WARNING!! Long story ahead!

I'm in between cameras at the moment. I sold my 1Ds about 5 days before the 5D became official, I'd believed the rumours and hence got a far better price than a week later! I've been surviving on the 10D in the meantime as I wait to buy my next camera, a I'm out of action due to an operation on my right foot until mid December, I've let the cash sit in the bank so as to get the best price on the 5D. To date waiting has paid off, the 5D has dropped in price by ~£600 (over $1000) here in the UK from when it first became available apparently due to slow sales.

I'm not looking to start a Canon/Nikon war, those who know me know that I'm not a troll. When I first expressed interest in the 5D several respected members of this board forced me to be open minded and to consider the D2X as well. Dragged kicking and screaming I actually tried my best to be open minded and worked it out.
To say that modern pro level cameras have little between them in the way of differences would, I think, be an honest statement. Certainly the top Canon and Nikon cameras are both extremely fine picture making machines. Compared to pro cameras of 20 years ago, either camera would be better than the wildest Sci-Fi dreams of pros then (OK they are far heavier ).
The main difference for me between the Nikon and the Canon was the Full Frame (35mm) sensor. Canon has no fast 'pro' normal zoom for the crop sensor cameras, the 16-35 is too short, the 17-40 also short and slow. This was the main reason I went FF with the 1Ds, I wanted the 24-70 focal length in a 'L' zoom. The Nikon however has the extremely good 17-55AFS which is both pro and fast but more importantly covers the required focal length. The 12-24 f4 would be available should I need super wide, and has had excellent reviews.
In the end and at the time the economics of changing my legacy lenses and flashes to Nikon outweighed the pro build advantages the D2X has over the 5D. I put in my order for the 5D. The initial reviews made me happy enough with my choice and I still had the money squirreled away.

Then Nikon announces the D200. In the meantime I've found out that my two Metz 54 MZ-3 flashes are not fully supported with ETTL II on the 5D. I need two new flashes. I use both TTL and auto flash and other than the Metz, no other such flash exists for canon save the horribly expensive, huge and heavy Quantam 5D.
But Nikon has an auto sensor in the SB-800.
Added to that, the D200 seems to be rather more 'camera' in it's build and features than the 5D. Weather Sealing, MLU switch, AI Servo switch, far better AF point spacing, built in grid, faster frame count, double battery life. If the AF is similar to the D2X then for low light it will beat the 5D and 1Ds. Oh and did I mention that it will retail at list price of £1300 while the 5D still costs £2375 street. Yes it has less megapixels but the D2X gives the 1Ds mkII a run for it's money apparently and I don't print bigger than 18X12". I also don't shoot over iso 500 often and remember that I'm used to, and mentally benchmark by 1Ds with it's horrible noise so I'm not spoiled.

When I worked out the economics, I could sell my canon gear and the two Metz's, buy a D200, 17-55AFS, 70-200VR, 50 1.4, cable release, 2X SB-800 and still have enough money to buy a D70 as backup. That becomes a powerful argument, one camera and lenses with no working flashes vs two cameras with 2 flashes. Yes I have more DOF than I like but the fast prime as a portrait lens plus two f2.8 zooms should be good enough.

On the flip side, I know canon, I know nothing about Nikon, there would be a considerable learning curve. I would not get the Nikon until late December though I still have a 10D to keep me going. I lose a couple of megapixels (the 1Ds had all the resolution I needed) and I lose the better high iso noise that the 5D would have given me.

The 5D's price has since dropped in the UK (£1991 at Jessops) and will probably drop further when the D200 comes out. I don't think that it was a coincidence that the biggest price drop coincided with the announcment of pre-orders for the D200 at £1250. The 24-105L with its IS is probably the biggest thing holding me back to the canon camp, not for landscapes, I only shoot on a tripod, but for weddings which is where I earn my bread, that lens is extremely attractive. I have an 85 1.8 for shallow DOF stuff.

There is a lot of speculation as to whether the replacement for the 20D, in having to 'one-up' the D200, will be better features wise than the 5D in every way save FF, and whether or not that will push the mid-level FF DSLR into a niche market. That is not what interests me. I'm wondering if these two cameras are making other pros go 'Hmmmm'.........

Or you can do what I have just done and buy a mint used Kodak 760C Great camera.

Get the Nikon D200. You'll get the flash compatability you need plus you'll save a lot of money. I'd bet there will be nothing to chose between the 5D and D200 when the full reviews are in, the price difference being a plus of the DX sensor size. Of course, I'm biased; I don't like following the crowd, and the crowd have flocked to Canon because they had a few months lead over Nikon in new product releases.

Back to playing with my retro Kodak...

Quentin

For someone like you who makes his living with his cameras, the decision involves a lot of intangibles, as well as some very practical considerations. I'm sure there will be plenty of wedding photographers getting excellent results with both systems. But which one works for you isn't something anyone else can answer. I've used Nikon for a number of years so when I pick up another Nikon camera it feels familiar, while a Canon feels a little awkward. If at all possible, you should find a dealer who will let you use both cameras outside the shop for a day or so and find out which one you can live with best.

On the practical side, you've obviously noticed the big price difference. Perhaps the question you should be asking is whether it is better to have two D200s versus one 5D. I would think the ability to have two lenses mounted at all times, plus have a true back-up capability would be a big positive factor in your line of work.

Good luck.

I did play with a 5D versus a D2X in the store for a couple of hours, shot them against each other, mainly for flash. The D2X has the fastest low light AF I have ever seen in my life!
The resolution was give or take the same as far as I noticed with a more film like feel to the Nikon pictures although the 5D had the lead (slight)for noise at iso 400 (I use 400 most of the time so I was trying to do a real world comparison, i.e. what mattered to me).
For flash the systems were give or take equal, I don't know how the Nikon flash system works so I can't say whether or not I even had the camera/flash on the right settings.
The D2X was extremely comfortable in my hand and although I prefer the QCD of the canon, the other ergonmics have to be handed to the Nikon (I used to own a 1Ds so I know what pro level canon ergonomics are) I also appreciated the setup and layout of the main controls, more dials, less buttons, far less having to use two fingers with your eye away from the viewfinder which I hated with the 1Ds. AI Servo lever and MLU were much appreciated though I prefer the mode dial of the 5D over button press, twiddle dial on the D2X.

As Jdemott says, for a pro the price difference is the difference between a compatible backup camera and that is a serious issue. With Canon I cannot in any way afford a FF digital backup and although I would be happy with a 10D for backup, the fact that I need a seperate set of focal lengths is a big problem. My 24-70 cannot be used on the 10D if my 5D were to break down mid job, it isn't wide enough. I rarely use a super WA and buying one just for the backup is expensive (I have a backup for the 24-70, I can't afford a backup for the WA zoom as well!) That is the reason I'm still using a film camera ready loaded for backup. It's the cheaper option. With the D200, since it also uses a crop sensor, a D70, though defficient, would share the lenses perfectly.

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, I probably will stay with canon, the price difference is closing up rapidly and I know canon inside out, I also have the canon lenses and accessories which would be a pain to sell. However, I'm going to wait it out a while, maybe until I can use both and make my decision. The 24-105 IS lens may be the deciding factor.

At the moment I'm still seesawing backwards and forwards over this, being lain up at home after the operation with nothing to do but read reviews and opinions with the money burning a hole in my pocket doesn't help!

Pom,
Sounds like you're making the most of your down time.
Not so long ago ( 4-6 weeks before the 5D was anounced ) I explored the option of changing from Canon back to Nikon as I was having lots of problems with sharpness from my 1DSII.
I thought I would get a Phase One P25 for my Blads for ad work and just use cheaper 35mm digital for functions/concerts and other lower paid work..
A couple of bodies, 2 flashes and 3 zooms....Save the money for the P25...
Nikon loaned me a D2X kit for a few days to try in my work situation.
Side by side with the Canon you could spend a lifetime working out which is better for what you need..
The new 5D and D200 make this harder still as the price for each is much lower then the D2X/1DSII setups and right up there with them for image quality in real world work.

