Canon EOS 50D or 5D Mark ii

[harrycobbold]

I have been looking for a new camera for some time and am toying between these two camera's. I will be mainly taking sport snaps and fast shots, but also need it to be able to take decent stills. I am wondering which of these to camera's i should go for? Is it worth forking out almost twice as much for the 5D mark ii or would I be better of spending this money on lenses

 

[Arn1499]

My advice, get the 50D and get a fast lens. If you're doing sports mostly you'll want a nice low fstop - that can get pricy... especially if you stick with canon lenses (L series....)

 

[harrycobbold]

could you recommend some decent lenses, not to fussed about the make although it needs to have some descent zoom to capture long range shots

 

[Arn1499]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Zoom-Lens-Reviews.aspx

That page give amazing reviews on lenses. For a nice zoom range - look for something that goes out to 200mm at least. 300 or 400 will zoom further, but for the most part, the price also increases, especially if you want to keep the fstop low

basically it's a balancing act between how much you're willing to spend, how much zoom you need, how "fast" you want the lens to be (fstop) and whether or not you need image stabilization (IS)

 

[harrycobbold]

especially if you want to keep the fstop low

What is the range for Fstop? basically how low do you think I need to go for taking the sports snaps?

 

[LittleCanonKid]

Pair the 50D with some good glass and you'll be set. The higher framerate will probably help you out when it comes to sports. You haven't elaborated very much on what kind of sports you'll be shooting though--indoors or outdoors?

 

[harrycobbold]

You haven't elaborated very much on what kind of sports you'll be shooting though--indoors or outdoors?

Will be shooting a variety of sports, f1 (from the grandstand, which is why I need a Zoom Lens.) ,Mountain Biking, Horse Jumping. Also a bit of Wildlife Photography.

 

[JFreak]

Will be shooting a variety of sports, f1 (from the grandstand, which is why I need a Zoom Lens.) ,Mountain Biking, Horse Jumping. Also a bit of Wildlife Photography.

You will need a fast lens. Take a look at 135mm f/2.0L

 

[harrycobbold]

Wheres best place to buy lenses, online i assume, but which site? (cheap and reliable)

 

[toxic]

Will be shooting a variety of sports, f1 (from the grandstand, which is why I need a Zoom Lens.) ,Mountain Biking, Horse Jumping. Also a bit of Wildlife Photography.

get a Canon 100-400 or Sigma equivalent (there's a few, 150-500 I think and some others). or a 70-200 and 400mm prime. SLRGear and Photozone.de have more comprehensive lists of third-party lenses than Digital-Picture, if you wanna look up the long Sigma lenses.

with whatever money you have left, get the best body you can afford, 20D or above. stick to 10-series or 1D-series bodies (no 5D, 1Ds, 300D, etc.)

Wheres best place to buy lenses, online i assume, but which site? (cheap and reliable)

online, there's 47th St Photo, sigma4less (I think), Cameta, B&H, Adorama, and a few others.

 

[luminosity]

5D Mark II, without question.

FF>crop unless you're doing wildlife or some (but not all) sports.

 

[Check 6]

I am lucky enough to have both camera bodies and each has it focus (no pun intended) If your main use is sports use i would go for the 50D and the Canon 70-200 EF L lens. The 50 D has more frames per second than the 5 D MKII and the 15 meg chip allows for more than enough cropping and follow on enlargement. The 70-200 lens at 2.8 max aperture is a great lens and I use it as the go to lens for my 50 D shooting sports car races. The 1.6 crop chip gives it slightly over 300mm max telephoto which works very well. If static shots and the need for true use of wide angle lens is your thing then the 5 D MKII is the better choice perhaps It is full frame and has the added capability of video However it is limited as objects moving towards you or away can be a problem as the auto focus is slow. For a first DSLR I would lean towards the 50 D and the 70-200 2.8 lens will make you a happy sports shooter

 

[sb11710]

If you can, you may want to wait...

The 7D is rumored to come out soon (maybe Sep. 1?) it is basically a 5D with smaller MP and faster FPS. It's supposed to fall between the 50D and 5D. And on top of that starting Sep. 1 are rebates for lenses and flashes (although this may be just in canada). Check out http://www.canonrumors.com/

Keep in mind its just a rumor but since we're on a rumor website I felt you may like to know

 

[harrycobbold]

What do you think the chances are of this rumor being true, and if they are Do you think it will be a gd camera?

 

[Grimace]

No one knows, that's why they are called rumors.

The 3D and 7D have been rumored for four or five years so I wouldn't hold my breath. It could just be a new moniker for the 60D.

September is the month for DSLR releases so wait until the 25th or so and you'll know everything that Canon is releasing.

 

[Kebabselector]

What do you think the chances are of this rumour being true

Probably the same chances as all the Apple rumours that come out. Make enough wild guesses and eventually you'll be right.

The 4D will be a Apple/Canon Tablet/DSLR hybrid. It'll also make toast.

 

[compuwar]

I have been looking for a new camera for some time and am toying between these two camera's. I will be mainly taking sport snaps and fast shots, but also need it to be able to take decent stills. I am wondering which of these to camera's i should go for? Is it worth forking out almost twice as much for the 5D mark ii or would I be better of spending this money on lenses

I'd go with the 40D and a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, which should be good for pretty-much all in- and outdoor sports in terms of speed and focal length. The 100-400 is f/5.6 at the long end, which will require 4x as much light to get the same shutter speed.

 

[harrycobbold]

The 4D will be a Apple/Canon Tablet/DSLR hybrid. It'll also make toast.

Modern Technology never ceases to amaze me!

 

[OreoCookie]

I will be mainly taking sport snaps and fast shots, but also need it to be able to take decent stills. I am wondering which of these to camera's i should go for? Is it worth forking out almost twice as much for the 5D mark ii or would I be better of spending this money on lenses

Definitely the 40D or the 50D: first of all, they're faster than the 5D Mark II in terms of AF and fps. And they're crop cameras which is actually beneficial in this case (because you get longer effective focal lengths -- which is good if you're working from a distance). Lastly, you should invest money in good lenses and the extra $1000 can be invested in some nice lenses. If you're on a budget, you could invest into one of Sigma's tele zooms (e. g. the 100-300 mm f/4 or the 150-500 mm f/5-6.3). Tele zooms are expensive, so I'd rent or borrow one before buying. If you should win the lottery at one point, you can also get the unique 200-500 mm f/2.8 zoom which comes with filter holders, extenders. You have to pay for the assistant, though, who carries this 16 kg beast for you

 

[dasmb]

The 5D Mark II's biggest strength is its full frame sensor, which as mentioned is mostly a hindrance to you -- you'd need to buy bigger, and thus more expensive, lenses to achieve the same framing you would have with an APS-C sensor (though I will add 21 MP gives you plenty of room to crop). Secondary strengths include a great viewfinder and amazing performance at 6400 ISO and below, with crystal clear 1600. Don't neglect this -- if you want to take a high shutter speed shot at night under field lights or in an indoor stadium, you need decent high ISO. No flash in the world will help you in this environment.

Both machines have the same AF points. I've heard tales of the 50D has superior AF, but the 5D's AF is nothing to sneeze at, and it'll focus in damn near darkness, which is a huge plus.

Honestly, these days any camera in Canon's line, including the consumer models, would fit your needs. I say buy a GREAT lens, then buy the camera that's most comfortable on your hands and wallet. Above 12 MP, the lens is your biggest limiting factor anyway.

I found the 5D to be worth the money, but I do almost exclusively available light and landscape work. It's a heavy, heavy camera.

 

[macjonny1]

Before spending any money I would suggest you invest in some basic photography books. I'm surprised people are here making recommendations when you obviously have a lot of learning to do. No, I'm not being mean, I'm trying to save you some expensive mistakes. I have a 5dII and you by no means need that camera unless you are rich. If you have money to burn then get one and some L lenses and call it good. Do some reading, educate yourself. Macrumors shouldn't be your source of photography education.

