Camera questions

**mxrider34** · May 5th, 2008

Looking to spend around 3k on a good camera/lens..

Suggestions...?

I will be shooting mainly scenery photos, and little moto but looking for something that will be good for both.

thanks

**MX154** · May 5th, 2008

I don't know, maybe a 5D cause its full frame...? I'm sure 11k will chime in on this one

**11kphotos** · May 5th, 2008

Drewek, define scenery photos. Generally speaking the Nikons handle the wide angle/portrait stuff better. At least they have less barrel dist on the wide side. Do you need high speed buffer? If not.. eBay the original Canon 1Ds. 11mp, full frame. Should be able to pick it up for about $1500. I used one of those last year at Freestone as a backup. Ended up shooting it more than my MK II but that's cause i'm a full frame freak. Cant go wrong with the 5d either. If i was rich i'd have my MK III and a D3 for the wide angle/portrait stuff.

**mxrider34** · May 5th, 2008

The scenery ranges from city scenes, to mountains and the ocean and even trying my hand in being paparazzi...

I guess im not looking for anything real specific just something good for all around use.

**f2point8** · May 6th, 2008

it also depends on what you mean by "good."

if you plan to hike out to yellowstone, mount to a tripod, and spend days getting the absolute sharpest picture possible of el capitan....then you need full frame and a canon 5d would be tough to beat. serious landscapers would call it a beginner camera, though. if you want to print your hard earned image of el cap in 48 inch-wide glory, 10mp just isn't enough.

it doesn't matter, though, because unless you buy used you won't get a 5d for $3k, and probably not even then.

then you have to buy glass, and that's probably more important. if you want one do-it-all lens for the stuff you are talking about, and you want the best, then the canon 24-105 f4l i.s. is the champ. but....it will set you back $1200 new, and used prices aren't much less.

so, if $3k were my limit and i wanted to do what you are talking about, i'd get the 24-105 and a 40d.

and a circular polarizer.

oh....and by the way...what the **** is DRAAWS??

wp.

**mxrider34** · May 6th, 2008

Thanks for the info...

I think I may get the 5d... how do they shoot moto???

Draaws is a nickname made up by jeff dement....

Apparently he doesnt know how to read my jersey well and started calling me draaws, he also made up nicknames for everyone else that weekend,, Connors, and C note were a couple

**Junk** · May 7th, 2008

Get a Canon G9 and photoshop...

The 5D is not really all that environmentally sealed up, so if you shoot moto with it you will probably trash it, sooner or later.

**f2point8** · May 7th, 2008

the g9 has the same shutter lag that all point and shoot units do. forget moto.

the 5d only shoots 3 frames per second, and that may be a challenge for moto.

the 40d shoots twice as fast for less than half the money.

that's pretty funny about dement....

wp.

**Rage** · May 8th, 2008

whats with all this cannon talk - Draws - you might want to consider a real camera not these bubble gum machine models - hahahahahahaha - Now that I got 2 D3's - I may have a d2x with a 70-200 2.8f for sale but only if your ready for a real camera

**11kphotos** · May 8th, 2008

Originally Posted by Rage

whats with all this cannon talk - Draws - you might want to consider a real camera not these bubble gum machine models - hahahahahahaha - Now that I got 2 D3's - I may have a d2x with a 70-200 2.8f for sale but only if your ready for a real camera

I'd take him up on that Draaaaaaaaws. The nikons are sharper on the wide angle stuff.. at least their glass is. Canon hasnt figured that out yet.
Besides Rage keeps buying guitars so he'll need to replenish the bank account!

F2.8er.. the 5d is a serious camera. if i shot weddings/portraits i'd ditch my MKIII in a hurry for one. I had one for about a year, shot plenty of moto with it (ask wil hahn about his Holeshot Cover.. yeah.. 5d, full frame with a fisheye). it's plenty fast but i dont spray and pray either. not a bad idea, definitely take one over the 40d. i just dont get that camera?

**JOE** · May 8th, 2008

Note that the 5D wasn't a keeper for 11K. The reason was body build quality, letting in too much dust on the sensor too frequently. Avoid the 5D if you plan to do a lot of MX. NEVER EVER take a 5D to Shady Grove. NEVER.

While there are exceptions, if you are willing to buy used, you generally get more for your money with Nikon. Especially when it comes to lenses.

If you insist on buying new, Canon initial quality is generally better.

For MX, if Rage is letting go of a D2X with a 70-200 2.8 for $3k, that's hard to beat. Is that a VR (like Canon's IS) lens? I can't imagine anyone would be unloading such modern glass unless switching to Canon.

As 11K said, the original Canon 1Ds 11MP is highly recommended if you are willing to buy used. Get whatever 2.8 Canon L glass you can afford to go with it.

Me, I get by with two Nikon D50's ($700), a f4 70-210 Nikkor ($200), and a f4-5.6 35-80 Nikkor ($75). Also have a f1.8 50 Nikkor ($100), so not much more than $1k for my digital setup. It won't match Aaron's or Rage's, but I am satisfied. There will always be someone else with something better.

**f2point8** · May 8th, 2008

reems, take the tampons out of your ears....er....eyes. i never said the 5d wasn't a serious camera. it's very serious....and way more serious than draaaaaaaws said he wants to spend. he can't get one AND get decent glass for $3k unless all he buys is a nifty fifty.

i would argue that other than being full frame, the 40d would do just as good at moto as the 5d (unless the race was in a dark room). what don't you get about the 40d? best camera body for the money!

wp.

**JOE** · May 8th, 2008

Originally Posted by mxrider34

The scenery ranges from city scenes, to mountains and the ocean and even trying my hand in being paparazzi...

I guess im not looking for anything real specific just something good for all around use.

Now that I read this much, it sounds like you will be doing a lot more telephoto than wide angle. You will probably have your lenses for longer than you will have your body, so figure out which lenses you like best, and buy a suitable camera to go with it.

You really want to have the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM AF Lens for MX $1,699 (B&H pricing). It's the best. Nikon's equivalent is a close second, $1,625 (B&H). You also want a 24-70mm f/2.8L Lens. Guess which is considered the best? Canon L $1,190 or Nikon $1,700 (B&H). There are a lot of less expensive 28-70 and 35-70 alternatives to this on the Nikon side that are still great.

Digital camera bodies depreciate very quickly compared to lenses, so if you want to get some value, go big on the glass and skimp on the body. This is what 11K did, starting with a prime L lens and a lowly Digital Rebel.

Last but not least, for your scenes, seriously consider saving about $250 for a decent Bogen Manfrotto tripod and head. It's not hard to put off and buy later, but be sure you get one for those still scenes.

ps. Say, 11K - how much was that Canon 300mm f4 IS USM AF lens back in the day? It is now $1,210 (B&H). Just curious to see how much the price of that glass has fallen.