In the end I stuck with Canon, here's why.
1. Canon CPS service is great, they spent lots of time making sure my sharpness issues were fixed and I was happy with my camera.
All my lenses are now calibrated by CPS.
2. Nikon Autofocus IMO is not as good as Canon.
3. I think sooner or later Nikon must go to a full frame and then any lenses you have for the smaller chips will need to be replaced.
4. The High ISO performance of the Canon is better then Nikon.

I now use two 1DSII's and good prime lenses for everything, the P25 would of cost more and had me choosing between systems for each job..
better I think to have both feet in one camp.
Time over I might have had 2 or 3 5D's and more money for lenses..

Hope this helps,
David.

Hi Pom,

Glad to see that Nikon users comments are still torturing you... :-) Just kidding of course.

The 5D appears to be a very nice piece of equipment, and together with the 24-105 IS must be really cool for the work you do.

As a side comment, the yet un-tested 18-200 might be better than its price might suggest, and is actually as bright than the Canon lens over their common range.

If the 24-105 is your main factor for deciding in favour of the 5D, then I would probably wait until test results of the D200 + 18-200 combo are published.

Regards,
Bernard

As a Nikon user I would love to see you change to Canon, since there are so many Canon users who promote the brand in an almost messianic manner.

But ...

There's no doubt that Canon will soon replace the 20D with something better. So rather than change to the D200 - an excellent camera according to everyone and his dog - would not the D30 (for want of another name) do the business? Or does the D200 have something you need that is lacking in a Canon D20 class camera? From what you have said, I suspect you don't think that Canon have suitable glass for an APS sensor.

Of course you could hire a Nikon camera for the day and find out if it does the business? That might avert a potentially rash move, or alternatively convince you that the dark side is better.

It might also be worth your while to try out the 5D.

As an afterthought, in a year or two Nikon will introduce an upgrade to the D70, presumably using the D200 sensor, but with consumer grade build and price. So will have a cheaper back up with similar resolution.

Leif

Leif, the problem with the canon crop cameras and the main reason I went FF in the first place, is the lack of a fast normal zoom to compete with the 17-55AFS. If canon were to have had that lens then, maybe, the 30D might have been an option worth waiting for. That said it's doubtful that it will be anounced until PMA which is longer than I'm prepared to wait.

I'm not messianic about canon, far from it, the D2X is better, for me, than the 1Ds was. Of that I have no doubt. If I could have afforded to make the switch with a D2X in mind then the 5D wouldn't have touched the ground, probably.

It may be crazy to think of it this way but the 24-105L, for all its flaws, will probably be the one that purchases the 5D for me. I don't have the steadiest of hands and 11+ megapixels are murderous to your belief in your handholding technique! That and sheer 'comfort' level with what I'm used to...

Somebody help me out please.

1. Canon CPS service is great, they spent lots of time making sure my sharpness issues were fixed and I was happy with my camera.
All my lenses are now calibrated by CPS.

I didn't know lenses could be calibrated. Could someone explain this to me.
Thanks
Jerry

If a lens shows back or front focusing then assuming that the lens is under warranty, canon will calibrate the lens for that specific camera to show better focus accuracy.

POM-

I have been going through the same exercise!!! I am current still shooting film (Nikon F100), but I do not have a lot invested in Nikon glass. A vendor switch at this point would not be too expensive. (And I shot an AE-1 for 10 years, so I have already switched once!) I am leaning Nikon, but we will see. DPReview just did an excellent review of the 5D. (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0511/05111201canon5dreview.asp) I am waiting for a similar on the D200 before I make the final decision. I am betting the reviews are going to show not too much difference between the D200 & the D2X -- at least not €3000 of difference!!

At the end of the day, though, both the 5D & D200 are going to produce fantastic images -- and that is all that really matters. Pick the one that fits your budget and your style of shooting. I really don't think you can wrong between the two!

Good luck & let us know which you choose!

-Jim


ps- I already own the Nikon 50 1.4 -- spectacular lens, especially teamed with Ilford Pan F 50!!!! I believe it would work very well on a digital body....

