Which full frame kit should I get?

[bronxbombers]

Hey guys,


I need help building a full frame kit. I have been shooting a 30D with a 24-105 f/4 IS for a few years. I also have a 50 f/1.8. I finally decided to upgrade to full frame. I have read thousands of reviews on every lens/camera in my price range, and I have no idea what to get. I generally shoot mainly landscapes, portraits, and city shots. A lot of time I'm wishing for a lens wider than 24mm. With what I like to shoot the jump to full frame makes sense. My price range is about $3000, and I will be keeping my 2 lenses. I am also very interested in Macro, but I'm thinking about giving the macro filters a shot before I buy a lens. In my price range I could build one of the following kits. Everything will be bought used. Which would you choose?


Canon 5d, 24-105, 50 f/2.8, 70-200 f/4 IS, and 580ex. I'd still probably have around $400-500 to play around with.


Canon 5d Mark 2, 24-105 f/4, 50 f/1.8, 70-200 f/4 Non-IS, and 430ex flash.





If anyone has any more ideas just let me know.

[jeffersonposter]

Just a thought, get a refurbished by Canon 5D from Adorama, about $2000. The refurbished has had "hands on" by Canon and will offer better QC than brand new. Also the 5D has larger pixels than the 5D Mk II for what I think is better IQ. As for glass, a lens that works well on a 1.6 may show signs of edge darking on a full frame (some of the light from the lens goes around the edges of the sensor on the 1.6 crop body but all of it hits the sensor an a FF body. This is why you have the 1.6x effect. You might look into the 70-200 f4 IS which has excellent IQ and IS ( I use one of these on a 5D) for about $1100 at B&H or Adorama or if your interested in primes a 200 f2.8 which is one of the sharpest pieces of glass Canon makes. About $700 I think. With this,you could get a 1.4x II Extender (about $300) and still be close to your budget. Both of these lenses will work well on the 5D. The 5D has 9 selectable AF sensors. All are 5.6 sensitive and the center AF point is 2.8 sensitive. This gives you very accurate and fast auto focus with glass that has amax. aperture of 2.8 or less (wider), your 50 f1.8.


This image was shot with a 5D, ISO 500, Av mode, 1/8000 (as fast as it goes) with the 200 2.8, 1.4 II Extender (280mm on the 5D). The car is between 75 and 90mph. You can read the gauages inside on a large image.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.27.05/The-Mitty-09_5F00_09-05-01_5F00_0113_5F00_edited_2D00_2.jpg


This image is not cropped. I shot it this way.


JeffersonPoster

[Keith B]

Looking at your choices, I'd go with the first package. I would not recommend the 70-200 without IS. It's uses are very limited without IS.


Also the 580EX is substantially better than the 430EX.


Obviously the 5D mkII is a better option than the mkI but the mkI is still a great camera.

[Daniel Browning]

I suggest the second kit. The Mark II just has too many important improvements. For me, live view is indispensible for landscapes, and the resolution and dynamic range are very nice.

[Fast Glass]

The second kit is WAY BETTER! Don't think about it, just get it.

[HiFiGuy1]

My 2 cents, buy the 5D Mark II, but forget either 70-200 without IS. The AF Microadjust feature is something I think is very important, as it will let you fine-tune your lenses to that body, and let each perform at its absolute best. I've owned a 5D, and if my budget were around a $1000 or so, I'd happily buy another and never look back, but for your stated budget of $3000, the 5D Mark II is a no-brainer.


The 2.8 non-IS would be better and might allow some shots the f/4 wouldn't, but I am using a borrowed 70-200 f/4 L right now, and I am missing keepers right and left on the long end because I can't get the shutter speed up enough to keep the images crisp. I took what would have been a fantastic shot of a deer through foliage this evening that was standing totally still and looking STRAIGHT AT ME, and because it was in spotty shade during the golden hour, the shutter was at 1/40 or 1/60 even at ISO 1600 and f/4. It is clearly recognizable as a deer, but it isn't sharp, and if I had 3 or even 2 stops ofIS, I think it would have been fine. It was one of those rare moments that I missed because my hands weren't steady enough and I had no IS to compensate. If it had been a 2.8 non-IS, at least the shutter could have been 1/80 or 1/125, which might have worked out. I'll never know.


Bottom line, there is no way I would buy the lens I am borrowing, but the silver lining is that I am fortunate to find that out without having to plunk down my hard-earned cash first. For that, I am very grateful.

[Keith B]

not on point edit

[Chuck Lee]

Are you the same bronxbombers who puts in 51 posts/week at dpreview? If you are I find your post rather puzzling.......


Otherwise, that's quitea user name you have there.


I like 5D+40D, 17-35 f2.8L, 28-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f2.8L, 50 1.4, 100 f2.8 Macro Tamron Pro1.4X TC in a AW200 Slingshot. Now, let's get going with the lighting..........


Chuck

[peety3]

Just for the sake of asking, is this desire something that could be cured (or merely explored) with an EF-S 10-22mm lens?

[HiFiGuy1]

peety,


I like that idea, too. A 100mm f/2.8 macro and EF-S 10-22 together are less than $1500. The macro, at least, is able to migrate to full frame later, in case that ends up happening. That way, the 10-22 on his 30D could be as wide as a 16-35 on a FF. Different approach, but good idea.

[peety3]

Yep, I figure if the 30D and 10-22 isn't a permanent solution, it could make an appealing package to sell sometime down the road. Plus, he'd know right away if a 16-35 was an extra, essential, or necessity when buying a full-frame body. The only (rectilinear) thing wider would be the 14/2.8L on a full-frame.