Reading mode: Light Dark

Convince me to buy a 5D over 450D

Go to last post
A

asherf

Active member
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
Location
ACT, AU
Hi All,

So - I now have decided that a 5D is within my price range. My main motivation to upgrade? I'm taking a lot of shots for poster art, and for exhibit - and the 8mp on my 350D does not cut it.

Consequenctly I'm looking at stats. I suspect the answer here could be expressed by "the 5D is way better you idiot", however:

The 5D versus the new 450D - their resolution is about the same. The 5D is a full frame sensor, but I'm not sure how that makes it better and not just different. The 5D is a MUCH older model, does that make parts of it obselete? High ISO performance on the older camera?

As the kind of portrait photographer I am, there are many features on a more expensive camera I wouldn't use (eg. I don't need continuous shooting, of any kind really). Everything I hear says the 5D makes much prettier images. I want less noise, I want sharper images with nicer res. On paper, in terms of specs for the 5D, how does that work?

The specs of the 450D (and I guess the 40D also) are making a compelling argument, that says to me I don't need to shell out $1000s extra for a camera from 2005.

What am I thinking??

Cheers,
Asher.

(ps. incidently I'm aiming to purchase a 24-105 f/4L - and the 5D pack that includes that lens looks nice)

--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
 
Make up your own mind:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon5d/

vs.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon450d/

The answer is ALWAYS "it depends". Some will tell you it's the camera that takes better images, but others will tell you it's the photographer.

Perhaps you should buy a 450d first, see if you like it - then move up to the 5d if you think it's warranted. There is more to these cameras than just IQ, ISO performance, etc. For example - handling, for one.

Given that there is some speculation that a successor to the 5d will be released later this year, buying a 5d right now wouldn't seem like the best choice. If you're like me and many others, we're hanging out for the 5d mk ii (or whatever it will be called).

HTH

--
Cheers,

Matthew

'True. You can shoot a Canon with a Nikon ... but it's much more fun shooting a Nikon with a Cannon.'
 
5D is the better camera but doesnt necessarily make the better pictures. you can do nearly everything with the 450D. the FF sensor is nice to play with DOF, easier shooting because your viewfinder is larger and the possibility to use the nice 24-105L lens.
if you dont need the bigger sensor you go cheaper with the 450D.
and if you want a 5D wait till the 5DmarkII will be out at photokina.
regards
thomas

--
visit my homepage http://thomas.im
portrait - studio - streetlife
 
As others have said: it depends. You certainly do not sound like you NEED a 5D. For portraits, full frame is less important.

DOF is. So think lenses, For a start, get a 50mm f/1.8 prime lens: around $100 and you get an excellent portrait lens on smaller frame cameras. I have used a Rebel XTi for studio portraits (and I have a 5D as well, and a 1D MkIII).

Have fun choosing.
 
I've owned 10D (briefly), 300D, 350D, 400D. I don't own the 450. To tell you the truth, I haven't seen any significant increase in IQ from each of these steps. About 4 months ago I bought a 5D and can tell you that there is a definite increase in IQ. I already owned a nice set of lenses, so I really didn't need to buy any good glass. The thing I notice is mainly resolution. Take a landscape photo with a crop camera, and quite often, distant foliage turns to green mush. With the 5D, you can see detail when sometimes the crop camera fails. I get a much higher percentage of keepers with the 5D; the IQ of the average photo is higher than with crop. That is my observation, and take it for what it's worth (it's a subjective opinion). As long as you are willing to buy some good glass, I don't think you would regret a 5D. Now, if you don't like carrying a pretty big and heavy camera, you are much better off with one of the DRebels, and their IQ is very good. Also, if you never print bigger than 8x10, it would be a waste to buy the FF cam.

Regards,

Jon
asherf said:
Hi All,

So - I now have decided that a 5D is within my price range. My main
motivation to upgrade? I'm taking a lot of shots for poster art, and
for exhibit - and the 8mp on my 350D does not cut it.

Consequenctly I'm looking at stats. I suspect the answer here could
be expressed by "the 5D is way better you idiot", however:

The 5D versus the new 450D - their resolution is about the same. The
5D is a full frame sensor, but I'm not sure how that makes it better
and not just different. The 5D is a MUCH older model, does that make
parts of it obselete? High ISO performance on the older camera?

As the kind of portrait photographer I am, there are many features on
a more expensive camera I wouldn't use (eg. I don't need continuous
shooting, of any kind really). Everything I hear says the 5D makes
much prettier images. I want less noise, I want sharper images with
nicer res. On paper, in terms of specs for the 5D, how does that
work?

The specs of the 450D (and I guess the 40D also) are making a
compelling argument, that says to me I don't need to shell out $1000s
extra for a camera from 2005.

What am I thinking??

Cheers,
Asher.

(ps. incidently I'm aiming to purchase a 24-105 f/4L - and the 5D
pack that includes that lens looks nice)

--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jon_b
 
asherf said:
Hi All,

So - I now have decided that a 5D is within my price range. My main
motivation to upgrade? I'm taking a lot of shots for poster art, and
for exhibit - and the 8mp on my 350D does not cut it.

