Full Frame…Help!

[jerrytech1]

Everyone…I am thinking about the jump to Full Frame. Currently I shoot with a 7D and I have a T3i as a backup. Ive been thinking about selling the T3i and a few low end lenses and getting into a used full frame. I don't shoot weddings or major events. I do lots of landscape, birds etc but I would like to concentrate on children and family portraits. I don't have the budget for anything brand new. Used 5D II can be found for under $1000

All Canon Lenses: 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 17-55 2.8, 75-300 5.6. , 60mm Macro 1.8, ULTRAWIDE 10-22 , 400mm Prime L series 5.6
Canon 580EXII Speed lite and 320ex as backup

All feedback and suggestions are welcome and appreciated…

Thanks!!

[jimwin]

Hi jerrytech1..........your situation is very akin to what I did some time ago.

Despite many negative comments, the 5D2 and 7D combo has brought me lots of joy. My preferred shooting subjects also resemble yours closely.

I use the following (all Canon) lenses: EF 24-105mm f4 L, 50mm f1.4, 100mm f2.8 Macro, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L, EFS 10-18mm as well as 430EX11 x 2 and Manfrotto tripods.

It is a sensible and versatile combo leaving some money in the kitty for more (always more!) lenses and other kit.

regards

James

[Sean Setters]

Keep in mind that you can get a refurbished EOS 6D for only $1,099.00 + tax/shipping. That'll likely be a better option than a used 5D II for not much more.

[jamsus]

Look out to 6D, not only the good old 5DMkII!

[DavidEccleston]

As many of you know, a while back I picked up a 1Ds2 (just before the 6D was announced), and loved it. The controls are a bit cumbersome, but it made nice pictures, with much less noise than the 7D until ISO 1600, but at ISO 3200 it just falls apart. A 5D2 will be similar, I expect. Good until you hit the ISO wall, and likely won't have Canon repair support much longer.

I got a 7D2 at launch, and the 1Ds2 ended up being neglected in favor of the higher-ISO capable and much lighter 7D2. Sports shots require fast shutter speed, so I often have higher ISOs. Late in the day, I just couldn't use the 1Ds2 anymore, so it just stayed home. But recently, going through my Flickr photostream, I noticed the 1Ds2 shots. They really stood out, and I got me thinking about upgrading to a newer full-frame. Which limitations would I be willing to accept to afford a newer full-frame camera.

Alright, so full-frame is nice, but are the IQ improvements I saw purely because of the full-frame sensor, or is it partially 1D specific? I know the 1D series does more work in analog before converting to digital, and it handles highlights really nicely. Would I be happy with the 5D3 or 5Ds, or do I crave some secret 1D magic, pushing me to a 1DX or something? I'm assuming the 6D won't keep up with my sports AF requirements.

So yeah, it's definitely worth considering, but if you cheap out too much, you might end up with a camera you can't always use. Try to avoid that. The 6D is newer, and has higher ISO capabilities, and can likely be found for a similar price. On the other hand, it's likely like the Rebel of the full-frame line, and has less controls. Is there a limitation of the 6D or a feature of the 5D2 pushing you to the 5D2 over the 6D?

If I get to the point where I am seriously considering the full-frame upgrade, I'd probably rent each body on successive weekends, and compare the results vs. price differences to try and answer the "Do the magic 1D secret sauce exist?" question. That may not make as much sense in your price-range, where the rentals costs would be a fair chunk of the body price, but that's my thought process about the upgrade...

[clemmb]

For landscapes and portraits the 6D would be a great option. Coming from a 7D you probably will not like the 6D & 5DII auto focus but for landscapes and portraits they are fine. You can pick up a 1DsIII for ~$1100. You will love the auto focus system and the IQ is great. I do not hesitate to shoot ISO 1600. If needed I do shoot 3200 but have to do significant noise reduction. Another great option is not quite full frame but closer. The 1DmkIV for ~$1500. Due to its larger sensor the IQ is better than the 7D. It is great for landscapes and portraits but also beats the 7D for sports. I shoot a 1DsIII for landscapes and portraits and a 1DIII for sports. I love them both. My 5D sees no action anymore.

