Age old question: Good Glass or Good body? [VIDEO]

[ollie]

Digitalrev (a sponser here) produce digitalrevtv. For those that have not seen it before, take the time it is a lot of fun and informative. Here they aim to answer a frequent question that i see here, Do i buy aPro DSLR + Cheapo Lens vs "Cheapo" DSLR + Pro Lens

A pro DSLR with a cheapo lens or a cheapo DSLR with an expensive lens, what would be better? We'd answer that question in this video by asking two very different photographers. We tested the Canon 1D Mark IV with a Sigma 28-300mm f/something and a Canon 550D with a 24-70mm f/2.8L.

[NikonUser]

Awesome fun. Thanks for posting!

[Kym]

Nikon neck strap and T shirt ??

It goes to show what we all knew - glass wins!

[ollie]

Thanks for fixing the video link Kym.

[William]

Worth a look , Thanks for that, So there's life in my 30D yet , Just got some L Glass

[mongo]

Age old answer - both ! if the money can stretch that far.

If Mongo had to pick - go the glass. Most bodies are reasonable and can be helped in post processing. However, poor glass cannot be.

BTW - there is nothing wrong with the best glass at a second hand price - its the smart way to go provided it is in excellent condition.

[arthurking83]

LOL.. funny.

while I disagree with the implications(on the whole), it is highly dependent on the cheapo glass you've chosen to use too. Choose the cheapo glass carefully and the differences are not so obvious. Obviously the Sigma 28-300 is one to avoid!!

[ving]

funny vid. thnx for sharing

[old dog]

that was a hoot, especially with the nikon strap and shirt. He had a great sense of humour too.

[TOM]

In a lot of ways, a $500 Olympus 4/3rds camera with a nice Carl Zeiss lens on it will outperform a Nikon D3 with say a 24-70mm Nikon lens. It's all about the glass.

[DigitalRev]

Thank you for liking the video! Kai did a good job again!

[JM Tran]

In a lot of ways, a $500 Olympus 4/3rds camera with a nice Carl Zeiss lens on it will outperform a Nikon D3 with say a 24-70mm Nikon lens. It's all about the glass.

until the Olympus is shot above its base ISO.......hahahaha

in all honesty, Im pretty sure the Oly sensor cannot resolve enough details from the Zeiss lens either to maximize its full potential anyway.

sensor resolving power to the quality of glass is something that ppl tend to overlook sometimes.

[Kym]

LOL.. funny.
while I disagree with the implications(on the whole), it is highly dependent on the cheapo glass you've chosen to use too. Choose the cheapo glass carefully and the differences are not so obvious. Obviously the Sigma 28-300 is one to avoid!!

Good point. Cheap glass varies. I consider the Sigma 10-20 relatively inexpensive as far as WA lenses go... and it delivers great results.
Even my kit 18-50 at f/8 does a pretty good job. Work with a lens's sweet spot and you can get great results.

The one in the vid clearly has CA and contrast issues.

In the video the 'cheap' body is a 550D which is latest technology, esp. in the sensor and on board chip/firmware, other than having a cheaper build, less buttons, and slower frame rate it is no slouch.
Maybe a 2nd hand 350D would have been fairer?

[JM Tran]

Good point. Cheap glass varies. I consider the Sigma 10-20 relatively inexpensive as far as WA lenses go... and it delivers great results.
Even my kit 18-55 at f/8 does a pretty good job. Work with a lens's sweet spot and you can get great results.

The one in the vid clearly has CA and contrast issues.

In the video the 'cheap' body is a 550D which is latest technology, esp. in the sensor and on board chip/firmware, other than having a cheaper build, less buttons, and slower frame rate it is no slouch.
Maybe a 2nd hand 350D would have been fairer?

Yeah no doubt Kym. In the video some of the shots I saw of the Sigma 28-300 were stated to be shot at F5 which meant that it was wide opened and never stopped down. Would have yielded better results at F8 or so.

even cheap lenses stopped down to F8 gives a respectable IQ, even the universally hated Sigma 18-50mm kit lens which I once owned

[Xebadir]

Having seen the gear my friends used before really stumbling up the market,...clearly there is no point having a top of the range body if you cant match it in glass...I would also suggest that at the time I went from a lower body there was a huge difference in the number of pixels...6 Mp to 12 is a big jump when it comes to print size...now the pixels arent really making much of a difference I think its reducing the distance between the TOL bodies and the entry levels...sure the top can do things faster, with more features, easier to handle, and with more size...but entry level cameras now (IE 550D, D3100) are no slouches.

Good for a laugh though...i love the expression...that the AF on the sigma sounds like C3PO with a spastic colon Still cant get over this guy painting the camera pink though.

[wmphoto]

Just great. This thread just cost me money on a Canon EF 17-40 f4 L. I was looking at the 16-35 but didn't need around $600 worth of "fastness".

[wolffman]

Its cunning marketing from the camera sales company.
Buy the cheaper camera from us now, and spend a shed load on some really good lenses. Once you have that you will want to come back for the candy and upgrade the body later on...
Amusing video, but the guy has a dreadful holding technique.
A better test would have been to put at least a kit lens on the expensive camera

[arthurking83]

.....
A better test would have been to put at least a kit lens on the expensive camera

I'm sure Canon make at least 14 different variations of the same kit lens types ... just as Nikon do

I think if Canon has an 18-105 or 18-135 kit lens to compare against, the results may not have been so obvious.

I wonder how well those two Canon lenses(24-70 and 24-105mm) work at their respective 200 or 300mm focal lengths?

I understand what they're trying to do... I just disagree with how they went about it.

I should really do my own comparative report one day, shouldn't I (I know what you're all thinking!!.. ... that's why I haven't ever done it )

[Divotor]

Very relevant to this newbie in the hunt for what entry level rig to buy. After carefully studying countless reviews of the latest and greatest entry level bodies, seems the continuous upping of the megapixel count in these models puts a real strain on the ability of kit lenses to do the job well. And let's face it., if I wanted to record video I'd buy a dedicated videocam.....I want to take photos!
This boy is leaning towards the well reviewed and now much cheaper 450D....along with the also well reviewed 15-85 USM. By all accounts, should be a killer entry package!

Have courage my son.......