Old Canon DSLR Question

Currently I own a 50D and a XTi, along w/ 6 primes & 2 zooms (15-85 & 70-200). I really like the 50D, as it does everything I need it to do, however, sometimes the IQ isn't very good, though I suspect I am overly picky. Mostly I shoot landscapes and an airshow or two a year. I take 12-18k pictures a year and have gotten many great shots. Except in the studio.

I have begun to shoot in the studio again and found I just don't like the quality of images I am getting. When I am shooting outside (or even inside, under non-studio conditions), my aperture rarely exceeds 8, so diffraction is rarely an issue. However shooting in the studio, I frequently see apertures exceeding 13 (ISO 100, 1/250s). I have been thinking of upgrading to the 6D (though the 5D Mk3 would be a better choice for me), however funds are still tight for me this year, so I have been looking at the 5DMk1 and the 1Dmk2(N or not). Honestly, if I have extra money sufficient to buy the 6D or the 5Dmk3, I would rather buy lenses or travel.

I plan to keep both the 50D and XTi (the XTi coupled w/ the 40mm is a great car camera). I briefly owned the 1Dmk2N prior to purchasing the 50D, I loved the feel of the camera, and the look of the images, but too many shots were out of focus. I am not willing to sell any part of my kit to fund the purchase of the 6D.

I am well aware of the potential downfalls of the 5D (no sensor cleaning, slow AF, etc) and the potential upsides (better IQ and shallower DOF). For studio photography & landscape photography, will I see a big difference? I have read reviews & reports on many sites, however I am looking for comments from anyone who has had or used the 50D/5Dmk1/1dMkiiN in the past.

Thanks!

PhotobyMayo,

Can you reduce the intensity of your flash / strobes to get a bigger aperture?

Dave

PhotobyMayo, Welcome to the forum.
I have never used the 50D but once had an XTi. I now have both the 5DmkI and 1DmkIIn. Both will give better IQ than the XTi or 50D. May not have as many pix but the overall IQ will be better. I have put nearly identical images side-by-side from my 1DmkIIn and a 7D and while at 100% crop the 7D was a bit sharper due to higher pixel count the overall IQ of the 1D won out IMHO.:rolleyes:
I don't know why you had focus issues with your 1D before. Mine has a better focus hit rate than my XTi or 5D. I also used the XTi for studio work back when I had it. I once had one of my shots from the XTi up on a billboard around town. It looked great. If upgrading I would however recommend something newer like the 6D or 5DmkII or III. Not only will you get better IQ than any of the other bodies mentioned but also AFMA(Auto Focus Micro Adjustments) plus other enhancements. Shooting your XTi or 50D in the studio at f13 should not be a problem. Any diffraction will not be noticeable if your focus is good except when pixel-peeping.

In a studio situation the higher pixel count will give you higher IQ, the larger sensor only going to give you thinner DOF in your position. Get t2i if you want some extra dietail.

John.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FastGass

In a studio situation the higher pixel count will give you higher IQ, the larger sensor only going to give you thinner DOF in your position. Get t2i if you want some extra dietail.

John.

---

I respectfully disagree :rolleyes:. Out of 5 or so things that go into IQ, pixel count is just one. I agree in a studio situation I am just splitting hairs that are difficult to see. Any of the canon bodies, old and new, in a studio situation, should give excellent results.

I know what you mean, there are many things that affect IQ when comparing bodies from different formats. But in a studio setting with primes stopped down to there peak sharpness the difference is minimal and the highest resolution wins.

If you compare on Bryan's ISO charts the 1D III to the 60D there is a slight sharpness difference at native resolution but nowhere near pulling the same amount of dietail as the 60D especially after sharpening.

Not putting down the 1D II, I think it's a great camera and I have often thought about getting one for a second body for a backup and for a few t hings my 60D doesn't do. But if your requirements for resolution are very high then you will better served with another body.

John.

Thanks for the replies! I went back & Looked at old photos from the Xti & 50D and found that I liked the studio shots from the XTi better, however the studio was smaller along with having less equipment & less powerful strobes. The old shots w/ the XTi were taken with a 2 strobe setup (x800's) whereas at the new studio I have been using a 3 strobe setup (x1600's & X800's). I will be in a couple times this week, so I will look at cutting the power (which is seldom above 1/2 power normally).