A small point, but you only need one 800 to act as master. You can use the 600 as slaves and save some money.

Bob

I had intended the second flash as backup. My backup flash, at this point in time, needs auto flash, hence two sb-800's. The canon solution is to either wait until Metz gets around to updating it's system for ETTL II or swop between the 580ex and an auto only flash.

I'm a bit curious, though, as to exactly what features in ETTL II it is that you can't live without? Wouldn't the current ETTL I support be good enough?

ETTL I is so utterly awful, especially for wedding work, that I consider it unuseable. According to canon you need to have the focus point over a neutral toned subject for correct exposure in ETTL I. This mean that your subjects face must be big enough to cover the sensor with no black hair or tux included, that there is a sensor over the face whatever compostion you choose or screw up your composition (like that's likely with canon's philosophy of putting all the sensors in the middle), oh and for split second moments that you need to capture you have to choose a focus point and make sure it over something neutral and only then fire or do FEL by which time the moment is long gone.

On the epitath for ETTL I they will write 'mourned by none'.

My Metz flash units use some sort of sensor in the flash head itself to provide exposure confirmation or whatever. This means that eventhough it can do ETTL II, it cannot do it if there is any diffuser on the flash head. I use the Lightsphere constantly, and even when I don't I have Metz's own clip on diffuser, if only to act as an ND filter for when I'm working at very close quarter's and the flash can't shut itself down fast enough at wider apertures. This means that I am crippled with the Metz to only using Auto flash or not using a diffuser which I refuse to be limited by, especially for digital where it can make all the difference.

Why don't I just stick with a 580ex or auto flash? The main reason I want ETTL II is for outdoor fill flash. Auto flash is not that good with outdoors, there is too much light dissapation before the light bounces back to the sensor which can lead to unreliable results. Added to that, I could really do with Hi-Sync flash, 1/200 can be very limiting when you're trying to photography wide open even in duller conditions.

I use auto flash indoors, especially at the reception/dinner/dancing as I set up strobes bouncing off the ceiling to boost the ambient light and fill out the shadows in the back and corners of the room. Although I use radio slaves so the preflash doesn't bother me, the preflash does not see the output from the strobes and therefore cannot factor it into the equation. Applying minus FEC is'nt reliable enough. Auto flash however measures at the time fo exposure and isn't 'intelligent' enough to realise that some of the light is coming from elsewhere, it takes the whole amount of light bounced off the subject and when it has reached f4 or whatever, cuts off its output.

Make sense why I want a TTL flash with hi sync that can also do auto flash?

Yes, thanks for explaining it.

I'll consider myself lucky that I don't make a living off my photography, and that I can say just "oh, well, that didn't work out" and toss the bad photo.

You can say that again! digital really taught me to make sure that my exposures are within half a stop of perfect, every frame, every time. The advantage of course is far faster post processing!

Pom, I'm in the same situation. I'm sitting on my 20D and using it for all my current work because it gets the job done, but I'd like something more.

There's been lots of options popping up, from Canon, then Nikon, and soon, I feel Canon will bring out a "30D" or something similar once again.

Having options is a good thing, but it's also frustrating. I'm seriously looking into medium format digital, at least, *used* medium format digital. A few weeks ago, I saw an excellent P25 sell for $12k on ebay. Not bad, but that must also include a whole other camera system with new lenses and accessories, etc. Talk about frustrating.

Full disclosure: I'm a Nikon user, although I've played with my son's 1DsM1 and I think it takes marvellous pictures.

However, since most of your photography is very practical -- it's a business -- I think you'd do well to focus on costs. If the D200 is "good enough" for your purposes, then that would be critical, because the costs are so much lower. Of course, it absolutely must be "good enough," or there's no point.

In the Nikon system, I expect that you could cover everything you need to do for weddings with 2 lenses -- the 12-24 and the 24-120. I find them both to be handy, light and actually quite good. That would give you solid coverage (in 35mm FF terms) from 18 to 180.