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

I have been looking for a new camera for some time and am toying between these two camera's. I will be mainly taking sport snaps and fast shots, but also need it to be able to take decent stills. I am wondering which of these to camera's i should go for? Is it worth forking out almost twice as much for the 5D mark ii or would I be better of spending this money on lenses

I know you're looking at Canons, but if you're comfortable spending enough to get the 5DII and you want to do action, in my opinion you should be looking seriously at the Nikon D300 or D700 rather than the 50D and 5DII.

The 50D is pretty close to the D300 in overall performance, but I think the D300 is a little faster, and with better AF system. For action and sports, the 5DII/50D is really lacking in AF points (9), but the Nikon D700/D300 is top notch with 51 cross type AF points and 3D tracking. If you put a fast AF-S lens such as the 70-200 f/2.8 or 300 f/2.8 on the D700 or D300 you've got killer AF speed and accuracy at your disposal.

So if you haven't evaluated Nikon at this point, I think you should. This is of course assuming that you don't already own Canon glass.

SLC

 

[Kronie]

I have both a 40D and 5DMKII.

For sports and wildlife I would strongly recommend the crop cameras. You will get 1.6 magnification and more frames per second.

For everything else go with the 5D2. IQ is just phenomenal and with 21MP files you can crop quite a but if needed.

 

[pvalpha]

Before spending any money I would suggest you invest in some basic photography books. I'm surprised people are here making recommendations when you obviously have a lot of learning to do. No, I'm not being mean, I'm trying to save you some expensive mistakes. I have a 5dII and you by no means need that camera unless you are rich. If you have money to burn then get one and some L lenses and call it good. Do some reading, educate yourself. Macrumors shouldn't be your source of photography education.

I second the above post. A bit of education is always recommended. Nobody should be recommending the 5d MII for a beginner. Its $3k, and well out of most entry level price-ranges. And L series lenses, while extremely nice, often cost as much or more than the camera you're putting them on.

And for those recommending Nikon, if you're shooting sports - then Canon it is. If you ever look along the sidelines of a sporting event, you'll see the distinctive white of the L-series large telephotos on almost every tripod. They'll usually be attached to a EOS 1D, a pro camera designed for outdoor sports photography - its weather sealed and has a high frame rate with a 1.3x crop sensor.

But the thing to remember is, the same technology that drives the EOS 1D series is in both the rebel and the X0D's. The Image sensor and Digic processors might be slightly different, but the IQ for the resolution will be nearly identical. So if you put that same white L-series lens on a rebel or X0D, you'll get nearly the same picture. Some pro photographers carry a X0D around as their backup camera. What makes the real difference between the models is the construction: Rebel - Plastic. X0D - Mostly Metal, 5D - Full Metal with a bit of dust sealing. 1D/1Ds - Full metal with full weather sealing. Also, each level you go up in the Canon lineup, the better the AF sensor, shutter, and viewfinder are.

Later,
PV.

 

[wheelhot]

And for those recommending Nikon, if you're shooting sports - then Canon it is. If you ever look along the sidelines of a sporting event, you'll see the distinctive white of the L-series large telephotos on almost every tripod. They'll usually be attached to a EOS 1D, a pro camera designed for outdoor sports photography - its weather sealed and has a high frame rate with a 1.3x crop sensor.

Erm, you made a mistake by saying those in bold. You see them on sidelines with Canon cause the camera body and lens are given by them by their company and as far as I recall, Canon offer discounts on their 1D series for these companies.

And fyi, after the launch of D700 and D3, I start hearing pros who shoots sports are going back to Nikon. And actually both Nikon and Canon are good and cannot go wrong with, it's only the user personal preferences that will make them choose either Canon or Nikon (I'm switching to Nikon cause I can't take Canon higher end [xxD and 5D] button layout) Well I don't doubt that some time, fan boys will come in occasionally and recommend their favorite brand randomly

Also, each level you go up in the Canon lineup, the better the AF sensor, shutter, and viewfinder are.

Well generally yes, but you are not exactly right, the better shutter is only that the pro body shutter will last longer but that doesn't really matter for most people. And regarding the AF, many people says that the xxD body has better AF then 5D