The best mid-range D-SLR....

Messages
350
Edit My Images
Yes
..for landscapes? (I.e. shorter focal length photography)

I'm talking "best buy for the money".

Is it the Canon 5D with its full frame sensor or the Nikon D200 with a shorter focal length to compensate? (Or indeed the 30D).

Discuss.
 
Depends on how much money you have and what to you is mid range ;)

However since its for landscapes then full frame would be ideal and the 5D has definately got the Nikon D200 beat there.
 
But has it got it beaten by £500 or so?
 
For a set amount of dosh I would say D70 or 20D, then spend rest on decent glass. I would argue you would get better shots from the above than D200 or 5D with medium quality glass.

Also note after using 10-20mm Sigma lens you don't always use widest focal length for landscape......it can be too wide sometimes.....therefore do you really need full size sensor of 5D, with the associated need for decent glass (cheaper glass will show up edge defects on 5D) ?
 
So, when on a budget, the lens is potentially more important than the body? Interesting.

/me awaits further discussion :)
 
Nobody mentioned glass in the opening question...it was specifically bodies ;)
 
I'm interested in both angles :)shock:) so please, continue :)
 
LOL....ah but the "best buy for money" gives impression of budget, so one has to take into account glass ;).
 
Right, without taking glass into account, which body would give the best pics for the money?
 
Spoil sport ;) ....well if you drew a graph of quality vs cost the old 350D will prbably win hands down. You get diminishing returns after that vs cost (eg. 20D at 50% more say, is not 50% more quaility etc)
 
lol. But which is best between the Nikon D200 and the Canon 5D?
 
Ribby said:
lol. But which is best between the Nikon D200 and the Canon 5D?

Just been searching on Google & no serious reviews other than Canon / Nikon banter on other forums ;).....gut feel for me if serious about landscape photography is the 5D due to full size sensor, with the knowledge I would need to invest heavily in lenses in future. Just my opinion on limited knowledge of the two.
 
Oh my god , did I just suggest a Canon....off to the Docs ;)
 
You would also have to take into consideration what size you would want to print you images, A2 no problem with the 5D.

DJW is spot on about needing better glass with the 5D, but in saying that you have more leeway as far as cropping goes because of the bigger file size.

Don't forget the £200 cash back on the 5D.
 
A 5d and 17-40L would make very good base equipmet for shooting landscapes. Large MP, full frame sensor with top quality glass...all you would need after that is a good tripod and a dollop of skill to get the best from the kit :)
 
Steve said:
A 5d and 17-40L would make very good base equipmet for shooting landscapes. Large MP, full frame sensor with top quality glass...all you would need after that is a good tripod and a dollop of skill to get the best from the kit :)

First lens I bought for my 5D was a EF 85 f1.8 for the studio. Second lens was the EF 17-40 f4L for landscapes, but is also great in the studio.

Actually I tell a lie, the first lens was a Sigma 20-40 and although it's a good lens, it's petty poor on a 5D so I exchanged it for the EF 85.
 
DJW said:
Oh, now he brings tripods into the equation ;)

:laugh1:

You could always use some rocks or a fence post at the location but don't blame me if your new kit falls :whistle2:
 
Obviously if we're just considering landscapes then a full frame sensor is desirable, but as has been said, be aware that if you buy a 5D, you'll have to invest in the very best glass to avoid loss in image quality and vignetting towards the edges of the frame.

Opinions are so split on the desirability of a full frame sensor. Initially the clamour and demand for them was understandable given that crop sensor DSLRs just didn't hack it for wide angle shots with the lenses available. Now that 8 and 10mm wide angle lenses are available for crop sensor cameras a lot of that disadvantage has melted away.

The cost of producing full frame sensors is horrendous and it's great that Canon have managed to market the 5D at the price it is. Prices will no doubt fall further and it will be interesting to see when full frame sensors are available to the less well-heeled whether they'll really be taken up with any great relish by the vast majority of photographers.

I can see the appeal of the 5D and I wouldn't rule out getting one for landscapes etc, but I think I'd still want a crop sensor camera. If you hang onto your 350D then you have the best of both worlds with a 5D too.
 
I currently have a Nikon D50 and the natural upgrade for me would be a D200. Before I spent any money I wondered if the 5D had a major advantage over the D200.
 
Landscape, wedding and portrait photographers will love the 5D. They can fill the frame, only need to invest in a couple of lenses, and they'll see an appreciable difference in image quality using all 12 Million + pixels.

Sports, action, wildlife photographers, will need to invest in seriously long, very expensive lenses to fill the frame or they'll just end up cropping more background than someone with a crop sensor. The end result would be the same (ish) size and quality image.
 
