Canon crop body??

smooth

smooth

Threebrows
Messages
5,553
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey all! :wave:
I am having a dilemma - I currently have a 5D mk1 and several lenses.
My trouble is that I LURVE the full framedness for portraits and landscapes etc etc etc but I do miss the reach that my 200 2.8 had on my crop frame old body.

So much so that I am tempted to purchase a crop frame body to pair it with and have 2 cameras to give the extra reach of 1.6 for birds etc. I dont want to sell the 200 2.8 and purchase longer reach glass as I dont have the funds available to make the massive step up - 300 2.8 or higher :thumbsdown: I take most of my nature pics at dusk so 2.8 is fairly important.

My question is - will I be dissapointed with the functionality of say a 1000D or would it have a worthy place in the kit bag and save me having to change lenses on the dust magnet.... Uh I mean 5D or is there another solution?

I am particularly interested to hear if anyone has done the same!

Cheers all (y)
 
smoothedit said:
Hey all! :wave:
I am having a dilemma - I currently have a 5D mk1 and several lenses.
My trouble is that I LURVE the full framedness for portraits and landscapes etc etc etc but I do miss the reach that my 200 2.8 had on my crop frame old body.

So much so that I am tempted to purchase a crop frame body to pair it with and have 2 cameras to give the extra reach of 1.6 for birds etc. I dont want to sell the 200 2.8 and purchase longer reach glass as I dont have the funds available to make the massive step up - 300 2.8 or higher :thumbsdown: I take most of my nature pics at dusk so 2.8 is fairly important.

My question is - will I be dissapointed with the functionality of say a 1000D or would it have a worthy place in the kit bag and save me having to change lenses on the dust magnet.... Uh I mean 5D or is there another solution?

I am particularly interested to hear if anyone has done the same!

Cheers all (y)
Click to expand...

If you longest lens is a 200mm, you've woefully short for wildlife shots, have you thought about the 400mm f5.6 instead of a body, this is highly rated by the wildlife fraternity and isn't too bad on your budget.

If you decide to go down the extra camera body route, personally I would look at the 450D, 500D or 40D head of the 1000D, they're better camera's all round, especially in the autofocus point area for your wildlife shots, the 1000D only has 7, similar to the 350D.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/CAMDB/compare_results.php

Peter
 
smoothedit said:
Hey all! :wave:
I am having a dilemma - I currently have a 5D mk1 and several lenses.
Click to expand...

Lucky boy!

My question is - will I be dissapointed with the functionality of say a 1000D
Click to expand...

I think you might be disappointed by the 1000D/400D. I went 400D to 40D and I'm thrilled by the improvement.

In your shoes I'd go for the 40D and, in my shoes I'd think about the 5D mk1 as a FF addition to my 40D.
 
I am considering the move from a 400d to a 40/50/?60? d just to get better performance at ISOs greater than 400. The problem I have, is that at 400 ISO, the noise makes things blurred.
What is the cost of a 1d ? Are they not 1.3x crop? Personally I also feel that 300mm (70-300 canon IS) is short for the type of things I am shooting. I am considering the 100-400 IS ~1k+ for extra reach

What about moving to the 5d Mk II? I think that the extra MP just about make it equiv to the 400d+crop.
 
You can pickup a 1D MKii body for about £900, the n version is still holding its price around the £1200/1400 mark (body are virtually the same camera) and yes its a 1.3x crop sensor. Another advantage is your not limited to manual focusing the lens if say you put a 1.4x TC onto the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 (which takes the it past f5.6 for the crop sensor camera's) with this body, it will autofocus upto f8. The 1Ds series are the full frame camera's.
 
Pete - I know I am on the short side for wildlife - alas bank balance dictates that I cant go longer with fast glass and I absolutely love the sharpness of the 200 prime. I really appreciate what you are saying though and am considering also biding my time and saving up for some fast long glass.

Tikka - great minds on the 40d - I have been offering on a few on here and keeping my eyes out for a bargain. Good suggestion though and I love the 40d for its affordability/image quality/features ratio.

Coldpenguin (cool username btw) - I would seriously love the 5D mkII and again its definately an option - I am also considering saving up to make the switch.

To all of you - THANK YOOOU!!! I really appreciate the time you took to reply with all your excellent answers and they are exactly what I was after - a look from all angles at the issue!

I love this place.

THANKS GUYS N GALS! (y)
 
coldpenguin said:
I am considering the move from a 400d to a 40/50/?60? d just to get better performance at ISOs greater than 400. The problem I have, is that at 400 ISO, the noise makes things blurred.
What is the cost of a 1d ? Are they not 1.3x crop? Personally I also feel that 300mm (70-300 canon IS) is short for the type of things I am shooting. I am considering the 100-400 IS ~1k+ for extra reach

What about moving to the 5d Mk II? I think that the extra MP just about make it equiv to the 400d+crop.
Click to expand...

I too am thinking of upgrading to a 50D. However, never heard of ISO 400 making things blurred!!!
 
odd jim said:
I too am thinking of upgrading to a 50D. However, never heard of ISO 400 making things blurred!!!
Click to expand...

May not have been the ISO as such, more the camera settings to take the image, especially if the light was poor and the subject was moving.
 
Perhaps in P mode - set ISO and the camera compensated by lowering shutter speed etc.
 
Have you thougt about buying 1.4x, 2x extenders to make your 200mm (and other lens) longer?
Although I think having 2 bodies is also nice especially if you are a pro.
 
Again an option I had not considered! Thanks Packham!
The only thing swaying me atm is how much of a dust magnet the 5d sensor is - and not having to swap lenses would be uber handy!

Thanks again.
 
If you can't do longer lenses I'd go for a 20/30/40D, whatever funds allow.

20D's especially are becoming an absolute bargain now, two have recently sold on here at around the £150 mark. A lot of camera for a relatively little sum of cash :)
 
Cheers dod.
I'm thinking a 40D - they seem to be amazingly popular for their quality to cost.

Thanks one and all! Off to post a wanted ad!
 
smoothedit said:
Cheers dod.
I'm thinking a 40D - they seem to be amazingly popular for their quality to cost.

Thanks one and all! Off to post a wanted ad!
Click to expand...

40's a cracking camera, I got a loan of Admirables not too long ago and was really impressed with it. If I needed another body I'd certainly look seriously at it :)
 
I'd recommend the 40D for your purpose, it's a lot of camera for not a great deal of money and represents excellent value. I am biased because it's what I use but I don't need any more.
 
I would go 40D too
after a 5D the 1000D will feel like a toy

also the high FPS< decent noise performance will see you right
the screen isn't awesome but will be a step up from the 5Di!
also it has spot metering...I'm not sure the 1000D has that function.

also what about a teleconverted on the 70-200 2.8?? will that work?
 
Its the 200 prime. My Kenko cheapy one does but the af performance is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard!
Have placed a wanted ad and am waiting patiently! (y)
 
odd jim said:
However, never heard of ISO 400 making things blurred!!!
Click to expand...

The ISO noise on the 400d can really ruin a picture unfortunately.
It could be that it is just stretching the camera/bad technique as suggested, but even if I perform tests using a tripod, and the computer remotely initiating the shutter, the noise in the system degrades the image and makes it look blurrier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top