Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

50d or 2nd hand 5d for MF
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:44 pm    Post subject: 50d or 2nd hand 5d for MF Reply with quote
Well here is the dilemma: Im trying to move to Canon (for my Zeiss) and have been saving up for a 2nd hand 5d for a while now. I recently ran into people discussing live view. It seems like a great feature for using mf lenses.

For the same amount of money I could get a brand new 50d or save 200-300 euro on a 40d/450d. Which would be better for focusing and overall usage? The 5d will have the larger viewfinder (and I'll get a focussing screen) but the others have live view.

I know its apples and oranges (full frame vs crop) here but what would you do?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Conor

Last edited by conor12 on Thu May 07, 2009 7:06 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If i can drop my 2 cents, the 50D isn't more interesting than a 40D for manual focus use and common photography use. Also note that it produce way heavier files since it has a 15 mpix sensor (so at least the raw will be heavier). The biggest differences compared to the 40D are the video capability, and a wider range of selectable iso (in the more sensible area of the range).

The 5D instead is interesting for its viewfinder and its full-frame capability, as you said. It costs more but it will allow you to make 100% use of wide angle lenses.

About the liveview, is useful but of course tooks a different approach while taking the photo, since you aren't exactly holding a point&shoot camera. If you plan to shoot action i don't think you would find liveview to be useful, there also is a down-time during which the lcd turns black since the sensor is actually taking the photo (it can't show you what it's "seeing" while it tooks the photo), and this downtime also last a little more of the time needed to the shutter to operate.


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Between the 5D, 50D and 40D, I think the 40D is the most "forgiving" cam for manual lenses. The 5D is very "picky" when it comes to the edges of the frame and needs excellent lenses to get excellent results, as does the 50D due to its extremely high resolution and narrow pixel pitch.
With average lenses you won't see any difference between the 40D and the 50D, but the 5D will disclose the "mediocrity" of these lenses.
But as soon as you mount a Leitz or Zeiss glass to your 50D, you can suddenly see how good those lenses are!


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:

But as soon as you mount a Leitz or Zeiss glass to your 50D, you can suddenly see how good those lenses are!


I have actually traded in all my m42 stuff for exclusively Leitz and Zeiss. Cool This all started when I couldnt bring myself to resell a distagon "hollywood" even though I had never used it. I made my mind up to switch but spent too much time here, leading to lens lust and me spending all my camera money on lenses Embarassed

Do either of you spend a lot of time using the live view function? The 450d also seems like quite a bargain.

Thanks for the help by the way


PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well I did it, literally 1 hr after posting here and browsing the net for reviews I took the plunge on the 450d. I didnt want to wait any longer saving money. I just need adapters now!


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I bought a 450D last year for use with mf lenses, and loved the live view with magnification of part of the picture for accurate manual focussing.

However, I now also have a 5D and the 450D hardly gets used at all... live view works but it's very cumbersome compared to the viewfinder of the 5D, and the 5D is accurate enough for my needs.

/Erik


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:25 am    Post subject: Re: 50d or 2nd hand 5d for MF Reply with quote
conor12 wrote:
Well here is the dilemma: Im trying to move to Canon (for my Zeiss) and have been saving up for a 2nd hand 5d for a while now. I recently ran into people discussing live view. It seems like a great feature for using mf lenses.

For the same amount of money I could get a brand new 50d or save 200-300 euro on a 40d/450d. Which would be better for focusing and overall usage? The 5d will have the larger viewfinder (and I'll get a focussing screen) but the others have live view.

I know its apples and oranges (full frame vs crop) here but what would you do?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Conor


Sorry I did not catch this thread in time.
What to do depend entirely on your shooting habits.
If you shoot live events, sports, street etc liveview is of no use. Better have a good viewfinder. That of 50D is good, but the one of 5D is better.
If instead you shoot still subjects, then liveview is more accurate than any split screen or AF chip adapter.
If you shoot architecture or wide landscapes, however, I would prefer a full frame, because in that case, focusing is not that critical as you would focus to distance and use a narrow aperture anyway.

So to recap:

for action photography: 5D (but a 50D with good AF chip can do)
for still subjects (macro, etc): 50D
for landscapes and architecture: 5D


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio summed up pretty much what I would've said (although I don't know much about action photography, save, perhaps, birds and bees Smile, but I would also like to have added to the 5D column (had I gotten here in time) "DoF control".


Specifically if you like to play with shallow DoF and bokeh shots, nothing beats a bigger sensor camera. Consequently, tilt photography (where you use selective focus, rather than simulating deep DoF) benefits a great deal as well. For any given focal length, you will always have the choice of using much shallower DoF on an FF than an APS-C. After experiencing this first hand between my K20D and 5D, I've shifted to using all my tilt/shift lenses on the 5D.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I could imagine the thinner DOF as great for artistic purposes but not so helpful for low light photography, in terms of in focus keepers. Does a f1.5 lens become that much more difficult to focus?


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
conor12 wrote:
I could imagine the thinner DOF as great for artistic purposes but not so helpful for low light photography, in terms of in focus keepers. Does a f1.5 lens become that much more difficult to focus?


The brighter the lens, the easier is focusing.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
conor12 wrote:
I could imagine the thinner DOF as great for artistic purposes but not so helpful for low light photography, in terms of in focus keepers. Does a f1.5 lens become that much more difficult to focus?



It's easier to focus @ f1.5 but hard to *nail* focus at f1.5, if you know what I mean.


If you have an f1.5 lens and an f2 lens and your objective is to nail focus at f2, it's going to be easier to do it on the f1.5 lens @ f1.5 and stopping down to f2.


But, if the question is regarding nailing focus at wide open, it gets harder and harder to do, the faster the lens, obviously, because the DoF becomes shallower and shallower.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exactly.
One thing not to forget, 5D's bigger mirror may hit the rear of your manual lens (depends).
This is no problem with the 40D and 50D.
One option is to use mirror lockup, another option is to shave the mirror.

I think it's important to consider that, for me it was.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
So in a low light situation where you are forced to shoot wide open it is harder to nail focus on a full frame camera.

Does this ever come into play much? Where you wish you were shooting a crop cam for the extra depth of field at the same aperture and shutter speed.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
conor12 wrote:
Does this ever come into play much? Where you wish you were shooting a crop cam for the extra depth of field at the same aperture and shutter speed.



It's exactly the opposite of wanting shallow DoF (people who like bokeh, selective focus, tilt-miniature photography, etc.); any case scenario where you want deep DoF, a smaller sensor (with adequate, but not absurd, pixel density) is going to be beneficial. So, macro photography, low light situations, bird photos, etc. This has to be, of course, balanced with the fact that you are going to have a smaller FoV, but all else equal, yes a high-end APS-C Canon will be better than 5D/Mk II for those kind of photography.


PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 5:52 pm    Post subject: Re: 50d or 2nd hand 5d for MF Reply with quote
conor12 wrote:

For the same amount of money I could get a brand new 50d or save 200-300 euro on a 40d/450d. Which would be better for focusing and overall usage? The 5d will have the larger viewfinder (and I'll get a focussing screen) but the others have live view.


A (new or used) 40D would make a great camera, and would leave you more money to spend on glass Smile


PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just to throw my ha'pennyworth in - I have a 5D and I think it is destined to be a classic Canon body with, perhaps, the best balance of pixel size and sensor size that Canon has ever or will ever produce. If it is "unforgiving" of poor lenses, that is just because it is so good.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
Page 1 of 1