Looking for answeres

[MattGholson]

Looking for answers, Geez I can't spell, anyway...

I'm sure this kind of thing gets asked all the time, but I could use some advise from the wise folks on here.

In 2006 I bought a EOS 10D and have used it on and off for the last 4 years.  It was a huge jump in quality from the Kodak DCS 520 that I had been using.  I was recently approached with the offer of teaching a digital photography class at my school and that has got me back into photography full bore.  I recently did a bunch of portraits and it reminded me how much I liked the portrait grip on my old DCS, so purchased a 1d mk i on ebay for a very low price without really thinking about it, but I'm thinking of selling my bodies and getting something newer.  I'm interested in all sorts of photography, studio, macro, landscape, wildlife, and I especially enjoy long exposures at night.

I don't really feel like the 10D is holding me back in terms of image quality, but I've found the autofocus does too much searching back and forth and doesn't always find its mark, and the delay in starting up is really annoying.  I don't use the 1600 or 3200 iso much, but when I have to it works OK.  

I like using the 1d a lot, I like the size and weight, and also the portrait grip.  I love the film speed readout on the LCD.  General operation is so much smoother then the 10D, autofocus is amazing.   The larger frame sensor is closer to my old film days. Image quality seems to be about as good as my 10D, but I haven't done long exposures yet.  Seems like when I'm using this camera I take things more seriously, sounds kind of dumb, but I leave it in manual and plan my shots better then I ever did with the 10D. The only issue is megapixels.

Specific questions, In landscape I feel like I have a lack of sharpness with both cameras, is this a resolution issue, or technique, or maybe lenses, usually a Tokina 19-35?  I've always been pretty impressed with the s/n ratio in my long exposures at night with the 10D, and I guess its only gotten better?

I'm thinking of getting a 1ds mk i, but thats just about the limit of my spending.  I could get a 40D?  I could invest in some better lenses, or I could just keep shooting what I have and be happy.  

Any suggestions appreciated.

[DarkPenguin]

A 17-40 and a 7D?

[fredjeang]

Hi,
I'm not wise but I give you my feeling anyway.
The Tokina 19-35mm, if I remember 3.5-4.5 no? is unfortunately not a very good lens. It is cheap and not bad for the price, but
of course it can not deliver the same quality than other more expensive ones.
If you plan to increment image quality, everything on the chain is important and more a sensor is big, more you need good lenses in order
to acheive the results you would expect.
Of course, good technique etc...but I have the feeling that first you could sell the Tokina and purchase something more serious in e-bay.

Fred.

[MattGholson]

I've been looking at some examples of and I was stunned by how much of a difference lens quality makes and resolving the fine details.

I haven't got the budget for a D7 right now, even though I don't think I would feel right spending that kind of money.  Need to improve technique first anyway.

Lets change the topic a bit because I've decided to use the cameras I've got and invest in a more serious lens.  

My Tokina has developed a couple of problems, the lens is loose on the lens mount, not the cameras mount but the lens' mount, and it's stuck in autofocus, I'm wanting to replace it anyway.

The 17-40L sounds great but I'm going to have a hard time justifing a 700 dollar lens to my wife when she thinks her 200 P and S takes good pictures.  

Can you reccomend me a wide angle that is going to be good, but less?

[DarkPenguin]

Tamron 17-50 f2.8

[NikoJorj]

Can you reccomend me a wide angle that is going to be good, but less?

For the 10D, I could recommend getting a 18-55IS (the IS version is remarkable) for a fistful of bucks, and adapting the mount... but it won't probably help with the 1D.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I'm not a Canon user but in general term I'd suggest:


The 5DII is the best camera you can buy for decent money. Any Canon will serve you well. The three digit models are good, the two digit models are more robust and sophisticated. The 7D is like a "Pro camera with small sensor".

You should always check autofocus accuracy. There are quite a few good APS-C lenses (for two and three digit cameras and the 7D). It's important to have good lenses. Canon lenses seem to be pretty good.

Best regards
Erik

Looking for answers, Geez I can't spell, anyway...

I'm sure this kind of thing gets asked all the time, but I could use some advise from the wise folks on here.

In 2006 I bought a EOS 10D and have used it on and off for the last 4 years.  It was a huge jump in quality from the Kodak DCS 520 that I had been using.  I was recently approached with the offer of teaching a digital photography class at my school and that has got me back into photography full bore.  I recently did a bunch of portraits and it reminded me how much I liked the portrait grip on my old DCS, so purchased a 1d mk i on ebay for a very low price without really thinking about it, but I'm thinking of selling my bodies and getting something newer.  I'm interested in all sorts of photography, studio, macro, landscape, wildlife, and I especially enjoy long exposures at night.

I don't really feel like the 10D is holding me back in terms of image quality, but I've found the autofocus does too much searching back and forth and doesn't always find its mark, and the delay in starting up is really annoying.  I don't use the 1600 or 3200 iso much, but when I have to it works OK.  

I like using the 1d a lot, I like the size and weight, and also the portrait grip.  I love the film speed readout on the LCD.  General operation is so much smoother then the 10D, autofocus is amazing.   The larger frame sensor is closer to my old film days. Image quality seems to be about as good as my 10D, but I haven't done long exposures yet.  Seems like when I'm using this camera I take things more seriously, sounds kind of dumb, but I leave it in manual and plan my shots better then I ever did with the 10D. The only issue is megapixels.

Specific questions, In landscape I feel like I have a lack of sharpness with both cameras, is this a resolution issue, or technique, or maybe lenses, usually a Tokina 19-35?  I've always been pretty impressed with the s/n ratio in my long exposures at night with the 10D, and I guess its only gotten better?

I'm thinking of getting a 1ds mk i, but thats just about the limit of my spending.  I could get a 40D?  I could invest in some better lenses, or I could just keep shooting what I have and be happy.  

Any suggestions appreciated.

[DarkPenguin]

For the 10D, I could recommend getting a 18-55IS (the IS version is remarkable) for a fistful of bucks, and adapting the mount... but it won't probably help with the 1D.

Ooo!  Forgot about the 1D.  That 17-50 I mentioned might be iffy on the 1D.  (Might be fine, too.)

[MattGholson]

Thank you for the answers, very helpful.

Looks like the 18-55 IS is going for around 100 bucks on ebay, that is perfect.  I have no problem hacksawing that.  And for that price that could just stay on the 10D, since I'd be afraid to use it on the 1D.

The Tamron 17-50 is a bit higher but could be in the price range.

I'm seriously thinking about a 100-300 /5.6 or 70-200 /4 L lens, which would you reccomend.  

I was shooting geese and ducks last afternoon and using my cheap 80-200 on the 10D and using my 17-35 on the 1d, I was thinking this is totally backward, I've got the fast autofocus and rapid fire on my lower pixel camera that's shooting landscapes, and my slow autofocusing, slower  camera is shooting birds flying around.