Hello Everyone! I'm a Canon guy now...

Greetings.

Long time Nikon DX shooter that has recently become a Canon full frame guy.

Through a very fortunate turn of events, I now have a 5D Mark IV, 40 2.8 stm, 50 1.8 stm, and 100 macro IS. The transition was fairly easy but on occasion I still find myself looking for controls that are in a different position than I am used to.

I really like the 40 and the 100 so far. The 50 is a decent lens but I think the 40 beats it almost way especially in the way OOF areas are rendered and in contrast/3D pop. I will be selling of the 50 in order to finish my walk around set of prime lenses.

What do you all think of the 24 2.8 is prime lens?

I think the 24,40,100 would make a great prime kit. In addition, the 24 would give the fov of a 40 if I decide to record in the 4k mode on the 5d Mark IV.

Thanks!

Congrats!
You can't make an announcement like that and not put some pics up. ;-)

+1

;-)

RA40 said:

Congrats!
You can't make an announcement like that and not put some pics up. ;-)

--
Mike

Click to expand...

OK fair enough

I quite literally had to go and shoot a girl's soccer game a few hours after receiving the camera. All I had was the 100 macro but I made the best of it. I have to admit that I let the camera do most of the work as I am still learning the AF system. It is very different than how the Nikon system works. I was very impressed with the default colors and the metering; they were pretty much spot on and required almost no adjustment in post.

My wife coaches our daughter's soccer team so I usually shoot images and then email them off the parents. They seemed pretty happy with what the 5D Mk IV was able to produce although I like to think I had something to do with it

Welcome to the Canon family! I hope you find this forum friendly, informative, and welcoming. Enjoy your new gear. I thoroughly enjoy my 40 f/2.8 STM as well.

Congrats. I've always been a Canon guy but I hear about Nikon/Sony users switching to Canon for the skin tones.

You might hold on to that 50/1.8. I don't have a 40, but the 50 is razor sharp well into the corners at smaller apertures. It performs like a champ on my 5DSR. I haven't used mine much for thin DOF work, mostly for landscapes and street. Love that lens. You might get $85 for it; I think it's totally worth it to just keep it.

Retzius said:

Greetings.

Long time Nikon DX shooter that has recently become a Canon full frame guy.

Through a very fortunate turn of events, I now have a 5D Mark IV, 40 2.8 stm, 50 1.8 stm, and 100 macro IS. The transition was fairly easy but on occasion I still find myself looking for controls that are in a different position than I am used to.

I really like the 40 and the 100 so far. The 50 is a decent lens but I think the 40 beats it almost way especially in the way OOF areas are rendered and in contrast/3D pop. I will be selling of the 50 in order to finish my walk around set of prime lenses.

What do you all think of the 24 2.8 is prime lens?

I think the 24,40,100 would make a great prime kit. In addition, the 24 would give the fov of a 40 if I decide to record in the 4k mode on the 5d Mark IV.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

There are two 24mm f2.8 lenses. The new one has IS, the old one doesn't. Both are very good optically. The old one is an absolute steal. It's an optic gem and you can pick it up for $200 on the used market. It's a great lens.

I agree with another poster who suggested keeping the 50mm lens. It's tack sharp at f4 and even at f2.8 it's just as good as the 40. Additionally, you'll have the extra stop if you need it. Since you have the 50, I would probably get rid of the 40 and get the 35 f2 for the extra stop.

Retzius said:

Greetings.

Long time Nikon DX shooter that has recently become a Canon full frame guy.

Through a very fortunate turn of events, I now have a 5D Mark IV, 40 2.8 stm, 50 1.8 stm, and 100 macro IS. The transition was fairly easy but on occasion I still find myself looking for controls that are in a different position than I am used to.

I really like the 40 and the 100 so far. The 50 is a decent lens but I think the 40 beats it almost way especially in the way OOF areas are rendered and in contrast/3D pop. I will be selling of the 50 in order to finish my walk around set of prime lenses.

What do you all think of the 24 2.8 is prime lens?

I think the 24,40,100 would make a great prime kit. In addition, the 24 would give the fov of a 40 if I decide to record in the 4k mode on the 5d Mark IV.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

As someone said, the old 24mm f2.8 is a nice little lens. But it has its shortcomings due to its age too: not rounded aperture blades, and oldfashioned AF motor.

The new 24mm f2.8 IS USM is a nice lens as well. Very good optics and still pretty small, with image stabilization and nice rendering.

I'd hold on to that EF 50mm f1.8 STM, because it is very cheap and will come in handy when the 40mm f2.8 does not quite cut it, aperture wise. Since you really like the 40mm (it is a likeable lens), I won't suggest the EF 35mm f2 IS USM.

Nice man.

i am amazes how Good that 40mm is. Super sharp. It can turn your camera into a walkaround camera it's so small. I like it a lot better than the 50mm 1.8 IMO Like others said, for,the money toy are almost better off keeping it, even if just for low light stuff.

This is one of the first pics I took with the 5D4, it's some dudes bulldog that I met when I went for a walk. I like the bokeh with that little lens.

Congrats on the camera. It's a joy to use photographing people. Like you mentioned, you do not need to do much at all when photographing people, the white balance for skin tones look awesome straight out of camera.

Retzius said:

Greetings.

Long time Nikon DX shooter that has recently become a Canon full frame guy.