If you already have Nikon equipment then I would advice you to stay in that camp. The D200 is a great camera and is more than capable of taking stunning landscape photos. Where it is reported not to be as good as some other makes/models is in low light/and/or action areas. It can produce noisy results and have AF focusing issues but as this is not going to be your area then it should do everything you need without breaking a sweat. The weather sealing would also be an advantage as I am sure if you are going to take landscape seriously, it will involve times when you and the equipment will end up getting wet. Remember though that as with the Canon and weather sealing on the more expensive models, it means nothing unless your lenses are also weather sealed ;)

The only other thing that is really of any interest in the Canon 5D from the perspective of a landscape photographer is the 5D's full frame sensor which will be an advantage providing you pair it with decent glass. I know for a fact that the 17-40L works great on a full frame as I have tested it myself so it needn't be really expensive glass that would have to buy, just chose carefully and you will be fine.

Final thoughts...Nikon have stated that they have no intention of going full frame in the future, so if you desire that then you will have to jump ship, otherwise as you already own Nikon equipment and the d200 is also well rated, especially for landscape work, then you won't go far wrong if you were to upgrade to that. You will require some wide lenses though.
 
Well, thanks for the input everyone. I'll have a long hard think about it before doing anything :)
 
Ribby said:
Well, thanks for the input everyone. I'll have a long hard think about it before doing anything :)

Just to reinforce what Steve said about Nikon equipment already etc., a major mag (cannot for the life of remember what one - and I am not home yet !) has just done what I see as the first major side-by-side comparison and extensive testing of the two ... 5D & D200 that is ! Out in the field, all conditions, range of tough tests etc., etc., if you can believe everything you read ! :suspect1:

The long and the short, after all the above and loadsa pages of tests and results in the mag is quite simply they are neck and neck on almost everything, including price surprisingly, although the D200 scores very slightly higher overall ! And I do not say this as a Nikonite ... I am simply relaying the high level summary from the mag ! ;)

HTH - and I will add to this when I get home if you like ? :smilenod:

Whatever your choice you will enjoy it and, one other thing is for sure ... you will be financially be worse off - so what's new ! :ponders:
 
Venomator said:
a major mag (cannot for the life of remember what one - and I am not home yet !) has just done what I see as the first major side-by-side comparison and extensive testing of the two ... 5D & D200 that is !
that was amateur photographer, you can order specific reviews from their website for £3 if you can't get the issue.

a d200 and the new 17-55 f2.8 would be a very nice combo indeed for landscapes if you can afford it.
 
If you do go the D200 root then the Nikon 12-24mm lens will be perfect for landscape if you want wide, or Sigma 10-20mm for less dosh (which I have)

From memory I think onestop quoted me around £570 for Nikon lens.

Go & buy ;)
 
noah said:
that was amateur photographer, you can order specific reviews from their website for £3 if you can't get the issue.

a d200 and the new 17-55 f2.8 would be a very nice combo indeed for landscapes if you can afford it.

Home now ... it was actually the Practical Photography, March issue I was trying to remember ! A much more in depth side-by-side review than the AP one of 11 February. :thumb:

To be fair the AP test placed the 5D 1% point ahead of the D200 whilst the PP one places the D200 ahead by a nose quote "it (the Nikon) offers so much for the price that for us it just sneaks it by a nose at the finishing post" ! ;)

Nuff said ... it is an extraordinarily even match depending entirely on your own personal preferences and precisely what you want from your gear ! :thumb:

I have the D200 and the 12 - 24 Dave refers to above and it is a phenomenal combination !

But I do not have the 5D so cannot compare from an informed persepctive ... my sig says it all for me ! :smilenod:
 
I'd just received my copy of PP through the post so I've read the article and in a nutshell it comes to the following conclusions:

The D200 "feels" more like a pro camera than the 5D.
The metering on the D200 is superior producing better quality detail in highlights.

The 5D has a full frame sensor.
The 5D's image sharpening is better than the D200.
The 5D has produces less noise (when over ISO 1600, at A3, at 200%).
The 5D's battery lasts longer between charges.

Overall, they said the 5D produced slightly better quality images but the D200 won because it was so close to the 5D but for around £600 less.

For me the full frame sensor doesn't seem hugely important. It only seems to make a difference at extreme wide angles. If I want an 18mm shot on the D200 I use a 12mm focal length. I can't imagine I'd ever want to go much wider than that anyway.

Seeing as I know my way around my Nikon I think I'd stick with that when I decide the time has come :)
 
When the time has come there may be new choices ;)

I agree with your summary though :)
 
Steve said:
When the time has come there may be new choices ;)

I ALMOST typed that lol :D
 
In my budget 300D opinion I would say that the Glass & the 'feel' of the Camera are the most important issues for Landscapes . Very generally speaking you don't need fast focus or multi frames per second , DOF is usually set V-deep and the number of pixels is dependant on how big you want to blow it up. 1.5 crop factor vs full frame , flippant answer would be stand further back :). The deciding factor for me would be IR response , people seem to enjoy IR landscapes & from what I've heard Nikon spank Canon in this area .

So even though I've got canon kit ,if I was buying good stuff for landscapes I'd go for the D200
 
Back
Top