11-14-2012 12:10 PM
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 =).
11-14-2012 12:15 PM
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.
11-14-2012 01:22 PM
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.
11-14-2012 02:11 PM
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:
11-14-2012 02:24 PM
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?
11-14-2012 04:02 PM
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.
11-14-2012 04:17 PM
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.
11-14-2012 04:22 PM
Ask yourself what you need in a body. Do you need 8fps? Do you really need FF?
The 7d, 60d, T3i, and T2i all have the same sensor so don't expect different IQ (lenses make more of a difference). What you're paying for are the extra features each one adds.
If you need higher fps and faster focus system, the 7d should be the obviousl choice.
If you don't, then the choice isn't so obvious.
If you want FF I highly suggest you rent a 5d2 first. There are SO many opinions on the subject of improved IQ from 7d/60d vs 5d2. Best to spend a tiny bit of money to shoot a 5d2 for a day (or two) and KNOW if it's worth the extra money for what YOU want to do.
I coveted the 7d for a long time but sat myself down and asked myself if the AF in my T2i was plenty fine for what I shot for an entire year, did I really need the 7d's? Ended up with a 60d because I didn't need the extras in the 7d. The 60d had the extras I wanted/needed.
It's about what YOU need/want in a camera. Don't get caught up in what others prefer/need.
11-14-2012 06:19 PM
New user here, so Hello.
I am three years into Canon dlsr now but mostly video work plus timelapse. I have two 5D mk2 and a 7D at my disposal at work and I shot with those for quite a while. However, I just somehow felt something missing ever since I got my own 60D and would often use it instead of the 5D and 7D. For what I do and my need, the flip screen is the biggest feature that make my life easier as a videographer. I would jump at the 6D FF if it came with the flip screen, but Canon decided to not to give us that. So I'll stick to my reliable 60D for now. Just my two cents.