Thinking of going Full Frame... (1 Viewer)

While I've been checking out online pricing for the Canon 7D (Ebay, Fred Miranda, Craigs List, etc.), I think I might just forego the 7D and pony up a bit more and just bite the bullet on a Canon 5D Mark II. Since I'm less of the sports, high-speed focus, high shutter speed photog ilk, and it just seemed like anyone who was selling their 7D was upgrading to a 5D MKII anyway, so why fight the inevitable. (and those selling their 5D MKII's were upgrading to the 1D MKIV, it never ends).


Of course, I'll need to look into the EF lens selection to settle on a wide/walkabout lens choice if I go with the 5D MKII. I may just open up with the EF 24-105 F/4 IS USM lens for the walkabout lens if I can find a good deal on it, and saving up later for a EF 85mm F/1.2 lens for portraits or a 10-22mm wide angle lens.


Should I make the jump?

I was tempted by full frame, too, Patrick, but I just couldn't justify the cost. I own two EF-S lenses, and figured that a 5DMKii would cost me at least a $1,000 more than the 7D by the time I ended up selling and rebuying lenses. Also, I like to shoot wildlife, and the 7D is a better fit there.


If you shoot mostly portraits, low light and landscapes, and can afford it, the 5DMKii would be a great choice.

5D M2 getting a little long in the tooth product cycle wise tho, no? Even if you don't jump to the inevitable replacement I'd be hesitant. (Googled it, it shipped almost exactly 2 years ago, in November of 2008, 3 years after it shipped the 5D M1)... So maybe you have a year to go on that.


Of course I've been waiting for the D700 replacement for a looooong time. Allowed me to save up for it tho!

But if you decide to go that route the price has never been better, especially if you use the tradeup program:

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?sduid=0&t=212129&page=125

Yes, Scott had mentioned the Loyalty program in the 7D thread, too bad the 5D MKII (refurbed) is out stock at the moment, though I'm just a little scared of the refurb-ness of such a deal, but at 64% of a new unit's price, it might be worth the gamble if I ever see it in-stock again in the near future.


As for it being long in the tooth, perhaps, but if Canon comes out with a new 5D Mark III model within a year, it'll still have a juicy price point in the mid-$2000s (and that's if Canon is going to stay in the full-frame game at that price point, considering I've read rumors of no more new EF lens models on the near horizon, if at all for the foreseeable future, as crop-body EF-S lenses appear to be where their attention is most focused on for now).

No new EF lenses? Where did you read that, Patrick? Almost all the new lenses Canon has announced lately have been EF lenses. The only new EF-S lenses I can think of recently are the 15-85mm and 18-135mm. There's been quite a few "L" lenses, on the other hand -- 400mm f/2.8, 70-300mm IS, 70-200mm f/2.8 MKii, etc.

It's been a while, just reading tons and tons of posts/articles, but the gist was it's a crop-body world these days for the camera manufacturers, and lens makers were going to lean their offerings more on the crop-body form factor models. Plus, it is cheaper to make crop-body lenses and offer them at a lower price point. But I'd welcomed being incorrect in that assessment on the future of new lens models.

Okay, now I get what Scott was talking about, as I did read of all the new spruced up editions of the longer EF telephoto lenses (they were mainly off my radar, as I'm more of a wide-angle/medium/shorter telephoto shooter, more interested in a possible EF 24-70 F/2.8 IS USM lens, but might settle for the non-IS version, or go with the 24-105 F/4 IS USM lens).


Found an old Powershot S2 IS camera that I could trade in, so I called up the Loyalty department and they said they were 1-2 weeks from having any more of the refurbed 5D's ($1600 + tax) in stock, but they did have 14 of the refurbed 7D's ($1087.20 + tax) in stock when I called today. I guess I'll cross my fingers and wait. Most of the 5D MKII's go for $2K and up on ebay, and I'm just hoping I get an unused store return for a "refurb" unit. Heh.

Good luck with the loyalty program, Patrick. I've read of people getting cameras that are almost brand new, with just a few shutter clicks, as well as people getting units with a few thousand. Hopefully you'll get a newer one. In either case, you'll be getting a fine camera for a great price.


As for the lenses, I'm glad that confusion has been cleared up. For longer lenses, it makes almost no sense for Canon to make crop-only versions. They do not make the lenses much lighter, and the long fast lenses are more for professionals, anyway -- and those customers are more likely to want a full frame compatible lens.

OMG, now I find myself shopping for used Speedlite 580EXs, and possibly EF 24-105 F/4 IS lenses. It never ends!

