@Waddizzle wrote:
@Canonfanboy wrote:
"It is always best to keep your gear in more or less equal quality."
That statement is completely false. I went from a T5i to a 5D Mark III. Before doing so I bought: 3x Canon 600EX-RT, 1x ST-E3-RT, EF 24-70 f/2.8L II, and an EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II... all of which vastly improved the quality of the photos coming out of the T5i.
Know what else buying this way did? It kept me from spending large amounts of money on ef-s lenses I would never use again if I had ever decided to go full frame, which I did.
Glass matters far more as to photo quality than the camera body.
So the statement is false. His bank account balance and his future plans as an enthusiast matter more than anything else before any lens or body purchase. Telling him that it is "always best" to keep the gear at more or less equal quality is just wrong, unless one is a lens and body salesman. 🙂
When it comes to Canon lenses and camera bodies, there is a lot of truth behind that original statement.
The more costly bodies have AF point sensitivity [f/2.8 and f/8) that the less expensive bodies just simply lack. This causes "L" to behave differently on more expensive bodies compared to bodies that cannot focus at f/8. In other words, many of the "L" lenses, including the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, actually perform better on the more expensive bodies.
Using such a lens on an entry level camera body will give you better IQ than the kit lenses, but you will not be realizing the full potential of the lens. For example, having AF points with f/2.8 sensitivity mean that the camera body can focus better with an f/2.8 lens, compared to a camera body without f/2.8 AF point.
What you are saying has nothing to do with whether or not the man should or should not buy the lens due to his camera being a T3i. The lens doesn't perform differently, the camera does. The lens will focus faster on a 1DX, but that is a camera limitation. It isn't a lens limitation.
What is being argued is whether or not it is always best to keep gear at more or less the same level. The answer is no.
Would you tell a person with a T3i it isn't appropriate to pay money he wants to spend on an L lens to gain better IQ? Why? He will get better IQ and it is his money to buy whatever he desires with it. Maybe he will go full frame one day. We don't know that. He might decide to at a later date. If he does, then he's already got some glass to do it with. If he never goes full frame, so what? That isn't any of our business.
Should we also tell him he shouldn't buy a 600EX-RT II if he wants to because we personally think that is too "pro" for the camera he has? That is just plain gear snobbery. "This lens is okay for me and my camera but, it isn't for you and your camera. Hogwash! For all we know the OP takes better photos than we do.
At any rate, saying "It is always best to keep your gear at more or less the same level" is not true.
Always best for what? It's his money and he decides what is best for him. The lens he mentioned is a great lens on any camera it can be mounted to. It will deliver excellent IQ on any ILC. Will it be as good as that of a 1DX II? Never. Is it always best not to buy that lens for that camera or any other ILC? No.
Saying, "I wouldn't if I were you." is very different from what Biggs1 said.
5D Mark III, Tamron SP 15-30 DI VC, EF 24-70 f/2.8L II, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, EF 35 f/1.4L II, EF 135 f/2L, Rising standard pinhole, EF 2X III, ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT x7, Flashpoint Streaklight 360ws
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I respect that and I know not everyone agrees with mine. Please show the same courtesy.