So I went ahead & picked up the used 5D. The price was great for a body in flawless condition and I just couldn't pass it up. I took some 200 pictures yesterday, landscapes & in the studio and found that once I got used to the camera, that my pictures turned out great! So far, I am happy with my purchase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhotobyMayo

So I went ahead & picked up the used 5D. The price was great for a body in flawless condition and I just couldn't pass it up. I took some 200 pictures yesterday, landscapes & in the studio and found that once I got used to the camera, that my pictures turned out great! So far, I am happy with my purchase.

---

Cool:cool:
You should post some shots with your 50D & 5D for comparison. Love to see them.

I have an old XTi. It has outstanding image quality for a 10.1 megapixel camera of its vintage. The body's biggest IQ letdown is that it isn't particularly good at controlling noise, which starts to get gross at about ISO 800. I still keep it around as a backup body. I've shot product and portrait studio work with it and don't understand how you would be having trouble with it or the 50D in a controlled environment like a studio.

Nonetheless, the 5D would give you the advantages you cite above. However, I would think that the FF body would be more attractive to you as a landscape photographer than for studio work.

Here is a website that is worth a look at. I would not base my purchasing decision on it but it is a decent comparison. I am sure there are some holes to be shot in it. :cool:
I find the 5D a perfect studio body as well as a landscape body.:)

Black Dog,

I'm not sure what you mean by 800 ISO looks "Gross". I had the XTi and even at 1600 ISO it was very reasonable after NR, even before NR it wasn't bad.

I see some of your comments quite strong like KR, everyone is entitled to an epinion but make sure you make that clear. If YOU think is looks bad for your aplication that's fine, but for someone who doesn't know any better might take your word for it.

John.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FastGass

Black Dog,

I'm not sure what you mean by 800 ISO looks "Gross". I had the XTi and even at 1600 ISO it was very reasonable after NR, even before NR it wasn't bad.

I see some of your comments quite strong like KR, everyone is entitled to an epinion but make sure you make that clear. If YOU think is looks bad for your aplication that's fine, but for someone who doesn't know any better might take your word for it.

John.

---

Hmm… I didn’t say it always looked gross, I said that it started to look gross at 800 ISO. There is a difference. I have taken many usable images with my XTi at 800, 1600 and even a few at 3200 (with the 400plus firmware “hack”). But anywhere there is light falloff or if the overall image is even slightly underexposed, I believe the XTi produces noticeably more noise than the Nikons DSLRs contemporary to the XTi, full frame cameras or any Nikon or Canon APS-C body made since. That is my opinion based on my experience shooting more than 50,000 frames with an XTi.

I don’t know what I may have written to have rubbed you the wrong way. Since you brought this up, I read through many of my posts on this forum. Nowhere could I find an example where I singled anyone out, called names, insulting or in any way personally attacked a forum member. My comments are about techniques, equipment (as above) and software – the kinds of things that are being discussed on this form all day long. As is also common on this forum, I sometimes have defended or clarified things I have written, but strictly limited to whatever topic is being kicked around, never in the form a personal attack.

On the other hand, twice now you have singled me out for personal criticism, comparing me to someone or something called KR. I don’t know who or what this is but I’m sure this was not meant as a compliment. I would ask that going forward you limit your comments directed toward me to photographic techniques, equipment or software.

Well spoken, Bill. If I ever have the slightest doubt about the technical advice that someone is giving, I would first look to see if they have a website, and check it out. In your case, a quick click on your signature line shows that you definitely know what you're talking about.

The other places that I have a problem was with the RAW issue (Ken Rockwell has a similar opinion) and with your other lens recomendations that were not a real big deal but when posted in a relatively short period of time it made me wonder if you were like one guy here that said IS was useless (Not even KR says that!). He started off with slightly off comments about gear/techniques untill he went off the wall. I may have overreacted a bit and did not imply that you attacked anyone. I really don't like trolls/village idiots on this forum! And now I know that you are definetly not one.

My apologies,
John.

Looking at Black_Dog's website, and realizing the type of photography he does I would say his comments about ISO 800 might be legitimate. But any advice given on a forum should be weighed carefully no matter how well known the photographer may be. Everyone will recommend what they own and enjoy using, not what may be best for a particular individual. They will talk from their own experience. As an example if I asked for wildlife photography advice and didn't know the person giving advice I would check their website. I would give Jonathan Huyer's advice a more weight than Black_Dog's, if I were asking wedding advice I would give Black_Dog the edge.

As for trolls/village idiots it might be good for the forum to have a few join the forum occasionally and stir things up. As it is now there are just a hand full of people that post each day.