Would you recommend improving glass before the camera?

[ScottS]

Would you recommend improving glass before the camera? My situation is this: I own a Canon 40D, which I purchased very clean from a photographer who was upgrading to the 70D. I own only kit lenses at this point. One of them is the "Nifty Fifty" Canon 50mm 1.8. I can't afford my ultimate dream quite yet of full-frame and L series glass. I think I can begin to either upgrade my lenses or my camera.

My choice right now is between the following scenarios:

Stay with my Canon 40D ~ purchase the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS II

Stay with my Canon 40D ~ purchase the Sigma 18-35 MM 1.8 Art Lens

(possibly both of those)

OR

Purchase the Canon 7D Mark II w/ the 18-135 STM Kit Lens

Purchase the Canon 6D w/ the 24-105 f4 Lens

I am leaning toward better glass, because low light, clear, sharp photographs are my goal. Video and sports photography are not what I'm needing now.

I am very open to your thoughts and experience.

Thanks much!

Scott S

[ebiggs1]

Just from what you stated I would, "Purchase the Canon 6D w/ the 24-105 f4 Lens"

[ScottS]

Hi Ebiggs,

Thanks for your input. My only concern is I still have low-light issues with that. Granted, though, the package has high quality in megapixels, video, full-frame, and a decent start on L lenses!

[TCampbell]

Ordinarily I'd say go with the lenses first... but your situation is a bit special because you want to do (a) video and (b) sports.

The 40D isn't optimized for either of those things.  A 7D II has a blazingly fast continuous burst speed for sports AND it's much better at video (it can do continuous auto-focus while recording video which the 40D can't do.)  So I expect you'd be happier with the 7D II even though you'd be stuck with the 18-135mm lens.

Ideally the 7D II *with* the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II would be perfect but that's a high price tag to get both at the same time.

The 6D with the 24-105 is a very attractive package... but the 6D isn't optimized for sports (it doesn't have the fast shooting speeds of the 7D II) and ti doesn't do continuous AF while recording video in the same way that the 7D II can handle it.  But it is MUCH better in low light then everything else on your list.

[ScottS]

Hi TCampbell,

Thanks for replying! I do want to point out, however, that those two things are things that I am NOT interested in at this point. I think you may have accidentally mis-read my initial post. Would you mind sharing your thoughts with that info?

Thanks much!

Scott S

[ScottyP]

The 7d2 makes no sense for you, as it really excels at sports. 

If low light is important then full frame 6d makes sense.

if you do choose to stay with your current body and upgrade lenses stick to the EF lenses rather than the EF-s if you may go FF later. 

[ScottyP]

FYI, check out the DXO mark ratings on the three cameras.  People criticize their mysterious overall scores, which may be created arbitrarily, but their "sports low light" rating tells the highest ISO you can use before the image quality drops to what they deem less than excellent.

The ratings are:

40d       ISO 703

7d2.      ISO 1082

6d.        ISO 2340

The 6d gives you a full stop of high ISO image quality over the 7d2, and about 1 2/3 stops over the 40d. 

Of course a nice bright f/1.4 to f/2.0 prime lens will give you about 2 to 3 stops over a kit lens. Your nifty fifty is a great value and surprisingly decent IQ for the price. If you do ever do replace it I think 35mm is a great all-purpose focal length on full frame. 

[ScottS]

Hey Scott,

Thanks for your great input!

I've had that thought about "investing" in EF lenses for "the future" as well as the present. That's why to me the 70-200 2.8 II IS seems like a great purchase, both now on my Canon 40D, and my eventual full frame.

And I really like the notion of the Sigma 13-35 1.8 Art Lens for the low light capacity reasons, though it would not be an investment for the future of a FF.

In your opinion and experience, is your Canon 6D a solid replacement for the need for a 5D Mark III? I know that this is really getting the cart ahead of the horse for me. But one of the quandaries to me when I do one day go FF, is that debate. I considered trying to obtain a used 5D Mark II for awhile, but everyone seemed to point out that the 6D is much better than that model, for about the same $$$ brand new.

Scott

[ScottyP]

My 6d really takes great pictures. It trounces my old crop sensor camera in low light. 

I occasionally wish wish the autofocus was a bit better at tracking things moving towards me but honestly I shoot using the center AF point 98% of the time, so any more fancy AF would be overkill most of the time. 

I would not not get a 5d2. It's AF is no better than the 6d and the 6d is better than a 5d2 at practically everything except weather sealing.  If you want something better than 6d save up for a 5d3.  Or a 6d2 when it comes out at the end of this year or the beginning of next year. 

The 70-200 f/2.8 IS 2 is incredible, by the way. Crazy sharp. Fantastic color and bokeh. Solid and feels great. 

[TTMartin]

---

@ScottS wrote:

Would you recommend improving glass before the camera? My situation is this: I own a Canon 40D, which I purchased very clean from a photographer who was upgrading to the 70D. I own only kit lenses at this point. One of them is the "Nifty Fifty" Canon 50mm 1.8. I can't afford my ultimate dream quite yet of full-frame and L series glass. I think I can begin to either upgrade my lenses or my camera.

My choice right now is between the following scenarios:

Stay with my Canon 40D ~ purchase the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS II

Stay with my Canon 40D ~ purchase the Sigma 18-35 MM 1.8 Art Lens

(possibly both of those)

OR

Purchase the Canon 7D Mark II w/ the 18-135 STM Kit Lens

Purchase the Canon 6D w/ the 24-105 f4 Lens

I am leaning toward better glass, because low light, clear, sharp photographs are my goal. Video and sports photography are not what I'm needing now.

I am very open to your thoughts and experience.

Thanks much!

Scott S

---

The 40D is a capable sports camera, but, it doesn't do video.

The 70D should be on your radar, a very good at both sports and video, without the price tag of the 7D Mk II.

I would go with the 70D and the EF-S 18-135 IS STM kit lens, and the EF-S 55-250 IS STM. That is actually a very good setup to start out with.

Be very careful about dumping a bunch of money into gear just because. Have a need for it before you buy, especially when you are talking $1000+ lenses.