But it seems to me (and I confess, everything I know about wedding photography I learned by going to a couple weddings where a photographer working -- that is, I know nothing) that your flash system would be critical. My personal feeling is that the SB800 might be the best on-camera flash system there is, period, especially in a situation which requires continuous adjustments in range, where lighting changes quickly and drastically, and where you may be changing lenses. You really do want a system where the flash talks easily to the lens...Nikon has that nailed.

JC

OT, but...

Pom-

While you are stuck at home, perhaps I can convince you to start a new thread with advice on the kind of indoor/flash situations you deal with constantly? A few friends of mine have asked me to take photographs at their MA/PhD commencements, which I imagine to be very similar to wedding photography, and I must say I have no idea where to begin figuring out the finer details. Can you suggest good titles/resources for getting a basic handle on this kind of work?

I must admit that I am especially leery about telling them yes, as my hobby extends primarily to natural subjects; I have tried little portraiture, making their request especially daunting, as I would not want (from a personal perspective) to give them bad work (though I would settle for middling ).

I kind of going through the same type of agonizing of which switch to make.

for me it's a bit differernt - i;m finally going to make the difference from film to digital.

I've been shooting with a 1v HS and Elan 7N as a backup.

Shoot mainly landscape and weddings, with a lot invested in canon - 1vHS, Elan 7n, 16-35 2.8L, 70-200 f2.8L IS, 2 580EX, 1 420 EX, ST-E2 and had the 24-70 f2.8L, which i just sold a few weeks ago in anticipation of purchasing the 24-105 F4L.


I waited during the last 1 1/2 for a "affordable" full frame and was very pleased when i heard about the 5D. Sounded just like what i was waiting for. Then this Fall i went on a three week tour of arizona, utah, wyoming, shooting around 80 rolls of film. based on the cost of film/processing and discussions with other photogrpahers in the USA that I met shooting with the 1DsII, D2X and the 5D (ran into someone in Page who had just had the camera for a week), I realized that now was the time to go digital.

After getting back home, i did some more research on the 5D and became very dissapointed - i thought it would be at least have been as weahter sealed as the EOS 3 was. but even more importantly, i couldn't believe that canon released a camera that costs $4300CDN (btw, the price in canada has dropped all of $30 at one store), that did not have the same viewfidner exposure information as the 1 series cameras (the EOS 3 did have this feature). Moreover, the camera also does not have dedicated FEL. THe FEL feature was for me was the strongest feature of Canon's flash system. I also shoot weddings, and for me the FEL reading, used with the FE compensation was a deadly accurate way of metering at weddings with my 1v. This solves the problem of having black suits/tuxedos or white dresses throwing off the meter - and yes - i shoot almost every shot at a wedding using spot metering and the FEL, to ensure accurate exposure.

Let me qualify the statement of no FEL on the 5D. with my 1v, i use custom function 4 set to "1", which activates AF with the AE lock button, to seperate AF operation from the shutter release. THis allows me to pre-focus and wait for that right moment to take the photo. Problem with non 1-series EOS cameras is that if you set custom functio 4 to "1", you CANNOT use FEL!!!!! Incredibly STUPID design, and very important feature missing on a camera $4300!!

Not being able to afford the EOS1dSII, my first reaction was that i ran into so many happy Nikon D2x users that i started considering that as an option, but having so much invested in canon, the cost of making such a switch (taking losses on lenses/flashes, and replacing with nikon lenses and flashes), would probaby be close to spending the extra money and getting a 1dsII.

Then Nikon announced/leaked the D200. and since then i have again been toying of making the switch. I could get two D200's for the cost of a EOS 5D.

Morevoer, i like the ultra wide options that nikon has. I have heard good things about their metering and flash system, but am very comfortable with ETTL (Used to hate ATTL that preceded it), and for me the entire effectiveness of ETTL rests with FEL - which is not available to me with the 5D based on my shooting preferences.

