Taking the consumer to SLR plunge

"Originally I had considered (primarily based on it's excellent reviews and the regard given to the L glass) the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens. I'm presuming that this lens would be too short for the sort of photography Iwould like to do. Are zooms not a sensible option? (excuse my idiot statements here). "

I've tried the 24~70L and whilst it works well enough and makes a versatile 'diver' lens, its close focus ability is not too good and it would require a diopter to move this closer. Its not a lens that I would recommend unless you already have one and you don't mind buying zoom gear/appropriate extenders for it.

My set-up: 100 mm macro, 60mm +Extender 12II (very good for lower vis diving) and 50mm macro - all Canons and all used on FF - of the 3 I'd lose the 50 first. Rather than think in terms of which is best, you could consider your own likely subject matter and request opinions on which would best work for it. For example, I find the 100 to be an excellent small fish lens (we are getting some wierd stuff around Britain/Ireland this year, so this is what I am concentrating on. If I want to shoot small benthic species then the 60ExtII is my next choice, but for sponges, larger anemones, etc., I'd probably select the 50. Horses for courses!

Herbko-

No question that the Canon has the best high ISO performance, even better than the Nikon and much better than the Canon. Nevertheless, that is not traditionally an issue underweater.

So question #4: Is this a dual use camera or just underwater?

OTOH, maybe high ISO performance should be importent to underwater shooters. Traditionally underwater shooters use ISO 100 (or less). However, my Nikon allows me to float the ISO up to a preset number. I tried it. When the shot was too dark (poor strobe placement) the ISO floated up and the shots were saved.

Hi Tom, good post.

I think it's definitely an issue for underwater. Clean high ISO means that you can stop down your wide angle lens more for MUCH improved corner sharpness. If you bump the ISO from 100 to 400 then you can stop down from f4 to f8.

It's also great for filter photography where you typically use a higher ISO.

Cheers

James

Herbko-

No question that the Canon has the best high ISO performance, even better than the Nikon and much better than the Canon. Nevertheless, that is not traditionally an issue underweater.

 

So question #4: Is this a dual use camera or just underwater?

 

OTOH, maybe high ISO performance should be importent to underwater shooters. Traditionally underwater shooters use ISO 100 (or less). However, my Nikon allows me to float the ISO up to a preset number. I tried it. When the shot was too dark (poor strobe placement) the ISO floated up and the shots were saved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What does tradition have to do with anything. Understand your equipment and use it to get the best image.

Here's an example: shot under a dark pier, F/11, 1/30, ISO 1600.

Using high ISO and small aperture is the right trade off for the 5D. You have to look hard to see the difference between ISO 100 and 1600.

I let my Nikon float to ISO 400 and see zero difference even on macro shots. The specs say a 5D is better at high ISO.

It ain't just specs...it be the truth.

stu

Herb, little diff between 100 and 1600?!?!?!

Holy cow... thats impressive

i want a new camera...

Thanks for all your answers this is just the sort of information I have been looking for. I think enough of you have made enough positive comments about the 5D for me to be confident that I'm making the right choice. Lens choice seems a little more tricky and I think from what has been said that I'm going to have to give up on the hope of using a zoom for my macro shots. Primes seem to be the favoured choice. Now all that is left to do is sewwt talk the wife into letting me buy the camera