Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Upgrading body - lens help please.

  1. #1

    Upgrading body - lens help please.

    Hello,
    I am looking to upgrade from my 60D possibly to the 7D Mark II. I currently primarily shoot with EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. Should I keep the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM or also upgrade the lens to either the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM or the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM? I understand I lose some of the wide angle, but I find myself zooming in and shooting in 35mm to the 55 mm range more often then not.

    Please feel free to recommend additional lenses, camera bodies and ask me questions.

    Thank you for looking, thank you for your help.

    Bruce J.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,443
    What do you shoot? What are you hoping to get from a 7D2 that you don't have on your 60D?

    If you don't need the 10FPS / super AF tracking of the 7D2, then for a similar price, the 6D would get you a higher quality image (but you would definitely need to switch lenses at that point, as the 6D is full-frame and requires EF lenses, and will not take EF-S lenses)

    Hard to steer you in one direction or the other without knowing what you want a) from the upgrade, and b) from your shots in general.
    On Flickr - Namethatnobodyelsetook on Flickr
    R8 | R7 | 7DII | 10-18mm STM | 24-70mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 | 50mm f/1.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-300mm f/4-5.6L | RF 100-500mm f/4-5-7.1L

  3. #3
    Hi David,

    Thanks for the reply. I photograph my family mostly. I have a three year old boy and my wife and I just had our second child 8 weeks ago. I have a 60 mm macro for the close up infant pics, and I need a great zoom as my son is getting faster and faster. Ive taken 25K+ pics in just three years, love photography!! Only hobby though.

    I want higher IQ from the upgrade, 100% view finder, and maybe the WiFi (6D), and the most up to date technology (not sure if that applies to camera bodies like it does to computers, tablets and phones).

    The 10 FPS definitely appeals to me, but not the end all be all. My cousin shoots with a 7D and lives and dies by it. The body of the 7DII is an upgrade (magnesium), but so would the 6D. Those are the two I'm contemplating between... does this help, would you go with the 7DII, 6D or stay with the 60D?

    Is full frame the way I should go? 5Ds or 5Dr?
    Last edited by Magijr; 08-17-2015 at 11:58 PM.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    466
    What is it that a new camera body will allow you to do that your 60D won't let you do?
    Unless there is some specific need for what you are planning to do with it you may be better off exploring a different lens or two instead to increase the range of what you can do.
    Last edited by jrw; 08-18-2015 at 12:04 AM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    466
    Edit: I see you answered some of that while I was pecking away at the keyboard.

  6. #6
    I appreciate your response. I guess I wanted to know if after three years, 25,000 pics and an outdated camera later if there was something better. The view finder in the 60D is annoying, other than that the camera is good. Is the 7DII a better choice than the 6D, or should I upgrade my lense and keep the 60D?

    Thanks again for your response.

    Bruce
    Last edited by Magijr; 08-18-2015 at 01:31 AM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    466
    The funny thing is that there is almost always something newer available to purchase. It is only better for you when it meets a need that your current equipment can not fulfill. The zoom lens you have is not one that folks would call a bad one by any means.
    Backing up a bit, What do you do with your images? Prints to what size, sharing on social media, digital picture frames perhaps? Unless you print rather large on a regular basis then 50MP isn't something you really require from a camera. If you don't frame tightly in camera and crop your images do you still have enough resolution for your end purposes? If so then a 100% viewfinder, while nice to have, isn't a necessity and this approach can help with moving targets. When I was doing contract sports shooting the companies only wanted images of around 10 MP which was sufficient for all their print needs and took up a lot less storage space. Loose framing allowed cropping the images to 8x10 and not lose body parts in the process. The slightly deeper depth of field from greater distance or shorter focal length helped to ensure that fast moving subjects would be sharply in focus as well. As far as outdated equipment goes the preferred body for this work remains a 1D3 as it has the right resolution for their needs while being low cost on the used market.
    At work we still use an original Canon Rebel for our still shots. It still works fine and provides all that is needed for the job at hand.