The negative to me about nikon is their customer service. I switched from Nikon to Canon around 15(??) years ago, when i bought a F801, which i had for 7 months (actually 3, coz nikon had it for four months for 4 different repair jobs - the first 3 days after buying the camera - discovered hot shoe didn't work, and then the camera would just shutdown). anyways, after nikon on four separate occasion refused to exchange a brand new camera and insisted on repairing it, i switched to canon. With canon, being a CPS member, i dropped a 80-200F2.8L lens at a base ballgame - entirely my fault, and canon gave me a loaner at no cost, coz they didn't have a replacement mount for the lens in stock. so i am a little hesitant on wanting to take a chance on nikon customer service again.

Because of my negative nikon experience in the past, i decided to investigate gettinga 1dIIN - best compromise in my eyes between cropped sensor and full frame (1.3x sensor). I don't need the 8.2fps, like the weather sealing and the fact that it operates and feels a lot like 1v HS. most people call it strictly a photojournaltist/sports camera, not really suited for weddings or landscape - but then my 1v HS shot off 10FPS and i used it mainly for landscape and weddings (havnet shot sports in the last 4 years). i figure my 16-35mm will get me down to around 21mm wide, and i've also looked at getting the sigma 10-22mm which works with full frame, and that would get me to just under 16mm wide as an ultra wide option (have read mixed reviews about this lens, so not sure yet about how viable an option it really would be).

Right now, before i commit either way i'm waiting for two things - selling my 1vHS and the release of the 24-105L before making up my mind.

One question i do have is how much of a resolution difference is there between the 1DIIN and the 5D?? What would be the largest print possible with the IDIIN?? How does that compare with the 5D, D200 and the D2X???

would appreciate some advice on difference in noise, dynamic range, image quality between the 1DIIN, 5D, D2X and the D200, as well as how much a diff there is on how large of high quality prints are possible with these cameras.

If there was a signfiicant drop in price in the USA in canada for the 5D or the 1dIIN, i would probalby stay with canon, but i can;t see tha happening for a while.

hmmm, there is a $500 rebate on the D2X..... more to consider

Sadly I am ot sure that Nikon service has improved. About 4 years ago I tried to contact Nikon by phone to get a camera repaired. I rang maybe 20 times over several weeks but no answer. So I went via a camera store, and after a long time was given a repair estimate by Nikon which I took to be a body repair and lens clean. After many months the items came back - with the body described as not repairable. They charged me a fortune to clean the lens. If I had known the estimate was for the lens clean only (half the cost of the new lens) I would have said no way, and taken it to a local repair shop. Other experiences suggest that Nikon are very slow and sometimes arrogant.

But they do produce nice kit ... esp. the D200 from the looks of things.

Leif

Larkvi, I'm not a hundred percent sure that I could help you. There is the EOS flash bible at http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/ which has most of the information that you could need for starting up with EOS flash.

Maybe I need to clarify this. With film ETTL I worked fine, really well in fact. I never had a problem, treated it like the auto flash I'd started photography with and the exposure were spot on. With digital they decided to lock the flash exposure based on the focus point in partial metering which is why the flash metering sucked so badly.
Although one could lock the flash exposure and then recompose like Khurram does, I could never use FEL at a wedding, too much confusion and rather annoying for the subject in my view.
Using CF-4/1 changes the flash metering from being a 'spot' meter linked to the focus point, to being center weighed average. This technically should solve the problem, it's much closer to auto flash, but I never managed to get focusing using the * button to the point that I could do it instinctively. If you can't shoot without having to think about it then you're in trouble!

(BTW Khurram, ETTL II flash as featured on the 5D works very differently than ETTL I, you may need FEL far, far less than you think, especially as you can switch to center weighed flash metering via a CF)

Canon tried to ignore the problems of ETTL, the FAQ on the CPS site are interesting reading in that they say that you must shoot the canon way to get good exposures with ETTL which given the tight placement of the AF points and the time lapse in either changing focus point or using FEL, was a rather pathetic point of view.
I struggled with ETTL I for 6 weddings then like so many others, sold my canon flash guns and bought into Metz Auto flash, Auto flash which is technology from the '60's and still gave consistent, predibtable and accurate exposures.

