40D or 5D

Phil Wood

Phil Wood

Suspended / Banned
Messages
181
Name
Philip wood
Edit My Images
Yes
I photograph weddings and portraits using a 30D and need to add a second camera as I am getting busy and do not have a good enoph back up camera ( at presant using much loved Sony F828 but it is not really up to proffesional work )
Is the investment in a 5D with the 24-105mmL IS USM at about £1550 worthwhile. I feel this may be a good camera and lens for large prints shooting handheld.
The camera would get plenty use but is it really worth twice as much as a 40D which is fully compatable with my 30D
Any comments or ideas would be helpful.
:thinking::thinking:
 
I would have thought if you were doing weddings then the 5D would be a must have item.. the 30/40D are great cameras but for attention to detail id go with the 5D.. just my opinion..:thumbs:
 
I cant go against the 5D for image quality, but I do think that if you are going to do lots of wedding type things and have 2 bodies (which is a good idea), then make them the same/similar as when you swap in the heat of the moment you'll forget the settings and c**k it up. Familiarity and consistency is what you need.
 
Iv got the 5D and the 40D and think they compliment each other very nicley, ok the layout on the back of the camera is different but once you know whats what theres no problem.. its nice to have the FF and when needs must you have the 1.6 crop to give the exra reach you may need.. or speed.. :thumbs:
 
Ok, I'm probably going to set the cat among the pigeons with this post but here goes...

You don't NEED a 5D for wedding or portrait work. Yes it has incredible detail with outstanding noise control but your clients can't tell the difference between a well exposed and processed print from a 40D, a 5D or even a 1Ds MKIII.

Your clients don't look at a print and worry about the colour balance being ever so slightly off, not quite enough DoF, barrel distortion, etc. They see memories of people they love filled with emotion and that's what is important, not the technology behind it. I've had wedding clients ask to see every shot I've taken, even the OOF ones just in case there's something special in one of the shots I'd normally reject for being crap technically.

The forums are filled with great people all keen on photography and, let's face it, we're all a bit geeky about the technology. We pixel peep and discuss noise on 100% crops, the best way to sharpen for web of print and so on.

How often do you see a post in the photo sharing section where someone asks what camera was used, what lens, exif, etc. That tells you everything you need to know, if the geeks here can't tell immediately then the REAL difference between bodies, brands, etc. isn't worth worrying about. In terms of what you need to supply to your client a 5D isn't going to take a better picture than a 300D.

So forget about image quality between the two and look at other aspects. Would full frame be useful for the extra width - have you found on occasion you needed to go wider and if so has it happened enough that you think full frame would be a good solution? Or would a wider lens do just as well?

Or would having two bodies with different crop factors be a pain? Extra lens swapping at crucial times because you really want the 50mm on the 1.6 for the extra reach?

How you work and how the 40D or the 5D fits into that workflow are points worth considering. As a business cost is always a factor, would the extra for the 5D be better spent on another flash, a lens upgrade, etc.?

Or the other hand you might just WANT a 5D for all the geeky reasons, same as well want the latest gadgets and gear. Of course there's nothing wrong with that either :thumbs:
 
Sorry Chewy...:woot:
 
I agree with pxl8 on this one, a 5D is not a necessity for wedding photography - it is however an excellent luxury to have & a massive confidence booster imo when it comes to handling noise & maintaining a ridiculous amount of detail.
I would however not recommend the 24-105 for weddings - don't get me wrong, it is an excellent, sharp lens but I just found it not fast enough for low light work & swopped mine for the 24-70. This was just my choice obviously but I'd still recommend the swop to anyone considering the 5D & 24-105 setup :thumbs:
 
I think my 5D is the dogs, but i'll have to agree with pxl8 too.
 
..and I agree with Moomike - I had a 24-105 on my 30d, and sold it for a 17-55 f2.8, as the 24-105 is not fast enough. I now have a 5d and will at some stage be trading in my 17-55 for something similar that works on the 5d, so maybe a 24-whatever, but it has to be f2.8...
That said, I am also on eof the few that has both the 70-200 f2.8 and f4 (both IS) and I prefer the f4, as it is easier to use. The f2.8 will be sold soon after Christmas, when prices will rise...!
 
I think having two near identical bodies is the way to go, and mixing sensor sizes can be a pain. pxl8 made some really good points, results are what count, and what people remember.
I think the 24-105 is a great lens (i have two), athough in low light (such as in the church) a faster lens would be better, and i think there is a lot to be said to having a fast 50 on one body (low cost size and weight) f1.4 ?
The same approach works for flashguns - i use a pair of 550's so the setting are all the same.
All three of my cameras have every button in the same place
 
Thanks all for your very constructive comments they all help me up the fast learning curve which I am enjoying at the moment :clap::clap::clap:
 
What a well reasoned, argued and intelligent post from pxl8, thank you :)
 
pxl8 said:
Ok, I'm probably going to set the cat among the pigeons with this post but here goes...

