7d vs 550d with Zeiss 50mm f1.4?

R

roe1and

Messages
20
Edit My Images
Yes
Not too long ago I sold my Panasonic GH1 along with 2 lenses, memory card, etc. and bought myself a Canon 7d. Of course I didn't have enough money left for a proper lens and ended up with a 18-55mm kit lens. Which is... ok I guess. I now recently bought myself a 50mm f1.8 and I'm thoroughly impressed with the difference in image quality. So now I'm thinking... In terms of image quality I would be better off with the 550d and a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZE Planar T, which by all accounts is a pretty sharp lens? Or am I :cuckoo:? The 7d and 550d has the (almost identical anyway) same sensor. I don't care about speed, I only do studio work), don't care about weather sealing(2 months and the camera has not once left my flat), don't care about 19 point AF as I mainly do close up work and mostly manual focus anyway(take a look here if you want to know what I do)... My only consideration is image quality.

I suppose the easy answer is to just save up and buy the Zeiss but for now that's not an option. Too broke. But if I sell the 7d with the 2 lenses etc I will be able to buy a 550d AND the Zeiss lens. What to do????
 
I have the Contax version on the Planar 50/1.4 and it's an absolute cracker! You could always buy a 2nd hand one of those with an adapter, which would save you a few quid e.g. cost about £200.00 total.

The lens is good at f1.4 but incredible at f2.8, where the image is extremely sharp and 3D pop very evident.

As for cameras, remember that the 7D has a much larger viewfinder. Is that important to you? If you're doing a lot of close up work I imagine you won't be interested in amazing AF or even high ISO, or perhaps even a big viewfinder if you are just using liveview...so maybe the 550D will do.

If you went with a 550D, and took the Contax route, you might even be able to squeeze in a used Makro-Planar 100/2.8 as well...another incredible lens...;)
 
roe1and said:
... . I don't care about speed, I only do studio work), don't care about weather sealing(2 months and the camera has not once left my flat), don't care about 19 point AF as I mainly do close up work and mostly manual focus anyway(take a look here if you want to know what I do)... My only consideration is image quality.

I suppose the easy answer is to just save up and buy the Zeiss but for now that's not an option. Too broke. But if I sell the 7d with the 2 lenses etc I will be able to buy a 550d AND the Zeiss lens. What to do????
Click to expand...

From what you shoot , what about a used 5D - you'd probably see more of a IQ improvement going FF than going to another crop body.
 
manualfocus-g said:
If you went with a 550D, and took the Contax route, you might even be able to squeeze in a used Makro-Planar 100/2.8 as well...another incredible lens...;)
Click to expand...

Don't put even more ideas in my head!! :D So its not just me then the lens DOES make a difference?
 
I've considered that D_m but I print my flowers out quite big 50x50 cm so I quite like the idea of 18 megapix to play with. I actually (briefly) considered the Sony A850. 24MP! wow. But no live view(so viewfinder is not a problem m_g) so no go.
 
roe1and said:
I've considered that D_m but I print my flowers out quite big 50x50 cm so I quite like the idea of 18 megapix to play with. I actually (briefly) considered the Sony A850. 24MP! wow. But no live view(so viewfinder is not a problem m_g) so no go.
Click to expand...

5D2 then :D - 21mp of FF godlyness.......
 
:nono: My wife would kill me. I'm allowed to buy photography as long as it doesn't cost me anything...
 
swag72 said:
You say that studio work is what you do - Surely the 5D is a no brainer for that. Why not look at a second hand one? The 5D's are made for that kind of work.
Click to expand...

I have looked at it but I don't think 12MP is enough. The Panny GH1 I had was 12MP and 6 extra megapixels does(in my opinion anyway) make a difference when you're printing you're images out at 50x50cm(plus). I have no doubt that eventually I'll end up with a FF camera but for now money is an issue.

At the moment I'm just stuck on the idea that I can sell my 7d body, use half the money on a camera with the same sensor, spend the rest on a decent lens and end up with even sharper images... :bonk:
 
Last edited:
As said a 5D if you can find one, but maybe just stick with a 550D and put money towards your lighting setup. If it is solely for studio then lighting can cost as much as the camera.
 
I don't think you'll have a problem with the 12MP of the 5D. You've got to remember the 12MP of the GH1 are over a lot smaller area (so the pixels are smaller - really simply put and I'm sure someone with better knowledge than me will be along soon to put me right).

The 12 MP of the 5D MkI are over a larger sensor creating bigger pixels and better image. I happily produce A2 images from my 8.9MP 1DII.


Dave
 
Sensor size and Pixel Density is all relevant.
A 5D will probably be your best bet.
 
In all honesty and looking at your pics I would try a dedicated macro lens with the 7D first, again looking at the work your doing the tamron 60mm F2 looks like a good idea and its an affordable option that works better than extension tubes.
The other thing I would suggest is a flash for lowlight days, something like either the 430ex/exII or the Nissin Di622, with a diffuser or home made softbox and an off camera ettl cord so you can hand hold it or place it off camera.

I think both of these will have more impact on your current picture quality than the 550D and the planar T.

