5d mkiii insanity

[spaced]

Hi All

I'm new here, but have been a visiting this site since late 2010.

I got into photography when I bought my first SLR (the Canon 50e)... then I bought a 350D when it first came out, and I've been using that up until now.

I really missed the full frame field of view, but the sheer convenience of digital over film essentially made my 50e redundant.

I discovered what the 5dmkii could do a year ago - and have been drooling over it ever since.

So anyway, cutting a long story short, I was on the brink of buying one last year, but after discovering this website and reading about the impending release of the mkiii, I thought I would hold out.

First it was said that it might come out Oct 2010.. then Nov 2010, then Jan 2011, then March 2011, then Oct 2011, then Nov 2011.... Now speculations are that it will be announced sometime in 2012.

Lately I was visiting this site everyday, like I had some sort of obsessive compulsive disorder - I think I was actually going a little bit crazy!

I finally couldn't take it any more so last week I took the plunge and purchased a 5dmkii with 24-105L...

All I can say is WOW... it's everything I wanted and more!

Coming from a crop camera, the field of view of a full frame camera is like discovering a brand new world.

I cant believe I waited over a year for this damned mk iii, and then finally bought a mk ii.

Anyway, I just wanted to give some advice to anyone else suffering from mkiii insanity, to do yourself a favour and take the plunge.... you won't regret it!

*takes a HUGE sigh of relief* phew.... I'm glad I got all that off my chest ;D ;D ;D

 

[Loswr]

Yeah, but you really should have waited for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II... ;D

 

[traveller]

Or the EOS 3D that's rumoured to be coming out this year too!

 

[shermanstank]

What's important is that you are happy with the images and this makes the purchase worthwhile. Though there will always be newer bodies and lenses, what you have now is crucial on how you improve your skills as a photographer.

I am currently enjoying the "inconvenience" from my CANON EOS 1V-HS with some FUJI PRO 400H and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II ;D ;D

 

[spaced]

Yeah, but you really should have waited for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II... ;D

lol neuro.... u got me!

That's actually the reason why I didn't get the 24-70 2.8L with the 5d ... precisely because of the II rumors around!

Arghhhhhhhh!!!!! the insanity never ends!!!

 

[handsomerob]

5DII is an amazing camera and 24-105L truly shines on it. Given the current prices, it's hard to not buy such a nice kit.

Congrats with your purchase!

 

[Wrathwilde]

I finally couldn't take it any more so last week I took the plunge and purchased a 5dmkii with 24-105L...

Personally, as someone in the same boat, I just wanted to say thank you. Murphy's law should now come into effect... Canon will therefore officially announce the 5DMk3 within a month.

 

[Isaac]

There is a point to not waiting and getting great usage from the 5D2 now especially if you need it, however I guess some of us would rather wait a few more months and get the 5D3 as one may not need it urgently or one may have sufficient alternate options in the mean time etc.

Enjoy shooting with the 5D2 - it's an incredible camera.

 

[spaced]

Personally, as someone in the same boat, I just wanted to say thank you. Murphy's law should now come into effect... Canon will therefore officially announce the 5DMk3 within a month.

Yes, i know! But honestly, I can put my hand on my heart and say 'I don't care'.

Canon could announce the mk3 tomorrow, and I wouldn't lose any sleep over it - I thought I would, but after having the mk2 to play with I am very happy with it and have been making good use of it already.

There is a lot to learn with the mk2, and maybe in a year or so after the mk3 gets to market, then I might sell the mk2 and get the mk3

I'm just glad that my crazy obsession has been resolved (...for now!)

 

[Enrico]

I have been in the same situation. Have been reading thsi forum daily, looked at tthe rumors and came up with my own thoughts on the canon release plan... decided to wait (in may 2011)... wajted until 23 of dec... The wait istelf and my 350d was killing me. I promised myself to buy the new "5D" or what ever it will be and use the 52D as back up... Puh... that was a relief...

