Making the FF move...

[akdj]

I have been an amateur photographer for too many years now (20) and am ready to make the "Pro" move! I have been producing audio and video for the last two decades, but always been more of a hobbyist when it comes to photography....and now, digital photography.

I am considering adding the "Wedding" photography element to our business and kicking around the idea of a 5D MKII as a primary camera. I am shooting with and have been shooting with the entire XXD series, excluding the 50D. I have the 40/30D combo right now, but started in the family with the 20D. I would like to keep the 40D on one shoulder, the 5D2 on the other. I don't have any L glass yet, but I do have several decent lenses....

The 28x135 IS that came with the 40D, the Canon 70-300mm f4/5.6IS, Sigma 10-20 f4/5.6, and the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX HSM prime.

I would like to buy the 5DMK2 kit with the 24/105 f4L. Also, add the EF 85mm 1.2 OR the 70-200 2.8 IS. I cannot do both right off the bat. Considering the other glass I have for the APS-C gear, would I be better off forgoing the 24/105 kit lens.....go with body only and do BOTH the 85 and the 70/200 OR.....will I be happy for a while with the length of the 105mm with the 5D and the 85mm.....with the 40D for tele?

Sorry....not sure this makes sense, but my budget is about 5-5.5k. I really want the best possible setup for weddings with the best redundancy built in, just in case We have been shooting video for years, and nothing is worse than missing the shot, losing the footage, or having a failure on a cam during the big event.

Just curious what others shooting weddings are using.....Seems to me the 24/105 and the 85mm would be almost 95% of what I need for time being. 40 D for anything longer....just don't want any surprises

J

 

[wheelhot]

Hmm, actually frankly speaking, I see wedding photogs shooting with 40D and such, especially when they are starting out, but no harm getting FF. The problem is, from what I see in your owned lens list, the best lens you own is the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, there is not even a single L Lens, and believe me, I see more people owning a 70-200 f/2.8 first before owning a FF body (it's about the lens first body second).

It is a good plan to buy the 5D and keep the 40D as a secondary body which is a great strategy, but if you have the budget to get a 5D w/ kit lens + 70-200 f/2.8 IS, then go ahead. In my opinion a 24-105 f/4 IS, 70-200 f/2.8 IS and 50mm should be sufficient for weddings, but if you need wider then 24, then consider getting a wideangle lens for those group shots.

Now, I don't see you list flashgun, I do hope you own flashgun

Also, if its me, I would just sell off all EF-S lenses and only own EF lenses which is what I am doing now caused I already decided that I will eventually make the move to a FF body, also if you do sell your EF-S lenses (which is not that impressive, frankly speaking, sorry) you will have extra cash to boot with. Oh and you can actually for example place a 50mm on your 40D while shoot with 24-105 or 70-200 on the 5D, I'm heard some people complained that the 50mm on crop sensor is a bit tight? But to me its reasonably fine.

Hope this helps and take note, these are my personal opinion and I am not commanding people to follow me Feel free to start a conversation from my points though

 

[luminosity]

I'll just give the body and lenses that a great wedding photographer I know of does the vast majority of his work with: 5D Mark II, 24 1.4, 50 1.2 and 135 2. Those three L lenses and the body account for what must be 90% of his output, or at least what's posted (and it's usually the best work that gets posted).

That kit alone would get you a lot. If you're looking for a standard zoom, the 24-70 is always good. I'd save your money and get the 70-200 2.8 non-IS, as it's a good bit cheaper and I don't think IS is worth the premium. The non-IS version is outstanding.

 

[toxic]

A 24-70 is much better for weddings than a 24-105. I doubt many people do group shots wider than 28mm unless they want a certain effect.

If you want to keep on ultra-wide, sell the 10-20 and buy a 17-40 or 16-35 - UWA on the 5D, standard zoom on the 40D. There's little sense using the smaller sensor for wides when you can do it better with a larger sensor. Use the 40D for extra reach. If you want wider, there's the Sigma 12-24, Canon 14, and fisheyes.

Replace the 70-300 with a 70-200 f/2.8 (IS). Don't buy any other primes until you're sure of what focal lengths you want.

 

[wheezy]

5DII plus the 70-200 2.8IS + Battery Grip. Start there, see what you have left over. If you can get one more hop on the 17-40F4L. I shoot weddings and I'm either doing portraits with my 135F2L, or groups with my 17-40F4L. I have the 50 1.8, but colors are contrast don't pop like they do on my L's, so I stick with them most of the time.

Or...

5DII with the 28-70 2.8L, and your 40D with the 135 2L on your shoulder. I actually like that idea. Get the Battery Grip too, when you start playing with tele L glass, it gets long and heavy out the front.

 

[wheelhot]

yup, battery grip is a must, adding a telephoto lens + flash gun is just killing if dont have battery grip.

