Originally Posted by MVers
This is true, and I do realize that. But since there's still a difference to me between a "50mm" and "28mm" even though they are actually about 80mm and 49mm on a cropped sensor. It like the labels were mixed up :P
Sounds to me like it'd be in my best interest to go with the 70-200mm or a new camera body. Thanks for all your advice MVers!
Should I decide to go with a 5D would it be best to wait a little while and get the 5D mkII?
The 5D kicks Booty, I agree with an earlier poster, if you want to see a differance the 5D will do it, but you will want good glass also, you could hold of on glass for a while what you have is not bad.
Invest in glass is the way to go. Body can wait, in 6 months you can get a 50D for around $900.
Right now you need a multi purpose walk around lens, and the 24-70 f/2.8Lis one of the best for that job if you read Bryan's Lens Recommendation.
The 50D is a very poor coice for those who shoot in low light at high ISO's. I can tell you speaking from personal experience the 5D (and 5DII, 1DsIII) are the best Canon bodies for low light event work. Shoot at 1600-3200 with no fear, go over 800 on the 50D and prepare to run all your images through some very heavy NR.
To the OP: For your type of work I'm not sure the additional cost of the 5DMKII will do you any good. Sure ISO performance has increased, and there are a few bells an whistles, but 21mp is a lot of camera and you will only be using about 50% of that on any given day (unless of course you plan on printing larger than 40-60" on a regular basis). AF is still the same old AF, even though people claim its a tad faster. IMO, while its a better camera in every way I don't think it's a cost effective decision for your use--though thats completely up to you to decide. If anything get a 5D now and save up for a 24-70/70-200 instead of waiting to afford the 5DII.
MVers-
That sounds like the best idea. I appreciate all your advice as well as every one else's. Thanks everyone!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote