Upgrade to 40/50D or 5D Mk I('Classic'). For portraiture.

[Fedaykin]

Hey guys. I got a decision to make. I plan on starting to work as a portrait photographer next year, and I want to upgrade my Rebel XS(both for IQ and having a backup body purposes). I've narrowed it down to a 40D/50D or a 5D Mk I; as they are all within my budget I want to know how substantially the 5D's FF sensor affects image quality compared to the 40/50D.

Regarding the 5D's AF I am aware of how bad it is, but I figure I don't really need a killer AF considering I plan to do portraiture where a fast AF isn't paramount(though it should be accurate of course). And I use center focus point 99% of the time. As to the lack of Live View and sensor cleaning, these things don't really bother me.

Another thing is the size of the viewfinder, is it a substantial leap from the crop cameras?

I appreciate any help/advice.

 

[Derrel]

FF has a bigger viewfinder than 1.6x. I would much,much,much rather shoot the 5D classic than any crop-body camera for portraiture....in fact, I DO SHOOT the 5D classic as my camera of choice for portraiture; the FF sensor is much larger than a 1.6x sensor, and gives vastly different depth of field and angles of view than a 1.6x camera.

On a FF camera, an 85mm lens is quite useful for full-length shots; on 1.6x, an 85mm lens requires you to be 34 feet away from a six foot tall person, in order to capture them with enough head- and foot-space to do a properly-framed full-length portrait, or a picture than can be cropped to 8x10 proportions; using the same lens, you must be 34 feet away to get the same framing on a 1.6x body.

Indoors, using a 1.6x camera, you will be stuck using very short focal lengths like 17,18,19,20mm to do full-length shots....which menas deep depth of field, ugly inpfocus backgrounds, and lots of distortion, both real (due to camera-to-subject distance) and apparent.

It's almost a no-contest between a FF 5D classic and a 40D,50D,or any other 1.6x body when the subject is portraiture.

 

[Fedaykin]

FF has a bigger viewfinder than 1.6x. I would much,much,much rather shoot the 5D classic than any crop-body camera for portraiture....in fact, I DO SHOOT the 5D classic as my camera of choice for portraiture; the FF sensor is much larger than a 1.6x sensor, and gives vastly different depth of field and angles of view than a 1.6x camera.

On a FF camera, an 85mm lens is quite useful for full-length shots; on 1.6x, an 85mm lens requires you to be 34 feet away from a six foot tall person, in order to capture them with enough head- and foot-space to do a properly-framed full-length portrait, or a picture than can be cropped to 8x10 proportions; using the same lens, you must be 34 feet away to get the same framing on a 1.6x body.

Indoors, using a 1.6x camera, you will be stuck using very short focal lengths like 17,18,19,20mm to do full-length shots....which menas deep depth of field, ugly inpfocus backgrounds, and lots of distortion, both real (due to camera-to-subject distance) and apparent.

It's almost a no-contest between a FF 5D classic and a 40D,50D,or any other 1.6x body when the subject is portraiture.

Thanks a lot Derrel! I'm pretty sure I'll get the 5D but I want to make sure. I plan on getting the Canon 100 Macro, would that be a good focal length for headshots indoors on FF?

 

[usayit]

My vote is the 5D MI.