Ive done my research but need more. Sell up and move ?

FetchMeMyTools

FetchMeMyTools

Suspended / Banned
Messages
298
Edit My Images
No
Hello all,

Im sorry to bore you with another "shall i sharent i" (ummm ????)

But im in the position now where im starting to use my camera for comercial purposes and for all intents and purposes, my Canon 40D does a good job, but when i want to sell my stuff i think you will agree, it hasnt got quite the power of some other models out there.

SO. Im after a camera that will be good enough for the WOW factor. I did have a 1D MKIII about a year ago but due to financial problems i had to sell it, and let me tell you , that had an unbelievalbe WOW factor and with a bit of LR made my shots look stunning, something im not getting with a 40D.

So i have left :

40D.
70-200 F/4 IS.
24-105.
Nifty Fifty

In total i could probably make £1800 for the lot.
Now do i spend that on a Nikon D300 (maybe) / D700 with a lens or a 5D MKII and keep the 24-105 and 50mm as those 2 lenses are what i predominately use.

I really dont use the 70-200 so either way thats going.

Cheers for any help, but i really need to step my camera up to something that will perform the way i need my 40D too.

Ta for any replies guys

:D
 
bear in mind if you list those on ebay as an auction the first three will attract final value fees of £40 each + 4% paypal fees which will put a big hole in your £1800

also if you go for the 5D mk II you may need the 70-200 for the extra reach as the 105mm may seem short compared to using it on your 40D
 
Selling a 40D and those two excellent f/4 lenses to get a D300 makes no sense whatsoever.

Why do you expect wows from a D300 if you are not getting wows from the 40D? Are you not expecting too much from a brand change?

IMHO you have the glass already, so I'd look at sticking with Canon.
 
If you want to step up a gear in IQ then you're going to have to step up a gear in sensor size. Changing brands alone won't get you very far. 12MP on a 1.5X crop vs 10MP on a 1.6X crop is not the answer. If you want a cheap solution then get a 5D1. If you want to keep up with the times then a 5D2 or 1D3 is where you should be focusing your attention.

If the lure of Nikon is too strong then it's got to be the D700, but you'll be taking a hit, pricewise, on glass as well as the body.

Whichever path you choose, if you're doing commercial work you'll need a backup body, if not lenses, so budget for that. A 40D would not make a terrible backup to one of Canon's other bodies.

EDIT : Another point - bodies come and go fairly quickly, with constant improvements in sensor (and other) technology. In the last 12-18 months Nikon has certainly been doing something right. In the next 12-18 months, who knows? Regardless of the body developments, the glass is what endures, so I'd say you should base your system around the glass you want rather than this year's flavour of the month body.
 
^^^ I'm with Pudders and Tim ^^^

But I would raise a question about the WOW factor. If you're not getting it with the 40D, you will get a lift in quality from full frame, but it's not night and day WOW difference.

Most of the time I suspect you would not be able to tell which prints were shot on full frame, unless you routinely print very large (pixel advantage) or shoot with high ISO (noise advantage).

One advantage of some of the pro cameras mentioned is their operating speed, particularly AF speed. If you shoot a lot of action, these cameras will nail three sharp images before your 40D has even got the focus right. For me, that is where their WOW factor lies :)
 
Cheers guys. Good point made about ebay and nikon.
i can sell elsehwere though and as for nikon i have just looked at a comparable lens to the 24-105 and would take my spending to ALOT more.
I have just been looking through 2 wedding shoots i did, 1 with mk3 and the other with 40d and the difference is very noticeable. The 40d is good, but its just not up to it in terms of depth of colour and tones.

As for my 70-200 i never use it. Ive had it for a few month and i did a check in LR and i havent even taken 50 shots with it. In the studio i only use the 24-105 and nifty fifty, so there will be no loss.

Ta for the advice. Has anyone been from a 40d to a 5d mk2 ?

Maybe WOW factor is wrong, but some shots i took with the MkIII are untouchable with the 40D, and a step up to FF would help me get the best out of my studio equipment.
 
I've just read a review comparing the Nikon 700 with the Canon 5D mark2 and the Canon won by a pipsqueak. I'd keep the glass and move on up to the 5D, if change is what you think will do it for you......but are you sure? I sense a bit of doubt and confusion.
 
Thats just me, im always unsure of changing. Hell i was worried about going from a 400D to a 40D back in the day !!!!!

After doing some more searching im pretty sure that im going to get a 5d MkII as ive seen so many examples of it with a 24-105 and its dead impressive and means i get a semi wide angle lens straight away (as i refuse to pay £350 for the 10-20).
I never use my 70-200 so wont miss it at all.

PM already sent to Kerso !!!
 
FetchMeMyTools said:
... and as for nikon i have just looked at a comparable lens to the 24-105 and would take my spending to ALOT more.
Click to expand...
Is there a Nikon lens which is comparale to the 24-105?? If so I'd like to know about it. I didn't think there was one.
 
StewartR said:
Is there a Nikon lens which is comparale to the 24-105?? If so I'd like to know about it. I didn't think there was one.
Click to expand...

OK, there isnt the same lens for Nikon, i was more of thinking of getting a 24-70 or one of the cheaper longer range lenses.
 
Don't forget that if you go full frame and you want your angle of view to match the 24-105 lens on your 40D you will need a 38-170 lens. Then if you want a constant max aperture (of f/4 or faster) and IS (VR) you are asking quite something.
 
ta for that. having the 24 as wide as it would be is a bonus. Exactly what i want in a studio setup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top