Consequenctly I'm looking at stats. I suspect the answer here could
be expressed by "the 5D is way better you idiot", however:

The 5D versus the new 450D - their resolution is about the same. The
5D is a full frame sensor, but I'm not sure how that makes it better
and not just different. The 5D is a MUCH older model, does that make
parts of it obselete? High ISO performance on the older camera?

As the kind of portrait photographer I am, there are many features on
a more expensive camera I wouldn't use (eg. I don't need continuous
shooting, of any kind really). Everything I hear says the 5D makes
much prettier images. I want less noise, I want sharper images with
nicer res. On paper, in terms of specs for the 5D, how does that
work?

The specs of the 450D (and I guess the 40D also) are making a
compelling argument, that says to me I don't need to shell out $1000s
extra for a camera from 2005.

What am I thinking??

Cheers,
Asher.

(ps. incidently I'm aiming to purchase a 24-105 f/4L - and the 5D
pack that includes that lens looks nice)

--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
Click to expand...
Why don't you do the research for yourself and come to your own conclusion based upon your needs?
 
First, the obligatory "did you do a forum search?" statement.

Second, the obligatory, "If you have to ask, then you probably don't need it" answer.

Third, the obligatory "Only you can decide if it fits your style" ending sentence.

Having said all that...Hell Ya, get the 5d!

I have had several dSLR's. I moved to the 5d a couple of months back from the XTi. I loved the XTi for it's size and features. Backpacked and traveled with it since it came out. I was seriosly contemplating the 40d as my new camera but I am one of the few who do not like crop camera's. After reading on here and Fredmiranda.com I decided to get a new 5d kit. I won't go into all the reasons since they are mine and not yours. Suffice it to say I wanted something that was more capable (even if I didn't have the talent to use it). The full frame sensor was what I really wanted.

When I received the 5d and 24-105 F4 kit I immediately took some samples and was blown away. There have been many, many posts on the 'magic' of the 5d images. I can attest that 'out of the camera' this is the closest I have came to a film look and feel. I took raw's with both the 5d and XTi with a variety of lenses and you could easily pick out the 5d ones. The ability to shoot at 800 or 1600 ISO with virtually no noise is not a fabrication...it really does resolve that well. Don't get me wrong, the 5d does have some serious limitations that are a reflection of it's 'technological' age. It's not fast. It doesn't have the advanced focusing available to other camera's. It doesn't have anti-shake, anti-dust, live-view, or 'easy modes'. It is very much, except for the sensor, a mediocre camera. Ah, but that sensor...it's everything you have ever heard. I don't know if it's the full frame or the size of the imaging pixels but it makes an 'ok' camera a very capable one. There's a reason it's 3 years old and is still selling well, it's just that good. The 24-105 lens is a great match for this camera and mine is basically glued to mine. I have the 50mm 1.8f and 75-300 IS also.

The decision is up to you and what you intend to use it for...I like mine but YMMV.

Cheers!

Jay
--
'Look kid, I'll give you $5 to shut-up and smile'
 
keep the 5D and your way to take photo will improve very quickly !
imo the full frame advantage is the real "matter"
when you use a lens you use the real focal this is the revelation !!
good luck !
Ad
 
I'd definately like to be printing bigger than 8x10. I have a big call for photos that fit A3 poster size, which is almost 12x17 in the american measures.

i intend to spend some money on glass at the same time - erring on the side of the 24-105L, and potentially another nice prime (i have the 50mm 1.8 and it's a gem).

i'm happy to carry the damn thing, and don't think i would dispose of my 350D in any case.

thanks for the post - i'm thinking that it's subjective opions that i need, or else heavily technical ones. the superficial...or should i say surface level... specs are difficult to choose between.

--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
 
because i feel that what's been called subjective opinions are quite valuable. Having researched already, i feel the specs are quite similar in several key areas. However, if only because of the price difference, it's clear that at least some people would value the 5D over the 450D considerably, and I'd like to know why.
--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
 
i have the 50mm 1.8 already, it's a brilliant lens for the cost.

i hear what you say, and am always reluctant to spend on technology right before an update. however - what's a likely opening price for a 5D succesor?

cost plays a big part here.

--
my site: http://www.didrain.com
 
you come across as someone who knows their photographic needs, but if you really need to be convinced to have a particular camera over another, then you don't need the camera you remain unclear about purchasing.

both are great cameras, and even though the imminent arrival of the new 5d mkII REALLY irritates the heck out of current 5d owners, only you in yourself know which body to choose. I really don't understand why so many rebel owners go from one rebel body to the nex..it isn't really an upgrade...perhaps a 40d might be more what you are looking for?

I think it's fair to comment that just because one camera is cheaper than the other, it dosn't always equate to cheaper quality pictures, and also, it is widley accepted that the 5d churns out better images than the rebel series.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/72157602470636767/
 
A couple months ago, the 5d price dropped to such a point that I couldn't resist - it was the camera I originally wanted to replace by Rebel XT, but instead I purchased the 40d because of all the wiz-bang features. So, I sold the 40d and crop lenses on eBay, which nicely funded the purchase of the 5d plus 35mm L/1.4 and 135mm L/2.0.

