cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Which combo would you get if on a budget?

CanonNewbie
Contributor

Hello.

 

I am switiching to a canon slr and looking to get new equipment soon as there are some decent sales going on.  I am very confused about the body of a camera to get.  I want something better than a beginner camera, and something that I can use for years forward as I get more experienced.  I am really interested in the 5d mark ii but not sure if I really need to spend the money on a FF as of yet.  But this camera has great reviews and the price currently is really good to ingore, and I think this will keep me happy in the long run.  Or I could get the 60D and get good lenses with it.  What would you get,  a 60D with F1.2L lens or a 5D Mark ii with a F1.4 lens?  Any advice is appreciated =). 

14 REPLIES 14

jwood911
Apprentice

Go to the Canon USA website and look at the SLR's. Do a comparison of the 7D, T2i, and 5D Mk II. Ask yourself if a full frame is REALLY worth it to you. My personal recommendation? The 7D..hands down. I have a 7D and a T2i (which I love) and have no desire to get a 5D Mk II or Mk III.

 

 

slerch
Contributor

So in terms of the 7D vs the 5D Mk II, the real question comes down to: what will you be photographing?

 

If your focus is wildlife and portraits, go for the crop sensor 7D. It's not top rated for nothing.

 

If your focus is landscapes, get the full frame 5D Mk II. And this one isn't top rated for nothing either!

 

Yes, you can do either photography option with either camera, but the cropped sensor can't get as wide as the full frame and the full frame won't get as close to wildlife as a cropped sensor camera. Nice thing is that with FF, 35mm is 35mm, not 56mm.

Full frame also has a slightly different depth of field from my perspective. I love the FF image.

 

The ultimate would be to buy both. 7D for wildlife and the 5D for landscapes.

stevepow
Enthusiast

Definitely depends on what you want to shoot.  7D has an edge for sports too over the 5DII beyond the great lens reach - 8fps versus 4fps - helps with fast action.

 

If you find yourself loving 16mm lenses or wider, then FF is the way to go - for wide shots.  Of course it also takes a good lens to deliver all the way out to the corners and sides.

 

Smaller sensors (7D) do give greater depth of field which could be good for Macro. I'm not sure there's enough difference in these two to really matter - but maybe.

 

This might help:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos6d&products=canon_eos5dmkii&...

 

 

Steve
EOS 5D MKIII

tagnal
Contributor

As others have stated, what do you plan to shoot?  Not only does that affect which body might be better for your needs, but it could also determine which lenses are better for you as well.  If you are shooting landscapes, you likely don't even need a lens that opens up to f/1.2 or f/1.4.  

 

What do you shoot with now?  What about your current setup do you feel is preventing you from getting the shots that you want?

So to kind of answer everyone's questions.  I currently am using a Sony A33.  It is a great starter camera, it helped me learn a lot of the basics.  I do sometimes shoot landscapes but mostly just love to take candid shots of friends and family and just like to photograph various family events. Sometimes I do get small paid gigs of friends, but nothing at a serious pro level.  I want to upgrade but make one good upgrade that will keep me satisfied in the long run.   Thats why I thought that maybe a FF might be the best investment as I could see my self wanting it in the future. 

 

I have not looked into the 7D yet, I was only considering the 60D or the 5d mk2.  But since you all have mentioned it I will look into this one as well, however I don't ever shoot sporting events.

 

 

For general photography, you will get best looking results with the full frame cameras, including the 5D mark II. You can get great prices on nice used models on ebay and elsewhere. When you say f/1.2 vs f/1.4 are you speaking specifically about the two 50mm lenses that fit that description (the only focal length in the Canon line-up that does so), as in more generally, spending more on a full frame body and cutting back on lens cost? Generally, full frame is going to cost more for lenses that cover the bigger sensor, although many of these can fit smaller formats like the 60D. The EF 50/1.4 lens takes good pictures, so don't be worried about that. 

 

Go for the 5D mark II.

Thank you all for your input.  I've got a lot to think about.  I'm going to try the three models in the store and make a decision.  Thanks again!

Yes I was speaking about the 50mm lenses. For someone like me, will getting the f1.2 make a lot of difference? I also want to get the 24-70mm f2.8 in the near future. So I have to spend wisely...

What kind of budget are you working with as well?

For what you are going to shoot, I would say a 5D2 would work well. Lens wise, get the 24-105, 50 1.4, 85 1.8.

If your budget is large, then you can get the 24-70 2.8 II and either the 85L II or 70-200 2.8 II. Or both if you can afford it.

You can get by doing landscapes at 24mm on a FF. But if you want wider, the 17-40 is great for landscapes.
Announcements