AndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1017 posts, RR: 2 Posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1427 times:
Oh no, not that age old topic I hear you say... However, here I go, and comments would be very much appreciated:
With continued heavy use, I fear my trusty Canon EOS-5 will soon pass to the great camera graveyard in the sky. It has recently gone through two bouts of intensive care in the hands of specialists, after which it has recovered from its war wounds and has been returned still world weary but fit for further service. As it has cost me overall less than £0.50/$0.70 per film over the years and produced excellent results, I've come to regard it as a faithful and reliable servant - its paid its dues, and almost every picture I have on Airliners is shot with it, except for the 1980s stuff. I suspect however (Shhh! Don’t tell it!) that I might be best reducing my dependency on it before it finally expires. I am therefore left with a dilemma…
I am intrigued by digital although not won over - yet! Whilst the Fuji S1 appeals mightily, I have Canon mount lenses and the S1 would mean that I'd have to replace all of these with Nikkor / Nikon mount lenses, which would be well and truly beyond my budget. As far as I can tell, that leaves me with only one realistic choice if I go digital, and that is the Canon EOS D30. Has anyone got any constructive comments on this camera please, especially if they’re based on experience?
I also really need a new longer tele-zoom, and I could run to the EOS D30 and the 75-300 IS, using the D30 for digital whilst retaining the trusty EOS-5 (and a backup EOS-1000) for 35mm. Keeping within budget, the alternative is to forget digital altogether and go for an EOS-1 and the Canon 100-400L IS. I don’t think I can justify the spend on both the D30 and 100-400L IS.
I am severely tempted to forgo digital at the moment and go for the EOS-1 a 100-400L IS. Primary concern is quality of results, longevity, and robustness. Any comments from the serious digital / pro-lens photographers on these choices would also be appreciated…
Sonic99 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1376 times:
A true dilemma you've got there... and you've answered a couple of your own questions as well - regarding replacing all your Canon lenses with Nikkor ones and final decision re: camera body and/or a pro lens.
Although I'm unfamiliar with digital cameras, I can offer this advice:
(1) Buy a camera body that is within your budget,
(2) Re-evaluate your needs - digital vs. reg. SLR, in this I mean to say that if a digital product would be beneficial to you (maybe you're a photographer by profession), then weigh those options carefully. Keep in mind that digital is still in its infancy - oh they've been around for a while, but technological advancements will render today's digital SLR's into "entry-level equipment" in a couple of years.. If, however, you plan to use your camera for other than posting beautiful pics on the net, then consider a good quality SLR (you mentioned the EOS 1V or 1N - excellent option!!). SLR's still give you great mobility (well so do digitals), better versatility, 35mm film won't be going out of style all that soon, and will outlast most present-day digital cams in terms of tech (dis)advantages.
(3) Longer, larger, further, faster .... well we're not talking Airbus here, but a lens with those qualifications certainly is a good investment. The lens you mention, the 100-400 is an excellent lens (add "versatile" to the list). I've used one before and, although it's a tad heavy, it is fast-focusing and really brings out good quality results. Remember, as you mentioned in your post, most - if not all - Canon lenses will be compatible with their Digital SLR's. I read a report from Canon attesting to this (check out their website).
I'd say forget the digital equipment and get the EOS 1V and the 100-400 - can't go wrong with that combination - all told it will be cheaper than the alternative and you're getting the best SLR on the market!
Craigy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1361 times:
When evaluating digital, remember to check the capacity of the memory card supplied in the package. The last thing you want to do is end up with a setup that will only hold one or two photos at maximum resolution. Yes, some manufacturers sell combinations like this, and you will have to shell out several hundred extra pounds for big memory cards.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 744 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1347 times:
I too am considering a re-equip and am looking to Canon EOS - probably the EOS 3. I considered digital but
a) my film scanner can still generate far more info from a slide than the best digital camera (and those little 35mm rolls of film are probably the most cost effective image storage medium available)
b) any digital body now will fast be superceded - I can't help but think this is an area of rapid evolution and upgrading which I'd rather not participate in. Meanwhile those EOS lenses will be good for many years to come.
So I'm concentrating on which lenses to go for with the EOS 3 - I suspect I may pick up a D30 in a couple of years as an extra body for a few quid 2nd hand!
Speaking of lenses, I'm looking at the 70-200 f4 L and the 300 f4 IS, plus the new 1.4 and 2x convertors. In terms of focal lengths, this is a combination which has worked well for me in the past, but I'd appreciate any comments on good or bad points of these lenses. If I could afford it, I would opt for the 2.8 versions of these lenses, but the extra cost seems prohibitive and difficult to justify.
AndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1017 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1336 times:
Yes, having thought about things a bit more since I made the post, I too suspect I'll stick with 35mm for now - I don't truly have a huge personal use for digital at the moment, or at least not one that can't be satisfied with conventional film and my current scanner. And I've always been concerned about the huge drop in value digital exhibits, once the next step up in technology comes along - in comparison, 35mm is hanging on fairly well these days.
I did consider getting another EOS-5 as I'm very at home with that camera - it does everything I need and has totally proved itself as far as I'm concerned over the years, taking knocks and all. However, the EOS-5 design is getting a bit long in the tooth now, and I don't really care for any of the other Canon bodies below the EOS-3 as they all seem to lack something in robustness terms (especially having used the fairly big and heavy EOS-5 for probably 6-7 years now). I too think I'll end up buying an EOS-3 rather than the EOS-1 as I'm not sure I can justify the extra £500 or so for the -1 when I also need a new tele-zoom. Answer, for me at least, resolved I think. Thanks for the contributions.