My Dilemma

AndyBorzi

AndyBorzi

Suspended / Banned
Messages
985
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got a dilemma and I keep changing my mind on each time I think about it. I just wanted to sound off, to see if doing so helped and to get some sound advice from you guys.

I turn 40 on the 2nd January and my wife has suggested that the family club together for a combined chrimbo/birthday pressie to celebrate my coming of age (ahem!). I jokingly suggested a 5DMKII and a couple of L series lenses. To my shock she didn't laugh at me but suggested that the 5D and lens(es) was too much.

To partially fund a 5D I would have to sell my current EF-s compatible kit (40D & Grip, Canon 10-22, Sigma 17-70), I would have to make use of my wife's EF28-135 IS until such time we could afford a 24-70/24-105L or even the 17-40L, with the advice that it would be easier to save for a lens than a 5D.

Alternatively, I could keep my 40D & Grip, 10-22 and go for a 24-70L and a 70-200F4 possibly stretching to a F2.8 or F4IS. The 5D/Canon Full FRame alternative would have to wait for 2 or 3 more years.

So my dilemma is:

a) do I go for a 5D with an OK'ish lens and save for a L series (will probably be 2010 by the time I get one). (I will miss the 10-22!)

or b) keep my existing kit and get a couple of L lenses.

as an afterthought: Is a 5D and a 17-40L a good landscape/walkabout lens.

Just to give a bit of background. My preferred subject is Landscape, Detail, Macro, still-life/studio and people (when I get the chance). I haven't done sport or wildlife (other than the local Zoo) so high fps or ultra-zooms aren't required.

What do you think?
 
go for the glass:thumbs:

far outlast any camera.
 
Aye, I agree but I have been after a Full Frame since the 5D MKI came out 3 years ago but couldn't justify spending 1500-1800 on a camera.

Now I have a chance with my birthday to be able to get one but will have to be without a decent lens for a while.
 
You are going to find the 17-40 L on a 5D as minging as a week old pair of undies ,compared to the 10-22 on a 40D.

I'd probably get the 5D, but Canon don't do good full wide angles lenses yet..just average ones.
 
Stick with the 40d and get more glass.

And nice to see another Person from Peterborough on here! :)
 
puddleduck said:
You are going to find the 17-40 L on a 5D as minging as a week old pair of undies ,compared to the 10-22 on a 40D.

I'd probably get the 5D, but Canon don't do good full wide angles lenses yet..just average ones.
Click to expand...

The term "Utter $hite" springs to mind.


That aside, the 5D2's sensor is the equal of (some even say superior to ) the 1Ds MKIII.
I would be wary about putting a 28-135 on this camera.
It's generally agreed upon that you're better off spending your money on good lenses and a modest body rather than a really good body and modest lens.
 
Garnock said:
The term "Utter $hite" springs to mind.

I would be wary about putting a 28-135 on this camera.
Click to expand...

So if I get a 5D, it would be like owning a Ferrari but having no ignition keys then! :lol:

Garnock said:
It's generally agreed upon that you're better off spending your money on good lenses and a modest body rather than a really good body and modest lens.
Click to expand...

Aye, I am swinging in that direction. But the 5D does look good! sigh
 
puddleduck said:
You are going to find the 17-40 L on a 5D as minging as a week old pair of undies ,compared to the 10-22 on a 40D.

I'd probably get the 5D, but Canon don't do good full wide angles lenses yet..just average ones.
Click to expand...

Eh? Canon 17-40L f/4 is only technically 1mm off the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 on a 1.6x crop. Then theres the Canon 16-35L f/2.8.
 
I'm not sure what he's referring to. They are both brilliant lenses. They're both L after all.
 
AndyBorzi said:
Isn't he just referring to the quality of the lens on the 5D rather than the focal lengths? Do you agree with their assesment of the 17-40? I won't be able to afford the 16-35! :)
Click to expand...

Technically, a 10mm lens on a 1.6x crop body give a FoV of 16mm if im correct, so only 1mm off the 17mm end of the 17-40 on a FF camera
 
AndyBorzi said:
Isn't he just referring to the quality of the lens on the 5D rather than the focal lengths? Do you agree with their assesment of the 17-40? I won't be able to afford the 16-35! :)
Click to expand...

The 17-40 on a FF 1Ds MKIII or 5D MKII will probably start to show some weakness compared to the 16-35 at the wide end (17-20mm) and max aperture.
Step down to f8 and it will improve.
I'm guessing softness in the corners and CA.

It's a fine lens for the money and far from minging.
 
I think that Garnock and Puddleduck were referring to the IQ of the 17-40L on the 5D rather than then crop factor differences.

I hadn't considered a MK1 in this round of thinking but I think it would have to be a MKII, for the added features. I find Live View ideal on my 40D for closeup work and levelling the horizon for landscapes, plus there is the added benefit of HD 1080 movies....my wife will cringe at the thought of HD Home Movie goodness!

I have never used my wide angle wide-open, my 10-22 stays on f11 90% of the time. So maybe the 5D + 17-40L is a possibility.
 
The 17-40L will be freely available ....... the 5D2 I don't know.
Might be in short supply pre-Christmas.

I'm waiting until Jan/Feb in the hope of a decent reduction in price but more importantly to ensure no repeat of the 1D MKIII fiasco.
 
Garnock said:
The 17-40L will be freely available ....... the 5D2 I don't know.
Might be in short supply pre-Christmas.

I'm waiting until Jan/Feb in the hope of a decent reduction in price but more importantly to ensure no repeat of the 1D MKIII fiasco.
Click to expand...

Aye, I expect there will be supply issues. Not sure of the MKIII fiasco- was there some QA issues or something?
 
puddleduck said:
You are going to find the 17-40 L on a 5D as minging as a week old pair of undies ,compared to the 10-22 on a 40D.
Click to expand...

ollacks!


I have a 5D, 12-24 Sigma (good) 17-40L (great) 24-70L (brilliant) 70-200L f2.8 IS (superb even at f2.8).

The 17-40 is a very good lens not a lot different to the 10-22 on a crop body, but wait until you can put a real wide angle on a full frame body!
 
If you went for the camera, you would always be saying that the lens isnt doing it justice, but if you went for the glass, I am sure you will know the 40D is a more than capable camera.

I personally would go for the glass.
 
But if you go for the camera then you'll have something to pester the wife for because you're not getting the best from the camera ;)
 
petemc said:
But if you go for the camera then you'll have something to pester the wife for because you're not getting the best from the camera ;)
Click to expand...

This man speaks with great wisdom.
bow.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top