The Cost of Switching to Full Frame

[homersapien]

This is probably not what you want to hear, but I'd keep the 40D and use the difference to replace that kit lens! I love the 5d, but unless you need the marginally better high ISO performance and/or are willing to make a major change in your glass, I wouldn't switch. But that's what I would do

[JAHphoto]

Originally Posted by homersapien

This is probably not what you want to hear, but I'd keep the 40D and use the difference to replace that kit lens! I love the 5d, but unless you need the marginally better high ISO performance and/or are willing to make a major change in your glass, I wouldn't switch. But that's what I would do

The 40D has pretty awesome noise reduction, I don't think the 5D is really any better.

[joefish]

Originally Posted by homersapien

This is probably not what you want to hear, but I'd keep the 40D and use the difference to replace that kit lens! I love the 5d, but unless you need the marginally better high ISO performance and/or are willing to make a major change in your glass, I wouldn't switch. But that's what I would do

I definitely want to replace the kit lens. I'm trying to think long term here (with both lenses and bodies), so was thinking something along the lines of the 5D replacement model, whatever that happens to be. The 1D series is well out of my price range at this point in time, and for the foreseeable future too.

[JAHphoto]

Originally Posted by joefish

so was thinking something along the lines of the 5D replacement model, whatever that happens to be. The 1D series is well out of my price range at this point in time, and for the foreseeable future too.

The "leaked" specs (take it with a big grain of salt, as according to the "leak" it was supposed to be announced april 22nd ) are pretty damn good looking
New generation of CMOS, 15.4MP, ISO up to 25,600, just above 6FPS shooting, two Digic III's, a new generation of live view, better than the XSi and 40D's, and 35% faster focusing than the 40D.

I'm certinaly looking forward to it.

[ScooberJake]

Originally Posted by JAHphoto

The 40D has pretty awesome noise reduction, I don't think the 5D is really any better.

The 40D may have a nice in-camera noise reduction feature, but the 5D can easily have noise reduction applied in post as well. The 5D will definitely produce far less noisy images simply due to the pixel size.


@joefish - here are some things to think about.

24-70mm 2.8 - why not the Tamron 28-75? About $800 cheaper, very highly regarded IQ, and constant 2.8. Will still be significant upgrade from the 18-55. You lose those 4mm at the wide end. If those are important for what you do, what about the 17-40mm for ~$500? The 40-70mm gap between your zooms is filled nicely by the 50mm.

85mm 1.8 - you could just use your 70-200L for portraits since you have the 2.8 version. Can't get that super narrow DOF, but 2.8 ain't bad.

300mm 2.8 - I'd suggest that a prime may not be great for event photography. Get the Canon 1.4x for your 70-200mm or the 70-300mm IS.

[joefish]

Originally Posted by ScooberJake

300mm 2.8 - I'd suggest that a prime may not be great for event photography. Get the Canon 1.4x for your 70-200mm or the 70-300mm IS.

I've definitely been thinking this about the prime, actually.

My general thoughts since last I posted is that I still want to buy EF lenses, rather than EF-S, and that I'm not sure I would use something that's 24-X or 28-X except if I had a full frame camera (at least, not as a walk around lens). So with this in mind, I think I would buy such a lens at the same time as I bought a full frame camera (hope this makes sense).

So, my question then is still which lens to get to replace my 18-55 in the mean time (and something that will work on a full frame camera should I get one in the future). The 17-40 and 16-35 spring to mind; the 16-35 being very tempting (and also expensive).

[ditch_azeroth]

one of the reasons why "the crop factor" was ever introduced into slr's is this: lenses naturally have lower image quality on the edges. no matter what kind of lenses you have, even the L's, this will always be true. with aps-c cameras (like your 40d, which is probably one of the best cameras around for its class to-date), the image is cropped such that you will get the image that is in the middle area of the lenses - where quality is at its peak. secondly, a pseudo-zoom factor is naturally in place due to the crop, as mentioned by @smc. for me, this is a good thing. heck, i know a lot of full frame photographers who end up adding hours and hours on their workflow due to cropping alone. might as well nip it in the bud.

sure, who wouldn't i kill for a mark3, but i'd rather go for a 40d with a stockroom's worth of L lenses. i don't know if this will help, but here's my medium term daydream. just play along with me - dreaming doesn't cost a thing.

- a brand new canon 40d body
- at least 3 batteries and the wifi grip
- at least 2 580EX II's, remote triggers
- a bigger apartment where i can have a studio
- umbrellas, light stands, wall outlets
- a maxxed out macbook pro and a maxxed out mac pro

and then the lenses
- EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM (hey, what can i say... this is probably the best there is for portraits. the 85mm 1.8 is nice, but let's go crazy)
- EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM (the 10-22 is nice, but it's not L, and useless if, in case i win the lottery, decide to upgrade to full frame)
- EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (rumors of a mark2 for this lens is going around, but no one can subtantiate. besides, it's almost perfect as it is)
-EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM ('nuf said. oh, and i might want to get a Extender EF 1.4x II for this. the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM would be a good alternative, but i'd rather have the 70-200 with the extender)

[SJH Foto]

Hey, unless you are planning on buying the 1D Mark III (and if you are, you probably won't be worrying about the cost of new lenses), I would wait until they replace the 5D. It can't be long now. The Digic sensor is outdated, and a lot of stuff has been greatly improved in lower cameras (eg burst mode, resolution, noise reduction etc)

That being said, if you want a "cheap" full-frame camera, I've seen used 5Ds from reputable dealers go for "as little as" $1900.

[inkista]

Interesting thing, though. You see Luminous Landscape's hands-on of the 40D? Here's the controversial bit:

...the IQ of the 40D is on a par if not even slightly better than that of the Canon 5D.

If you stop to think about pixel counts and resolution, it'll make more sense. The LL reviewer also backs up the claim with 100% crops, and by pointing you to someone else who's come to the same conclusion.

[Headshotzx]

I know this isn't exactly what you want, but since everyone is telling you to stick with a 40D, plus the fact that even if you ever go fullframe, you'd definitely want to keep your 40D.. I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (1.6crop only), Canon 17-40mm f/4L, or the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L (both EF lens). They're in order of increasing cost.

When people buy the tamron, they have 3 options: Kit lens (18-55mm), Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (L quality). So, you've got your kit lens already, and you said you wanted to replace it. However, you're intending to upgrade to FF when something new comes out, so spending close to a grand on an ef-s lens won't do you good in the long run, thus the Tamron comes about. You wanted f/2.8, and this is as best as you can get without it costing you a bomb.

If you ever upgrade to a FF camera, I'd get a 300mm f/4L IS for 1/3-ish the price of the f/2.8 and for 80% of the same sharpness. To have a UWA lens, I'd get a 17-40mm f/4L because the price difference compared to the 16-35mm f/2.8L isn't justifiable to me. To have a normal walkaround lens, I'd get a Canon 24-70 f/2.8L or 24-105 f/4L IS. There are many threads asking between these 2 lenses. I'd keep the 70-200mm f/2.8IS because it's the king of Canon's L zoom lineup.

So that'll give you (for FF):

17-40mm f/4L - Wide Angle: Great for landscapes on fullframe cameras
24-70/105mm f/2.8L or f/4L IS - General purpose walkaround
70-200mm f/2.8L IS - You know how good this is already
300mm f/4L IS - If you need the 300mm range-- if you need more range, there's always a cheaper 400mm f/5.6L (no IS) for stuff like large bird birding.

I also have to stress that when going fullframe, you don't have a flash. Thus, a 580EXii would be of great great great use to you =)

Hope this helps!