Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
I don't want the 5D Mark II just for the 2 week trip, I want to get one before the Total Solar Eclipse too.
So, the timing is right. I'm hoping the Mark III will be announced in the next 2 months so the price of the Mark II will come down.
If it does, then I might be able to justify the 16-35mm.
No doubt the Nikon has some nice stuff, but I'm not going to switch at this stage - and can't afford the 14-24 even though Alex has shown how brilliant the lens can be in the right hands.
|
Hi Mike,
If Canon releases a 5DIII I don't think the price of the 5DII will go down at all. Rumors are about a split in the 5D line with a camera with 21mpx and 6fps coming first and a high mpx camera later.
If the first 5DII released is not a high mpx camera the price of the 5DII will even get higher.
About lenses.
I've tried the 16-35 and for nightscapes I hated it. The borders were very bad and I couldn't explain the quality it had for the price.
For the 5DII consider the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm F2.8 it's very cheap and in quality it can be compared to the Nikon 14-24 2.8 I'm saying this because I have them both. The 35mm 1.4 is also very good.
I haven't found a nice wide angle zoom for nightscapes in the 5DII except the Nikon 14-24. For APS-C the Tokina 11-16 2.8 is hard to beat.
Finally the zoom vs prime argument is from the 70s today zooms are in the same category as primes. The 70-200s, Nikon 14-24, Canon 17-55 and several others are comparable in quality to primes in the same range.
Primes are good for luminosity.