 

[toxic]

5DII with the 28-70 2.8L, and your 40D with the 135 2L on your shoulder. I actually like that idea. Get the Battery Grip too, when you start playing with tele L glass, it gets long and heavy out the front.

28-70 on one, and then a 200mm equivalent on the other? i think that's a rather large gap, and 200mm is a rather specialized length...

 

[akdj]

Thanks guys...much appreciated, and wise advise as expected.

580EX2 is the flash I have now. Not sure what else I am going to add with respect to lighting. I have a very good friend that has been doing fashion photography for quite a while....he has a couple of wireless strobes and umbrellas(?) setups...is there a need to actually set up external lighting other than a strobe at most events? The 580 has been all I've needed on my 40D for most shooting up until now. I realize though, deeper churches, reception halls, etc. may call for different strategies.

I do realize the lenses are what are going to take my shooting to the next level (that, and more and more experience)...hence, I am ready to buy a couple pieces of glass with the 5D. It does look like the general consensus is the 5D is a good idea? Compared to sticking with the 40/30D combo with "L" lenses? I do understand the 28-135 and 70-300 are consumer lenses. I do like the Sigmas on the 40D though (I think I've used that 50mm for 80% of my shots over the last 6 months.....from my son to Mt. Mckinley!) The 10-20 is beautiful too. I am pretty excited to step up to the sharper factor of the L glass.

With the understanding bodies come and go....I don't want the achilles heal of my glass to be a camera/sensor/body that cannot bring out the best in the shot. So the 5D is the place to be?

I mean honestly, this is probably the time for me to (I hesitate to even say this, because of some of the BS I've seen in the brand wars) try out a Nikon as well, eh? I am VERY familiar with Canons....from the G7, 9, 10, SD 450, 550, 1100, Rebels, 10, 20, 30, and 40D bodies, etc. BUT....with the glass not being as relevant (EF-S) on the FF body that I currently own, this would most likely be the appropriate time to check out the other guys' offerings I really look at the whole thing as Ford vs. Chevy. Dewalt vs. Mack, etc. I am not totally set on Canon...especially with the 40/30D set I have currently. Maybe I can be the only photographer in the land with a Canon on one sleeve and Nikon on the other? LOL.

Thanks again

J

 

[akdj]

I should've also mentioned the lens sizes. I am pretty much set on the 70-200. That seems like the workhorse everyone is using and I have had the chance to shoot with it as well. I tend to be a bit shakier in the hands, IS is a life saver for me. Especially when without the tripod. I will probably pay the premium. Maybe the 24-70 and 70-200 is a great place to start (again, if I stick with Canon)....then look to the primes when I get a feel of where I'm shooting the most.

With my experience with the 50mm (Sigma) with my 40D though, I know I will LOVE that 85mm f1.2 (with 5D)! I am going to have a hard time staying away from that lens. Maybe that is lens #3????

J

 

[cube]

Before thinking about FF, look at Dynamic Range:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor

 

[akdj]

Thanks Cube

I've been following it for a while now, some fantastic stuff!

J

 

[FX120]

Just a question, but why buy a 5DII with the 24-105? Why not buy the body only for $2700, 70-200 f/2.8 IS for $1600, and 24-70 f/2.8 for $1200? That comes right in at $5500, the top end of your budget.

IMO IS doesn't help a whole lot for low light, wide angle photos at weddings. Kick up the ISO on the 5DII to 3200 and go with a f/2.8 lens and keep your shutter speed as high as possible to freeze motion. So if you're planning on doing a bunch of wedding stuff, skip the 24-105 for now.

Also, while the 85 f/1.2 is a fantastic lens, it shines more in the studio than it will for wedding work with moving people. DOF is really freaking narrow wide open, it focuses to slow, and that will be compounded by the only so-so AF system on the 5DII. You'll have a hard time getting a shot with it wide open, and will likely be forced to stop down considerably, at which point you'd be better off with a 85 f/1.8 which not only focuses faster, but is just as sharp once stopped down.

 

[toxic]

Also, while the 85 f/1.2 is a fantastic lens, it shines more in the studio than it will for wedding work with moving people. DOF is really freaking narrow wide open, it focuses to slow, and that will be compounded by the only so-so AF system on the 5DII. You'll have a hard time getting a shot with it wide open, and will likely be forced to stop down considerably, at which point you'd be better off with a 85 f/1.8 which not only focuses faster, but is just as sharp once stopped down.

AF on the 5D is not so-so. the difference between a 5D and 1D(s) and D700 is tracking ability, and weddings don't typically require exceptional tracking.

yes, DoF can be narrow, but who said you have to shoot wide-open and up close?

the 85/1.8 is a good lens, but does not have the optical qualities of the 85/1.2. there is more to a lens than sharpness.

back to the OP: 5D or D700 is the way to go. 1-2 stop noise advantage over APS-C, which is nice for weddings. the extra image quality doesn't hurt, either.

