So, I'm switching it up already... sold my camera

Thanks Overread. I plan on doing both, improving the glass and improving the body. Combined it's a win-win situation for me.

The member here who purchased my 40D is getting an amazing camera for a very good price and I'm getting the camera I should have bought the day I walked out of the store with the 40D and not the 50D. Everyone is happy.

I ordered my 50D a little while ago and it will be here tomorrow afternoon (assuming Amazon doesn't screw the pooch again). Now I need to figure out which L glass I'm going to pick up. The 24-70 f/2.8 or the 24-105 f/4.

Decisions, decisions.
 
In terms of cropping, perhaps. It's funny, everything I've read on the forums indicates MP plays a big role in larger prints. I can search it here even and find lots of references. But all of a sudden in this thread it's irrelevant and we'd all be better off with 4MP cameras again. Kinda funny how that works.

As for the feature set, I will be much happier with the 50D. DOF preview, the vastly improved LCD screen (enough of a reason for me to buy the 50D alone), the extra ISO stop, the 15MP images, even the AF in Live View (I'll play with it) - all will keep me quite happy with the purchase... it's the camera I originally went for and was talked out of. I won't let that happen again. :)


I'm happy with 4mp when it is paired with a 300mmF2.8L (also got 12.8MP) i can't even zoom in on the LCD screen but it makes me money and cost very little wouldn't swop it for a 50D and 15mp
 
I for one have a hobby/activity more expensive than photography: Japanese Sword Arts. Before I had a family I had a custom order katana forged to my specifications (and this was on US soil, not even a japanese blade), and it cost me 7,000.00 when all was said and done, finished product to my door.
Swords... nice. I'm more into European swords and have often wanted to have a custom sword (Rapier) made for my office. A $200 wall hanger just won't do, I have to know it's a real weapon otherwise it's not of interest to me... even if I don't know how to properly use it. :)

My other expensive hobby is firearms. I have several handguns worth twice what the 50D is worth. I have some rifles worth $18,000 or more, depending on the market (collectors items no longer available). It's a never ending cycle... you get something you've wanted for years, then something else pop's up you can't live without.
 
tne 24-70mm f2.8 L is a good solid choice of lens - its fast aperture is great when in lower light conditions and for that reason (along with its focal range) its a very popular wedding photographers lens - for all those inside situations

The 24-105mm f4 IS L is another good solid choice, and is often chosen more as a generalist walkaround lens because of its slightly longer focal length and IS - f4 whilst not f2.8, is stil a respectable aperture for a lens.

As an aside I think that - since you found yourself cropping a lot before - the 24-105mm might be the better option for you
 
I'm happy with 4mp when it is paired with a 300mmF2.8L (also got 12.8MP) i can't even zoom in on the LCD screen but it makes me money and cost very little wouldn't swop it for a 50D and 15mp
I think we've found the crux of the argument. It boils down to what *you* want. You're happy with a 4MP camera that doesn't even have zoom in preview. I wouldn't even consider it as an option. Different strokes for different folks.

I am quite content with the 50D that's on the way.
 
Mine is motorbikes :lmao:
After 20 years, I got out of that hobby. I have more broken bones from failed landings and failed hops over things like fences... :) I think the longest time spent in a hospital bed was by a street bike though... 4 weeks with a broken pelvis. I'm motorcycle free as of right now, I sold my last bike a couple years ago... but damn it if I don't find myself in the wrong section of the magazine isle at the store from time to time. :p
 
tne 24-70mm f2.8 L is a good solid choice of lens - its fast aperture is great when in lower light conditions and for that reason (along with its focal range) its a very popular wedding photographers lens - for all those inside situations

The 24-105mm f4 IS L is another good solid choice, and is often chosen more as a generalist walkaround lens because of its slightly longer focal length and IS - f4 whilst not f2.8, is stil a respectable aperture for a lens.

As an aside I think that - since you found yourself cropping a lot before - the 24-105mm might be the better option for you
I think that's the way I'm leaning too. I'll figure it out and place an order by this weekend.
 
