upgrading

Displaying 1 to 16 of 16 matches.
barolo1961
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 9:53AM
I have been using for many years a Canon 350d with a 17-85,  a 70-300DO and a 50/1.4, all from Canon. I have uploaded a little more than 100 photos and sold a few. In the last 2-3 years I stopped uploading for various reasons but now I am considering to restart. I would like to buy a new camera and maybe a good quality wideangle in order to improve my acceptance rate (with the 350d I end up downsizing most of my photos to try to fulfill the requests concerning noise and artefacts, but starting from a 8MP camera I struggle to reach the large size...).


I am now considering the following two-three possibilities (my budget is limited and I would not like to spend more than maximum 2000 euro, possibly much less!):


1) Canon 650d + canon 10-22mm. Looking carefully on the net I can buy both items new with about 1200 euro);


2) Canon 5D mark II used + 24-105. A used camera would cost me about 1000 euro and more or less the same a new 24-105, so i would end up spending about 2000 euro;


3) Canon 6D + ... The camera itself is more than 1600 euro, so with the lens I would be over 2000 euro, wondering if it would be a real advantage respect to the Canon 5d markII.


I mainly take landscape photos and a few still-life of objects and of flowers. I travel quite often for work so I try to combine (first) work with photos.


All your suggestions are very welcome! Thanks a lot! 


alessandro    


p.s. I also have a good quality Benro tripod with a leveling base from Acratech and a Canon flash (Edited on 2013-05-19 09:55:57 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 09:58:16 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 09:59:17 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 10:00:09 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 10:00:59 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 10:01:47 by barolo1961)
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 10:28AM

Posted By barolo1961:



1) Canon 650d + canon 10-22mm. Looking carefully on the net I can buy both items new with about 1200 euro);


2) Canon 5D mark II used + 24-105. A used camera would cost me about 1000 euro and more or less the same a new 24-105, so i would end up spending about 2000 euro;




These two combinations of body and lens offer vastly different fields of view. The first option is significantly wider than the second when accounting for the crop factor. To get a similar field of view on the 5D2, you'd need to look at something like the excellent Canon 17-40L, which is relatively cheap and produces great results, especially stopped down a little, as you tend to be for landscapes.

I used to have the Canon EF-S 10-22 on my 30D and it was ok, again it was better when stopped down a bit. It's not terribly sharp wide open and suffers quite a lot of CA at the edges. I did a lot of architectural shots with it that were taken generally around f/8 to f/11, but it took a bit of processing to control the red/cyan fringes.

Not sure if it helps, but I have just uploaded this which was shot with the 5D3 and 17-40L

stock-photo-24299448-leeds-corn-exchange


And I uploaded this years ago shot on a 30D with 10-22.

stock-photo-5316174-leeds-corn-exchange

I find that the 24-105 on the full frame body is often wide enough for most landscapes that I do, and I only tend to get the 17-40L out when I'm really restricted in space or trying to create a more dramatic look. If I was in your shoes I would carefully choose a 2nd hand 5D2 from a reputable dealer and whatever lens you feel is most appropriate for your work. I like the 17-40L a lot, but the 24-105 is incredibly versatile and the IS really does work wonders in lower light conditions to reduce camera shake.
barolo1961
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 2:26PM
Thanks a lot for your useful reply Kelvin!


From the two photos you posted I am not able to distinguish differences in resolution between the two set, although the one with the 5D3 looks "less processed".


Maybe a possibility to satisfy my needs would me to buy the 5D2 used and a 17-40. Since i have already a 50/1.4 and a 70-300 DO I could start taking photos with that set (the 70-300 is not bad up to 150-200) and maybe use the old 350d to take some timelapses (in that way I will not burn immediately the new camera!). Do you think that it could be a reasonable set (5d2, 17-40, 50 and 70-300DO) also for taking stock photos? Altogheter I would spend no more that 1300-1400 euro for the (used) camera and the 17-40.

(Edited on 2013-05-19 14:27:27 by barolo1961)

(Edited on 2013-05-19 14:27:52 by barolo1961)
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 2:59PM
This may be more useful. This was shot at 17mm on the 17-40L on a 5D2.