Then Canon announced ETTL II with the 20D (I think). According to canon the new flash system was no longer tied to the focus point at all (not 100% true as in Av/Tvmode the fill is calculated based on the ambient which still is tied to the focus point), incorporated subject distance data into the equation and various other types of magic. They also gave the option of a CF which can change the flash from evaluative to center weighted flash metering.
I have to be honest in that I have no working experience with ETTL II save messing around with other people's cameras. However what I've seen so far seems to match what others have said. Namely, Evalutive is more useful for outdoor fill flash though you may need to apply positive or minus compensation to achieve the best fill effect. Evaluative does not let objects blow out so if you have one subject closer than another, the metering will not let the foreground subject blow out. If that foreground subject is wearing white then the cumulative effect will be underexposure over most of the frame. Therefore it has been suggested that for indoor work center weighed metering will be a better solution.

I'm hoping and praying that ETTL II center weighed metering acts like auto flash. I know how to control auto flash. If it does then I will be able to, finally, come back to reliable canon flash metering, auto flash has its own share of issues most importately no high sync.

It looks like I will be staying with canon for the 24-105L lens and the familiarity with the system. I still think that the Nikon is a better camera, and deal, in every other aspect, from my point of view.

Pom,
I know what you mean that FEL can be confusing at weddings. but i try to let the client no before hand that the first flash is just to get a reading. makes candids more difficult though. but after having one wedding almost totally screwed up, i gave up relying on the camera totally. so now i shoot completely manual, using spot metering and FEL, will adjust for changes in ambient with my Aperture/shutter speed combo, and then use FEL with Flash exposure adjustments for the main subject. I'm still kind of reluctunat using center weighted, bcoz often there is still a lot of black or white in the centre are. I also pretty much have switched from using different focusing points to using the centre point, unless, i'm shooting in AF servo mode (not very often - usually for dances), in which case i select an AF point that will focus on the subject's face).

i pretty much rely on manual control for weddings - will this process work with digital?

For me using the "*" for focusing has become second nature, and always creates a problem when i am using my Elan 7N with flash

would also appreciate if you could let me know what the differnces are in the maximum high quality print sizes that are possible with the 5D, 1dmkIIN, D2X and D200.

I just found an old news post from an acquaintance of mine who's very happy with the Metz 54 MZ-3 with the M3 (E-TTL II) adapter.

He's using it with a 20D and 1D MkII.

According to his post, E-TTL doesn't work with indirect flash, supposedly because of a Canon-owned patent. That's why the sensor is in the reflector instead of being a "real" E-TTL, as pom correctly observes.

Urgh. It just had to be a silly patent, didn't it?

Jani, that's exactly the problem that made me sell the Metz, was not at all pleased and is another reason why I'm considering Nikon.

According to my usual pro store, the 24-105L won't be available again until mid December, i.e the same time as the D200 is released. Apparently the fault was caused by a small part inside the lens not having been coated and therefore reflecting in all it's polished metal glory, makes me shudder to think of.

I will still probably go for the Canon and buy a 580ex for when I need ETTL II but I can't pretend to be impressed with either their QC or Metz faking ETTL.

I wrote to Metz in Germany about the ETTL II issue with reflectors, they are apparently bringing out two handle mount flashes in December with full ETTL II capability even with diffusers, but when I asked about an update for the 54 line they said 'we told you to wait for December'. Not sure what that means but I'm not holding my breath.

Khurram, it might be worth you having a go with the 5D and flash shooting in Av and manual modes with the camera set to regular evaluative. Your spot metering, FEL trick may cause you more trouble than its worth with digital, especially as I no longer believe that it is necessary from my own limited experience and all that I have read. Try it out, see what you think. Personally I couldn't even countenance using FEL for wedding shooting, too slow for candid and split second shooting, confuses the heck out of everyone, and I believe would bother my subjects.

That seems like a typical German response. While technically not quite rude, it's not wrapped in cotton like an American response would be. Just pretend that they were writing a bunch of stuff about how sorry they are for the problems, the delay and blahblah models with handle mount blahblah.

actually it was abrupt to the point of rudeness though I wouldn't be quick to be sure of that considering that my ability to transalate English phrases, pleasantly, into German is precisely nil. I had backed him into a corner by saying forget handle mount, I have an investment in two Metz 54's, are you doing something about it, to which he probably didn't have an accurate reply.

