Finally got a 5D

[jdos2]

I've finally jumped in, committed, and done the appropriate trading...

Got one. Came "new" in the box (with the picture index on the saved files at 7k+!) from Cord camera, but got it at a good price.
Lenses I got were the ubiquitous 50mm f/1.4, 100 f/2.8 macro, and a used 17-35 f/2.8 zoom. All are of nice quality: "they take nice pictures." I await delivery of the 85mm f/1.8, though I'm thinking it might be a bit too redundant and would may well prefer to get rid of both the 85 and 100, and go straight for the 100 f/2 or 135mm...
ANYWAY.

My Fuji S3 left me, the day of the Big Trade, and I watched as it once again entered the Used Camera stream, happy to know that whomever gets it, whomever uses it, they'll be happy with a camera that delivers everything it promises.
Of course, I'm glad to have what I do now- a better machine for my own purposes, more efficent on battery, card usage, and nearly the same when it comes to the other things I so liked about the S3- dynamic range, for one.
I have a Real viewfinder now!
My wide angle lens is REALLY wide, and will challenge me for some time to come- I've never owned anything so wide, my 50mm Mamiya Universal or 43mm Mamiya 7 lenses being the widest. My last 17-35mm zoom was good, but 17mm wasn't as wide as this.
I finally (FINALLY!) have a bright prime (new, for less than $1,000!), and if I'm willing to look around and suffer a bit in the pocket-book, I could have an F/1 lens again (the Noctilux is gone, for bills and the 5D). I can even manually focus the thing, the viewfinder is far brighter, bigger, and better- I can change focusing screens, if I choose.

The auto-focus, for the first time in my digital photography experience, is "dead on," and I'm not taping newsprint to walls just to see where the focus points hit (a habit from ALL previous auto focus cameras)

I'm there.

Digital photography has always been fun. I don't now feel pressure to upgrade, knowing that this will be good for long enough.

The pictures I've taken so far have been fun- shallow depth of focus, or better- nice bright pictures at karaoke, and I'm happy with the quality, they've printed well.

If anyone is in the market for a good digital SLR and are curious about the 5D, know it is indeed a good buy, that it takes nice pictures, and that it does indeed live up to the promise of a full frame sensor in a body that works easily.

White balance could be better, from what I hear, but then again, it wasn't fun on the Fuji, either.

Pictures to soon follow.

[Macpod]

ive heard great things about that camera. the only downside are probably price and size. if you dont mind those two things its a no brainer.

now. wheres that sub 1000 full frame digital rangefinder?:D

[jdos2]

Hee Hee! Too true. Go ahead and ask THAT over on the Rangefinderforum. There are those that don't take kindly to "full frame" questions. :-)

[JohnS]

I am curious about how you came to choose the lenses you did? I assume Canon has several models of these lenses plus a history of discontinued ones. Is there a website or other literature that helps a person pick the good from the bad? Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. have all made superb lenses over the years but they are mixed in with lots of "dogs" too. You are obviously looking for wheat not chaff. :)

[jdos2]

I am curious about how you came to choose the lenses you did? I assume Canon has several models of these lenses plus a history of discontinued ones. Is there a website or other literature that helps a person pick the good from the bad? Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. have all made superb lenses over the years but they are mixed in with lots of "dogs" too. You are obviously looking for wheat not chaff. :)

I knew what I needed, and then did research to find out what the "best fit" lenses were for me. I've been involved with rangefinders for years, so I kinda figured I'd hang with the standard 28mm/50mm/85mm/135mm series that works so well for me.
The 50mm f/1.4 was a no brainer, though I'd very much prefer the f/1, if I can find one (eventually).
The 85mm... I had a choice. I'd like the f/1.2, but only version II, as the original is a bit slow in focusing. The f/1.8 is nearly as good, and both take "nice looking pictures."
The 17-35- um... This was more of a "tacit," as the fellow trading with me for the 5D happened to have one. It's often said that this isn't a great lens, but I've had "good enough" luck with it, and until I find an inexpensive f/1.4 wide, I'll stay with it.
The 100mm? I wanted a macro. The 100mm is almost redundant with the 85mm, but the 85 does give over a stop more speed. The 100mm Macro is known for rather better image quality than the f/2 version, so I think I did the right thing. It's not ALWAYS about speed.
I still am looking for an f/2 135mm lens. I'll find one someday, in my price range.

For that matter, I'm looking for an f/4.5 135mm for my Bronica RF645, but that's a different story.

I was given several 42mm Pentax Screw Mount lenses. The 28mm f/3.5 has been a favorite, and is on the camera far more often than the 17-35. It works "well enough" and doesn't hit the mirror unless I rack it all the way in for infinity focus. I'll grind the mirror down someday. The 75-200mm zoom has served me well for longer shots, and I'll eventually have fun with the 400mm Bushnell.

[JohnS]

Thanks JD. I like the idea of lensing up with fixed focal lengths. :)

[jdos2]

Yeah, that's sorta where I come from. I don't like to think in terms of zooms, with the sole exception of weddings, where I have seen how useful the 28mm-70mm on the Fuji S3 was. That Canon 17-35 was really too wide, and as I look back on the pictures, I can see that...

Primes. I work well with 'em. Now, who's got one of those 50mm f/1 Canon EOS mounts that isn't doing them any good?

[JohnL]

Congratulations - I'm sure you'll love it! I wouldn't worry too much about small differences in lens speed (eg f/1 vs f/1.4) - the high ISO performance of this camera is truly amazing.

[MCTuomey]

Thanks JD. I like the idea of lensing up with fixed focal lengths. :)

Hi John,

The real bargains among Canon primes are the "classic" 50/1.8MkI, 50/2.5 macro, 35/2, 28/2.8, 28/1.8, 24/2.8, 85/1.8, 100/2, 100/2.8 macro, 135/2.8 SF. My favs are the 35/2, 50/1.8 I, and 85/1.8. Prices range from about $150 to $375 or so.

"L" glass is impressive, but unnecessary at many focal lengths in the EOS/EF system. If you shopped about you could cover the three FLs 28-35-50 for less than $500. Add the 85/1.8, 100/2, 100/2.8 Macro, or 135/2.8 for less than $400. There's hood and filter sharing among these lenses, too.

Being a bottom feeder, I've been really delighted to discover just how good the overlooked non-L lenses often turn out. Allows me to save for that 5D ...

[jdos2]

Heeheehee! Still doesn't stop folk (ahem!) from buying a 50 f/1.2, 35 f/1.4, 85 f/1.2...

And zooms. Sigh. GAS strikes HARD!

[Bike Tourist]

JD —

I, too, have recently aquired the 5D. To do so cost me a Leica M6 system and my good standing in RFF but, oh well. For me it was the non-acceptance of the stock sites of anything with noise or grain, which they see as another form of noise.

Meanwhile, I tired of waiting for Sony to come out with a FF sensor, so my
Sony/Minolta stuff is on its way to appraisal. Whatever it brings will fund my new Canon lenses.

Right now, I am shooting with just the 50/2.5 Macro, but it's almost enough! Big, beautiful, noise-free images are what you get with the 5D.

Enjoy!

[Bike Tourist]

Wow! The traffic on this site makes my head swim!

Administrator: Maybe shut it down and move it into a sub-category of RFF?

[jdos2]

Well... That's probably fair comment about the site traffic. I think that the original admin got himself a Leica digital SLR back, and I suspect, got rid of it, so hasn't had the interest.
I got rid of my 5D, but I'm thinking that's just the way I am. I like toys, and new ones are bettern' old.

:-)