You don't NEED a 5D for wedding or portrait work. Yes it has incredible detail with outstanding noise control but your clients can't tell the difference between a well exposed and processed print from a 40D, a 5D or even a 1Ds MKIII.

Your clients don't look at a print and worry about the colour balance being ever so slightly off, not quite enough DoF, barrel distortion, etc. They see memories of people they love filled with emotion and that's what is important, not the technology behind it. I've had wedding clients ask to see every shot I've taken, even the OOF ones just in case there's something special in one of the shots I'd normally reject for being crap technically.

The forums are filled with great people all keen on photography and, let's face it, we're all a bit geeky about the technology. We pixel peep and discuss noise on 100% crops, the best way to sharpen for web of print and so on.

How often do you see a post in the photo sharing section where someone asks what camera was used, what lens, exif, etc. That tells you everything you need to know, if the geeks here can't tell immediately then the REAL difference between bodies, brands, etc. isn't worth worrying about. In terms of what you need to supply to your client a 5D isn't going to take a better picture than a 300D.

So forget about image quality between the two and look at other aspects. Would full frame be useful for the extra width - have you found on occasion you needed to go wider and if so has it happened enough that you think full frame would be a good solution? Or would a wider lens do just as well?

Or would having two bodies with different crop factors be a pain? Extra lens swapping at crucial times because you really want the 50mm on the 1.6 for the extra reach?

How you work and how the 40D or the 5D fits into that workflow are points worth considering. As a business cost is always a factor, would the extra for the 5D be better spent on another flash, a lens upgrade, etc.?

Or the other hand you might just WANT a 5D for all the geeky reasons, same as well want the latest gadgets and gear. Of course there's nothing wrong with that either :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Some very wise words there....I have a 5D and will not be changing it for another body until it's dead.....I think it's better to get a body your happy with and then just build up on good glass. I myself want to start getting Prime lenses and am not afraid to change lenses on the fly because nothing you do will stop you getting dust on sensor...when it's dirty, I clean it. Reason I went for 5D....it's full frame, and you can crop images down a fair bit and still get a very good final image....
 
I would choose a 40D. 2/3rds the performance of a Mark III at a 1/3rd of the price. Digic 3 hammers Digic 2 into the floor. Thats a fact. Why buy 22 month old technology ?

Working with both cameras day by day and I own a Mark III so I think that , yep, it would be a 40D for me. The 3 custom banks would be a bonus for wedding work too.

Diego.
 
I know a wedding tog that shots with a 5D on the medium size jpg. which shows as pxl8 implies that resolution is not the all important factor.
 
Why would you choose to shoot on a medium size JPEG? Is speed an issue, or storage? Seems rather strange, especially as cards are so cheap nowdays.

Even if the 5D was the same price as the 40D I'd still prefer to have the 40D for the following reasons:

i) The 1.6x crop (extended zoom and more of the picture in the sweet spot)

ii) 6.5 fps, which will no doubt be usedful for wedding photography.

iii) Improved image processing.
 
Diego Garcia said:
I would choose a 40D. 2/3rds the performance of a Mark III at a 1/3rd of the price.
Click to expand...

I do wonder what Canon were up to with the 40D. When you compare features/price to the 1DmkIII it does seem like they've under valued the 40D or over valued the mkIII somewhat. If you don't need the weather sealing or the extra 3.5fps the mkIII really doesn't offer much else. :shrug:

Don't get me wrong, the mkIII is a great camera (despite the focus issues) but the marketing and price point of the two seems a little skewed to me... I was all set to get a mkIII and then the 40D was announced, saved me a packet :thumbs:
 
Well, things are going to get even more confusing when the 450D specs are released.
 
RichieRich said:
Well, things are going to get even more confusing when the 450D specs are released.
Click to expand...

or the 5andahalfD, 1DSMKIV or the 1DMKIII.5Nish , its just a continuos battle of which to choose, the bottom line is you dont need the newest/highest spec camera to get the shot you want, the way you want.

Personally I am thinking sod the camera get a compact and some new eyes (Do they do them in full frame or crop yet) :D
 
CScottMcQueen said:
or the 5andahalfD, 1DSMKIV or the 1DMKIII.5Nish , its just a continuos battle of which to choose, the bottom line is you dont need the newest/highest spec camera to get the shot you want, the way you want.

Personally I am thinking sod the camera get a compact and some new eyes (Do they do them in full frame or crop yet) :D
Click to expand...

I agree, the 5D is more than good enough for me, and I've no intention upping that till the camera dies on me....and I'll probably get a 1d series after that....and wear that down till it breaks.......and so on........the money folk spend on latest bodies, would in my view be better invested in better lenses...as they with care should last a life time.
 
pxl8 said:
You don't NEED a 5D for wedding or portrait work. Yes it has incredible detail with outstanding noise control but your clients can't tell the difference between a well exposed and processed print from a 40D, a 5D or even a 1Ds MKIII.
Click to expand...

Wise words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top