And well...

Why the hell did I wait?
This christmas eve the 5D2 gave me pictures for a lifetime and will help my feamliy remembering it in 50 years... pictures i wouldn't have been even close in getting with the 350d... feels nice that ISO 400 is not the top of what is usable

Insanity continues... what lenses is safe to go for and which ones will be updated ... however, that insanity is easier to live by than the one of when to go for a FF

 

[Silverstream]

I have been waiting as well but I am looking at this solely as a professional investment. I have a T2i and have shot around 25000 images with it over the past year and a half focusing primarily on beauty and fashion shoots. Since I can control the light typically in those shoots and shoot at iso 100, I've been quite successful with it and have generated enough income to almost cover my costs of Einsteins, Pocketwizards, and higher quality lenses.
I am forcing myself to wait thru March since I expect to barely have enough money to cover my hoped for cost of the 5D mkIII (~$2500) and I will need the 24-70mm f2.8 II as well. If at that point they haven't announced the mkIII, the T4i should have been announced at the beginning of Feb if it follows the pattern and I may have to substitute buying that camera. I expect Canon to be aggressive in the feature set on the T4i as Sony has been making real inroads in this segment and I expect Canon will be willing to sacrifice a certain amount of sales in the area between the 5D mkII and the T4i to slow Sony's fast growing share (unless they surprise all of us with a 7D mkII!). If, however, the T4i does not significantly reduce noise at higher ISOs and the mkIII is not announced, I may just go into wait mode dependent on the paid work (particularly low light event work) that I have pending at that point.
As a new professional photographer, I really have to make my money count while trying to get every advantage I can. If I bought the 5D mkII now, I would lose the expected advantage of the mkIII. Based on the age (of the mkII) and the tech development since that we have seen as well as competitive pressures, I expect it to be a fairly substantial difference.

 

[scottkinfw]

Hi Neuro, and happy holidays.

I have yet another opinion question for you. I took the plunge and purchased a 5D2 body. You suggested 16-35mm f/2.8L II to me previously for this body. Would you recommend it over the 24-70mm f/2.8L II? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and want a wide angle zoom. Reasons?

Thanks.

sek

Yeah, but you really should have waited for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II... ;D

 

[scottkinfw]

Then start saving now.

I finally couldn't take it any more so last week I took the plunge and purchased a 5dmkii with 24-105L...

Personally, as someone in the same boat, I just wanted to say thank you. Murphy's law should now come into effect... Canon will therefore officially announce the 5DMk3 within a month.

 

[Loswr]

Hi Neuro, and happy holidays.

I have yet another opinion question for you. I took the plunge and purchased a 5D2 body. You suggested 16-35mm f/2.8L II to me previously for this body. Would you recommend it over the 24-70mm f/2.8L II? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and want a wide angle zoom. Reasons?

Thanks.

sek

Happy Holidays to you, too...and congrats on your purchase!

They're pretty different lenses, and it's going to depend on what you shoot and what other lenses you have. The 16-35 covers ultrawide and wide (<24mm and 24-35mm, respectively). The 24-70 covers wide, normal, and ends at short tele - that makes it a general purpose zoom, ideal as a 'walkaround' lens.

Personally, I'd get the 24-70mm (or 24-105mm) before the 16-35mm. 24mm on FF is pretty wide, same as 15mm on APS-C for comparison. Unless you have a real need for ultrawide (lots of landscapes, or real estate - although I'd consider a TS-E 17mm for the latter).

The gap from 35mm to 70mm isn't all that great, in that you can usually sneaker-zoom in a few yards. But, a lot of shots happen in that range.

Hope some of those ramblings help. Knowing what you shoot might help for more specific examples.

Enjoy your 5DII!!

 

[scottkinfw]

Thank you for your ramblings!
The big question I have is which would tend to give better iq?

Let us know how you love your future 1DX

Scott

Hi Neuro, and happy holidays.