 

[akdj]

"Just a question, but why buy a 5DII with the 24-105? Why not buy the body only for $2700, 70-200 f/2.8 IS for $1600, and 24-70 f/2.8 for $1200? That comes right in at $5500, the top end of your budget. "

Original post I mentioned that specific possibility, instead of buying the kit lens, substituting the 70-200. I am definitely looking at this option, thanks though.


"IMO IS doesn't help a whole lot for low light, wide angle photos at weddings. Kick up the ISO on the 5DII to 3200 and go with a f/2.8 lens and keep your shutter speed as high as possible to freeze motion. So if you're planning on doing a bunch of wedding stuff, skip the 24-105 for now. "

Excellent point, I imagined on the long end, I will be using the tri or monopod as well. This could save over $500...Thanks again

"Also, while the 85 f/1.2 is a fantastic lens, it shines more in the studio than it will for wedding work with moving people. DOF is really freaking narrow wide open, it focuses to slow, and that will be compounded by the only so-so AF system on the 5DII. You'll have a hard time getting a shot with it wide open, and will likely be forced to stop down considerably, at which point you'd be better off with a 85 f/1.8 which not only focuses faster, but is just as sharp once stopped down."

Probably not the brightest move for me to invest in this one as a first or second....I just love the option as a third lens. It is incredibly sharp, I shot with it last weekend. I am also intrigued by the idea of doing some studio stuff as well (long winters in Alaska) as some different mountain and terrain shooting. (All hobbies, of course...not money makers). This may mean a 35 or 50mm prime as a better choice. Too many excellent lenses in the group. And, I know NOTHING about Nikor lenses Time to look around!

Toxic,

Thanks. I agree about the IQ. Just seems a step up. Also, dark and dimly lit venues/churches seem to be the norm. Also, in Alaska, we spend a lot of time in the dark (in the winter months). An extra stop or two and quick L glass seems to be the way to go.

Now...maybe it is time to sell the HVX200(a)

Take care guys/gals

J

 

[luminosity]

I'd strongly recommend thinking about the 24mm 1.4 and/or the 135mm 2. Only the Nikon 85mm 1.4 has been so uniformly praised as a lens as the Canon 135mm 2 that I've seen.

Both are stellar performers. The 35mm 1.4 is right there as well.

If you want to see the 5D Mark II in action with wedding and other portrait photography, check this link out: http://www.davidblakeman.com/blog/

I think you'll be suitably impressed.

 

[jwt]

The guy who just shot my wedding 3 days ago used a 40D with a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8. He used the 40D 24-70 combo for nearly the entire event.

 

[akdj]

Luminosity,

Suitably impressed, while a great line, is an understatement...>UnREAL!!!

Thanks for the link. Those are some Great "People" Shots. Is this your work?

J

 

[luminosity]

I should be so talented. No, it's the work of a local college student and photographer. He does most of his posted work on just a few lenses. The recent unedited work illuminates both his ability and also the gains you achieve when you edit well.

 

[akdj]

Local college student? of college age? (or is there any such standard, anymore) What an excellent blog...some absolutely incredible photography. He is GOOD! Seriously, in my eyes, Incredible. Page 10 checking out the band stuff and his videos, they're great too. It is a very deep blog, tons of great photos.

Good stuff. Thanks again for the link. I am going to get nothing done all day.

I went down to my local shop to pick up the kit today. They are going to make me a deal on the setup, regardless of which way I go (17/40, 24/70 or 24/105), if I also pick up the 70-200....which I did The IS version!!! But NO 5D, they are out of stock. Going through 5-8 bodies a week....in Anchorage AK!!! LOL. Next week hopefully....I am next in line. I won't buy online. Prices are the same at his shop and he's local. Gotta support him and I am in no hurry. New toy to play with tonight though!!!...New 70-200. Can't wait to try it on the 40D!!! I'm looking forward to comparing it with the pics I have been getting with my standard lenses. My first piece of L glass and I'm pretty stoked. Thanks everyone for the wisdom. Much appreciated.

BTW, I did mess around with the D700 and D3 (Nikon) and a couple of the Nikkor lenses....Incredible! Really awesome stuff. Pretty cool to check it out, but definitely a different layout than I am accustomed to. Now I understand why it may very well be 6 one way a half dozen the other I like their Pro lenses too...as I do the L series from Canon. I certainly, even as a Canon shooter, could never say one is better than the other. There is some awesome-ness to both the 3D, 1D mk3, and the 700d/5D mk2 cams. 8 or 10 frames a second? That is insane!!!!

J

Thanks again

 

[luminosity]

I think Mr. Blakeman is 20 years old. Glad you liked the blog . I use it as inspiration and motivation.