Selling my gear and going FF with MF alt glass!

[TWLreal]

You post here explaining why the OP can use Nikon lenses on FF Canon bodies

Please show me where I have told the OP "can use Nikon lenses on FF Canon bodies." I was replying to 2 other people. I never once addressed the OP except to tell him about viewfinder size.

It's really not that difficult to see who I was replying to.

but construct a rather artificial scenario under which Canon bodies do have an advantage (wanting to use Nikon MF glass on Rebel-class cameras is irrelevant to the discussion here since the OP wants to sell his mid-range crop body in favor of a FF body). You just come across as a Canon fan boy at this point.

I'm sorry that stating a fact makes you a fanboy.

2 people came in touting Nikon and Pentax legacy lenses. I came in stating you can use said lenses as well on a Canon body. And that every single Canon EF body will actually meter and confirm focus with Nikon AI lenses, something that D200 and lower bodies cannot do. It's a simple fact. That is fanboyism?

BTW, quite a few posters here (myself included) have suggested an entirely different route if the OP wants to stick with Canon bodies: getting cheap(er) EF lenses rather than non-EF mount MF lenses. He already owns one according to his sig. We aren't pushing him to switch systems at this point.

I actually don't care much about what he does as I never even replied to him. You and the other posters can argue all about that. I was only here to state facts to the people I was replying to.

There is no reason to be rude. I'm not the only one who interpreted that part of your post as pertaining to image quality.

How is saying "If you take the time to read my posts, I am replying to 2 other people and not the OP" being rude?

I'm only asking that you not lump me in with what the OP is asking and see that I'm replying to 2 other distinct posters. It's another discussion that branched off from the original topic.

 

[compuwar]

Nothing I have said should be read as a reply to him, as I clearly didn't mention him at all.

It's not that difficult to see who I am replying to.

The thread provides context, if you can't see that then you're simply not participating in the conversation the way the rest of us are.

I understand that for some people, it is difficult to understand basic conversational elements like context, but if you're going to partake and be taken seriously then it helps to be in the same Universe as the rest of the participants.

Paul

 

[TWLreal]

The thread provides context, if you can't see that then you're simply not participating in the conversation the way the rest of us are.

We can't ever diverge from the origintal topic and provide additional information that may be relevant to others?

This is how forums work?

Amazing.

In all seriousness, I was clearly not replying to the OP but to 2 other people. Please read my posts in context with what those 2 people said. It's really simple.

Unless you're telling me you can't reply to what other people say in threads anymore.

 

[Ruahrc]

It's not like you can't ever stray off topic a little but this thread got hijacked pretty bad. Probably 3/4 the thread is now a bickering match. If you want a long discussion with other members then go PM or start a new thread on that topic.

Additionally, you admitted in a previous post that you have never even addressed the OP or his topic(s) in your replies. While that may not be a totally bad thing for a comment or two, you have carried on for nearly 2 pages and still have not tied any of your replies into the original topic. That's taking it a little far IMO.

Ruahrc

 

[TWLreal]

It's not like you can't ever stray off topic a little but this thread got hijacked pretty bad. Probably 3/4 the thread is now a bickering match. If you want a long discussion with other members then go PM or start a new thread on that topic.

Additionally, you admitted in a previous post that you have never even addressed the OP or his topic(s) in your replies.

2 people came in first and were already branching the topic out. I replied to them on what they said.

It's a thread in a forum. This happens all the time.

While that may not be a totally bad thing for a comment or two, you have carried on for nearly 2 pages and still have not tied any of your replies into the original topic. That's taking it a little far IMO.

I replied to 2 people on their post. Others chose to instigate on what I said.

I offered my opinion on what 2 other people said. Are we supposed to stay on topic at all times and never diverge?

Again, unless you are telling me we cannot reply to what people post anymore then nothing was wrong. This is not that big of a deal. People chose to make it one.

 

[panoz7]

Moving on...

I shoot with a 1 series camera and the weight / size can be a major pain. If I didn't need some of the features that are only offered on the 1 series then I wouldn't hesitate to go for a smaller camera. If you're still set on the 1ds make sure you hold one before you commit to buy. I know I was stunned by the weight the first time I picked one up.

In your case I'd highly recommend sticking with the 40d for a bit and giving live view a chance. If you shoot mostly from a tripod and mostly using manual focus then you owe it to yourself to give it a try. Just think of the screen as a much bigger viewfinder...

 

[Ruahrc]

That's a good point I forgot the 40D has live view. Many serious macro shooters actually prefer live view to any viewfinder (even the FX ones) because you can zoom in to 100% on the LCD and really nail the focus on the part of the image you want. If you're going to be a slow methodical shooter, live view is the best tool available for critical manual focus.

