Camera and lens selection help

I am trying to decide on camera/lens purchase here

Currently I am looking at the 7d with either the 17-55mm 2.8 or the 24-105mm 4.0. My main issue with the 17-55 is build quality and I cannot use when I upgrade to 5D. Which I plan to buy the Mark II when the Mark III comes out (great price reduction)

Indoor shooting is really just family pictures/kids etc some portraits. Outdoor I shoot landscape, street, portraits etc.

Also,
just to mention, I can buy the 7D now at normal retail or I have the option to buy the 5D at cost +7%. Should I just get the 5D now?

Whether you buy the 7D or 5D II depends on what you are going to do with it. For still objects IMO the 5D II is the better camera. The 7D is a better action camera. We had this discussion in another thread just the other day. You might be able to glean some good information out of it. Personally for what you listed so far, I would go with the 5D II now.

Here is the thread:

http://community.the-digital-picture...ead.php?t=5332

If you are going to do much indoor work with the 24-105mm you are going to need a flash for the 5D II as well.

Welcome to the TDP forums!

Honestly, I'd get the 5DII + 24-105mm kit now.

For the 7D, I'd really recommend the 17-55mm over the 24-105mm - the latter leaves you without a wide angle, and 24mm on a 7D is often too narrow indoors and not optimal for landscape, either. Also, the time to buy a 24-105mm lens is when you're buying a 5DII, hard to beat the $800 kit price for the lens!

IMO, the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the best general purpose zoom for APS-C, but the 24-105mm on FF is better. The FF equivalent of the 17-55mm would be a hypothetical 27-88mm f/4.5 lens. Thus, on the 5DII the 24-105mm f/4L IS is wider, longer, faster, and still has IS.

I'm inclined to agree on the 5D, I'll go that route. One question, what about the D700? Assuming you were starting from scratch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drizzit

I'm inclined to agree on the 5D, I'll go that route. One question, what about the D700? Assuming you were starting from scratch

---

Most of us here are Canon people; I think the responses you get may be biased. This is the age old question and it used to be do you drive a Chevy or Ford. I went with Canon because of problems I had over the years with Nikon products.

It is an important decision, because it tends to lock you in to that one product. There are allot of people using Nikon and getting good results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Most of us are Canon people; I think the responses you get may be biased. This is the age old question and it used to be Chevy or ford. I went with Canon because of problems I had over the years with Nikon products.

It is an important decision, because it tends to lock you in to that one product.

---

You know, come to think about it, I've owned a Dodge, Buick, Chevy, and now I currently drive a Ford....but I've been with Canon ever since my first DSLR purchase. So, you could say that the camera brand you sink your first [relatively small] investment in will likely be the one you're still investing in many years down the road.

I'm pretty sure the Canon and Nikon companies both know this, considering how much effort and new technology they put into their low-priced, entry level DSLRs...

The d700 is a beautiful camera, but before buying either/any, grab one and feel it. I loved the 300, but hated how it felt. I wanted more controls and knobs, but not at the expense of a crappy shutter button angle. If you do think about going nikon, look at the lens choice and make sure they have what you want in a price you can afford.

Both Amazon.com and B&H have the 5DII + 24-105mm kit for $3049. I'd jump on that price right now, since that's the cheapest I've ever seen that kit. At that price you're getting a brand new 5DII for $2000, which is around what they go for used on eBay. I think you'll be very happy with the 24-105mm on the 5DII. It's the lens I use most often for landscapes, and will work great for portraits and indoor shooting because of the IS.

Make sure to click the links from this site before buying so Bryan gets some cash to help keep it going!

Is it potentially worth ordering from Canada? Lots of retailers with it for $2799.

Link (Photoprice.ca)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidEccleston

Is it potentially worth ordering from Canada? Lots of retailers with it for $2799.

---

I think Canada requires retailers to charge tax on all sales, no matter where it's going, so you might have to pay as much as 13% tax, totally negating your savings. Plus your credit card may charge you a foreign transaction fee of something like 3%. You're welcome to look into it, with the current exchange rate, as long as you don't have to pay some huge tax you might save some money.

When I add it to my cart on McBain Camera and indicate I'm shipping to the U.S., it doesn't add tax to the order.

The 5DII + 24-105mm kit got even cheaper on Amazon! Now it's only $3019.

First, I just want to thank you all for the input. I picked up the 5D kit, I got it for 7% above cost, it ended up being a no brainer. Now I jut need to decide on my next 2 lenses and other gear.

Other gear? Definitely get a good tripod, preferably carbon fiber if you'll be traveling, and a good ballhead. Probably include a flash for indoor use. Lenses? Consider a telephoto zoom (70-200 series or 70-300 L), fast prime for portraits (85mm f/1.8, 135L), possibly an ultra wide zoom (17-40, 16-35), all depending on priority and budget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Other gear? Definitely get a good tripod, preferably carbon fiber if you'll be traveling, and a good ballhead. Probably include a flash for indoor use. Lenses? Consider a telephoto zoom (70-200 series or 70-300 L), fast prime for portraits (85mm f/1.8, 135L), possibly an ultra wide zoom (17-40, 16-35), all depending on priority and budget.

