EOS 30D vs 5D

03-07-2006, 7:01 PM

Hi

I am currently a EOS 300D user... and now need to upgrade... Although this is partly wanting to get newer and flashier things! There is a reasonable excuse!

I mostly do reportage photography at weddings, with occasional portrait / fashion work... and have found that the 300D just doesn't have the fps i require for my shooting style.. plus i want to work more in RAW format which i find gives greater flexibility / a safety net for mistakes!

The obvious upgrade is the 30D... but the gadget hound in me wants the 5D! (I have had the existence of the 1D range removed from my brain via hypnosis!

)

So After the scene setting, i would like to know if the figures on the canon website stack up... can the 30D and 5D really burst RAW faster than the 300D can in jpg? or are there caveates? (sp)

I would also like to know why you 5D owners out there chose the 5 instead of the 30... what features do you use that the 30D just doesn't have?

and 30D owners... was it just cost?

thanks everyone!

Steve

Kaoshan · 03-07-2006, 7:26 PM

You go for the 5D if you want a full frame camera!

John7 · 03-07-2006, 8:01 PM

The 5D is ideal for the kind of subject matter you are shooting. However, it does not have the FPS (only 3 FPS) so you may need to look elsewhere.

I have a 5D (previously owned 20D) and it is a fantastic bit of kit, but I don't need 5FPS

tomson · 03-07-2006, 8:29 PM

Like yourself, I shoot weddings and have up until now used a pair of 350Ds as my weapons of choice. Recently though I have upgraded to a 30D and a 20D. The main reason for upgrading was spot metering on the 30D and the bigger display (and price I guess - bought the pair, used, for a little over £1K).

I always shoot RAW and from using the 30D recently the burst mode seems pretty damn good. I can't actually imagine needing that sort of fps but you never know. The buffer also seems to clear quite quickly too. I must have fired off 500 odd shots a few weekends ago (at the World Naked Bike Ride) just playing with it and seeing how it performs. Also compared to the 350D the AF seems more reliable - far fewer out of focus images.

I did toy with the idea of an old 1D and a 5D - I dismissed the 1D mainly due to the size, but the 5D was definitely a contender. The image quality was marginally (but noticeably) better and high ISO images seemed a little less noisy. But the extra cost and the fact that i'd not really gain anything by going full frame (never really needed wider than what I have now - 17mm on a 1.6x body) were the deciding factors against. Also the new canon 17-55mm IS lens is looking inviting and that'd be a no-no on a 5D.

richard plumb · 03-07-2006, 10:30 PM

30D has 5fps compared to the 5Ds 3.

5D has a larger sensor, and is full frame 35mm compared to 1.6 crop APS-C of the 30D.

Both have higher precision focusing when using a lens with f2.8 or faster maximum aperture.

Personally I'd save the money and go for the 30D. Its getting about time for Canon to replace the 1D series, possibly full frame. That'd be a cracker of a reportage camera.