[peety3]

Everyone…I am thinking about the jump to Full Frame. Currently I shoot with a 7D and I have a T3i as a backup. Ive been thinking about selling the T3i and a few low end lenses and getting into a used full frame. I don't shoot weddings or major events. I do lots of landscape, birds etc but I would like to concentrate on children and family portraits. I don't have the budget for anything brand new. Used 5D II can be found for under $1000

All Canon Lenses: 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 17-55 2.8, 75-300 5.6. , 60mm Macro 1.8, ULTRAWIDE 10-22 , 400mm Prime L series 5.6
Canon 580EXII Speed lite and 320ex as backup

As others have said, look to the 6D. Far better IMHO than a 5D2. You are going to have some work to do lens-wise, as your 10-22, 17-55, and macro are all EF-S. Having lived with APS-H + APS-C for 5+ years, then transitioning to FF/APS-H/APS-C (only lasted for a month) then FF/APS-H and now essentially FF with APS-H on the shelf if I really need it, you're going to find that if you try to use your APS-C to shoot wide and FF to shoot long, you end up with disappointment on both ends. You're going to want perhaps a 16-35/4IS (allowing you to sell your 10-22 and possibly your 17-55, since you have 50/1.4 and 85/1.8). You may also want to ditch the 75-300 and 400/5.6 for a 70-200/4IS (or non-IS if that works for you). I think 6D/16-35 and 7D/70-200 would be a fine combo for a while, especially with either of your fast primes handy.

Fair warning: you may find the 7D to be rather weak alongside the 6D.

[peety3]

Alright, so full-frame is nice, but are the IQ improvements I saw purely because of the full-frame sensor, or is it partially 1D specific? I know the 1D series does more work in analog before converting to digital, and it handles highlights really nicely. Would I be happy with the 5D3 or 5Ds, or do I crave some secret 1D magic, pushing me to a 1DX or something? I'm assuming the 6D won't keep up with my sports AF requirements.

So yeah, it's definitely worth considering, but if you cheap out too much, you might end up with a camera you can't always use. Try to avoid that. The 6D is newer, and has higher ISO capabilities, and can likely be found for a similar price. On the other hand, it's likely like the Rebel of the full-frame line, and has less controls. Is there a limitation of the 6D or a feature of the 5D2 pushing you to the 5D2 over the 6D?

If I get to the point where I am seriously considering the full-frame upgrade, I'd probably rent each body on successive weekends, and compare the results vs. price differences to try and answer the "Do the magic 1D secret sauce exist?" question. That may not make as much sense in your price-range, where the rentals costs would be a fair chunk of the body price, but that's my thought process about the upgrade...

Disclaimer: my experience with 6D is limited to a single four-day rental because one of our 7D bodies was in for repair. I shot two charity walks with it, something we enjoy doing but absolute image quality is simply not a factor (getting the images culled/cropped/delivered fairly fast is). I didn't notice any secret sauce with that camera. I'd rented a 5D prior for a charity event, but wasn't experienced enough to really look for the sauce.

OMG, yes, there's some sort of secret sauce in FF. I feel like almost every EF (as in "every Canon lens that's not an EF-S") lens just makes more sense on FF, and the images are just more WOW across the board. This goes for 5D3, 5DsR, and 1Dx, having owned 40D, 7D, 1D3, and now 5D3, 5DsR, and 1Dx, while also having rented 5D, 5D2, 6D, and 7D2.

Amongst other things, years ago I had a nifty fifty. I used it on my 1D3, and once I finally went back to TDP's review and realized that it was best if I stopped down to f/2.8, I discovered that it was a decent lens, but felt the focal length just wasn't all that amazing (and with a 16-35/2.8, 70-200/2.8IS, and later a 24-70/2.8, it didn't serve a purpose, and got sold). Now that I've gone FF, I've picked up the 50/1.2 and wowsers. Sure, I can shoot with that lens for a while and just crank out magic all day long. I had a blast at a baby shower shooting the kiddos playing with bubbles and such.

[neuroanatomist]

Some years back, I was using a 7D and bought a 5DII. I found the IQ to be much better, although the AF was not as effective. I continued using the 7D for birds, but switched to the 5DII for everything else. Agree with the above that the 6D should also be considered.

I suspect your biggest future issue will be lenses, as your standard zoom, your ultrawide zoom and your macro lens are all EF-S. Macro is a toss up for FF vs. APS-C, so I'd say that's not a priority. Also, most FF standard zooms start at 24mm, so if you use your ultrawide mainly at 15mm or narrower, you'd be covered for FF. I'd look into a used/white box 24-105 f/4L as a standard zoom to replace the 17-55/2.8 (the FFeq of the EF-S is 27-88mm f/4.5, so the 24-105 is wider, longer, and faster).

Good luck!

[DavidEccleston]

OMG, yes, there's some sort of secret sauce in FF. ... This goes for 5D3, 5DsR, and 1Dx, having owned 40D, 7D, 1D3, and now 5D3, 5DsR, and 1Dx, while also having rented 5D, 5D2, 6D, and 7D2.

Okay, you're the guy to talk to then. So, "the sauce" is purely full-frame, and not 1D specific? If so, maybe a 5D3 is in my future. If I get "the sauce" without the weight or price of a 1D, then that sounds perfect.

(Hopefully this discussion is useful to jerrytech1, and anyone considering full-frame, too.)