Looking for the perfect pro-grade DSLR

S

sd_photo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
20
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking for a DSLR that can be a daily shooter, but can also handle a wedding or any other demanding situations.

I've been hearing great things about the Canon 5D and the Canon 30D.

I had my hands on a Mark III this weekend, and it appeared to be very powerful.

Currently, I own a Nikon D80, but compared to the Mark III, it seems to almost be a point-and-click.

Any input would be appreciated :thumbs:
 
Hi,

I'm not a pro', just an enthusiastic amateur, but I have both the 5D and the 30D.

I have often read that the 5D is the popular choice amongst wedding tog's and my limited experience would seem to think this is probably a good choice. The full frame sensor with lower pixel density gives good rendition to most shots no matter how hard I try to screw up. The 30D is less of a pro body and more aimed at the serious amateur market although it has most of the attributes required to do everything you'll need.
The big advantage for me is that the controls on the two bodies are identically placed and this prevents over-taxing my diminishing grey matter.
If I was trying to make a living then I'd have the 5D with a 30D as back-up.

There seem to be numerous pro's hanging around here who's opinions will be far more qualified than mine.

Bob
 
At a pro's seminar I attended recently, they berated the 5D as Wedding tog's camera, and suggested anyone serious should have the 16mp Canon instead (if indeed the choice was to be a Canon)

You'd think this was about quality wouldn't you? However I recently had a mate order a 30x20 canvas mount from what turned out to be an image of no more than 2.5mp! And it looked fine at normal viewing distance

Let's not forget that when togs first turned to digi for weddings, some were using 4-6mp - so anything around 10mp has to be fine surely

There is also an argument that the 'pro' should have a 'pro-looking' camera, and at many a modern wedding if you turn up with a 5D, 30D, D80, etc. some of the guests will have the same camera as you

Short answer - your D80 is fine already - to 'pro-up' you need the D2Xs with your D80 as backup, or the newer D3 and swap your lenses too; or, spend even more money and move over to the Canon 16mp with a 5D as backup - so how deep are your pockets then?
 
I would recommend that you have a very careful think about switching from Nikon to Canon - do you already own lenses & other Nikon equipment - if so, would the trade be costly to you, how much money would you lose, etc?
Comparing a D80 to a MKIII will indeed show up the D80's inadequacies but to be honest, the MKIII is in a whole different league (both in quality & price as it is a top of the line PRO DSLR) & the comparison is not a fair one.

A MKIII will be better compared to the newer range of Nikon cameras being released soon - the D3 looks especially promising & I know that initial reports from members here have been good. If you have the spare money to spend out on this sort of camera & actually feel that you'd justify that amount of expense & have the lenses to use it to it's full potential then go for it - personally I wouldn't before being completely sure & reading up a massive amount of reviews, etc.

If you are definitely set on the change then I'd recommend the 5D (I own one) or the 40D (I don't own one but teething troubles seem to be ironing themselves out slowly but surely - see Diego Garcia's recent 40D threads)

EDIT: Must type faster than DD in the future but what he said I completely agree with - I use an original 1D with my 5D & it equates to around 6mp & I have never once had complaints about IQ - megapixels aren't everything.
 
moomike said:
I would recommend that you have a very careful think about switching from Nikon to Canon - do you already own lenses & other Nikon equipment - if so, would the trade be costly to you, how much money would you lose, etc?
Comparing a D80 to a MKIII will indeed show up the D80's inadequacies but to be honest, the MKIII is in a whole different league (both in quality & price as it is a top of the line PRO DSLR) & the comparison is not a fair one.

A MKIII will be better compared to the newer range of Nikon cameras being released soon - the D3 looks especially promising & I know that initial reports from members here have been good. If you have the spare money to spend out on this sort of camera & actually feel that you'd justify that amount of expense & have the lenses to use it to it's full potential then go for it - personally I wouldn't before being completely sure & reading up a massive amount of reviews, etc.