Through a very fortunate turn of events, I now have a 5D Mark IV, 40 2.8 stm, 50 1.8 stm, and 100 macro IS. The transition was fairly easy but on occasion I still find myself looking for controls that are in a different position than I am used to.

I really like the 40 and the 100 so far. The 50 is a decent lens but I think the 40 beats it almost way especially in the way OOF areas are rendered and in contrast/3D pop. I will be selling of the 50 in order to finish my walk around set of prime lenses.

What do you all think of the 24 2.8 is prime lens?

I think the 24,40,100 would make a great prime kit. In addition, the 24 would give the fov of a 40 if I decide to record in the 4k mode on the 5d Mark IV.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

I have both the EF 24 2.8 IS (and the EF 40). I think the 24 is a fantastic little lens.

I don’t have a normal range zoom and don’t use the 24 FOV a lot. However, it’s so compact and light, it’s easy to have with you (in a pocket, wife’s purse, etc...) when you’re on vacation, out and about, etc... I’ll often walk around with a 35mm (or the 40) mounted to my 6D and when I need someting a bit wider.....it’s easy to pop on the 24.

Good cameras that make good images. In challenging light you might miss the dynamic range of the Nikon. Lifting shadows with Canon does not have the leeway of the better Nikon image files.

The new 24mm f2.8 IS is a wonderful lens. I recommend it highly.

George Zip said:

Nice man.

i am amazes how Good that 40mm is. Super sharp. It can turn your camera into a walkaround camera it's so small. I like it a lot better than the 50mm 1.8 IMO Like others said, for,the money toy are almost better off keeping it, even if just for low light stuff.

This is one of the first pics I took with the 5D4, it's some dudes bulldog that I met when I went for a walk. I like the bokeh with that little lens.

Congrats on the camera. It's a joy to use photographing people. Like you mentioned, you do not need to do much at all when photographing people, the white balance for skin tones look awesome straight out of camera.

Click to expand...

Very nice portrait of your english bulldog

Deardorff said:

Good cameras that make good images. In challenging light you might miss the dynamic range of the Nikon. Lifting shadows with Canon does not have the leeway of the better Nikon image files.

Click to expand...

Says the guy without a 5D4.

I don't think the difference between the 5D4 and Nikon has any practical implications. You'd have to really screw up an exposure AND print huge in order to see any difference.

Deardorff said:

Good cameras that make good images. In challenging light you might miss the dynamic range of the Nikon. Lifting shadows with Canon does not have the leeway of the better Nikon image files.

Click to expand...

Interesting. That hasn’t been my experience so far. The files do behave “differently” but I can’t say one is clearly better than the other. Nikon shadows retain more detail when lifted but I always found that the colors went off. So far it seems that the Canon shadows don’t have quite as much fine detail when lifted but I find their color fidelity to be far superior. Having been fortunate enough to have spent years shooting Nikon and now find myself shooting Canon I can definitely say I like the Canon files better, at least at this point in time. Color issues require much more time to fix in post and minor adjustments of one tone often affect another. I don’t have these issues with the 5D Mk IV files. They are just very easy to work with; I can definitely see why portrait and wedding photographers who have to process thousands of images would love this camera.

DR. Unless you are a real estate photographer or landscape guy... The most over rated spec on DP review. Seriously if you are manipulating images more than a stop on a regular basis you need to look at your skills not the camera.

JackM said:

Deardorff said:

Good cameras that make good images. In challenging light you might miss the dynamic range of the Nikon. Lifting shadows with Canon does not have the leeway of the better Nikon image files.

Click to expand...

Says the guy without a 5D4.

I don't think the difference between the 5D4 and Nikon has any practical implications. You'd have to really screw up an exposure AND print huge in order to see any difference.

Click to expand...

The same old same old lifting shadows nonsense. It gets tiring.

I went through an interesting expeiance recently.

I ended up up with a Nikon 800e. For my weddings I use the 5d4 mainly and the 7dII for outside stuff with the 70-200 and backup. I stopped using the 7DII for indoor lowlight/mixed lighting because the files were tedious to edit.

Anyway..... I friend gave me his 800e to use if I wanted it. So I thought cool... I'll bolt a prime on it, use it for indoor stuff that I want to shoot shallow and leave the 70-200 on the 5d4 ( it's my favourite lens) and run with 2 cameras indoors. For me it was just pure frustration. The Nikon files for me just look too different alongside the 5D4. So I would spend 30 seconds to a minute editing a 5d4 file. Crop, bit of brush, maybe a vignette etc... done. It must be that I do not know what I am doing with the Nikon files because I could not get them to look how I liked and I would spend ages just WBing them. I asked around and persevered but in the end I gave up. Not for me.

I get that it's my lack of skills, because I look at the work of guys like cliff Mautner or Joel Satore who are Nikon guys and ambassadors and their work is breathtaking. Hell, even some mates of mine who shoot Nikon make their files look awesome. Anyway.... Different strokes for different folks I guess.

George Zip said:

DR. Unless you are a real estate photographer or landscape guy... The most over rated spec on DP review. Seriously if you are manipulating images more than a stop on a regular basis you need to look at your skills not the camera.

Click to expand...

Doesn’t even matter if you’re a real estate photographer. Most are using hdr or off camera flashes anyway. Definitely overrated here on dpr

Deardorff said:

Good cameras that make good images. In challenging light you might miss the dynamic range of the Nikon. Lifting shadows with Canon does not have the leeway of the better Nikon image files.

Click to expand...

As-shot




Processed to taste in LR