Should I buy the 5D Mark III Kit?

[ramon123]

I'm seriously thinking of upgrading from a Canon XXD camera and want to know if those of you who have bought the 5D Mark III recommend taking the plunge. Obviously going from a Canon XXD camera to the 5D Mark III is a considerable jump however most photographers around including on this forum have said that there's no limit for how good a picture can be.

Purchasing the kit would mean this would be my first full frame camera as well as my first L lens. $4299 pretty much fills up my $4500 budget for photography. I do have a concern that there have been quite a lot of "returned units" due to malfunction etc. There have been quite a few issues popping up and that makes me a bit more nervous to buy something so expensive. What are the chances of getting a "dud unit?" and are all these issues that have come up able to be fixed through a firmware update?

I would say that I fit into the category that Canon mentioned below "advanced amateurs and emerging professionals".

Canon Press Statement:
"The EOS 5D Mark III is Canon's answer to hundreds of thousands of advanced amateurs and emerging professionals looking for a compact, high-quality camera system to help them achieve their artistic vision, whether it be through still or video imagery. The EOS 5D Mark III introduction coincides with Canon's 25 th anniversary celebration of the EOS camera system."

Please provide an answer with some backing behind your recommendation.

 

[Tcapp]

I'm seriously thinking of upgrading from a Canon XXD camera and want to know if those of you who have bought the 5D Mark III recommend taking the plunge. Obviously going from a Canon XXD camera to the 5D Mark III is a considerable jump however most photographers around including on this forum have said that there's no limit for how good a picture can be.

Purchasing the kit would mean this would be my first full frame camera as well as my first L lens. $4299 pretty much fills up my $4500 budget for photography. I do have a concern that there have been quite a lot of "returned units" due to malfunction etc. There have been quite a few issues popping up and that makes me a bit more nervous to buy something so expensive. What are the chances of getting a "dud unit?" and are all these issues that have come up able to be fixed through a firmware update?

I would say that I fit into the category that Canon mentioned below "advanced amateurs and emerging professionals".

Canon Press Statement:
"The EOS 5D Mark III is Canon's answer to hundreds of thousands of advanced amateurs and emerging professionals looking for a compact, high-quality camera system to help them achieve their artistic vision, whether it be through still or video imagery. The EOS 5D Mark III introduction coincides with Canon's 25 th anniversary celebration of the EOS camera system."

Please provide an answer with some backing behind your recommendation.

yes, buy it. Don't worry about getting a "dud". I suspect most of the people who complain about the camera not working is user error. If you do actually get a defective unit, just exchange it. Personally, I would say get the camera only and then either get a prime lens or the 24-70 2.8. I never shoot with anything slower then 2.8. If budget allows, maybe get yourself either the 24 1.4 L II or the 35 1.4 L, along with a 50 1.4. Or if you want something longer get either the canon 85 1.2 L or for half the price get the sigma 85 1.4. I have the sig and LOVE it.

Just my two cents from experience.

 

[ramon123]

If I could stretch my budget a little more would you say that getting the 24-70 f/2.8 over the 24-105 f/4 IS - would be the right move? Meaning that there is no question that I should choose the 24-70 f/2.8 (older version) even though people have said that there is a QC issue with that lens?

 

[Tcapp]

If I could stretch my budget a little more would you say that getting the 24-70 f/2.8 over the 24-105 f/4 IS - would be the right move? Meaning that there is no question that I should choose the 24-70 f/2.8 (older version) even though people have said that there is a QC issue with that lens?

I personally think so. Really it depends on what you are going to be doing with it. Like I said before, I never shoot with anything slower than 2.8, so I think you should get the 24-70. But I'm a wedding/portrait photographer, so I love fast lenses and shallow DOF. What specifically do you want to do with it?

 

[Bennymiata]

The 24-105 kit lens is a fantastic lens, and probably better for everyday use because of the longer focal length and the IS.
For many advanced amateurs and professionals, it is the lens they use 80% of the time.

 

[JR]

First, you should not worry about a few return unit on your decision to buy the mkiii. Bad unit and returns happens all the time it is just that now people talk more about it because the produc is new, but i dont believe we are seeing returns higher then say the mkii even a year ago. I had a hot pixel on my first mkii when i bought 18 months ago, well aft its launch!!!

As for the kit, it come down to your budget and need. If you need a zoom, i would not put a non L zoom on a mkiii (it is just me but i would not). The 24-105 is a great lens and has IS. Me personally i would stretch my budget and get the 24-70 II because it will be sharper and faster which is more important then IS for me...

Up to you to decide what is best for you...either way you will be happy!

 

[mdm041]

I will second the 24-70 F2.8L. Even without IS this focal length doesn't really need it and I've found it to be very sharp. The F4 is just a little to slow for me esp since I generally don't shoot wide open in order to keep things as sharp as possible...With the 2.8 the lense is Tack sharp in the 3.5-4 range (IMHO) but the F4 wouldn't be sharp till around 5.6 or higher...that is to slow for me and I like the DOF you can get with the 2.8 if necessary.

