New Mark III - Need recommendations

[chuck27p]

Hey everyone,

I have a new 5D Mark III on the way and this is my first full frame sensor camera. I shot with a 50D for many years. I have 4 lenses and only 1 is an EF-S, so I'll be getting rid of that. The others are EF, so they should be good for the 5D as far as I've read. 

I'm looking for a few recommendations here.

1. What compact flash card should I use? I am currently looking at these:

- SanDisk Extreme Pro CompactFlash Memory Card UDMA 7 Upto 160 MB/s by SanDisk

- Lexar Professional 1000x 128GB CompactFlash Card LCF128CTBNA1000 by LEXAR

- KOMPUTERBAY 128GB Professional COMPACT FLASH CARD CF 1000X 150MB/s Extreme Speed UDMA 7 RAW 128 GB by Komputerbay

2. The EF-S lens I have is my 10-22mm wide angle. I use it quite a bit. I'll be looking for a replacement. Any suggestions? I was looking at this one:

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

3. Any other lens recommendations? What I have is below and I mainly shoot portraits / headshots in the studio, landscapes, and do a bit of long exposure work. I know it's based on what you shoot, but if anyone has any lens they use all the time that they love on the full frame, I'd love to do some research on it. 

My lenses:

Canon 50mm prime

Sigma 70-200mm Zoom

Canon 24-70 2.8 (my workhorse)

- Need to replace my wide angle

Thanks guys! 

[amfoto1]

I agree with the other recommendations about the memory cards.... Lexar and Sandisk are very reliable. Your camera is UDMA 7 capable, so might as well get that. I doubt the camera can take advantage of much faster than 400X or 45MB/sec write speed, but most are selling 800X and 1000X now, so that's probably what you'll find. All the cards I'm currently using are either Lexar or Sandisk. Most are UDMA. Some of the older are 300X, others are 400X and the newest I have are 800X. I really don't notice any difference in performance out shooting with them.

The larger cards I use are 16GB. Those each hold more than 500 RAW files from either my 5D Mark II or 7Ds. It takes mere seconds to swap cards and, as noted previously, I don't like putting all my eggs in one basket. Lose that one huge card full of images any you'll really be crying the blues!  I took nearly 9000 images last weekend, using 17 or 18 memory cards ranging in 8GB and 16GB sizes. If I lost one of those (or it failed or whatever), it would be a tragedy, but only a small percentage of the overall shoot.

You do have to watch out for fake memory cards. I don't know if it's still the case, but there used to be a lot of Sandisk fakes, in particular. So long as you buy from a reputible dealer, there shouldn't be a problem.

Shooting portraits, if you used your 50mm a lot, I'd recommend the Canon 85/1.8 or the Sigma 85/1.4. But you also might want to consider the 135/2L... it's a wonderful portrait lens on a full frame camera.

For your wide angle replacement, any of the Canon full frame (EF) ultrawides would do nicely. Personally I just use an 20/2.8 a lot. It's a nice lens. If I wanteda zoom, I would consider the 17-40 and new 16-35/4 for their slightly smaller size and weight, as well as its use of smaller filters (77mm, as opposed to 82mm on the f2.8 lens). I really don't need IS on an ultrawide, but it doesn't hurt having it either. I also don't really need f2.8.... I'm usually using an ultrawide stopped down for increased depth of field, not wide open looking for some small amount of background blur.

I haven't used it, but have heard really good things about the Tokina AT-X 16-28mm, too. The only problem I see is that it has a strongly protruding front element, that prevents mounting standard filters (it's probably possible to use larger rectangular filters with a jerry-rigged mount, or just handheld in front of the lens).  

***********
Alan Myers

San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM 

[cale_kat]

It is my personal opinion that the main difference between Komputerbay cards and name brand cards is that name brand manufacturers spend millions of dollars on marketing to support the higher prices they charge. This is Marketing 101 and should be more commonly acknowledged than it is. The main reason people recommend name brand cards, and buy them, is because of scare tactics like those that caution that any lost shot will leave you devastated.

Manufacturers have been making unbranded products on the same equipment as branded products since the dawn of marketing. But if you're the sort of person that spends extra to put "Tier 1" gas in your car, I can see how spending multiple times the amount necessary to buy a name brand card appeals to your sense of caution.