I have yet another opinion question for you. I took the plunge and purchased a 5D2 body. You suggested 16-35mm f/2.8L II to me previously for this body. Would you recommend it over the 24-70mm f/2.8L II? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and want a wide angle zoom. Reasons?

Thanks.

sek

Happy Holidays to you, too...and congrats on your purchase!

They're pretty different lenses, and it's going to depend on what you shoot and what other lenses you have. The 16-35 covers ultrawide and wide (<24mm and 24-35mm, respectively). The 24-70 covers wide, normal, and ends at short tele - that makes it a general purpose zoom, ideal as a 'walkaround' lens.

Personally, I'd get the 24-70mm (or 24-105mm) before the 16-35mm. 24mm on FF is pretty wide, same as 15mm on APS-C for comparison. Unless you have a real need for ultrawide (lots of landscapes, or real estate - although I'd consider a TS-E 17mm for the latter).

The gap from 35mm to 70mm isn't all that great, in that you can usually sneaker-zoom in a few yards. But, a lot of shots happen in that range.

Hope some of those ramblings help. Knowing what you shoot might help for more specific examples.

Enjoy your 5DII!!

 

[Loswr]

Thank you for your ramblings!
The big question I have is which would tend to give better iq?

IQ is almost a wash. 16-35mm is a bit sharper in the center, but a bit softer away from the center. 16-35 has more vignetting. Also, the 24-70 can share filters with the 70-200, whereas the 16-35 uses 82mm. Basically, though, both are very good lenses, and IQ doesn't significantly differentiate them. IMO, it's a decision that should be based on focal length.

 

[scottkinfw]

Awesome.

I knew I could count on you for a concise answer.

Thank you.

sek

Thank you for your ramblings!
The big question I have is which would tend to give better iq?

IQ is almost a wash. 16-35mm is a bit sharper in the center, but a bit softer away from the center. 16-35 has more vignetting. Also, the 24-70 can share filters with the 70-200, whereas the 16-35 uses 82mm. Basically, though, both are very good lenses, and IQ doesn't significantly differentiate them. IMO, it's a decision that should be based on focal length.

 

[bobthebrick]

For me, the 16-35 has significantly better IQ than the 24-70. Neuro summed it up fairly well; at most focal lengths the 16-35 is very slightly sharper in the center, but softer in the corners, and if you look really, really hard for it, you can occasionally find CA on a FF, but you have to zoom in to about 300% (and no one bar those perfect sharpness jocks who sit behind their laptop criticising everything will ever notice). The 16-35 also needs to be used with a 'slim' filter, to prevent vignetting. It's an annoying filter thread size too.

But (and I'll probably annoy a lot of people here), in MY opinion, the colours that come out of the 16-35 are so much nicer, so much smoither and more attractive, and to ME that makes it worth a lot more than the 24-70 (which I still love to bits).

I can't remember what body you said you had, but I reckon as a general purpose lens tnat you'll never need to repkace, on crop you should get the 16-35, and on FF you could get either, but the 24-70 is a more useful focal length for most people.

So anyway, that's my honest opinion.

Thomas.

 

[wickidwombat]

Hi Neuro, and happy holidays.

I have yet another opinion question for you. I took the plunge and purchased a 5D2 body. You suggested 16-35mm f/2.8L II to me previously for this body. Would you recommend it over the 24-70mm f/2.8L II? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and want a wide angle zoom. Reasons?

Thanks.

sek

Yeah, but you really should have waited for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II... ;D

i would recomend the 16-35 especially since you have the 70-200 i would also recomend the 50mm f1.4 to fill that gap and use the bipedal zoom to go between 35 and 70 those 3 lenses give you alot of coverage and awesome felxabiliy

 

[willrobb]

Hey spaced,

Well done on the purchase, you won't regret it. Even if a wonderful 5DmkIiI is announced tomorrow you still have a great camera that will last for years. Enjoy your time with your new baby.