Bulb
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2013
- Messages
- 117
- Reaction score
- 17
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I've been spending a lot of time shooting with my EOS 650. It has helped me grasp the basics of composition, exposure, and everything else which has helped me go from taking snapshots to taking thoughtful photos.
As much as I love using film, I've decided to make the switch to digital for a few reasons:
OK. So more than a few reasons. Right now I'm trying to decide which DSLR is right for me. Right now, the 6D seems to be the winner, but I'm not sure whether the 5DMKIII is worth the extra money. Here is my reasoning:
Is the 5DMKIII really worth the extra $1500? The only improvements seem to be slightly higher resolution and the ability to shoot HDR and multiple exposures in raw.
On that same note, is the EF24-105mm f4L IS USM lens worth buying as part of the kit? I've heard that it has major distortion problems. Would a set of primes or an alternate zoom lens be a better idea? (The lens is $500/$600 as part of the kit or $700 on its own)
I won't be buying a DSLR right away. I'm going to continue to study and hone my skills on film for a while whilst I save up for the DSLR. I'll still keep my 650 with me for those times when I find a shot that I like enough to have it on (probably ISO 50) film.
As much as I love using film, I've decided to make the switch to digital for a few reasons:
- Having film processed is costly and time-consuming
- I don't know exactly what my shot looks like without having them processed, meaning I do a lot of bracketing (which uses up more film)
- The ability to change ISO speeds (not to mention much better sensitivity with less 'grain', good for low light)
- The resolution of film scans that my local drugstore can do, as well as my own scans, are much lower than images I can get from a DSLR
- EXIF/GPS data (which otherwise I would have to manually put into my shot notes)
- Raw
OK. So more than a few reasons. Right now I'm trying to decide which DSLR is right for me. Right now, the 6D seems to be the winner, but I'm not sure whether the 5DMKIII is worth the extra money. Here is my reasoning:
- The 6D is $1900 without the lens, 5DMKIII is $3300; savings = $1400 (the price of a good lens)
- The 6D is $2400 with the lens, 5DMKIII is $3900; savings = $1500 (the cost of the lens for the 5DMKIII is $100 more, despite being the same lens?)
- It natively does GPS tagging, and it has wifi so a smartphone can be used for liveview (GPS is a gimmick for some, but a good feature for me)
- The 6D blows the 5DMKIII out of the water at higher ISO speeds because of its much lower levels of noise
- The extra pixels of the 5DMKIII won't matter: the 6D will already make 27"x18" prints at 200PPI
- Its AF is rated to work in one stop darker environments
- It weighs less
Is the 5DMKIII really worth the extra $1500? The only improvements seem to be slightly higher resolution and the ability to shoot HDR and multiple exposures in raw.
On that same note, is the EF24-105mm f4L IS USM lens worth buying as part of the kit? I've heard that it has major distortion problems. Would a set of primes or an alternate zoom lens be a better idea? (The lens is $500/$600 as part of the kit or $700 on its own)
I won't be buying a DSLR right away. I'm going to continue to study and hone my skills on film for a while whilst I save up for the DSLR. I'll still keep my 650 with me for those times when I find a shot that I like enough to have it on (probably ISO 50) film.