 

[HBOC]

Wow, this has been an interesting read! Thanks for everyones input. It is very interesting to see what people have to say.

I have missed "FF" since I sold my EOS-3 and got into a DSLR (crop body).
I am not necessarily thinking I am going to be better by just getting a new body, I just want to do something different with my approach to photography.

I am not just going to use MF lenses exclusively. Just some of the glass that can be had for cheap can be sharper than my 17-40L. In any case, I am not spending a ton of extra money into this venture (at first ). I got $550 for the 40D (about what I paid) and am getting $600 for my 17-40L. I am picking up a 1Ds in EX++ condition for $900. I will have about $300 left over to get started on glass.

If i end up not liking this venture, I can sell start over again.

Again, I appreciate all the input. I have been contemplating this for quite some time. I would love to get a 1Ds2 or even a 1Ds3, but just cannot afford it at this time.

 

[Phrasikleia]

I am not just going to use MF lenses exclusively. Just some of the glass that can be had for cheap can be sharper than my 17-40L. In any case, I am not spending a ton of extra money into this venture (at first ). I got $550 for the 40D (about what I paid) and am getting $600 for my 17-40L. I am picking up a 1Ds in EX++ condition for $900. I will have about $300 left over to get started on glass.

I don't think you're going to find anything "for cheap" that will be both as wide and sharper than your 17-40L. That's a really fun lens to have on a FF sensor; it will be a whole different experience than what you had on a 40D, on which it gets transformed into a normal zoom. Also, it's weather-sealed, as is the camera, so you can use the combination in a greater variety of situations. I'd keep that lens, if I were you.

 

[OreoCookie]

I'd keep that lens, if I were you.

Ditto. Selling it is pointless. You can eventually get a complementary lens (e. g. an 85 mm f/1.8 or so, I think the difference between 40 and 50 mm isn't as marked) to cover the normal focal length range. The 85 mm doesn't break the bank and it's a very good lens.

Get the body, keep the 17-40 mm and start shooting!

 

[funkboy]

Hey HBOC,

I was once in your shoes. I have a 40D, and stayed with my 10D from the time it came out until the 40D was released. A good friend of mine has a 1Ds and wanted to trade it in on a 40D at the time. I was really on the fence between the 1Ds and the 40D; she pretty much would have given me an even trade of the 1Ds in exchange for me buying her a 40D, which was a very good deal at the time (this was in late '07 when the 40D came out).

I used it for a week while on vacation with a lot of different lenses on it, from my adapted 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss Planar up to her 24-70L.

That camera is just too heavy for me to use as a walk-around camera, even with small light lenses like the Planar. With the 24-70L on it my wrist starts hurting after about 20 minutes. It really shows that it's a 2002-vintage device. RAW processing is slow, ISO1250 (the maximum) is very noisy, and the controls are clunky for everyday use as they're designed not to be changed accidentally. You pretty much can't change most parameters on it without using both hands. As others here have said, the 1Ds II is a vast improvement, but it's still huge & clunky. You have to really need the "mil-spec" features of this thing to be happy with it IMHO.

I have two humble suggestions for you:

- if you really really want FF & the great viewfinder that goes with it, get the 5D. You sound like you don't care that much about AF, which is the original 5D's biggest drawback (40D AF is much better, esp. in low light & AI servo tracking).

- You could do what I did i.e. stick with your 40D, put a Katz Eye focusing screen in it & a Nikon DK-21M viewfinder magnifier on the back, and invest the resulting saved cash in glass. A Hoodloupe 3 (or if you've got the dosh, the Zacuto finder) will really improve live view focusing & stability. BTW another good reason to use live view on this camera is the silent shooting mode, which is an oft-overlooked feature on this camera that I love.

Fantastic manual-focus glass I use a lot:

- 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon (adapted C/Y mount). This is my "normal" prime.
- 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss Planar (native ZE mount). This is my "portrait" lens.
- 20mm f/3.5 Voigtländer Color Skopar pancake (native ZE-style mount). This is my "walk-around wide" lens.

I probably use the Voigtländer the most just because it's so small, light, and versatile, but all 3 of them are always in my bag (all 3 together take up about the same space as a 70-200 f/4L).