City Park

It's a pretty good torture test for a lens as you have bright vertical lines at the extremes and this tends to be where you get a lot of CA. This image was just processed in Lightroom with no adjustments made, other than the auto lens corrections that it makes to reduce distortion / CA. It looks just a fraction soft to me but I think that may be just a tiny bit of camera shake, plus, it's not been sharpened. Obviously it's not a work of art - but it should show you a bit of what that lens and body combination is capable of.

I've done a few trips where I only took the 17-40L and a 50mm prime, and didn't really feel I was missing much. Obviously that's going to be the ideal lens for a lot of portrait sessions, but for what I shoot, it works well.

Oh and this was a shot from the 10-22 on my old 20D.

Church wide

Actually, that looks pretty good. Better than I remember it being. Again, no LR processing at all apart from the auto lens corrections it makes.

(Edited on 2013-05-19 15:17:20 by kelvinjay)
barolo1961
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 3:26PM

Thanks again Kelvin!


My feeling is the following:


1) if I go with the 650d i suspect that i will end up donwsizing quite often to 12 MP from the original 18 MP (still enough to get a XL image), since i am not so sure about the quality of the 650d at native resolution (the images i have seen seem to me slightly muddy when there are leaves and grass, what is relevant for landscape photos). On the other hand the 10-22 seems to be a very good lens, maybe comparable or better than the 17-40. I would also spend only about 1200 euro buying all new;


2) if I go with the 5m2 I think i can use more often the full resolution, although I suspect that close to the corners leaves and grass would maybe not be perfect and I could end up downsizing to about maybe 18 MP, still a huge file. I would spend more, on the other hand, about 1500-1600 euro and the 5d2 would be used in that case.


I really would love to be able to spend less time in postprocessing and have a higher acceptance rate than the one I have at the moment, since that time spoils the game sometimes and it was at the origin of the reduced entusiasm I had in uploading photos in the last years... .


If I could be reasonably sure that I can get acceptable photos from the 5d2, maybe just downsizing them a little, I think i would go with that choice... I will check on the web if I can find really good examples of landscapes made with the 5d2 and the 17-40: if I will find... i will go for that


Thanks again!
slobo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Sun May 19, 2013 3:51PM
Posted By kelvinjay:
I find that the 24-105 on the full frame body is often wide enough for most landscapes that I do, and I only tend to get the 17-40L out when I'm really restricted in space or trying to create a more dramatic look. If I was in your shoes I would carefully choose a 2nd hand 5D2 from a reputable dealer and whatever lens you feel is most appropriate for your work. I like the 17-40L a lot, but the 24-105 is incredibly versatile and the IS really does work wonders in lower light conditions to reduce camera shake.

same here. same advice. I find myself shooting mostly with 24-105 even when I have 16-35L with me. To make things worse, I dropped 16-35 from the moving car and rushed to buy another one before trip to New York and I ended up not using it there at all! I used 15mm fisheye instead.
HeliRy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon May 20, 2013 1:51AM
Agreed. If you can get your hands on a good used 5Dii, do it..... you will not regret that choice. A 5Dii with a 24-105 is just about the best camera/lens combo anyone could ask for in your budget range.
lagereek
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Tue May 21, 2013 2:01PM
Posted By kelvinjay:
This may be more useful. This was shot at 17mm on the 17-40L on a 5D2.

City Park

It's a pretty good torture test for a lens as you have bright vertical lines at the extremes and this tends to be where you get a lot of CA. This image was just processed in Lightroom with no adjustments made, other than the auto lens corrections that it makes to reduce distortion / CA. It looks just a fraction soft to me but I think that may be just a tiny bit of camera shake, plus, it's not been sharpened. Obviously it's not a work of art - but it should show you a bit of what that lens and body combination is capable of.

I've done a few trips where I only took the 17-40L and a 50mm prime, and didn't really feel I was missing much. Obviously that's going to be the ideal lens for a lot of portrait sessions, but for what I shoot, it works well.

Oh and this was a shot from the 10-22 on my old 20D.

Church wide

Actually, that looks pretty good. Better than I remember it being. Again, no LR processing at all apart from the auto lens corrections it makes.