If you are definitely set on the change then I'd recommend the 5D (I own one) or the 40D (I don't own one but teething troubles seem to be ironing themselves out slowly but surely - see Diego Garcia's recent 40D threads)

EDIT: Must type faster than DD in the future but what he said I completely agree with - I use an original 1D with my 5D & it equates to around 6mp & I have never once had complaints about IQ - megapixels aren't everything.
Click to expand...

I'm rather new to the DSLR world, but what I discovered almost immediately after playing around with mine, is that I want to get serious about it.

The Nikon D80 was my stepping stone from the world of compact point-and-shoot cameras. However, once I got it, and started talking to people on forums, it became evident that most people favored Canon over Nikon as their choice for DSLRs.

That got me looking and comparing, and it does seem that overall, Canon is the higher quality camera (dollar for dollar).

I sort of centered in on the Canon 5D because of some of the shots I've seen online from people using this camera. As well, it's considered a pro-grade camera, without the price commitment of a true pro-grade (ie. Mark III).

So, I guess at this point, I have two questions:

1) Do most of you prefer Canon over Nikon?
2) Would a 5D be a good introduction to the pro world, and would it suffice as a wedding camera should I decide to get into this in the near future?

Thank you all again :thumbs:
 
we do weddings with a 30D and a 350D. were about to upgrade to a 5D.anyway, whats wrong with wedding photography?:)
(the 350 will become backup). so yes a 5D would certainly do the job. were going for the 5 as a full frame sensor camera at less than ridiculous money.5d and 24 -105L at less than £2000
as some have said tho, consider sticking with the brand your working now, if only to use some of the gear you have already.
 
...
and once you think you've made a decision - hire one for a weekend
see what it's really like!
 
1). I own a Canon, but I don't prefer the brand to anything. I got it because it did what I wanted for the price I wanted to pay and have no real brand allegiance.
2). Absolutely, it's a great camera and would do weddings fine.

Here's some other stuff you need to know.

+ I've done weddings with a D30 (3 megapixel) and 10D (6 megapixels) and had some A3 prints of these shots. Everyone was happy and the quality was fine.

+ Your D80 is more than fast enough, resolution is good enough and will be fine for whatever you want

+ A real reason to by a 5D over a 40D is the fact it is full frame - wide meanes WIDE. Do you really need this? If not, save some pennies and go for the cheaper 40D.

+ Glass is more important than the body it is attached to, a your D80 with some quality glass will take a better pic than a 5D with average glass.

Hope this helps,
James
 
Agree with what has already been said, you are comparing the wrong cameras, a D80 against a 5D is a very unfair test. You should be having a play with a D2x to compare it to an equivalent Nikon.... or even better, wait a month or two and go play with the new model Nikons, the D3 and D300. I have a D70s and a D200 and they are VERY different beasts, so I think you need to do a lot more research before commiting any money to an even bigger leap. Brand favouritism on forums does not guarantee its the camera for you. Go and play with them, perhaps, as Mike suggested, hire one of each for a weekend [for Calumet perhaps] and really have a proper 'living with' experience.... jumping from an entry level to a Pro-Body is a massive jump that is worth as much research as you can possibly manage.
 
sd_photo said:
The Nikon D80 was my stepping stone from the world of compact point-and-shoot cameras. However, once I got it, and started talking to people on forums, it became evident that most people favored Canon over Nikon as their choice for DSLRs.

That got me looking and comparing, and it does seem that overall, Canon is the higher quality camera (dollar for dollar).
Click to expand...

OK so I think you need to step back from the "Canon V Nikon" arguements. The important thing to remember is that you are buying the camera for YOU not most people...

People prefer one brand over another for various reasons. Price, range of bodies, range of glass etc.

My Father shoots Canon, and gets some great shots from a 350D and a sigma lens. When I had my D70 I handed him that and he hated it. The controls weren't where he was used to them, the D70 was heavy etc. Where for me in contrast I didn't like the way the 350d was really light and doesn't feel as solid as the D70, and I didn't like the colours of the photos out of the camera. Neither of us are wrong, we just prefer different things. I moved to Nikon when I went digital as I felt the Nikon was the better tool for me.