Phil Askey's review of the 5D at www.DPreview.com has some useful comparisons of the 5D, 1DII and D2X, and he indicates that the D200 review will compare to the 5D. One thing I like is his new use of various RAW conversions and various different tone curves and contrast settings for in-camera JPEG to assess resolution, dynamic range and such. The resolution results are often quite different than with default JPEG output, due to the different approaches of different cameras to sharpening and such in JPEG conversion. It is the most careful resolution/DR work I have seen so far in a review.

P. S. Thanks to Pom and all for one of the best, least dogmatic camera/system comparison discussions I have seen in a long time. I suppose this is what to expect from pros making decisions that involve real money.

'Larkvi, I'm not a hundred percent sure that I could help you., etc.'

Actually, that was more or less the answer I was looking for, as I was really not clear on what exactly the problem was that necessitated my learning manual flash in the first place, but a photography instructor told me that to deal with fast-moving indoor situations I really needed to be able to use manual flash because the E-TTL system would screw up. As I had recalled reading (in a book written in the film age...) that automatic-exposure systems were common, I was not clear what to make of this, until you connected the problem specifically to the digital camera.

I have seen the flash document before, but never actually finished reading it. I will go back and actually get all the way through this time. Thanks.

There's a very simple workaround for E-TTL; read http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photograph..._ettl_flash.htm and your flash consistency will improve greatly.

Isn't that the CF-4/1 that I mentioned earlier? As I said it would have solved my ETTL problems but I couldn't get focusing with the * button to become natural or subconscious.

Larkvi, manual flash would be an even bigger gamble on digital IMO for fast moving situations. The most important thing I believe is relevant to fast shooting, specifically event shooting where the variables are changing very fast, is to have the least amount of changing settings needed to take a shot.

What I mean is that for split second timing you need to be able to shoot on a subconscious level. With film that was easy. Shoot on Av or manual and let the flash do the rest, just adjust for black or white in the frame.
With digital not getting it perfect can result in blown out highlights or posterized/banded shadows with colour shifts in the facial tones, all bad things.
To shoot with ETTL in Av mode you need to apply exposure compensation for a B/W situation, and use FEL, change focus point, use a two button press system, or use FEC. With ETTL II it's slightly better, you can get away with EC and FEC.
With either of these methods you are doing several steps between seeing the potential photography and the shutter opening.

Therefore I prefer, with either Auto or ETTL II flash, to use a incident handmeter in advance for a ambient reading which I set in manual mode and can forget as long as the light remains. This reading will of course be correct for either black or white! The only variable I have left to change is the flash. Plus for white, minus for black and only one variable that needs changing when shooting fast. With the wheel on the 580ex this can be incredibly fast. The metz is slightly slower due to the tiny wheel that needs a press before and after the correction.

Using manual flash is a nightmare for fast moving situations in that not only are you making a guess based on your tested results of what the flash output really is (don't believe what the flash tells you), at each fstop, iso and zoom setting, but you are having to change the setting literally every time the subject moves even 1/2 a meter otherwise you could be screwed.
You are also seriously out of luck for any diffused or bounce flash where unmetered manual flash on the go is impossible. You are guesstimating distances where 1/2 a meter can make a lot of difference to whether you get the shot or not for close distance work.
I've also found with both the Metz and the Canon that although ETTL flash can turn the power really low for close up work, the manual settings do not go as low to the extent that shooting at iso 400 1/60 f5.6 (my usual settings for indoors), the flash will overexpose subjects with a <1m setting even at the lowest manual setting of 1/256 (on my metz, the canon doesn't go lower than 1/128). I have to use a diffuser with auto flash at that distances, e.g. at a tight reception or during the dancing. Apparently with ETTL II the flash can lower it's power to the extent of providing suitible fill flash for outdoor work with extremely fast lenses, even close up.