---

With all that new gear you should definately look at getting a bag/case to haul it all around...lots of options depending on your needs and personal preferences.

Stephen

And don't forget to consider a good strap like the R-Strap from Black Rapid (www.blackrapid.com). It's so much easier than lugging around your gear using the provided neck strap.

I have budget for one more lens now. I am leaning towards the 85mm, I can afford the 16-35, but I'd rather not spend that much this week lol. I have to buy a tempurpedic bed this weekend too.

@theking love the strap, I will pick it up.

What are your thoughts on the 50mm 1.2?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drizzit

I have budget for one more lens now. I am leaning towards the 85mm, I can afford the 16-35, but I'd rather not spend that much this week lol. I have to buy a tempurpedic bed this weekend too.

@theking love the strap, I will pick it up.

---

Are you talking about the 85mm F/1.2L? I would love to have one of those.

The 16-35mm L II is an awesome lens, it puts out very good IQ for a zoom. Your problem is you have half that range covered now. I would prefer the 16-35mm over the 24-105 at 24-35mm, but how much will that range matter to you? It sounds like you are getting two lenses that are closer to being similar than offering much more variety. I would suggest you shoot a while then decide what would be more important to you. I would also suggest if you want a wide lens consider one of the primes like the 24mm F1.4L instead of the 16-35mm and keep your 24-105mm to cover the rest of the range. You start seeing lens distortion around 21mm and at 16mm it will be very noticeable on a FF camera. I consider any thing that wide a specialty lens and you should know for sure why you want it before you get it.

If you have the money, think about the best of the best as far as zooms go, think about the 70-200mm F2.8L II IS. Personally I carry a few wide primes (35mm and 24mm) and then this as a zoom when I am walking around. With your 24-105 paired with the 70-200 you have a huge range covered then you can start picking up specialty lenses as you see you need them.

You are going to want a flash with the 24-105mm

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...dlite_TTL.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drizzit

What are your thoughts on the 50mm 1.2?

---

Some say it is soft because of the way it is made. I have never owned it, but wouldn't mind adding it to my collection.

I think the 85/1.8 if great for portraits. Had that before I got the 85mm f/1.2L II. On FF, I usually shoot at f/1.6-f/2.2 with the 85L. IMO, the 85/1.8 is one of the best values in the Canon lineup. Do get the hood, and if you plan to use it outdoors, you might want a 3-stop ND filter (B+W 103, 58mm $42 at B&H).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

I think the 85/1.8 if great for portraits.

---

+1 for the 85 f/1.8. For the money ($400) it's hard to beat. The 85 f/1.2 is legendary and carries a legendary price tag too. For 1/5 the money, the f/1.8 is the right place to start. Plus its AF is much faster than the f/1.2, making it a good action lens when you can get close to the action. While I don't use it as often as other lenses, there's no real substitute for a fast prime when you need one. I find the 85 f/1.8 much more reliable (for wide aperture IQ and AF accuracy) than the 50 f/1.4.

There's also the suite of 70-__ L zooms, all of which have excellent IQ. My 70-300L spends more time on my 7D than any other lens.

Have fun!

I own the 50L, and it is softer than all my other lenses at most apertures. But that's not really the purpose of the lens, the purpose is to be able to shoot at f/1.2 and produce useable results, and that's exactly what it does. There's a bit of a learning curve, but the results you can get with the lens are stunning once you understand how to get the most out of it.

I've used the 85L before, and have seriously considered getting one myself. Again the samples I've seen from this lens are stunning. I need to stop looking at them or I'm afraid I'm going to be $2000 poorer.

However, after saying all that, I would recommend that if you can afford it now or in the near future, you should consider getting the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. It is my most used lens on my 5DII. The versatility is just amazing, and with f/2.8 you can get some great bokeh, especially at 200mm. The image quality rivals primes, and so unless I want a wider aperture, I just stick to using the 70-200.

Take a look at the lens sample archive on photography on the net for some examples of what each lens is capable of: Photography-on-the.net Lens Sample Photo Archive

Need any bag recommendations?

+ 1 on the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II - I absolutely love it on my 5D2. It really is one of the best telephoto zooms Canon has released. It's expensive but it's just so damn nice! I occasionally use it with the Canon 2 x extender III and the results are still usable at 400mm - mind you there's definately a loss in image quality.

What about the Sigma 85mm f/1.4? There's been a plethora of great reviews about this lens (so many actually that I ordered it yesterday). I can give some feedback in a few days on how it performs if you like. It's significantly cheaper than the Canon primes (50mm f/1.2L and 85mm f/1.2L) and produces similar results. The autofocus is supposedly much quicker than the Canon 85mm f/1.2L as well, which is the main reason I didn't go for the Canon.

The Canon 85mm f/1.8 is also a great suggestion if your just kicking off your photography.