Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


CANON 5D


8 Mar 2007 11:29PM
I AM CURRENTLY USING A CANON 30D MOSTLY FOR LANDSCAPES AND THINKING OF MOVING UP TO THE 5D TO INCREASE THE PIXEL POWER AS I CROP MOST OF MY PHOTOS TO 24 X 10 INCH PANOS. I CURRENTLY USE A SIGMA 10 - 20 BUT THIS WILL NOT BE COMPATABLE WITH THE 5D. I WAS THINKING OF THE SIGMA 12-24 DG MODEL, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WILL BE OK WITH THE 5D. ANY COMMENTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED. THANKS

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
8 Mar 2007 11:30PM
AAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!


[Argh shortened by EPZ, poor Ade!]
ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
8 Mar 2007 11:31PM
sorry there

not keen on all-capital text - just seems like shouting to me
strawman e2
11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
8 Mar 2007 11:32PM
GET A 17-40L IT WILL GIVE YOU THE SAME FIELD OF VIEW. The 12-24 will be a wider field of view and either needs non-screw in filters or a bodged holder.

No need to shout by the way.
martin.w e2
12 355 22 United Kingdom
8 Mar 2007 11:32PM
Just bought the 5D myself, after using a 20D for two years and like you mostly for landscapes. The Canon 17-40L is worth a look and will give you roughly the same field of view as you currently get with your 10-20.

Martin.

LOL, way too slow Smile
8 Mar 2007 11:34PM
Sorry it offends, do you have any other thoughts re my question.
cambirder e2
10 7.2k England
8 Mar 2007 11:37PM
Edit, comment N/A
strawman e2
11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
8 Mar 2007 11:38PM
If you realy want the 12-24, and can live with the filter issues I am told the DG coating ones have better contrast. So when out shopping watch out. And Canon's 16-35 is a due a make over I hear. May be some good 2nd hand ones in a few months time.
8 Mar 2007 11:40PM
Martin

What is your thoughts on the 5d
andytvcams e2
12 10.4k United Kingdom
8 Mar 2007 11:42PM
A 17-40 will do you just fine.
martin.w e2
12 355 22 United Kingdom
8 Mar 2007 11:46PM
Only used it twice so far, but first impressions are favourable. Much better viewfinder, much more detail in the images and no harder to use than the 20D.

Martin.
8 Mar 2007 11:52PM
Thanks Martin

I am still keen on Sigma lens and do not have a prob with filters as had same prob with 10-20 and will have to invest in Cokin z series to avoid crop crap.
9 Mar 2007 12:43AM
quite a lot of people recommending 17-40mm

whats the verdict on the 16-35?
pcheywood e2
9 1.3k England
9 Mar 2007 12:51AM

Quote:Quite a lot of people recommending 17-40mm

whats the verdict on the 16-35?




Crap alledgedly (according to others on another thread)!! Though I ain't going to be swapping mine for the cheap (budget) version anytime soon Wink

Paul
culturedcanvas e2
9 4.7k 59 United Kingdom
9 Mar 2007 12:54AM
Well the 17-40 is excellent .. not really used the 16-35mm but Keith uses one, and therefore it must be upto standard. David Noton on the other hand thinks it's soft ... I'd hazzard a guess that Noton doesn't sharpen as well as some of us guys tho Wink

Horses for courses probably ... but the new version looks interesting. 17-40mm is a bargain in my eyes.

Dan

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.