    Hope that something in my rambling helps.
    Last edited by jrw; 08-18-2015 at 02:38 AM.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,443
    If you don't have something specific you don't like about the camera, the camera is the last thing to upgrade. Lenses make a bigger difference. A 60D is not outdated. They're only at the next model. Unless you're finding yourself at ISO 1600+ most of the time, and the noise levels are bugging you, your 60D is fine. I have a fullframe body that generally stays home because it's extra big and extra heavy. If you're lugging around things for two kids, the last thing you need is a bigger, heavier camera.

    Lenses on the other hand, can change how things appear. An ultrawide angle can make the "very" immediate foreground appear large, while the background is pushed way out to the distance. You can get a distorted look, like the first two images here, or non-distorted, like the last.


    My, what a big nose you have by Dave E, on Flickr
    Bobble Head by Dave E, on Flickr
    Puppy daytime, gnawing by Dave E, on Flickr

    A telephoto can let you capture things you can't get close to, animals, the way your children play when you're not hovering over them with "the camera".


    Goslings swim by Dave E, on Flickr
    Jumping the waves by Dave E, on Flickr

    Your f/2.8 lens is pretty fast, so I won't do a series of "wide aperture" images, but something like one of the Sigma Art f/1.4 primes will make your background extra bokeh-licious.

    What images are making your feel like you're not getting similar results? Most likely, it's not an issue with noise levels, it will be one or more of:

    a) Lighting. Lighting isn't just speedlights, but morning/evening light vs. noon. Using a diffuser to soften the light. Open shade. Direction of light. Shots of shadows. Lots of free options to explore here. Heck, an old thin sheet can be a very big diffuser, or double as studio a backdrop.

    b) Framing/Composition. Tight framing, even cutting parts off of the face. Not every hair has to be in every shot. Loose framing, showing the environment, leaving "breathing room" around your subject. Composing for rule of thirds, artfully angled, or even subject dead-center. Each one has a different mood/feeling to it.

    c) Perspective. This is a mix of lens choice, and camera/subject placement. I covered wide vs. tele looks above, so I'll focus on camera/subject placement. Shooting up, from down low, to exaggerate height. Shooting down low at a low subject (kids/dogs) to mimic their perspective and give a better background. Shooting from way above. From up a ladder, up a tree, up a cliff, whatever. Mix it up.

    or even d) Location. Do you shoot your family at the same places, over and over. The house. The yard. The park. Perhaps you're bored of *where* you shoot, not of (or not just) how you're shooting it. Go for a hike, get shots of the 3 year old exploring a forest. Dress the kids up and take them somewhere to make an interesting shot. Perhaps they're bandits, or spies, or piano virtuosos, or they're on their way to Mars. Recreate movie posters or something. Find an idea that makes you *want* to shoot.
    On Flickr - Namethatnobodyelsetook on Flickr
    R8 | R7 | 7DII | 10-18mm STM | 24-70mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 | 50mm f/1.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-300mm f/4-5.6L | RF 100-500mm f/4-5-7.1L

  9. #9
    Senior Member jamsus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Florence
    Posts
    539
    The 60D is quite a good camera, i'm practically shooting only with it and the only limit that i found is "AI-Servo" focusing the flying birds, something that this camera isn't build for !

    In my opinion, if you "feel" to change but you don't want to go full sport\bird hunting, you should safe some money and go with a 6D full frame, and keep the 60D as backup or second body - the 7DMkII is not the evolution you want.

    The 17-55 f2.8 is a really good lens too
    Dogs and cats, living together! Mass hysteria!

    Jamsus

  10. #10
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,565
    Hey Bruce....

    Congratulations on the 2nd. I am about to go spend the weekend with my brother/sister in law who have two little ones (2+ and just 0+). I am looking forward to it. Those ages are a lot of fun.

