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

how would you spend 1000€?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:16 pm    Post subject: how would you spend 1000€? Reply with quote
Hello,
I have a friend who has 2500€ for photographic gear, He owns now a nikon d80 but wants to sell it and buy a 5dmkII( the money from the nikon is in the 2500 allready)
I am telling him why not get a cheap 5d and spend the money in glass?
I would say is more important, he is interested in landscape photography and portraits
one of the lenses could be an AF lens Shocked Shocked the 17-40 f4 L if no good qualyti alternatives were possible
Lenses could be, a 20mm, 28mm, 35mm & 50mm and maybe a 24mm or a 85mm
Suggestion wellcome with reasonable market prices, things like "I bought 2kg of leica gear for 10$..." won´t help

I suggested the yashicas ML, the samyang 85mm 1.4 and some rusians
regards


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would certainly not spend the grand on swapping camera body, no difference if it is brand switch or upgrade within same mount.

GGG = get good glass. Glass will outlive the body anyway and it's a much better situation to have glass that can outperform the body than vice versa.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'd certainly get the 5D Mark II if I had that much to spend, and rather than spend £1000s on L series lenses, I'd buy a failry decent tripod (£100.00) and spend the other £600.00 on some rather nice 2nd hand MF lenses Smile


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
In this case my choice will be an 5DII too.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Am I correct that the 5DII has live view, while the 5D does not? Live view would give you more flexibility with MF lenses that would hit the mirror...


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Scheimpflug wrote:
Am I correct that the 5DII has live view, while the 5D does not? Live view would give you more flexibility with MF lenses that would hit the mirror...


Live view is great and makes working with MF lenses a breeze. Plus you can magnify a section of the screen to get tack sharp focus. It's worth spending the extra money to get the Mark II for that feature alone. There's also the fact that you can shoot some awesome home movies as well as professional work with the video functions on the cam.

As for the original question, I would most certainly get the old Russian glass. For around $500-$600 (or less) you can get a really nice suite of primes from ultra wide to tele and the optics are great.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I understand but depends on the needs of each one, I do not care about video and the 24mpx but it is true that live view is a nice feature. I never used it on manual focus lenses but on some low angle shots that looking through the viewfinder was a pain. I am sure I would spend it on glass, the old 5d is more than enough for my needs. I hope to swap one day to a Full frame pentax!!! Canon just cares about video and mpx nowadays Wink

Now that I mentioned pentax, Can it take C/Y lenses?
Esox lucius wrote:
I would certainly not spend the grand on swapping camera body, no difference if it is brand switch or upgrade within same mount.

GGG = get good glass. Glass will outlive the body anyway and it's a much better situation to have glass that can outperform the body than vice versa.

i do not understand the brand switch either, he wants to go into fullframe. He allready owns nikon lenses and there is the D700, a fantastic piece of hardware.
I see you use nikon and you also own some M42, etc. How do you manage to use them? did you have to modify the lenses?

The main reason for me to stay with canon is that I can use MF lenses on a FF, sony´s do no take C/Y lenses and I love my MLs
Regards


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A lot of this is subjective, but for me, Live View and the sheer quality of the LCD for preview were worth the money differential upgrading from the 5D to Mk II.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
it's true, this is very subjective and depends on what one wants out of the equipment, and also the talent level going in. i am just a hobbyist, not a professional, so the $1500usd (i think !000euro) difference between 5di and ii makes it not even a second thought that i would go with 5d. on a professional level (or a situation not like your question, where money is no object) maybe go to 5dii. but for hobbyist w a limited amount to spend on camera and glass, to me its overkill. i think the 5d has a great screen, which can even be improved w additional screens, for mf--much better than most other dslrs, so live view again to me, overkill for my purposes.

i think great glass performs great on the 5d, so i would put my money in the glass.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:
A lot of this is subjective, but for me, Live View and the sheer quality of the LCD for preview were worth the money differential upgrading from the 5D to Mk II.

I can´t afford 2 cameras, I "downgraded" from the 40D, I lost the Live view, nice screen & lovely menus; but when see the results results on the screen I am glad I did. If I could afford a secon body I would go for one of the new mirrorless, either the Pen or the NX-10
Regards


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi

I would highly recommend the 5D plus a good glass, one AF if you like and as MF the Zeiss ZE 50mm. If you go that way, buy the 1.4 version, don't waste time with the 1.8, you won't be disseapointed. The 85 and 100 mm are also in the same price range.

You can find good examples of 5d's being sold for less than 1000€ and i'm being large, as for theaf 50mm it's about 300€ in vgc ( read new ). The Planar is about 450€.

The 5D may be 5 years old, nonetheless it is far for being outdated, and beats up many existing dslr in IQ. Just remember that FF camera are scarce, there are only 4 so far "affordable" i mean to amateurs. Th 5D being the most affordable one, many do sold it to upgrade to mark 2 Very Happy

The major difference with the mark II seems to be in pixels, live view and video mode, but the construction is the same, for twice the price, and for me it's not worth it.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's my justification; with DSLRs, being able to preview your shots is a very important factor. If I didn't need a preview, I might as well shoot medium format film (and no DSLR screen has anything on my AcuteMat D Hasselblad screen).

And the 5D preview/LCD absolutely sucks donkey balls. It is a piece of crap. I'm sorry. I had the 5D before a Mk II. I've also owned a Pentax K200D, K20D, K-7, and a Canon Rebel XS. The 5D LCD screen is junkier than any one of those. Mind you, I could've taken a GREAT shot with the 5D. It doesn't matter because it would look like absolute CRAP on the LCD.


Now, for me, the problem is that this visual feedback (or lack thereof) translates directly to my motivation; if the preview looks crappy, then I lose it. I lose motivation. It makes me not want to shoot any more. This was absolutely detrimental.

Towards then end of my 1 year ownership of the 5D, I was able to kind of train myself to ignore the crappy rendition of the preview and use my "mind's eye" to visualize my shot. After all, that's what we do with film cameras Laughing But then I'd be thinking "Why not just shoot my 501CM?". Especially since it's so much easier to visualize the outcome in my mind when the focus screen was so huge and bright.

The MkII LCD is great, better than any that I've had, including my K-7. Of course Live View is crucial for critical focusing using fast primes and my tilt-shift lenses.

I sold my 5D for $1K US and got the Mk II for a little over $2K US, so yes, the price differential is about 1,000USD. But I will probably shoot 10-20K shots with the Mk II, if not more. So that's less than 10c per shot. I consider that amount worth it if it means complete lack of all that frustration I felt every time I shot & previewed with the 5D and those times I'd miss focus because of the lack of Live View.


My 2c (or, rather, $1,000 Smile


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Everyone can use their money as they want to. If it was my money I would always prefer buying glass rather than body.

seta666 wrote:
i do not understand the brand switch either, he wants to go into fullframe. He allready owns nikon lenses and there is the D700, a fantastic piece of hardware.


My thoughts exactly. Expensive swap always to sell all existing glass and body and then start building up a new system in a different mount.

seta666 wrote:
I see you use nikon and you also own some M42, etc. How do you manage to use them? did you have to modify the lenses?


I use them within their own system (M42 lenses on Voigtländer Bessaflex) as well as adapted (mechanical adapter, no infinity and optical adapter, infinity) to Nikon mount. No modification to lenses. Work fine, some M42 lenses have wonderful character and they give a look that is hard to imitate with other glass.

My Nikon mount glass is all perfectly working on my D3. The pro level Nikon bodies meter and indicate focus confirm with all Nikon lenses built after 1959 (well, a few exceptions). I've Ai-converted one lens myself and bought factory kits for a few others.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:

And the 5D preview/LCD absolutely sucks donkey balls. It is a piece of crap. I'm sorry. I had the 5D before a Mk II. I've also owned a Pentax K200D, K20D, K-7, and a Canon Rebel XS. The 5D LCD screen is junkier than any one of those. Mind you, I could've taken a GREAT shot with the 5D. It doesn't matter because it would look like absolute CRAP on the LCD.

yes, mi 40D´s screen was better, and newer screen must be grate but I do not really care. I do not care abot the screen hreenish color beacause I shot raw, I just use the screen to check the blown highlights and check the histogram, that´s it. Ok, and to see if the picture is in focus, may be is not to acurate but again enough for me. After using manual focus lenses on the 1000D and lateron the 40D the 5d viewfinder is heaven. One of this cheap chinese focusing screens is on its way to me, I was happy enough with it on the 40D
I would never use liveview for focusing, only used it to see what I was doing in some very low macro shots
Esox lucius wrote:

I use them within their own system (M42 lenses on Voigtländer Bessaflex) as well as adapted (mechanical adapter, no infinity and optical adapter, infinity) to Nikon mount. No modification to lenses. Work fine, some M42 lenses have wonderful character and they give a look that is hard to imitate with other glass.

My Nikon mount glass is all perfectly working on my D3. The pro level Nikon bodies meter and indicate focus confirm with all Nikon lenses built after 1959 (well, a few exceptions). I've Ai-converted one lens myself and bought factory kits for a few others.

thanks for answering, you have very nice glass; I know about nikon backwards comptibility. It ifeels a bit weird being able of using nikon glass on an eos body while you can not mount old FD lenses
Regards


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:
....I consider that amount worth it if it means complete lack of all that frustration I felt every time I shot & previewed with the 5D and those times I'd miss focus because of the lack of Live View....


I understand you point, for me the lcd only applies to check quickly if i misfocused, which was rare, since i used AF a lot lately ^^
The backscreen is not an "essential" tool in photography, people dealt fine before its invention.

