7D or 70-200 2.8 II?

[Bill M.]

Hi all,


I need some advice on what my next purchase should be. I have been debating making the plunge on getting the new 70-200 2.8 II or picking up the 7D. I currently own a 5DmkII and the 70-200 f4 IS and use a 20D as a back-up body.


I have been shooting more portraits and weddings lately and feel I would benefit from the low-light performance and bokeh of the f2.8 vs. the f4 but my 20D feels really old these days and the high ISO performance just isn't acceptable to me any longer (as I have been spoiled by my 5DII).


Money-wise it would almost be the same since I would sell my 70-200 f4 if I were getting the 2.8 and the cost of the 7D just went down by $100. The 7D would be an upgrade in just about every area compared to the 20D and would negate the need for me to rent a better back-up body for when I shoot weddings...


Would the improved high ISO performance of the 7D compared to the 20D be enough for me to keep my 70-200 f4?


Thanks for reading and any thoughts on the matter!

[JJphoto]

I always think spending $2500 for a f2.8 zoom is way too expensive. you can get 35mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 and 135 mm 2.0 total for about $2500 and these 3 lenses are just amazing lenses for portraits. and 7 D is good for birds, and I think a newer version of rebel is good enough for a back up body. just my 2 cents.

[neuroanatomist]

That's a tough call, in part made harder without knowing which lenses other than the 70-200mm f/4L IS are in your kit. For example, I'd actually suggest looking at the 7D for improved ISO vs. the 20D (though still not up to the 5D2 capability) plus the EF 85mm f/1.8 for portraits, and keep the 70-200 f/4L IS. But, if you shoot a lot of indoor functions, the combo of 5D2 with a 70-200 f/2.8 IS zoom would be wonderful.


I disagree that a Rebel will suffice as a backup body, though. Although the new Rebel's ISO performance will beat the 20D, the Rebel series' AF systems aren't as effective as those in the 7D (which is stellar) or 5D2 (which is really good). Still, it's an improvement on the 20D (the Rebel AF module is based on the 30D).

[wusstigphoto]

I agree with the neuroanatomist.. if thats your budget and your looking to do more portraits, weddings, and need really good ISO performance, I'd highly recommend going the 5DMII route.


I just bought the 7D 3 weeks ago and did a HS Team & Individual shoot and a 6 month old baby shoot the very next day. In both cases, I wish I had the 5DMII instead.


The main reason I opted for the 7D is that I also shoot sports and needed the 8fas performance of the 7D. My 30D 5fas was just not cutting it anymore. Ijust shot a HS varsity softball game with the 7D/70-200 L f/2.8 combo and was astounded at how much chromatic aberration I was getting versus my 30D. Although the 8fas was really sweet, I'm not thrilled using the 7D for commercial Portraiture.





If your still not keen on getting the 5DMII, then go for the 70-200 F2.8 II and use with your 1DMII. that'd still be a sweet combo imho.





Good luck

[Bill M.]

Neuroanatomist, unfortunately I really don't have a lot of fast glass at this time. I use the 24-105 as my general purpose lens, I have a 50 1.4 for low light and moderate length portraits, and then the 100-400 and 100 macro round out the rest of my kit. I have considered primes for their IQ and size, but really like the versatility of zooms.


I would absolutely agree that the 70-200 2.8 would be a great combo with my 5D2, which is why I posed the original question []


I have never really seriously considered a Rebel series body for a back-up as they are a bit too light, both in size and in the features I want...


wusstigphoto, I'm not sure if you read my original post completely, but I already have the 5D2 (which I have no doubt performs better at high ISO's than the 7D) and was looking to upgrade my back-up body to give me better performance than by 20D...


And yes, $2500 is a lot to pay for that lens!

[Scott]

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"]Bill Bill Bill, ol mate there is only one solution, buy the 70 &ndash; 200 2.8II and sent it to me, please, I&rsquo;ll even pay for the postage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I want that lens and can&rsquo;t see it happening for a long time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] All the best with you quandary. []
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"]
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"]Scott

[neuroanatomist]

Bill,


What do you shoot with the 100-400mm? If you use that lens for wildlife and especially birds, the 7D + 100-400mm makes a great combo!


I suppose it comes down mostly to how often you shoot where you need a backup body, and also whether that second camera is actually a back up (in case the 5D2 fails), or a second body and you'd shoot with both (24-105 on the FF, 70-200mm on the crop). If you'd shoot with both, I'd get the 7D (although it's really, really hard to recommend against the EF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]L IS II USM - I got mine a couple of weeks ago and love it!).


One additional convenience (if it matters) is that the 5D2 and the 7D use the same battery.


Good luck with your decision!

[Bill M.]

Neuroanatomist, I generally use my 100-400 for wildlife and outdoor sporting events with good lighting. One of the reasons I want to keep a crop camera is because of that lens...having a 640mm 5.6 lens isn't too shabby []


When I do shoot weddings, I do use a two camera setup, exactly the way you mentioned, so upgrading my second body is a priority for me. (Which probably points me to answer my own question!)


Congrats on your lens! Did you own another 70-200 before it or did you take the plunge completely? I personally enjoy the f4 IS version I have very much, but the extra stop and the creamy bokeh are strong draws for the 2.8...


Steven, it does seem like a never ending cycle of saving, buying, selling, buying...buying some more! I'm just trying to determine my best option for the moment but I probably will end up with both items at some point!!

[neuroanatomist]

Congrats on your lens! Did you own another 70-200 before it or did you take the plunge completely? I personally enjoy the f4 IS version I have very much, but the extra stop and the creamy bokeh are strong draws for the 2.8...

I 'took the plunge' as I'd never had a 70-200mm zoom. I considered the f/4 IS version, but I knew at some point I'd want to use it in less than optimal lighting, and want the shallower DoF as well, so those considerations outweighed both the cost and weight disadvantages of the f/2.8 II IS. I do have the 200mm f/2.8 II prime (which I picked up used but like-new for a truly bargain price). Bryan's ISO 12233 crops show that the new zoom at 200mm is actually a bit sharper than the prime across the aperture range, which seems to upset my world-view to some extent! [] But some informal 'real world' testing with my lenses shows that to be the case.

When I do shoot weddings, I do use a two camera setup, exactly the way you mentioned, so upgrading my second body is a priority for me. (Which probably points me to answer my own question!)

Probably does, yes. [:S]

[Steven23]

If you already have a 70-200f/4, and doing fine with it, i wouldn't upgrade, i would get more lenses, if your fine on lenses, the 50d or 7d will do you fine as a back up, action body. I would keep saving that cash for emergency money for any case. If you are running into issues with noise, the 70-200 f/2.8 II wont do you wrong, for that extra stop of light. Just ask yourself, "do i need the top lenses, for what i'm shooting". Also what you can do is, get the 70-200f/2.8 II then sell off your 70-200/f4 can get most of its value back, then keep saving up to get a 7d or other lenses you might need. &lt;3 that never ending buying, trading feeling.