 

[dswatson83]

I'd go with the Kit and then pick up a Canon 85mm f/1.8 for when you need extreme dof or low light shots. Giving up IS and and the longer focal length for 1 stop better aperture with the 24-70mm is not worth it to me. Those lenses are almost equal for sharpness anyway but the 85mm will outperform both the 24-70 & 24-105.

Then save up for the 35mm f/1.4 or another wide angle and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for a complete setup.

 

[iso79]

If you have to ask then you are not ready. When you are ready to buy it then you will not hesitate. Other than that I'm loving mine. I didn't buy the kit since I already have L lenses. I think it's more than worth it.

 

[Loswr]

If you have to ask then you are not ready. When you are ready to buy it then you will not hesitate.

I think a little hesitation is perfectly normal for most people considering spending a $4500 lump sum on camera gear.

 

[preppyak]

I think a little hesitation is perfectly normal for most people considering spending a $4500 lump sum on camera gear.

Agreed. If people (including pro's) didn't have hesitations and questions, we wouldnt have forums.

I'm seriously thinking of upgrading from a Canon XXD camera and want to know if those of you who have bought the 5D Mark III recommend taking the plunge.

I would say that I fit into the category that Canon mentioned below "advanced amateurs and emerging professionals".

One thing I might suggest, depending on your equipment and what you shoot, would lenses or a different body suit your needs? If you're budget is $4500, you might get more out of spending $4500 on L lenses and keeping your current body. Or, if you dont shoot a lot of action stuff, you might get more out of a 5DII and $2500 of lenses.

I shoot on a 60D personally, but my brother just got a 5DII...I put my 70-200 on there and it really did feel like the camera was finally using it to its full potential. But, if I had put my Tamron 28-75, it'd have probably looked pretty bad compared to my crop sensor. So, do you have the lenses to match a FF sensor and use it to its potential?

 

[Wideopen]

Take the plunge dont look back. The 24-105L is an awesome lens and buying it as a kit will save you money over buying it separate. You can always resell it or trade it in to offset the price difference between that and the 24-70 2.8 L As said earlier if you need something faster for low light then a 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.8 prime would keep you set for a while.

 

[swampler]

The 24-105 kit lens is a fantastic lens, and probably better for everyday use because of the longer focal length and the IS.

Agree 100% with this. However, I use my 70-200 f/2.8 most of the time as I shoot a lot of sports, but for around the house, non sports stuff, the 24-105 is great!

 

[Random Orbits]

One thing I might suggest, depending on your equipment and what you shoot, would lenses or a different body suit your needs? If you're budget is $4500, you might get more out of spending $4500 on L lenses and keeping your current body. Or, if you dont shoot a lot of action stuff, you might get more out of a 5DII and $2500 of lenses.

+1. What lenses do you currently have and what is your budget next year? If the kit 24-105 will be your only FF lens, then it might make sense to get a less expensive body or upgrade your lenses first and get the 5DIII next year. If the 4500 represents what you'd be able to spend for the next year or two, then upgrading your lenses first may give you better results than upgrading the body now.

 

[bchernicoff]

I would definitely recommend the kit. I ordered it even though I owned the 24-105L. I sold my existing one for $850 on craigslist which more than offset the $800 price difference for kit vs. body.

It's a fantastic lens.

 

[ernande]

If doing so isn't going to take food off the table, then YES. By all means, get the kit package. It's a great deal on L glass and the 24-105 is a fantastic walk around lens.

I took the plunge a few weeks ago and I'm so happy I did. The IS combined with the high ISO shooting of the mkIII means you can still shoot in low light situations. For really low light, I'd use a prime anyway.

 

[prestonpalmer]

yes.

 

[pdirestajr]

Out or curiosity, why do so many people say "take the plunge" when referring to buying a digital camera with a sensor that equals that of 35mm film? What do you say if you move on to medium format? "I just spent my kid's college fund!", or "I just sold the farm!"

My suggestion to the OP is why not buy a super sweet 5D mkII for 2K, and invest the rest of your budget in glass? I'd get the kit lens too, why not? You can always sell/ trade it for no loss. Or buy an EOS 1V monster for like 500 bucks and enjoy your EF lenses on a "full frame" gem that won't be outdated in a few years? Then use the rest of the money and take a vacation!

 

[V8Beast]

If the money is burning a hole in your pocket, then why not ? I love my 5DIII, but the xxD bodies are very, very capable pieces of hardware. If the money isn't burning a hole your pocket, then I'd say hold off on taking the full-frame plunge until you feel like your xxD body is holding you back.

 

[unkbob]

One of the biggest advantages of a FF camera is the DOF control. The 24-105 may be a great walk-around lens, but the 5D3 is more than just a walk-around camera and it really starts to shine at wider apertures. For taking pics of kids around the house, sure, the 24-105 would work, but so would a 60D and a 17-55.

I would personally get the body only and the Sigma 50mm 1.4. You can shoot people all day (and night!) with that and I often take it out as my only lens. Then look at the old-but-good Canon 24-70 L or the new Sigma 70-200 OS (optical stabilisation) depending on what you're shooting.

Just my 2p.