What i don't understand in your sayings, in how can you misfocus with the 5D ? You don't need live view for that, i mean, the viewfinder is huge and bright enough Confused

sorry live view make me think of compact cameras, i hate this stuff, composing your image through a back screen is a bit crap for my taste.

only my thoughts, there's nothing personal mister Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:


What i don't understand in your sayings, in how can you misfocus with the 5D ? You don't need live view for that, i mean, the viewfinder is huge and bright enough Confused

sorry live view make me think of compact cameras, i hate this stuff, composing your image through a back screen is a bit crap for my taste.

only my thoughts, there's nothing personal mister Very Happy

I agree with you, I can manual focus with my 5d and have not recieved my split prism screen, viewfinder is huge compared to APS-C viewfinders
Liveview is usefull tool for some akward shoting situations, very low angle or high shots, never used it for normal shooting

Last edited by seta666 on Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:18 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Live view is the greatest technology for manual lenses. A dream come true for me. I can shoot anything now first hit. Goodbye bracket focusing. Live view can even represent exposure before the shot, without changing to histigram. What a dream machine!

Is it not funny we discuss 5dmkii rather than Zeiss vs Canon glass with all this money?
This is evidence of an exceptional camera.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
seta666 wrote:

I would never use liveview for focusing, only used it to see what I was doing in some very low macro shots



I didn't know you were the one thinking of buying the MkII. Wasn't it your friend?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hexi wrote:

What i don't understand in your sayings, in how can you misfocus with the 5D ? You don't need live view for that, i mean, the viewfinder is huge and bright enough Confused

sorry live view make me think of compact cameras, i hate this stuff, composing your image through a back screen is a bit crap for my taste.



I guess you don't shoot with f1.2 lenses or tilt shift lenses much?


Part of it might have to do with my eyesight (I'm legally blind without correctional glasses), but it's almost impossible for me to nail focus when shooting 50/1.2 or 85/1.4 wide open or when shooting my tiltshift lenses (Hartblei/Carl Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Super Rotator) at maximum reverse tilt using the focus screen.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hexi wrote:

The backscreen is not an "essential" tool in photography, people dealt fine before its invention.


Of course not, and I said that.

However, for me, it IS absolutely an integral part of using a DSLR. What's the use of shooting digital if you can't benefit from digital technology, with such things as fast and accurate instant preview?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:
seta666 wrote:

I would never use liveview for focusing, only used it to see what I was doing in some very low macro shots



I didn't know you were the one thinking of buying the MkII. Wasn't it your friend?

Je, je, right Wink I should say " I had Live view on my 40D and never used it for manual focusing"
Regards Wink


PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 2:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
seta666 wrote:

Je, je, right Wink I should say " I had Live view on my 40D and never used it for manual focusing"
Regards Wink



I don't mean to be a dick, but it's kind of an important point. Multiple people above have suggested that, in fact, investing in the Mk II is a good idea, and some of us are expressing exactly why we think so.

I understand that you yourself may not feel the need for it, or that the price differential is warranted, but ultimately, that's a decision for your friend to make. So at the least you should convey these points to your friend as alternative points of view, instead of insisting to him that the 5D is the way to go.


For example do you shoot with the Samyang (or any other for that matter) 85mm f1.4? And do you often shoot it wide open? I don't see it listed in your gear list.

The point being that I know from experience that nailing focus with an 85/1.4 lens on the 5D at portraiture distance without Live View is a bitch. It was a bitch with the stock focus screen, it was a bitch with a split prism screen I got from Alex. I found I'd always have to focus bracket. Not to mention shooting with my Zuiko 50/1.2.

And (again, I don't mean to be a dick but) I think it would be kind of irresponsible to suggest to your friend that a Samyang 85/1.4 would be a great lens for his lineup, without letting him know that with the 5D, he's gonna be lucky if he nails focus with that manual focus monster fast lens one in every three shots.

Last edited by rawhead on Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:59 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
... and as I mentioned before, live view may not just be a preference feature. It may be a required to be able to use lenses which would otherwise hit the mirror. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Scheimpflug wrote:
... and as I mentioned before, live view may not just be a preference feature. It may be a required to be able to use lenses which would otherwise hit the mirror. Wink


+1

LiveView is also not an important feature for me. The EEs and today the EG-s Screen is doing a very accurate job, especially with 1.2 and 1.4 Lenses.
Sometimes LiveView is a "nice to have", not more. I hate the shaky View if you not working from a tripod. Most of my shots are taken handheld, so no need for that.

If things have to go fast, LiveView is a "No Go" for me.
For me, the much better display for controlling the image is more important..

and me, i shot with the Samyang 1.4/85, the Canon SSC 1.2/55mm and lots of fast glasses.

But rawhead is right, what we prefer, is not important. whats the friend of Seta666 would prefer should be the benchmark..

Regards


PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I do not own Samyang 85 1.4, my fastes glass are Yashica ML 50 1.4 and Jupiter-9; sometimes I use them with extension tubes or close up lens and DOF become much shallower. If I do not nail focus I think is more a matter of not holding my posintion, moving a few mm backwards or staying still makes the difference of keeping a shot or not.
You are right, is my friends decision, not mine. I did not care to get a second hand machine, he now say he wants it new and it is quite difficult to find them new now(the 5d classic I mean)

Regarding live view being nice for using glass that otherwise would hit the mirror; well, if you own a lot of glass allready may be true, but If you do not own any(like my friend) is easy to start getting the ones that are known to work
Thanks all for your help
Regards
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2