(Edited on 2013-05-19 15:17:20 by kelvinjay)

This is great photography Kelvin! great control with the geometry. Almost the result of a TS-lens. The 17-40 is actually controlable at 17, as opposed to the 16-35 which is totally impossible at 16.
barolo1961
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Fri May 24, 2013 11:47AM
Thanks everybody for all the suggestions. I have seen that it is now possible to buy a 6D + 24-105 for about 2000 euro, all new... I am very tempted to go for that... any further suggestion? Thanks again! 
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Fri May 24, 2013 12:33PM

Posted By barolo1961:
Thanks everybody for all the suggestions. I have seen that it is now possible to buy a 6D + 24-105 for about 2000 euro, all new... I am very tempted to go for that... any further suggestion? Thanks again! 


It's a really good and versatile combination, I'm sure you will be very happy with it.
Bike_Maverick
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Fri May 24, 2013 1:36PM

If it helps all of my landscape photos after 2009 are shot with 5D Mk2 + 24-105.


If it's not wide enough I shoot few shots and then stitch them together via photoshop stitching feature that works wonders.


file_thumbview_approve 


file_thumbview_approve 


And this was a stitched panorama (had to take 20 shots 3 exposures each to stitch it)


file_thumbview_approve 


That said, strictly for landscapes I would have been happier with 17-40 I think. When I go shooting landscapes I only need a very long or very short range, and 24-105 falls right in between those two not really touching both of them.


 


Don't discount used lens too. Used lens is actually a safe bet than the camera, so if you're going to buy a used camera there's no reason why you can't buy a used lens too. Not sure about Europe but here you can find 24-105 for 800 bucks or something like that.
lagereek
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Sat May 25, 2013 12:22AM
Posted By Bike_Maverick:

If it helps all of my landscape photos after 2009 are shot with 5D Mk2 + 24-105.


If it's not wide enough I shoot few shots and then stitch them together via photoshop stitching feature that works wonders.


 


 


And this was a stitched panorama (had to take 20 shots 3 exposures each to stitch it)


 


That said, strictly for landscapes I would have been happier with 17-40 I think. When I go shooting landscapes I only need a very long or very short range, and 24-105 falls right in between those two not really touching both of them.


 


Don't discount used lens too. Used lens is actually a safe bet than the camera, so if you're going to buy a used camera there's no reason why you can't buy a used lens too. Not sure about Europe but here you can find 24-105 for 800 bucks or something like that.


 Nice work Andrey!

(Edited on 2013-05-25 00:23:12 by lagereek)
Bike_Maverick
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Sat May 25, 2013 1:10AM
Thanks! One thing I need to add is that almost of my landscapes are HDR - these three are, and then there's a lot of post involved in making it look good. I think I spent couple hours in total on that Moraine Lake shot (first one). I wouldn't expect those colors and such dynamic range just because of the lens or camera.
barolo1961
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sat May 25, 2013 10:08AM
Great photos indeed Andrey! I also uploaded a HDR photo of Yosemite and I agree, that is probably the best way to obtain rich and saturated colors! Thanks for the help!
bbostjan
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat May 25, 2013 11:25AM
I had Canon 400D camera with 50 f1.4 and 70-200 F4 L lenses. In february I upgraded to 6D for similar reasons as you and I really wanted to get larger size photos. Image quality is amazing regarding to 400D, but due to my excitement over the new camera my acceptance ratio actually dropped (every image was great in my eyes). Quite some lenses flaws emerged in ful frame that were not visible in crop format. Nevertheless I uploaded quite some images and my aceptance ration is slowly getting better. But unfortunately I ran into another problem. I thought that XL and larger files would get better BM placement and more views/sales. Lately that is not the case. I ony sold 2 files taken with 6D so far, and right now upgrade to 6D from this point of view doesn't seem justified. But on the other hand I love my new camera and photos really looks great so I don't regret buying it.
lagereek
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Sun May 26, 2013 12:31AM
Posted By barolo1961:
Great photos indeed Andrey! I also uploaded a HDR photo of Yosemite and I agree, that is probably the best way to obtain rich and saturated colors! Thanks for the help!

Yes but HDR have to be treated with care. I use the Nik HDR effex pro. realistic colors, etc. adding very, very little effect or else the result is grain, haze and artifacts. Bike have found a nice balance, thats good. Apart from landscapes, HDR lend itself beautyfully to certain industrial and architecure scenes.
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 16 of 16 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)