- Messages
- 15,580
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
A 5D would not work with your zoom lenses ,the 50D is a nice camera and superior to both the 60 and 70 as they are biased towards video ,had them all and with your budget the 50D is the best bet .
...but it still wouldn't give the OP that leap in high ISO performance, which is the point of her upgrade. As good as the 50d is (it'll also do video with the magic lantern firmware),A 5D would not work with your zoom lenses ,the 50D is a nice camera and superior to both the 60 and 70 as they are biased towards video ,had them all and with your budget the 50D is the best bet .
Her budget doesn't stretch to a camera that will give her that sort of leap which is the POINT of my suggestion .there are lots of cameras out there that will do but NOT on a £200 budget...but it still wouldn't give the OP that leap in high ISO performance, which is the point of her upgrade. As good as the 50d is (it'll also do video with the magic lantern firmware),
But there aren't ANY cameras out there that will solve the OPs issue for what she's prepared to pay, that's the whole point. Having used both 40 and 50d (still owning the 50) there's not much in it in high ISO. So what's the point in spending £150 to be back at square one?Her budget doesn't stretch to a camera that will give her that sort of leap which is the POINT of my suggestion .there are lots of cameras out there that will do but NOT on a £200 budget
But there aren't "lots" of cameras out there that will solve the OPs issue, that's the whole point. Having used both 40 and 50d (still owning the 50) there's not much in it in high ISO. So what's the point in spending £150 to be back at square one?
As above, for her budget she's asking the impossible. Shreds sums it up perfectly. Save a little more and she'll have a 5d2 in her bag for just over £400.
Unfortunately youve hit the nail on the head. This sort upgrade costs money.But buying the 5d2 means I'll have to replace my grip, lenses and other bits too
Which is adding to the cost also
If I were to get a 5d, I'd be as well switching systems as will have to replace everything anyway.
Slowly reality is dawning...... a 5D now isn't going to help, its not that much better than a 40D in low light, and requires a lens change. Personally I don't think that a 5DMk2 is the answer either when Canon's low light monster, the 6D can be had for similar money.
This is my view:-
Really you want to be aiming at the 6D, yes I know that funds don't allow purchase at the moment so either just save your money, or buy another (FF compatible lens) like the 85mm f1.8 that will help now by giving you a bit more reach and will work well on the 6D. £200 should be there or thereabouts for the 85mm.
I'd go for the save money option, having just traded away a 6D + Tamron 24-70VC for less than £1K, I would save your money until you can afford to make the change, A gripped 40D has some value, your existing zoom lenses less so, but all of that kit combined with £200 is probablyr halfway to a 6D.+ zoom lens.
Practise with your existing 50mm, crop heavily if required.
For your budget buy a tamron 17-50mm f2.8 it's the best low light improvement you will get.
Which is an option worth considering. Is it just the high ISO performance where your current set-up leaves you frustrated? or are there compromises in your lenses as well?If I were to get a 5d, I'd be as well switching systems as will have to replace everything anyway.
Whilst this is *usually* true, I don't think it is in this case. The OP is constrained on shutter speed because of the need to photograph moving animals, and she's constrained on aperture because of the need to maintain an adequate depth of field. So the only variable she has to work with is ISO, and that points to a camera upgrade rather than a lens upgrade.On a budget the sensible way of going about it is to upgrade your lenses 1st if you can't afford the latest cameras
Suggest a upgrade to the canon 40d?
Doesn't need to be a big jump up, and I'm not looking to spend huge amounts on a used body...I'm mostly happy with how my 40d performs , just would like something that performs a bit better in low light.
Sticking with canon please.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, Phil.I suspect the answer to your problem is to find a different shot, because you've painted yourself into a corner where the only way out is more gear....
And going to look at a 28 2.8
None of that will really help.All things considered ... I love my 40d , the way it works , the Weight etc .
If I upgraded , I'd like one in the same body range , 50d, 60d etc as I love the function of it
Got on better with it than any of my other cameras
I'm thinking of getting a monopod and speaking to stewards about light use
Plan on skipping the 50d, but if i see a reasonable 60 or 70 will take a punt at it
Also seen a 60d with a 28mm 2.8, which may buy if it goes within my range
And going to look at a 28 2.8
None of that will really help.
So using a monopod instead of hand holding won't help...
Using a 2.8 , instead of the kit lens won't help...
Having a 60d instead of a 40d won't help..
And potentially being able to USE lighting in situations where I usually can't won't help...
Flipping heck .
So using a monopod instead of hand holding won't help...
Using a 2.8 , instead of the kit lens won't help...
Having a 60d instead of a 40d won't help..
And potentially being able to USE lighting in situations where I usually can't won't help...
Flipping heck .
A d3200 won't give her the high ISO boost she needs (if she wants to take the same shots). She really would need to invest in a good FF body ultimately.Monopod does nothing to slow down your subjects so won't help
You already have f/1.8 so how will a slower lens help?
Canon sensors haven't really moved that much in years, not at the rate of the other brands to sequential upgrades don't really make that much difference so changing to a 60D will help a bit but not that much.
Lightroom might help a bit but it can't do miracles.
Personally, and I know lots will disagree, if getting these shots was ALL I cared about without spending loads of cash I would be switching systems to Nikon or Pentax, both of which have excellent high ISO in bodies even a few generations old. Heck, even the D3200 can be had cheap as chips and that has a fantastic sensor in it - way better than any Canon crop body has.
A d3200 won't give her the high ISO boost she needs (if she wants to take the same shots). She really would need to invest in a good FF body ultimately.
Extra MP, if anything, can increase noise in images.Ok... the nifty fifty, is a great lens, but it's too close... Hence why I was also using the kit lens.
The 2.8 won't be better than the nifty fifty, but it Will be an improvement on the kit lens, and it's the better focal distance for me than the 50.
The monopod, I've never used one so I am not certain, but can this not be used with panning? which is something that was suggested might help get a shot of movement rather than standing ? if not, a monopod is worth investing in anyway I am sure, as there's many situations I could use it in.
And in regards to lighting, in that post I never mentioned LED's... I Just said that I would speak to the stewards in regards to "lighting"... as in, hopefully some shows might allow me to use flash if I ask permission, and have permission of the owners.
And the 60d, might not be a huge improvemet, but as stated the 40d to 60d is a jump of almost double the mp, from 10 to 18... so this would surely affect the visible noise of the images ? (not at 100%)
And low light aside, I am sure there are other good reasons to upgrade to the 60 if one comes up at a reasonable price ?
Now, you'll read many comments on the internet that say the 50D noise performance is no better than the 40D. That's probably true, but only up to a point, and you need to understand what people mean by that. You see, most people look at noise by looking at images at 100% magnification. That's fair enough, but the 50D has 15 megapixels and the 40D has 10 megapixels. If you downsample the files to the same size (eg 2 megapixels for on-screen display, or 8 megapixels for a 12"x8" print), you'll be downsampling the 50D image to a greater extent and that will reduce the noise accordingly. Unfortunately I haven't seen any comparisons which look at noise this way so I don't know how much better it would be.
Extra MP, if anything, can increase noise in images.
I'm really lost.
OK, let's see if we can disentangle this a bit.I'm really lost.