Whats would you advise?

JohnN

JohnN

Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Off the back of another thread where others (and my wife) said figure out what you like taking pictures of and buy the best body and a couple of lenses.

So within realistic reason (ie nothing bar the body over two grand) what would you get?

It can be either Canon or Nikon (as I own Canon and a MPE, but I can use that with my daughters 450D so that would never be sold)

The main subjects are:

Wildlife\Birds (in flight)
Natural light shots of the kids.

Now initially I'm drawn to the 5D3 as I know Canon and know the AF will keep up and being full frame will give the look I want, but the dynamic range of the D800 looks good too, plus being £500 cheaper helps, but I've seen a vid where the white balance seems greenish which while easily overcome in post seems like a pain to sort out with every image and much more so for video.

What are your thoughts (other than learn what you have - that isn't the point of the question)

Ta..
 
My thoughts are with the level of equipment that you've got it would be silly to move from canon to nikon :thumbs: it you want the 5D3 I'd say go for it, you've seen what I've got out of it over the last few weeks and I'm confident that there is a lot more to be had out of it :thumbs: but then I'm biased :suspect:

Matt
 
Colour casts etc can be dialled out in the settings so ignore that for now.
Best advice is go to a shop and try them both in your hands. The one that feels best is the one for you.
 
I'm inclined to agree with Matt. I'm heavily invested in Canon, but read about the Nikon D800 with interest. When I stopped and considered the implications of 36MP I lost interest quite quickly. I have a modern PC with quite a high spec, but would have to consider upgrading to cope with the file sizes, especially with panoramas and HDR.
I'm lusting after the 5D MkIII and will probably get one soon. :)
Both are great cameras and I'm sure you'd be delighted with either.
 
For me the 36mp was a draw for sheer resolving\crop power and the images do look sharper, but much less punchy - but as you say the files will be huge so that could eventually become an issue.

Either way I'd have to sell the 1D3, 100mm L, home studio, 70-300 VC to get a body, then for the 5D3 a kidney too ;)

Now what do you guys think about lenses?
 
If you want to take birds in flight would suggest you keep your current camera and invest in a fast long prime lens
 
I used to own the 400mm f4 - wonderful lens but I hated the lack of flexibility, hence why I sold that to get the 50-500OS, which while slower in all ways is very very flexible.
 
The 50-500 should be fine for BiF. A friend had the old non-os version and got some great shots with it. The high ISO performance of the newer cameras should negate the slower aperture.
The 50, 85 and 100L are excellent lenses and should serve you well for shots of the kids, unless you prefer to work with a zoom lens. I suspect the 50-500 would be a bit too heavy, so maybe the 70-200L f4 (IS or non) would be a good alternative?
 
It is actually pretty good, but as described in another thread and pointed out by my wife I tend to stop gap alot - by that I mean than I buy then upgrade, buy upgrade and so on until I eventually get to the best (in macro for instance the MP-E + twin light), so what I'm asking is bar for the stupidly expensive stuff where is the lens of choice for the someone willing to spend but not a millionaire if that makes sense.
 
I think in your situation and with the subjects you like to shoot I would go for the 5D111.

As your selling your 70-300 why not replace it with the 300/F4?
 
Since I got my 5D3 I've been shooting BIF quite regularly with my Sigma 150-500 OS and it's a match made in heaven. For low/natural light shots there's nothing I've seen to touch it and I never once thought about changing brands just to get a few Mp's and fewer features that I'd use.
 
Really does sound great, hopefully one day I'll own one
 
Lol, I don't know why the tamron has a bad rep, had I not got the 70-200 2.8 I wouldn't be selling.

I used to have a 7D but the noise used to do my head in, other than that a great camera though, maybe the new firmware with ISO limiter may help though
 
I was going to say a 7D because of the crop factor for birds until I read that you've already had one and didn't like it.

So thinking about it the D800 would give you the dynamic range and with a DX lens or DX crop mode you'd still get 16mp. In DX mode the focus points would cover more of the frame too. :)



With regards to the 'huge' files of the D800 people keep on quoting, and how they will have to upgrade their computers to cope, if you go 14bit uncompressed the they may be about 75mb. However, some people have said that they can't see a difference between 14bit and 12bit files, so you go 12bit. And Nikon have a lossless compressed file option which will bring in about 30-35mb files. I think the 5DIII RAW files are about 25-30mb. Not that much difference. :shrug:

I'm only going from what I've read and seen in videos about the D800 and 5DIII, any real world users would be able to confirm file sizes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top