[ebiggs1]

"...  that any lost shot will leave you devastated."

An therein lies the difference between an amateur and a pro.  He puts groceries on the table with his camera.

Amateur, says there is always another shot.

[cale_kat]

Again, the ramping up of analogies makes the "scare" worse. No where do the responses offer anything substantial in the way of evidence.

If there were any doubt in the effectiveness of marketing, one has only to read the collection of responses from people (being a "pro" makes you no more cautious than an "amateur", you just think you are) recommending branded cards.

[ebiggs1]

"... you just think you are ..."

They don't pay for the shot you almost got.  No matter how great you say it was.

[cale_kat]

Boo! Did I scare you? Probably not. So why are you scaring others? Or do you have any evidence to support that more shots are lost to unbranded cards (like the Komputerbay card in question) than branded cards?

[Skirball]

---

@cale_kat wrote:

It is my personal opinion that the main difference between Komputerbay cards and name brand cards is that name brand manufacturers spend millions of dollars on marketing to support the higher prices they charge. This is Marketing 101 and should be more commonly acknowledged than it is. The main reason people recommend name brand cards, and buy them, is because of scare tactics like those that caution that any lost shot will leave you devastated.

---

I agree with parts of your post, however there is truth in those that are aprehensive of generics as well.

I'm a big supporter of third party gear and use it regularly, but I research the gear that I get, because not all generic is created equal. There are plenty of companies out there that try to cut in on a market with low quality product because they cut corners on materials, quality control, warranty, customer service, etc.  The generic battery market is a great example.  I use third party batteries because Canon charges an outrageous amount for theirs.  And because th risk of a third party battery is relatively low.  But I research who I buy from, because there are plenty of crappy batteries being sold that won't hold a charge after a few cycles.  Batteries aren't difficult to make, but it's easy for someone to sell complete junk, make a few bucks, then change the company name when the reputation sours too much.  For some it's just not worth the risk and they buy Canon, other's like me, research the brand and the reviews they get and buy a decent third party battery and save some cash.  If the battery doesn't last quite as long as a Canon I'm not out much, and I saved some cash for another.

For me it all comes down to a risk vs. benefit ratio.  It's worth it for me for a battery, the cost difference is relatively large and the risk is small - the camera simply dies and I have to put a new battery in.  SD cards are cheap, even the name brand ones.  The little bit of money I save with a generic just isn't worth it for me compared to the perceived risk of having a card fail and losing my photos.  Yes, name brand cards can fail too, and Komputerbay could be just as reliable.  I don't know.  If I saw data showing that then I would switch.  But for the tiny bit of difference it's just not worth my time.

[cale_kat]

Skirball, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I'm not immune to risk, but I'm aware that percieved risk and actual risk can be two different things. You mentioned the batteries as another place to "cut corners" where it comes to budgeting for photograhy. You wrote that your perceived risk  of doing so was low. Yet there is little evidence to support that the battery you have choosen to use is less, or just as, reliable as the Canon battery. (IMHO, the failure of a battery is just as bad as a failed memory card because it can also cause you to "miss the shot".)

I could be completely wrong, but my interpretation of what you wrote is that as you move from the battery to the memory card, your perception of the consequences of a failure (or increase in perceived risk) grows greater. But there is no evidence that the risk is any greater than that taken with the third-party battery.

I shoot with the 5D Mark II and have compared prices for CF cards. I agree that the market for SD cards is a lot more competitive leaving less room for the manufacturers of branded cards to mark-up their products. What is lost to this diminished profit margin, is made up in the higher sales volume. So, the manufacturer still wins.

Just my $.02.

[Skirball]

---

@cale_kat wrote:

Skirball, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

---

You're welcome.  Thank you for the conversation.  There's too little discourse here, and too much bickering and pithy attacks.  I'm always happy to discuss ideas, but there's a tendency online to simply take offense and retort just because someone has a different opinion than you.

---

@cale_kat wrote:

I'm not immune to risk, but I'm aware that percieved risk and actual risk can be two different things. You mentioned the batteries as another place to "cut corners" where it comes to budgeting for photograhy. You wrote that your perceived risk  of doing so was low. Yet there is little evidence to support that the battery you have choosen to use is less, or just as, reliable as the Canon battery. (IMHO, the failure of a battery is just as bad as a failed memory card because it can also cause you to "miss the shot".)

