So what should the semi-affluent amateur get?

The 5D - but only if you don't already own a 20D.

Thanks for that, Steve. Indeed, cameras are just tools for someone who earns a living from them.

While I do not do assignment photography, per se, and am not the 'pro photographer' that Steven is I have had the good fortune to sell quite a bit of photographic work since returning to still photography during the past year. I concur that not a single client ever asked what camera I used for an image. All they really want to know is whether or not I can deliver a 16 bit 300 dpi image file that supports dimensions of x by y inches or centimeters.

The 5D is an impressive step forward, particularly since it sets the already high digital imaging bar that much higher. Now if it only featured a shutter as quiet as my 10D's I might very well bite on it eventually. (I should add that I shoot with a 10D, a 1D Mark II, a 1Ds Mark II, and even a Leica M7 depending on my objective.)

Ken,
A Leica M7. Now that is a real camera! You always have the nice stuff. I do miss the days when I carried around 2 Nikon F3s and a FM2 back up. The word upgrade was not even part of the lexicon.

The reason you have been asked about delivery specs is because you are turning architecture into art and it has gone into coffee table books. My work has little to do with art. I am a hack that shoots for anyone that pays me for an assignment. Photography has been good to me and I still enjoy it.

Keith,
I did know you were kidding; I’ve enjoyed the humor in your posts for a couple of years. I will do you a favor, I will sell you one of my 10Ds for the price of a new 20D and you will still be about $1,500.00 ahead because you took my “professional advise” and did not run out to buy the 5D just because it’s there.

Steve

Steven, I think any of those cameras is too much camera for anything I would use it for. But if it turns out to be a 10D I believe Dylan has one he wants to unload before he runs out and buys a 5D because it's there.

I know I'm in the minority here but personally I like the 20d's image sensor size because (this is the wierd part) it's much closer to the sensor size of 2/3 inch chip video cameras and when you know you'll be composing for those shots the 20d can be a great tool. Though I'm sure everyone in the bigboy world of film probably want's something closer to the 35mm image area.

Actually, I'm just going to follow Ken around until he gets bored of either his 1D or 1Ds and pitches one in the trash. :)

Back to flashes, even if you guys don't use flashes, do you not consider a fill flash a valuable tool? I hate carrying anything more than one body and one lens (despite the collection), and no external flash. Stuff is heavy, I like to travel light.

PS: if your lens gives you flash shadows, take the hood off!

Dammit, I got sucked into a dumb internet arguement. I should have just signed up for the Special Olympics. Ok, you win, I'm going outside to shoot some photos. :)

wow..slow down there wrangler...all i'm saying is canon is catering toward the pro market by taking out the built in flash and stuff like auto focus assit light, and auto settings like macro, landscape, and sports that the d20 and d300 have because the pro market doesn't use them, so it would be logical that this product is aimed at the pro market...

no need to get nasty, i'm wrong a lot, its ok to be wrong... :)

Robert, you must have caught my post just before I edited it. I realized it came off nastier than I meant when I re-read it, so I just trimmed it down. :)

The vast majority of my work has been done sans flash or supplemental lighting. Generally, I work to capture and accentuate the qualities of the scene's existing light and the emotional quality of the scene.

But not always. As in videography, supplemental light can be essential for many types of image objectives and conditions. On-camera flash guns, such as the 20D's, are just not powerful enough or flexible enough to be very useful. They suck battery capacity while returning generally the same old results. They also require space in the body chassis for the lamp and circuitry.

So it makes perfect sense that Canon decided that anyone serious enough to buy a 5D is probably also serious enough to have at least one good external flash, such as the Canon 580EX or 550EX.

Gee, Dylan, didn't your mama tell you to ALLWAYS use a lens hood?`Just kidding.

Cough ....
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...4&page=1&pp=15
cough cough

hehehehee

well now.. umm.. yeah ok, im a big head alright.. lol

actually this cam with a 580ex should do nicely.. i dont like the price here in Oz ($5500 rrp.. i can get a FX1 fo that much money... ) but you get what u pay for i guess..
I dunno.. to me now.. gettin back into the photography side of things, im used to old SLRs with a light meter reading from the cam..
press the meter button, the lever tells me if im over or under, i change my shutter to suit, press my meter again, its level, voila good exposure... good shot... I guess its time to go back to school.. ;)

I dunno if these new cameras have these old SLR features

They didn't include a built in flash on the 5D, so they could keep the viewfinder a decent size.

That makes more sense to me.