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.
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
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. []
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).
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
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
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote