i may be alone on this....

[mattsartin]

so i'm having difficulty making up my mind. i know everyone says better glass is the way to go, but i'm thinking of upgrading the body first. i love to shoot sports and am slowly working my way into paid gigs for shooting weddings and take care of the photography needs of my local church. i'm considering the 5D mkII or the yet to be released 60D depending on price and how patient i am saving money for this. here's my logic (opinions very much welcome) i can't afford to go buy a whole set of L lenses but i figure if i want to for the paid stuff i can rent top of the line equipment as its needed depending on the situation i.e. for a wedding or for my own wants such as significant sporting events. i'm thinking the HD video would be a nice asset for a wedding photographer to offer. so that you don't think i'm completely insane i do plan on upgrading my lens line-up when possible. i currently shoot a Rebel XTi with an 18-55 IS, a 50 1.8 and a 75-300mm. nothing special by any means but it covers the focal range and is satisfactory for my own stuff at the moment. let's hear what you think!

[mpphoto12]

I was in the same situation as yoi but i had an XT and the 75-300 18-55 but No nifty fifty. I got the 70-200 2.8 instead of getting the 50D. I reccomend getting the 70-200 2.8 for Weddings and sports. You would be crazy not to buy the most renowned wedding lens and sport lens for a new body. I sugest the 70-200 for your purposes. It has great bokeh and FAST focusing and a low apeture for good backround blurr and low light situations. By the looks of it you best go with the lens for what you say you are going to use it for. Then i suggest upgrading a body with better Iso for sure. I noticed a huge difference as soon as i mounted the new lens. It made clearer pictures as well. Hope this helps.

[Colin]

So far, yes, you are alone.


I'd go glass first ... I don't really see what the new bodies really get you over glass. full frame would be nice, but the 50 1.8 would be your most capable lens, and consider that a 5D mkII would cost over 20 times what your best lens costs...


The most significant benefit would be shallower possible depth of field with the 5dmkII, and maybe frame rate....


For what a 5dMkII costs, you could get some really nice glass that would allow you to do significantly more than you can now, using the body you've already got.

[mattsartin]

thanks, jus wanted to see how crazy i was, [:P] i'll take both your comments into consideration

[Madison]

Sports?


As much as I like my 5D MkII, for Sports I would consider a 1D MkIII to be honest, because of the sheer speed over the 5D model(s).


Go glass first though. Fast glass of good quality can set you off in the right direction. Bodies change every few years and are enormously expensive. Glass is a long term investment because it will still be great, when you decide to get a new body a few years from now.

[quattrophinia]

I also would suggest to go with glass instead of a new body...

[JJphoto]

If you want to buy camera body, buy lenses instead, if you have to rent some lenses, rent body instead

[tank]

The camera can only record what it see's. It see's thru the lens. Go for the "L" glass. A good lens on a less camera is much better than poor glass on a good camera.

[Colin]

If you want to buy camera body, buy lenses instead, if you have to rent some lenses, rent body instead
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>






Nice and concise. [:)]


The camera body just records the image. The lens creates it.

[Dallasphotog]

I'll throw in several comments to add to the confusion. The lens is clearly the key to image quality and the body gives you the tools and durability for whatever typeof work you undertake. The 1D bodies are rugged, weather sealed and generally perfectfor professional use. I have a 1DMKII for sports and Ilove it (except maybe its weight). I also use an XT and XTi as 2nd and 3rd bodies for sports shoots and they deliver great results wearing nice glass. In the rain, the 1D is the only one I trust to get wet.


For weddings, I carry the 5DMKII and backup with the XTi. My second shooter carries the 1DMKII and theXT. Again, we sell a lot of pictures shot with the Rebels using good glass...and the Rebels are so much lighter when you are wearing them through a 5 hour reception!


If you happen to shoot indoor sports, I would advise at least taking a look at the 5DMKII. I've been using it a lot with the EF70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM for volleyball and basketball. The key is the high ISO performance. It just stomps my1DMKII in the dark gyms.


...and for me, the local camera storerents a HUGE variety of lenses that I can usually grab with 30 minutes notice. For all the oddball use lenses, I've continued to rent instead ofown.

[peety3]

I vote for lenses. Ignoring the depth-of-field advantages of full-frame for a moment, there's no way to get thin depth-of-field without wide aperture lenses. Good glass will bring your camera to life - I remember being amazed at what the XTi could do at the aquarium in Sea World San Diego when I put the 85/1.2 on it.

[Jon Ruyle]

On the other hand, the 85mm f/1.2 on a 1.6 fovcf camera acts pretty much like a 135mm f/2 on a full frame camrea, and the 135mm f/2 is $600 cheaper. So a full frame body is worth a premium of $600 for that one lens alone. If you like fast lenses and plan to own several, it seems to me that investing in full frame makes sense.


Either that, or I'm just jealous of your 85mm f/1.2. [:)]

[Daniel Browning]

I would suggest a 50D (or 60D if you can wait) and $2000 in lenses. I think that would give you more satisfaction than a 5D2 and a $500 lens to replace the 18-55 (augmented by 75-300 and nifty fifty).

[mattsartin]

that's my current plan, i really like the HD video, i'll probably slap
a 24-105 L on there since everybody seems to like it so much. if i
really need wide angle that bad the 18-55 would still fit, plus i have
some fast primes for my 35mm still :) thanks for all the advice

[Chuck Lee]

My motto, "Invest in glass, buy camera bodies."


"i really like the HD video" I think you meant to say that you like the idea. Have you actually used a 5DMkII to shoot HD video?


I would rent or borrow a 5DMKII first and try the HD video out before I let that be your primary motivation for going in that direction. Have you read about the limitations? The 5DMKII is "NOT" a video camera. If I were going to offer professional video services for weddings I would not show up trying to use a 5DMKII to shoot video. I'd show up with a pro video camera. I'd be taking photos with the 5DMKII. To offer video services you would need at least oneor more dedicated people. At the weddings my wife and photograph, there's usually a videographer with one to three cameras. I too had the same thought about using the 5DMkII as a video camera to justify purchasing it. Then sanity, reality, and logic kicked in. Seven months ago I bought a used 5D. Love it. (well, except for the LCD. I got spoiled by the 40D)First shot was 6490 and I've rolled the counter back to 0001 twice!!


"I'll probably slap on a 24-105 L" Say What?? Just what is important here? What was the original post question?


Also, isn't the 18-55 an EF-"S" lens for crop cameras? Won't do much good as a wide angle on the full frame 5DMKII.


Your not only alone, your crazy too.The money you'd spend renting lenses could go towards thier purchase. IMHO Rent bodies and video cams. "Invest in good glass" I think I'm the sixth or seventh person to say it. You can shoot sports with a used 800.00 40D and a 70-200 f2.8L non IS. I've got at least 500 shots from this years junior basketball league to prove it. You want to talk dark in-door sports? Unless your making a living doing it why in the world would you need something like a 1D MKII? If money was no object you'd already have it all.


It sounded like to me the majority of replies suggested that you buy some nice lenses first.Please don'tignore thecumulative years of wisdom shared by those thathave takenthe time to reply.


I vote "Lenses"!!


God Bless You Brother,


Chuck