a 5D
    > > body and no additional telephoto lens. What would others do, go for
    > > the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D body without the additional
    > > telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious telephoto capacity
    > > because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my longest lens.
    > > I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the 20D body
    > > with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    > > replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?

    >
    > I have been very happy with the nearly *identical* set of lenses you
    > describe:
    > 16-35 2.8 L
    > 24-70 2.8 L (which recently replaced my 28-135 IS non-L)
    > 70-200 2.8 IS L
    > 100mm 2.8 Macro
    > 1.4x
    >
    > If you want to do significant tele, I think you're right in that you may

    be
    > frustrated without the 1.6 crop-factor.
    > I've been considering the 5D myself (10D at the moment), but I realize

    that
    > this would mean my desire for a fast 400mm lens would seriously
    > increase...and I'm not prepared to spend $7K for the one I'd want...


    I also have a 10D and I think I will wait for an "improved" 20D which I hope
    will come before next summer. While a 5D looks very nice, it lacks in a few
    areas which are important to me: the 1.6X factor being the most important
    one and the frame rate which is not higher in the 5D than it is in my 10D.

    Jean


    > I think you'll likely find that the gap between 35mm and 70mm is too
    > significant. You might want to consider either the 28-135 IS, or the

    24-105
    > IS L. If I had it to do over again, I'd likely switch my 24-70 for the
    > 24-105, simply because it's such a useful long-end range.
    >
    > The only time you'll wish for full-frame is when you want REALLY wide

    angle
    > (which I would often appreciate), or when you simply need the high
    > resolution for bigger enlargement.
    >
    > -Mark2
    >
    >
     
    jean, Nov 14, 2005
    #6
  7. > I'm leaning toward the
    > 20D body with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need
    > replacing in 3 or 4 years. Comments?


    With a 20D and some 'L' glass you get to take excellent photos
    immediately. With a 5D and no money left to buy a decent lens you get to
    take crappy photos immediately (where "crappy" is defined by the quality
    of the lens you do manage to get hold of). There really isn't any point
    in getting a 5D if you can't afford to put a decent lens on it.

    It's a no brainer. Get the 20D, take lots of great photos, and in 3
    years time when you've got the budget, get a 5D Mk II and bolt your good
    lenses onto it.
     
    Derek Fountain, Nov 14, 2005
    #7
  8. Mardon

    Skip M Guest

    "Mardon" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > Mrs. Claus has asked me what I want for my new DLSR & lens combination.
    > I'm not sure what to tell her and the opinions of others would be
    > appreciated. My dilemma involves the trade-off between the lens cost and
    > camera body cost. I know that conventional wisdom says to put the money
    > into the lens but I wonder if that is the case with my specific choice. I
    > also know that the decision depends upon what kind of photography I want
    > to do, so I'll recap that quickly. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro. I've been
    > using film SLR's for over 40 years. I switched to digital in 2002 with a
    > Canon G2 and I've had my work selected as POTD on several occasions at the
    > PowerShot web site. I like to take pics of family events (for which I
    > generally need wide angle), of insects and flowers (for which I need
    > macro) and of car races and other action sports, for which I need
    > telephoto. I have already decided on Canon equipment and I do not want
    > any "S" series lenses. I have also decided that I do not want any primes.
    > I know that 'no primes' may be an unpopular decision but I've had primes
    > in the past and I find that I've hardly ever used them. I know primes
    > give better quality for the money but I wouldn't use them, so it would be
    > a waste for me to buy one. That said, I already plan on getting an EF
    > 16-35mm f2.8L USM and an EF100mm f2.8 Macro USM. That decision is made.
    > What I'm unsure about is the telephoto lens & camera body combination.
    > For the exact same price, I can get either (1) a D20 Body with a EF
    > 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I know this is a heavy lens, especially for the
    > D20 body) or (2) a 5D body and no additional telephoto lens. What would
    > others do, go for the 70-200 and the 20D body or the 5D body without the
    > additional telephoto lens? With the 5D I'd lose serious telephoto
    > capacity because I'd have no crop factor and a 100mm less for my longest
    > lens. I would like spot metering however. I'm leaning toward the 20D body
    > with the idea that almost any body will be outdated and need replacing in
    > 3 or 4 years. Comments?
    >
    >

    Unless you have an overwhelming need to shoot wide angle stuff, stick with
    the 20D. I have both a 20D and a 5D, and while you couldn't pry the 5D away
    from me, I'm also hanging onto my 20D. But I already have the lenses that I
    want, so it wasn't a choice for me, like it is you. I just wanted my 16-35L
    to act like a 16mm, not a 27mm lens.
    Or you could wait until Feb, when Canon will probably announce the 20D's
    successor. I'm betting on more pixels, same size sensor...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Nov 14, 2005
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. totojepast
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,078
    totojepast
    Aug 6, 2003
  2. =?Utf-8?B?Q2FuYWRhX0d1eU0=?=

    Certification - MCP versus MCSA versus MCSE

    =?Utf-8?B?Q2FuYWRhX0d1eU0=?=, Aug 24, 2006, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    761
    =?Utf-8?B?TW9udHJlYWwgTUNTQQ==?=
    Aug 24, 2006
  3. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    607
  4. Little Green Eyed Dragon

    TV screens big versus Small LCD versus Plasma.

    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Mar 2, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    395
    Little Green Eyed Dragon
    Mar 2, 2007
  5. Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

    Re: Mozilla versus IE versus Opera versus Safari

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo, May 8, 2008, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    754
    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
    May 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page