Cut to now and I have a lot invested in Nikon fit glass. And I have got used to the way the D2x handles. I don't like the 1D canons because I'm set in my ways about the controls mainly, which is why I'm going for a D3.

So first off decide how much you really want to spend, how much you think you'll use it all in reality, and then hit a good camera shop and try them all out. Then if you're still torn between a couple of them, hire them for a weekend as suggested and give them a real try.

What I'm saying is don't go with "everyone else thinks" go with what works best for you...

Pete
 
Oh and just to add to that...

The perfect pro-grade camera is the one you don't need to think about useing, you only think about the image you're capturing ;)
 
Remember your pictures won't be any better just because you have a more expensive camera!
 
If your options are limited to Canon/Nikon, go for the 5D or D200 - I think they're in more or less the same price bracket and similar pixel-count.
It'll come down to handling, features and price in the end. Any camera with 10Mp (ish) is capable of producing an A3 print at photo-quality if you shoot RAW and process the image carefully. I was shooting Weddings on my D1x (6Mpi) and even a D1H(3Mpi) only three years ago and no-one could tell me they were sub-quality images...
With the newer 16Mpi camera you also start running into storage problems.
I shoot RAW files at 18meg. These open as 32meg TIFFs...
If you shoot from a 16Mpi camera that's going to be something like 26meg RAW and 50meg TIFF - if you do a lot of weddings then pretty soon you'll be running out of space.
As you'll not be hammering the cameras against the sides of tanks in rain/dust storms, you need not concern yourself with build-quality and weather seals as much as I do, so the very top-of the range bodies will be of less interest to you (but are still nice to fondle).

If I was starting out fresh and concentrating on Wedding and Social Photography, I'd be very tempted by the Canon EOS 5D, as I think Canon have the edge on image quality and specs on their lower-end cameras. If I were to carry on doing what I do now, I'd stick with Nikon.
 
icecavern said:
Oh and just to add to that...

The perfect pro-grade camera is the one you don't need to think about useing, you only think about the image you're capturing ;)
Click to expand...

Good point!

I think I'll hire a 5D for the weekend and see how it treats me :thumbs:
 
Arkady said:
If your options are limited to Canon/Nikon, go for the 5D or D200 - I think they're in more or less the same price bracket and similar pixel-count.
It'll come down to handling, features and price in the end. Any camera with 10Mp (ish) is capable of producing an A3 print at photo-quality if you shoot RAW and process the image carefully. I was shooting Weddings on my D1x (6Mpi) and even a D1H(3Mpi) only three years ago and no-one could tell me they were sub-quality images...
With the newer 16Mpi camera you also start running into storage problems.
I shoot RAW files at 18meg. These open as 32meg TIFFs...
If you shoot from a 16Mpi camera that's going to be something like 26meg RAW and 50meg TIFF - if you do a lot of weddings then pretty soon you'll be running out of space.
As you'll not be hammering the cameras against the sides of tanks in rain/dust storms, you need not concern yourself with build-quality and weather seals as much as I do, so the very top-of the range bodies will be of less interest to you (but are still nice to fondle).

If I was starting out fresh and concentrating on Wedding and Social Photography, I'd be very tempted by the Canon EOS 5D, as I think Canon have the edge on image quality and specs on their lower-end cameras. If I were to carry on doing what I do now, I'd stick with Nikon.
Click to expand...

Just for reference, I have had jpgs from the D200 [before I discovered the joys of RAW] printed to A2, and they are superb, so thats an idea of how far you can push even a am to pro camera.
 
A lot of people do a lot of willy waving about the latest cameras been better and you cant be a professional if you don't have one of these etc, most of it is a load of tosh, I upgraded to a canon 1d mk2 because of its weather sealing etc from a canon d60. which did many a wedding and images from that camera still grace the pages of magazines and newspapers on a regular basis. Images from the d60 are accepted by top image libraries as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top