---

I think there is actually a decent amount of data to support concern.  Perhaps not formal data from a controlled test, at least not on Canon dslr batteries, but there is data of sorts.  I take Amazon reviews with a grain of salt, people on the internet are quick to simply complain and give 1 star because something didn't work out the way they wanted.  However, if you look up generic Canon batteries on there you will see a ton of reviews stating that the battery died out after a few weeks, or would only give XXX shots compared to the YYY they got with their Canon battery.  You can certainly argue the quality of this data, but it's in large enough quantity to be of use.   You won’t see the same quantity of comments with Canon batteries.  I've seen it myself with generics I’ve bought, although admittedly I haven’t done controlled tests and I’m well aware of the power of the placebo effect. 

The same thing happens in standard alkaline like AA batteries.   Like the crappy ones that come with electronics that hardly last at all.   Even in rechargeables you’ll see considerable performance differences between quality batteries and cheapos.  I’m sure there’s plenty of data from controlled tests with AA batteries supporting this point.

But there’s more than just charge issues with generic batteries.  I had one that would get stuck in the camera.  I had to pull it out with needle nose pliers; the connector was designed poorly, too tight.  I ended up wrapping dental floss around the battery to create a tether that I could pull it out with so it didn’t get stuck in there.  Canon wouldn’t release a set of batteries like that.  They’d recall the batch and send you one that worked properly.

---

@cale_kat wrote:

I could be completely wrong, but my interpretation of what you wrote is that as you move from the battery to the memory card, your perception of the consequences of a failure (or increase in perceived risk) grows greater. But there is no evidence that the risk is any greater than that taken with the third-party battery.

---

It may have been worded poorly on my part.  I used the word perceived, because I don't actually have any data supporting that generic SD cards are unreliable, I admit I'm purely going from gut feeling on this one, and the risk vs benefit ratio I see.

My point was that the impact of a failure, and thus my risk, of a failed SD card is significantly more than a failed battery.  With the battery I simply put in a new one.  Moreso, it's a "failure mode" that happens to even good batteries.  And there's a gauge on my camera to let me know that it's going to happen.  And SD card failure on the other hand is spontaneous, and I may not even find out until after the shoot.  And it could result in catastrophe.  Hence, in a risk vs benefit analysis, I see significantly more risk to a generic SD card than battery.  To your point, I don’t have any data with which to assume that generics will fail more often than namebrand.  And if I saw data showing them to be as reliable I would gladly switch.  But without such data I simply compare the cost difference to the potential risk, and I decided that name brand is worth it to me.

[cale_kat]

@Skirball, I like many of your points and will always accept that opinions differ. I also believe that the motivation behind posters, whether on Amazon or this Canon forum, are important and that "self-selected" respondents may not provide a complete picture of a product or its durability. Good data is hard to find.

Perceived risk is important. After all, where would we (humans) be as a biological species if it weren't for caution? For example, the color red is almost universally used as the color of warning. (All sorts of red things support this warning, from spiders to glowing hot metal.) “Red calls attention to itself,” I’ve read.

But what influences perceived risk? Your comment about the battery being easy to swap out and therefore of less trouble, minimizes the risk that the battery could conk out at the worst possible time. When the bride and groom kiss, for example. And with equally disastrous consequences. You know that the batteries rely on software and electronics to know when they are completely charged and their “condition”. You’ve probably also heard or read of batteries, not taking a charge and perhaps other stories of batteries reporting a full charge to the camera when they aren’t fully charged. I don’t mean to suggest that this is a real possibility, that of a false reporting battery, but bring up the question because it would likely become more of a consideration, with related changes in your perceived risk, once you’d read or heard of the problem once or twice.

Perceived risk acts in strange ways. It takes the measurement from your “gut” but doesn’t consider other information that might also be important. An example would be the number of failures in relation to the overall size of the production run. All manufacturing processes are error prone so there’s no arguing “any failure is unacceptable”. The place of manufacture could also be an important factor. (You would want a competent and conscientious company to make the cards but there’s no way that I know of, to determine if branded cards are made in different manufacturing plants than un-branded cards.) What do we know about the machines and equipment that are used to make CF or SD cards? Does one company dominate the business for the machines that make key parts of the assembly? What is the failure rate of that equipment?