I used to have the aforementioned 50mm f/1.4 Planar & 28mm f/2.8 Distagon (my first Zeiss, which I loved), but I only had one adapter & at some point you gotta clean out the stable, plus I like being able to use automatic 1/3-stop matrix metering (yes, I know there are AF-confirm adapters, but most of them are not made very well, & at some point I got tired of fiddling with adapters & stop-down metering and just wanted lenses that work like they're supposed to. I still make the exception for the 35mm f/1.4 Distagon because it's soooo nice & I almost always use it between f/1.4 & f/2.8 anyway). At one point I had so much C/Y mount Zeiss glass that I came within a gnat's knuckle of buying a Contax Aria before I reminded myself that I've shot about 8 rolls of film in the last 8 years .

Anyway, good luck man. BTW all three of these lenses will work great on a 5D too of course .

 

[OreoCookie]

if you really really want FF & the great viewfinder that goes with it, get the 5D.

<offtopic>The 5D is one of the things I'm envious about all ya Canon heads: you have access to an affordable full frame dslr body while I still have to wait for the successor of the D700 to be released and then some! Ugh! </offtopic>

 

[ManhattanPrjct]

<offtopic>The 5D is one of the things I'm envious about all ya Canon heads: you have access to an affordable full frame dslr body while I still have to wait for the successor of the D700 to be released and then some! Ugh! </offtopic>

Aren't they pretty much the same price (don't know much about Canon stuff)?

 

[OreoCookie]

Aren't they pretty much the same price (don't know much about Canon stuff)?

I've seen a used 5D Mark I pop up for about 890 € (+ another 100 €*if you want a battery grip) while it's very hard to get a used D700 for less than 1500, 1600 €.

Although to be honest, I'd have to sell half of my lenses then and spend even more

Sometimes it's really a pity that Canon's UI is going so against my grain while I feel naturally at home with Nikon's UI. But to be honest, my D80 is no slouch and I have little reason to upgrade besides a bigger viewfinder and smaller depth of field at equivalent focal lengths.

 

[ManhattanPrjct]

I've seen a used 5D Mark I pop up for about 890 € (+ another 100 €*if you want a battery grip) while it's very hard to get a used D700 for less than 1500, 1600 €.

Although to be honest, I'd have to sell half of my lenses then and spend even more

I guess that explains why the 5Dii and the D700 are the same price new at B&H.

 

[OreoCookie]

I guess that explains why the 5Dii and the D700 are the same price new at B&H.

I'm talking about a used Mark I, not a Mark II. Or am I misunderstanding something here?

If you were to compare the prices for the 5D Mark II and the D700 (also on the used market), they seem to be more or less on par here.

 

[ManhattanPrjct]

I'm talking about a used Mark I, not a Mark II. Or am I misunderstanding something here?

If you were to compare the prices for the 5D Mark II and the D700 (also on the used market), they seem to be more or less on par here.

I'm probably adding to the confusion here by jumping into a discussion of Canon gear after having not used any for years!

 

[compuwar]

- You could do what I did i.e. stick with your 40D, put a Katz Eye focusing screen in it & a Nikon DK-21M viewfinder magnifier on the back, and invest the resulting saved cash in glass.

I'm curious- I've read that the Katz Eye screens change metering- do you find this to be a problem, or can you usually compensate for it, or are you not that exacting?

Thanks,

Paul

 

[HBOC]

The main reasons I went with the 1Ds is because it is a 1 series, can be had for a little cheaper than a 5D and the one I bought is absolutely mint. Just had the shutter replaced at Canon and looks brand new!

Also, I tend to switch gear a bit. Resale value is another reason. a 5D in the same price point I wanted to spend aren't in good shape and have 60-70K clicks. My 40D had 7900 clicks.

From looking at the photos through this thread,
I see many lenses that are just as sharp (if not sharper) as my 17-40L. Of course some of them cost $600 +, but there are some in there that are much much cheaper, which is what I am getting at.

Again, AF is important to me. Right now I am just using MF lenses as I don't want to buy expensive lenses right now. Hopefully I will have a few lenses + camera by Tuesday and I can see if I made a good choice or not.

Here is the auction i won..1Ds

 

[leighonigar]

From looking at the photos through this thread,
I see many lenses that are just as sharp (if not sharper) as my 17-40L. Of course some of them cost $600 +, but there are some in there that are much much cheaper, which is what I am getting at.

How can you tell if they're as sharp? All I could see was XGA size scaled versions?

 

[TWLreal]

I'm curious- I've read that the Katz Eye screens change metering- do you find this to be a problem, or can you usually compensate for it, or are you not that exacting?

Using third party focusing screens can throw your meter off but people will usually say it's a non-issue.

It shouldn't be more than a stop at most. Center weighted average is recommended. Spot metering will be affected.

Just use exposure compensation if you must.

 

[flosseR]

Ok, so you bought a full-frame camera from 2002???? just for the AF which won't do you any good until you invest money into AF lenses but your 40D had only 8k clicks on it?.. man.. i dunno but you are confusing the heck out of me.

