More important: Lenses vs. Mp???

Dao · Jan 29, 2009

Katier said:
Canon has a lot LESS choice with respect to upgrades than pentax due to it's change of lens mount. If a pentax user finds a fantastic K-Mount super fast lens made in 1974 it'll work fine on a K20D.. but same isn't true on canon.

I believe VI was referring to the sensor size.

djacobox372 · Jan 29, 2009

I'd say used nikon d200,d300,d700 or canon 5d

For lenses: don't by anything slower then f2.8 and you'll be assured of quality glass. With the nikon d200/300/700 line you can save $$ by buying older nikon AIS non-cpu glass--these lenses won't meter on a d90.

Village Idiot · Jan 29, 2009

Katier said:
Canon has a lot LESS choice with respect to upgrades than pentax due to it's change of lens mount. If a pentax user finds a fantastic K-Mount super fast lens made in 1974 it'll work fine on a K20D.. but same isn't true on canon.

But if you're a professional photographer doing portraiture, a full frame camera usually offers more desirable results. You get a shallower DOF at a narrower aperture. You also get more MP without sacrificing quality due to pixel size. That's why I'm not a fan of Olympus. The 2.0x crop sensor is something I'd expect in an P&S.

Nikon, Canon, & Sony have cameras with FF sensors all over 20mp. MP aren't everything, but when you have a selection of cameras with that many MP that have the quality that exceeds pretty much anything else with crop sensor, then it's the obvious choice.

Sure there's people doing weddings with HOLGA cameras and shooting amazing photos with 300D's, but if you have the money, the means, and the need, some companies don't offer the gear.

Plus when a Canon user finds an exceptional lens they want, they can purchase it from any major retailer at anytime, provided they have the money.

manaheim · Jan 29, 2009

This has spiralled way off-topic now, hasn't it? OP asked if she should be more concerned about megapixels or lenses?

Katier · Jan 29, 2009

manaheim said:
This has spiralled way off-topic now, hasn't it? OP asked if she should be more concerned about megapixels or lenses?

hehe indeed...

In short - lenses. The cameras in the 10-15mp range have close enough the same quality from the sensors to mean the number of mp doesn't matter. What matters is having the glass to do the job you need.

So in short, assuming you have a 10-15mp camera, the glass matters.

tsaraleksi · Jan 29, 2009

Katier said:
Canon has a lot LESS choice with respect to upgrades than pentax due to it's change of lens mount. If a pentax user finds a fantastic K-Mount super fast lens made in 1974 it'll work fine on a K20D.. but same isn't true on canon.

Lots of great upgrade options isn't really an honest way to look at it-- there are tons of lenses for Pentax, but most of them are old manual focus lenses of varying quality. Canon and Nikon have full lines of modern, currently made, currently serviced lenses, with a depth and breadth that Pentax really does not have. Not to mention that both Nikon and Canon have extensive upgrade paths for bodies that Pentax is also lacking. I know a fair few successful professional photographers, and none of them are shooing Pentax.

Lynnzora · Jan 30, 2009

Ok... I love the difference of opinions... I'm getting the impression that I might be better off getting a full-frame camera... Probably the Cannon 5d mark II... I was thinking about using something a little less expensive... and investing in higher quality lenses... but I may as well stick with something that I can grow into. I might have to start with only two lenses... maybe I'll get one prime and one zoom for now. What do you think 100mm or 50mm... how about zoom???

**Remember I mostly do head-shots and modeling portfolios. I might do the occassional event...

ANDS! · Jan 30, 2009

Holy christ. Are you for real? It is your money, but if you are literally new to this, there is no way I would recommend the Mark II over a cheaper body and pro lenses. If you have the cash to drop on a Mark II then I would go Village's route and get the cheaper body, and splurge on a 50MM F/14 lens and a **** load of lighting equipment. Seriously, you're doing POSED photography - the benefits that come with a better body (noise reduction, easy access to menu items and what have you) are MEANINGLESS in an environment completely controlled by you.

Yes, you will "look" more professional with the big huge camera, but really do you NEED that?

Lynnzora · Jan 30, 2009

oops I didn't mean the EOS 5d Mark II... I meant the EOS 5d 12.8mp... Is that the cheapest of the full frame cameras?

ANDS! · Jan 30, 2009

The EOS 5D is still pretty damn pricey. Is there some reason why you are trying to invest in a full frame camera? The 50D or D300 can be had for 1K less, and with the savings can give you a **** load of wiggle room as far as it comes to being able to create a COMPLETE portrait studio environment.

Lynnzora · Jan 30, 2009

I know eventually that I want to invest in a full-frame camera... Am I ready for that now. Not quite but I've been told that the full-frame camera lenses don't fit on the older camera. I want to get a camera that I can stick with for a few years... or if I decide to change the camera body... I'll at least be able to keep all the lenses I invested in.

ANDS! · Jan 30, 2009

I don't know about Canon, but there is no "full frame" lens. Any lens that is compatible natively on a full frame camera body will fit on a cropped sensor body. It is only a lens designed for cropped sensors that will be compromised on a full frame body.

inTempus · Jan 30, 2009

sultan said:
The 50D has too many megapixels that will be put to waste because no lens that costs less than the camera will be sharp enough to get the full detail out of its sensor. Thus its output will appear overly soft when viewed at 100%.

I agree. The 50D's sensor is probably the most sensitive and the most advanced of the semi-pro cameras. It pushes the limits of crop sensor technology. The 50D is a watershed camera, and the first of its kind. With proper glass (L series glass) it will blow you away with detail. With cheap kit glass (with a few exceptions) the sensor is so sensitive it exposes every imperfection. It is so sensitive it comes dangerously close to exceeding the capabilities of even the most expensive lenses.

If you buy a 50D, get the body only and buy a good lens like the 24-70mm f/2.8L USM or the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. It will knock your socks off.

Does this image look soft to anyone? It was shot with a 50D and a niffty-fifty ($89 lens).

Simply put, I don't recommend it. If you want a canon, the 40D or 5D would be better choices. The 40D is a less expensive 50D with less MP, and the 5D is slow and awkward, but has better image quality than the 50D (despite having less MP).

I would say if you're buying the 5D to avoid buying expensive glass, you're doing things kind of bass ackwards.

Lynnzora · Jan 30, 2009

ok... I have a lot to think about. The only question that I don't think has been answered is the type of lens that I should invest in doing portrait work, head-shots, modeling portfolios... I'm looking for good resolution... crisp. stunning...

100mm? 50mm?