If anyone else is considered a refurbed 5D MKII, Canon has them back in stock! Just ordered mine!

Get the 85 1.8, it was my favorite Canon lens. Now I have the Nikkor verion:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/5130647476/

An 85m F/1.8 lens is probably 3rd or 4th on my lens purchase priority list (just because I need medium wide angle, and 85mm is at the long end of that range for my type of shooting, but it's nice portrait lens), but I'm been enjoying gbrummett's photos on Flickr with the 85mm F/1.2 II lens. I'm still struggling with the choice for walk-about lens between the EF 24-105 F/4 IS and the EF 24-70 F/2.8 models (and it's long-running dilemma for many photogs, it would seem by the number of threads in various photography online venues).

With the excellent high ISO capability of the 5DMKii, unless you need the smaller DoF of f/2.8, I think the 24-105mm f/4 would be a more versatile lens. You get a better focal range and IS.


I've actually considered the EF-S equivalent for my 7D -- the new 15-85mm IS. However, I just cannot justify the expense since I already have a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.

It's not necessarily a "need" for smaller DoF with F/2.8, but more of a "wanting' better bokeh capabilities for portraits, but I need to find out of the 24-70 F/2.8 is soft at 2.8 (which I've read a lot of the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 lens, much so that it's better to just shoot at F/4 than F/2.8, then what's the point in buying a lens without solid performance at its highest aperture?) or vignettes a bit on a FF body. I know that 24-70 is going to be heavier over the course of a full day of shooting, but it's just a mental thing to overcome. The rest is a financial thing to chip in the extra $200 if I decide on the 24-70 lens over the 24-105, which I know is a solid performer in conventions and industry shows (but mainly with fill-flash, which is acceptable to me). Plus, shooting with an EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 on my XSi has made me not want to give up F/2.8 if I can help it, even if it means more weight, less reach. But it's still quite a dilemma nonetheless, even though higher ISO capabilities opens up faster shutter speed at a smaller aperture, but the actual look of the photo is still changed a bit with the larger DoF. Oy!

Pat,


FF would have shallower DoF for a given combo of settings. You should get just as shallow DoF at f/4 on FF as at f/2.8 on 1.6x APS crop.


One nice aspect of FF is that although you're spending a lot more on the body, you can get away w/ spending less on glass (at least in the wide-to-medium focal length ranges).


For portraiture, I'd think having the extra bit of reach to 105mm would probably be good too as 85mm on FF probably isn't ideal for headshots -- and you probably won't usually want quite *that* shallow DoF (of 85-105mm at f/2.8 on FF) for that. OTOH, f/2.8 glass stopped down to f/4 would probably be better most times than f/4 glass shot wide open. If you're looking for a prime fixed lens for portraiture, you might consider going for a more classic 105mm f/2.5-to-f/2.8 lens instead (and maybe go for a manual lens for that, if you can find a good used one for much less) -- not sure you'd actually want a 105mm f/2.8 macro for that though as people find that lens probably too sharp(!) for portraiture. At least Nikon versions of those lenses seem very popular for that (though brand new, modern, AF versions of them tend to be quite expensive).


Considering all that, perhaps you might want to reconsider going w/ good 3rd party f/2.8 glass (and/or try the used market for a prime fixed portraiture lens) for that instead of paying the huge premium for Canon L glass. Also, remember that you have substantially lower pixel density w/ the 5DMk2 than w/ any recent APS crop cameras -- the 21MP 5DMk2's pixel density is comparable to an 8MP APS crop body -- so you don't need the glass to be quite as critically sharp to make full use of the camera's resolution.


_Man_

I've read that that's exactly untrue, that you want to pair the best glass you can with full frame sensors because it outresolves the details that lesser quality lenses are capable of.

Thanks for the swing thoughts. I don't think I've found any 3rd party constant F/2.8 lenses that I would want to buy (just from reading reviews of the Sigma - which is a little intriguing - and Tamron - not intrigued as much - offerings in this focal length range (20-ish to 80-ish), so I think I'm still ending up with the classic decision/dilemma: 24-70 F/2.8 vs 24-105 F/4 IS. The primes will be down the road a bit for me since I want to get up and running with a walk-about lens by early December (or stick with the nifty-fifty in the interim and trying to be creative with it).

Originally Posted by Sam Posten

I've read that that's exactly untrue, that you want to pair the best glass you can with full frame sensors because it outresolves the details that lesser quality lenses are capable of.

Click to expand...

That is my understanding, too. In fact, even the higher resolution crop sensors, like the 7D, will show the flaws in lower quality glass.