Regrets? None. I don't miss any of the features really on the 40d with the possible exception of the ISO in viewfinder and menu system.

For me, I like the full frame because I really ejnoy shallow DOF images. There's no doubt about it, 5d is better for higher ISO images. I don't even bother to run 800 or 1000 ISO images through noiseware with 5d - it's really that good. But, most importantly, there is no 35mm 1.4 for a crop camera. There is no 135mm 2.0 for a crop camera. And, there is no 85mm 1.2 or 50mm 1.2 for a crop camera. They don't exisit because of the crop factor. And, as you probably know, the lenses make all the difference. I shoot in RAW, make minor corrections in Lightroom, and then nothing...I just marvel. Maybe other cameras could have taken the same pictures, but that's just speculation. Oh, and that viewfinder....wow! Once you look through that, a crop camera seems like a toy.

There's also a less tangible aspect to the 5d. Work with me here...almost like the BMW 3-series. Yes, there's cars that come close or even surpass in terms of performance and other attributes, but it's the "whole is more than the sume of the parts" thing with that car - it just feels great. And, that's what I feel with the 5d -- perfect size, bright viewfinder, beautiful shutter noise, etc. There's no more wondering about "did I get the right camera." I can just concentrate on photography.

So...my advice? If you can afford it, get the 5d. It's truly a classic. You'll have no regrets.

Good luck,
Jeff

PS - I think it's a bit deceiving to on Flickr or Pbase and compare 5d images vs. crop camera images, at least it was. I think that up until recently, the 5d was a camera at a price point that probably it was purchased mostly by pros or very good amatuers who are probalby more skilled than people buying more entry-level crop cameras. Thus, better images. But, maybe not, I don't know...anyway, here are a couple of shots from this week wiht 5d....









--
http://www.jeffseltzerphotography.com
 
Jeff Seltzer said:
A couple months ago, the 5d price dropped to such a point that I
couldn't resist - it was the camera I originally wanted to replace by
Rebel XT, but instead I purchased the 40d because of all the wiz-bang
features. So, I sold the 40d and crop lenses on eBay, which nicely
funded the purchase of the 5d plus 35mm L/1.4 and 135mm L/2.0.

Regrets? None. I don't miss any of the features really on the 40d
with the possible exception of the ISO in viewfinder and menu system.

For me, I like the full frame because I really ejnoy shallow DOF
images. There's no doubt about it, 5d is better for higher ISO
images. I don't even bother to run 800 or 1000 ISO images through
noiseware with 5d - it's really that good. But, most importantly,
there is no 35mm 1.4 for a crop camera. There is no 135mm 2.0 for a
crop camera. And, there is no 85mm 1.2 or 50mm 1.2 for a crop camera.
They don't exisit because of the crop factor. And, as you probably
know, the lenses make all the difference. I shoot in RAW, make minor
corrections in Lightroom, and then nothing...I just marvel. Maybe
other cameras could have taken the same pictures, but that's just
speculation. Oh, and that viewfinder....wow! Once you look through
that, a crop camera seems like a toy.

There's also a less tangible aspect to the 5d. Work with me
here...almost like the BMW 3-series. Yes, there's cars that come
close or even surpass in terms of performance and other attributes,
but it's the "whole is more than the sume of the parts" thing with
that car - it just feels great. And, that's what I feel with the 5d
-- perfect size, bright viewfinder, beautiful shutter noise, etc.
There's no more wondering about "did I get the right camera." I can
just concentrate on photography.

So...my advice? If you can afford it, get the 5d. It's truly a
classic. You'll have no regrets.

Good luck,
Jeff

PS - I think it's a bit deceiving to on Flickr or Pbase and compare
5d images vs. crop camera images, at least it was. I think that up
until recently, the 5d was a camera at a price point that probably it
was purchased mostly by pros or very good amatuers who are probalby
more skilled than people buying more entry-level crop cameras. Thus,
better images. But, maybe not, I don't know...anyway, here are a
couple of shots from this week wiht 5d....









--
http://www.jeffseltzerphotography.com
Click to expand...
--

great shots..I mean, all of them are amazing and a very compelling reason to go get a 5d, but I'm still going to wait for the mkII to be announced lol.

also, I think you have demonstrated beautifully that to get the most form the 5d, you do need good quality glass.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/72157602470636767/
 
'Compelling' is exactly the word I'd have used. There's another post here that recommends looking into a 40D rather than a 450D, I'd second that too. Like you though, I'm waiting for the 5DMkII...
Wonder if the OP has read

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/#myths yet...it's technical, but covers most of what would explain the subjective opinions and IMO is well worth the time...skip the baffling bits and get an education.
That 50mm f/1.8 should be a peachy portrait lens on a 1.6 crop.
We're spoilt for choice.

Cameras don't shoot people...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top