    Regarding how to upgrade, it does really depend on what you want. As others are saying, the 60D is a good camera. Several members are posting great pictures with it or other similar cameras. But that doesn't mean that you can't "improve" upon it. Just bare in mind, "improve" may be marginal.

    The 7DII. I loved my 7D. It was the ergonomics as much as anything, but just a great all around camera as it combined good AF, fps, etc. And the 7DII is better in just about every respect. Over the 60D the first thing I will point out is that you will be able to AFMA you lenses. Often, for me, AFMA results in minor improvements, but, once in awhile, I AFMA a lens and it is suddenly so much better than before.

    Some comparisons of the 7DII to the 60D: Spec List, Sensor, and resolution. The 7DII clearly has better specs. Those that jump out to me are the fps, AF system, and metering system. You should expect better overall performance from the 7DII. You mention 100% viewfinder, the 7DII has that. The sensor specs start to show the difference. Not only do you have 20 MP (slightly more), but you get better dynamic range, tonal and color performance from those pixels. Not up to a FF sensor, but better, typically by ~0.5 stops, maybe 0.7 stops over the 60D. Will that help, sure, if you are limiting yourself to ISO 400 in some situations, you can likely now use ISO 640. Then the resolution, the 7DII is slightly nicer, IMO. This could be due to the MP, or, a better AA filter. So, the big difference to me is the specs, but you could expect a small bump in IQ as well.

    Comparing to the 6D to the 60D: Spec List, Sensor, and resolution. I've heard the 6D called the FF version of the 60D, and looking at the specs, I can see why. Very similar. Thus, I would expect a similar experience. Once exception is people talk about the low light AF of the 6D, and you can see it AFs down to -3 EV. You do gain Wi-Fi and GPS. But your viewfinder is the same. But, you see a distinct jump in sensor performance. Approximately 2 stops across the board. In other words, if you limited yourself to ISO 400, now, you could shoot ISO 1600. Big difference in the sensor. Also, ISO 100 would have better color rendition, tone, etc. But do note, you will only see those differences in certain situations. Also, I seen a nice difference in the resolution.

    All of that said, I think the 7DII is one of the best "all around" cameras. One camera and you can use it for most things. Its weakness would be low light situations, but, honestly, that is a limited weakness as eventually with all cameras you will need to create your own light.

    But this brings me to where others have already suggested, the camera body is only one area where you could upgrade. Others include:
    • Lenses. Based on what you've said, the EFS 17-55 is a good lens. But adding a fast prime like a Sigma 35A/50A would give you increased sharpness, bokeh, and allow you to photograph in lower light. Something like a 70-200 will give you more reach and a EFS 10-18 or 10-22 could be UWA.
    • Lighting. Do you have a flash? I used my 7D, EFS 15-85 and 580EX for years for indoor shots. Actually, I just found out that a friend, who had a professional photographer, just finished her wedding album and, I was told but I have seen it yet, contains "mostly" my shots taken with that combination (the wedding was before I upgraded to the 5DIII).
    • Support. Tripods slow you down, make you a deliberate photographer. They also allow for slow shutter speeds for waterfalls or to blur people and will allow you to run back into the shot so you can start taking some family portraits.
    • Filters. I love 'em. I probably have too many. CPLs and ND filters simply allow you to do or enhance different things.
    • Transportation. By this I mean bags. Back packs, pouches, etc. But good ones really help get you to where you want to be.
    • Storage. Where to you store your gear? I have heard safes, gun safes, and pelican cases go by.
    • Accessories. Memory cards, remotes, cable releases.


    So, there is a lot there. Hopefully not overwhelming. But as you can see, you can pick what you want and go with it. As others have said, I've always found it best to shoot until you have found a need and solve it. But, you can also anticipate your eventual needs, as you might want to do with a growing family, and have an upgrade plan to meet those needs.

    Good luck...let us know what you decide.
    Last edited by Kayaker72; 08-18-2015 at 11:00 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •