HELP! Need a little advice on what Camera/Lens combo to go with!!!

J

jag0

New member
SO in 2013 I plan to record my entire Trinidad Carnival experience. This includes
- Day Parties
- Night Parties
- Jouvert (for those unfamiliar, its basically a party where everyone gets painted up and has fun)
- Road MArch (or Parade)

I really only want to carry one camera and one lens to all these things, but I'm having a little trouble deciding which to go with? Do I go with the MARK 2? Do I go with a MARK 3? (do i really even NEED a mark 3?)? Maybe a 50D? 7d?

DO I go 50mm 1.2? 24-105 f4? I'm really not sure what would be best for this kind of scenario.

I'm getting a fairly good deal on a MArk III Kit (Camera + 24-105 F4 Lens) for 3300, But I can't decide if i should really spend all that, or if I should get the MARK II and a different lens.

Please, help!!!

:)
 
Sounds like this is your first DSLR and not sure exactly what to do , my suggestion pick up the 650D t4i with the kit lens, you still get 29 minutes and 59 seconds record time and it's only maximum $1000 and you get good quality pictures entry-level DSLR, spend the extra cash On a lens, If this is your first DSLR really wouldn't start with a 7D or 5D especially, start with a rebel line once you get comfortable move up from there in my opinion :)
jag0 said:
SO in 2013 I plan to record my entire Trinidad Carnival experience. This includes
- Day Parties
- Night Parties
- Jouvert (for those unfamiliar, its basically a party where everyone gets painted up and has fun)
- Road MArch (or Parade)

I really only want to carry one camera and one lens to all these things, but I'm having a little trouble deciding which to go with? Do I go with the MARK 2? Do I go with a MARK 3? (do i really even NEED a mark 3?)? Maybe a 50D? 7d?

DO I go 50mm 1.2? 24-105 f4? I'm really not sure what would be best for this kind of scenario.

I'm getting a fairly good deal on a MArk III Kit (Camera + 24-105 F4 Lens) for 3300, But I can't decide if i should really spend all that, or if I should get the MARK II and a different lens.

Please, help!!!

:)
Click to expand...
 
nope, not my first DSLR... I actually have a 60D I use now. A few reasons I don't wanna do it.
1. It's not weather sealed... given that I'll be in an environment where its VERY likely It'll rain, or I'll get splash, I really want somethign that I can worry less (I know weather sealed isn't waterproof) about.

2. I've been trying to shoot in low light with the 60D and a set of takumar lenses.... 50mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.8.... lets just say, the footage i take is not very usable. So i figured, the Mark II (or 3) would be a better bet.
 
ok makes more sense, mark 3 then L lens no question =)
jag0 said:
nope, not my first DSLR... I actually have a 60D I use now. A few reasons I don't wanna do it.
1. It's not weather sealed... given that I'll be in an environment where its VERY likely It'll rain, or I'll get splash, I really want somethign that I can worry less (I know weather sealed isn't waterproof) about.

2. I've been trying to shoot in low light with the 60D and a set of takumar lenses.... 50mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.8.... lets just say, the footage i take is not very usable. So i figured, the Mark II (or 3) would be a better bet.
Click to expand...
 
If you're shooting at f/1.4 on the 60D and it's still too dark, then the mkIII with a 24-105 will not give you any better IQ. The 24-70 might barely give you a better image, but really you'd want to be using the mkIII and a couple of fast primes to really see an improvement.

If you're shooting at f/1.4 and it's still too dark, you're better off adding more light - even if that means an on camera light. The simple fact is that these cameras need light. Yes, they offer a big improvement in sensitivity over traditional 1/3rd" CMOS camcorders, but IQ is still very closely connected to the quantity and quality of light.
 
True!
deltoidjohn said:
If you're shooting at f/1.4 on the 60D and it's still too dark, then the mkIII with a 24-105 will not give you any better IQ. The 24-70 might barely give you a better image, but really you'd want to be using the mkIII and a couple of fast primes to really see an improvement.

If you're shooting at f/1.4 and it's still too dark, you're better off adding more light - even if that means an on camera light. The simple fact is that these cameras need light. Yes, they offer a big improvement in sensitivity over traditional 1/3rd" CMOS camcorders, but IQ is still very closely connected to the quantity and quality of light.
Click to expand...
 
Well here's my dilemma. I have a set of Takumars currently (35mm F2, 50mm F1.4, 85mm F1.8 & 1.9) that I COULD use with the 5D. However the problem is if I wanted to switch to taking stills, then it'd be a bit challenging with no autofocus (yeah I'm not quite THAT good yet to take lots of action shots with a manual focus). This is part of the reason I was looking at the 50mm 1.2 (in addition to the extra stop). But If I get that Mark III kit, then getting the 50mm 1.2 will be out of the question for at LEAST another year......
 
I shoot stills on those lenses all the time. It is VERY challenging, however, I get better at it every time I do it. I do have to rig up for stills (shoulder mount and monitor if in the field). If I'm doing casual photography (my kid's graduation, that kind of thing) I have some low end Canon zoom lenses I pull out.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
The issue with the mk2, 7d, etc... for this kind of use is the 12 minute max record time. I believe It's 30 minutes on the mk3.
Click to expand...

After 12 minutes of record time or 30 minutes you just press the record button again. You might have a second of blackness, but if you properly judge your shots and are paying attention to what is happening I think the op should be fine. Furthermore I agree that if your 60d is not fast enough, you're going to need more light. Maintaining focus at f/2.0 is very difficult with a 60d, I can;t imagine how harder it would be on a mark II/III
 
I have the T4i which I love.

just bought the 5D3 specifically for low light work at 1600 and above.

I **WOULD NOT** give up auto focus for stills. In those situations, you don't want a 50% loss rate shooting wide open with manual focus. Auto focus is way too good by comparison In fast, I love the T4i face tracking auto focus for video in good light.

Do the 24-105 for a good, all around lens on the 5D3. Add the 85 1.8 and a 28 2.0 auto focus, or whatever focal lengths you prefer. The 40 mm pancake is great for video auto focus, as is the newer 18-135 mm STM because they are silent.

Good luck!
Michael
 
Well, I have to make the choice today on if I should get the Mark III kit for 3300. That pretty much leaves close to $0 for additional lenses. I Do have the option to sell the 24-105 and add on a little extra...

How is the performance of the 40MM for stills? Maybe I could pick that up to go with the 24-105
 
I concur. The 24-105mm F/4L is a great all-round lens for the 5D3. It has IS which is usefull for handheld video work. If you really need to cover very low light situations then one of the lesser Canon 50mm lenses will do fine. The F/1.4 is good value at around $350. The F/1.8 is really cheap (around $100) & optically very good except it's not so easy to manually focus because of the narrow focus ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top