Swords... nice. I'm more into European swords and have often wanted to have a custom sword (Rapier) made for my office. A $200 wall hanger just won't do, I have to know it's a real weapon otherwise it's not of interest to me... even if I don't know how to properly use it. :)

My other expensive hobby is firearms. I have several handguns worth twice what the 50D is worth. I have some rifles worth $18,000 or more, depending on the market (collectors items no longer available). It's a never ending cycle... you get something you've wanted for years, then something else pop's up you can't live without.

i practice iaido and shinkendo, and actually use my swords to cut constantly. wallhangers = unsafe and never meant to cut. and in arts where your sword is your soul, you want an accurate representation of what that is. practical beater swords only last for so long, but you always want that custom made sword with the theme you want, to pass down to your kids generation to generation.
 
As with everything in this bidness ther is a middle-ground. No one worth their salt is going to say pixels dont matter or pixels always matter, just as no one should absolutely say the camera doesn't matter or it does matter. There is they grey middle that allows for variances in situations and different users.

Years ago, when a 6MP camera was the high end as far as resolution is concerned, people weren't really concerned with printing 20inch plus prints after cropping. Why would they; that is pushing the boundaries of what the average person might consider an "acceptable" print. This is without even taking cropping into consideration. These days, how many 4/6MP cameras are there? Even when we crop, and pull the effective resolution down, these bodies still have more detail in them then those cameras of yesteryear, and the programs we are using have better algorithims to preserve detail when upsampling. So megapixels do and don't matter. If a person is able to appreciate the value in that statement, why the better off they'll be (and not chasing the pink dragon).

This isn't to say we should just snap shots off and then crop later; crop/compose first and then you don't have to worry about how "bad" your photos will look when you have to start doing some aggressive cropping.

This message isn't directed at the OP since he's already made his decision, but to anyone who might stumble upon this thread and want the opinion of the Devil's Advocate.
 
As with everything in this bidness ther is a middle-ground. No one worth their salt is going to say pixels dont matter or pixels always matter, just as no one should absolutely say the camera doesn't matter or it does matter. There is they grey middle that allows for variances in situations and different users.

Years ago, when a 6MP camera was the high end as far as resolution is concerned, people weren't really concerned with printing 20inch plus prints after cropping. Why would they; that is pushing the boundaries of what the average person might consider an "acceptable" print. This is without even taking cropping into consideration. These days, how many 4/6MP cameras are there? Even when we crop, and pull the effective resolution down, these bodies still have more detail in them then those cameras of yesteryear, and the programs we are using have better algorithims to preserve detail when upsampling. So megapixels do and don't matter. If a person is able to appreciate the value in that statement, why the better off they'll be (and not chasing the pink dragon).

This isn't to say we should just snap shots off and then crop later; crop/compose first and then you don't have to worry about how "bad" your photos will look when you have to start doing some aggressive cropping.

This message isn't directed at the OP since he's already made his decision, but to anyone who might stumble upon this thread and want the opinion of the Devil's Advocate.


I just wanted to chime in and say - really good post.
 
tharmsen - I'm far more of a noob than you but for what it's worth I've got a 24-70mm f2.8 on the way... along with a 40D :) I was originally looking at the 24-105mm but decided that the f2.8 is worth far more to me than 35mm which will be covered anyway when I get a 70-200mm f2.8 down the line.
I've also been looking at the Sigma 30mm f1.4. It's what my bro has for portraits, parties etc and he loves it.
Just some thoughts. Best of luck with the new camera. Mine's still at least a week away, New Zealand is totally sold out of 40D's!!
 
I think we've found the crux of the argument. It boils down to what *you* want. You're happy with a 4MP camera that doesn't even have zoom in preview. I wouldn't even consider it as an option. Different strokes for different folks.

I am quite content with the 50D that's on the way.

I take it you have never seen a print from one, this printed a treat at A3

430391052_EujRf-L.jpg
 
Why do you need to crop so heavily?
It's only happened a couple of times, but in one case it's an image I really-really like and wanted the largest print I could get of it. This is the image.

IMG_2469.jpg
 

Most reactions

Back
Top