I shoot indoors all the time, adding an off camera flash has improved my photo's massively
 
Last edited:
I don't really want to get into the mega pixel thing but it is strange how different people have different views on it. Nikon seems to have decided the 12MP is more than enough and from the looks of it a lot of you here(and thank you, btw, for all your input) seem to be happy with this too. I remember the first close up of a flower I did was with my old Canon D30 and that was a 3.1MP camera. The photo I took wasn't too bad either and I'm sure if I carefully upscaled it It would print fine. My thing with the whole MP thing is that with 18MP you have 6 million little pixels with information that you would not have had with 12MP. The flowers I photograph(link in first post) range from small to tiny. And I'm convinced(rightly or wrongly) that the details of these tiny things are better when you're shooting with 18MP... Of course that is just my opinion. I could be right. I could be wrong.

I guess what this thread is about is the question of optics. Will the Zeiss lens improve my photos? (I can't just buy one.. too many £££s BUT if I sell what I have not only can I buy one but I can buy a camera with the same sensor my current camera has)
 
iancandler said:
In all honesty and looking at your pics I would try a dedicated macro lens with the 7D first, again looking at the work your doing the tamron 60mm F2 looks like a good idea and its an affordable option that works better than extension tubes.
The other thing I would suggest is a flash for lowlight days, something like either the 430ex/exII or the Nissin Di622, with a diffuser or home made softbox and an off camera ettl cord so you can hand hold it or place it off camera.

I think both of these will have more impact on your current picture quality than the 550D and the planar T.

I shoot indoors all the time, adding an off camera flash has improved my photo's massively
Click to expand...

Wow, Thanks Ian. I'll investigate the Tamron for sure. My lighting situation... I didn't really want to bring this up as it one of the big weaknesses I have at the moment. I'm using a 500w workmans lamp that is pointed towards the back of the room. My bad, I know. I've been considering some DIY flash building but that's a topic for another day....
 
roe1and said:
I've considered that D_m but I print my flowers out quite big 50x50 cm so I quite like the idea of 18 megapix to play with. I actually (briefly) considered the Sony A850. 24MP! wow. But no live view(so viewfinder is not a problem m_g) so no go.
Click to expand...

I recently printed out some A3 prints from my D40 without noticing (unless you get close) that it was only a 6mp camera...
 
roe1and said:
I don't really want to get into the mega pixel thing but it is strange how different people have different views on it. Nikon seems to have decided the 12MP is more than enough and from the looks of it a lot of you here(and thank you, btw, for all your input) seem to be happy with this too. I remember the first close up of a flower I did was with my old Canon D30 and that was a 3.1MP camera. The photo I took wasn't too bad either and I'm sure if I carefully upscaled it It would print fine. My thing with the whole MP thing is that with 18MP you have 6 million little pixels with information that you would not have had with 12MP. The flowers I photograph(link in first post) range from small to tiny. And I'm convinced(rightly or wrongly) that the details of these tiny things are better when you're shooting with 18MP... Of course that is just my opinion. I could be right. I could be wrong.

I guess what this thread is about is the question of optics. Will the Zeiss lens improve my photos? (I can't just buy one.. too many £££s BUT if I sell what I have not only can I buy one but I can buy a camera with the same sensor my current camera has)
Click to expand...
Resolution, i.e. image detail, is often limited by the lens. If you have a quick look around at review sites you will notice that only very few lenses actually push the boundaries of 10MP sensors (such as the D200).

There probably won't be a huge increase in picture quality between the Canon 50mm f1.8 and the Zeiss, especially when stopped down and tripod mounted.

As Ian said, get a proper macro-lens (and maybe lighting setup). Then you don't have to crop your images and the sensor pixel-count won't matter.
 
roe1and said:
I have looked at it but I don't think 12MP is enough. The Panny GH1 I had was 12MP and 6 extra megapixels does(in my opinion anyway) make a difference when you're printing you're images out at 50x50cm(plus). I have no doubt that eventually I'll end up with a FF camera but for now money is an issue.

At the moment I'm just stuck on the idea that I can sell my 7d body, use half the money on a camera with the same sensor, spend the rest on a decent lens and end up with even sharper images... :bonk:
Click to expand...

I have printed cropped images from 40D around 6MP total at A3 and they still look perfect. 16MP 1Ds allows me to print way beyond A3 should I want to. That goes down to the quality of pixels, and processing (corrections and correct upsizing). To be quite honest, I haven't used either 5D mk1 nor 7D but I would pick 5D of the two for studio work. Very clean ISO 100 with lots of dynamic range means a lot to me.
 
roe1and said:
Don't put even more ideas in my head!! :D So its not just me then the lens DOES make a difference?
Click to expand...

My Planar is streets ahead of the plastic fantastic EF 50/1.8, as expected. But it all depends what you want out of the shot. I love the Planar for street shooting a portraits as it has such incredible "pop" with the subject literally leaping out of the frame. This is also evident with close ups (I can usually tell which lens I used by visually inspecting the image) but as others have suggested, if you are mostly doing macro, then perhaps that is your route.

FWIW, my 50/1.4 is great on both crop (30D, 40D for me) and FF (5D). Ffordes have a couple of makro-Planar 60/2.8 lenses for £500.00 ;):D
 
Yup, I've already started listing my earthly possessions on eBay.... Soonall I'll own will be photography stuff :)
 
roe1and said:
...Or am I :cuckoo:?

<snip>
Click to expand...

Frankly, yes. If you make that change, you will wonder where your money's gone.

If you want IQ, the 5D's full frame sensor is four times larger than your old Pani, and 2.6x larger than the 7D. No lens ever made can bridge that differential. It's about size far more than pixels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top