So, you are a serious shooter (no other reason to get a 1ds) but your 40d has only 8k clicks. the 40D has 2013482904823092 more features and arguable better image quality than the 1ds but you feel you can be more creative with the 1 series and manual focus lenses that may or may NOT be sharper than your 17-40.

am i missing something here??? WTH! The metering system is old(ish), the AF while having more points, you cannot use with your lenses so it does not count. It writes slowly, shoots slowly, weighs 1.5KG!!! and is inferior in almost everything to anything that was mentioned in this thread.
Why even post this? This is , IMHO, like buying a laptop from 2002 and running windows 2008 Server full on it. It takes some tinkering to get it to work and when it works it might make a wonderful home server but boy what a step back.

 

[HBOC]

Well I won't keep repeating why I went with the 1Ds. I cant afford to spend $2000 on the body. I sold the 17-40L because inorder to pay for a FF, I need money. I think the analogy of a 2002 computer vs a 2008 windows machine is a bit crazy. If the 1Ds was soo worthless, why are they still $1000-$1200, and 5Ds going to cost less than a 1Ds in 3 months, when the new 5D3 will be announced?

I don't need a huge buffer. I only but 2000 shot son my camera in 3 months because i don't shoot 900000847 shots of the same thing. I still have the "film" mentality, where you nail the shot the first 2 shots and move on. That is how i have always been.

This is an interesting thread. Like I said, if it doesn't work out, I can sell. I am only using MF lenses right now, because for what I have to spend on glass, the MF are a better choice/value. I will post some examples in the next week when I get everything together.

 

[pdxflint]

Well, it's your experiment, your project... so have fun and learn something. Hopefully this will inspire you creatively. It's not always about the equipment anyway, so use the tools you want to. At least you got people talking about this, which is good.

Good luck, and let us see some new work when you get going...

 

[funkboy]

I'm curious- I've read that the Katz Eye screens change metering- do you find this to be a problem, or can you usually compensate for it, or are you not that exacting?

Good question.

In my typical silliness of the time, wanting to max-out everything, I got the ultra-brite treatment on my katz eye, along with all the other bells & whistles (composition lines, microprism collar + split prisim just like my old friend the T90, etc). I had just traded up from a 10D, which had a pretty dark viewfinder compared to my EOS 1n, so I figured I wanted the brightest viewfinder image possible. Well, actually, given that I almost always use fast lenses, I should have passed on the ultrabrite & stuck with the standard katz screen, which has a smaller depth of field for more accurate manual focusing and it mucks with the metering less as it's closer to a Canon screen than the ultrabrite model.

Now, about the metering, it actually worked out pretty well. First of all, if you don't know what I mean by "Expose to the Right" then go read that article. If you're going to be exposing to the right then you're going to need to dial in some exposure compensation anyway, and get pretty good at setting up your camera for nice full-range histograms with minimal blown highlights in a hurry. I had been using this technique for about a year on the 10D before I got the 40D, and it's one of the reasons that I made the decision to upgrade.

I really feel that a 40D with a Katz focusing screen works very well with this technique. The combination of highlight tone priority that compresses the highlights that would otherwise have blown by a stop (on newer cameras I guess there are multiple levels you can fiddle with, but on the 40D it's already pretty nice) along with the Katz Eye that pushes the camera to slightly overexpose means that with HTP turned on with the ultrabrite screen in the camera, setting -1/3 stop negative compensation as a default means that I get nice full-range histograms most of the time & rarely blow the highlights unless I'm not paying attention or attempting an impossible shot. Probably with the normal Katz treatment you wouldn't even need the -1/3 and could just leave it at 0 most of the time with this configuration.

Basically, set your camera up, test it out in a lot of different conditions, and after a couple days you'll have a "default" setting that works for you. After changing the exp. comp. for a particular shot I've been setting my 40D back to -1/3 as "zero" for so long that I don't even think about it anymore, it just comes naturally.

One caveat: I don't usually use any lenses slower than f/4 on this camera (and most everything I have other than the 24-105L is f/2.8 or faster, though there's a 70-200 f/4L IS on the cards unless they release an IS version of the 135L at Photokina . I'm not sure if you'd get the same results from slow zooms. I have used the GF's 55-250 IS on the 40D a bit and I didn't notice any metering wierdness, but I wasn't using it under difficult conditions & I certainly haven't tested it out the way I did the first few days I had the Katz screen in there.

Anyway, definitely a good investment, especially on a camera like a 40D with HTP and "officially Canon supported" focus screen swapping so you don't have to worry about shims & stuff. It took 2 minutes to install.