Canon 5D MKII or Canon ???

drselect

Is the Canon 5D MKII worth it or go with a cheaper body and better glass?

Its time for me to get back into the SLR camera world. I use to shoot more before the family duties took over. Well now there are events coming up that I feel I am able to justify getting back in. I have read several threads hear and on line about different DLSR cameras. I am really leaning towards the 5D MKII for two reasons: full sensor and its video capabilities. The factor weighting against it is what I have read about getting a cheaper body and putting more into the glass. So if your recommend the cheaper body then also please give specifics about what glass to get?

As far as budget goes I haven't set one yet but have checked on current prices of the 5D MKII and know this is can get $$$. I hope this will be a camera I have for a while. The last SLR camera served me for 20 years (Konica FC-1) before it broke and digital did it in. So I don't my spending some extra if it means I will get something for it.

What will I be using it for: family type things vacations, dance recitals, gymnastic meets, concerts, graduation portraits, some day sooner than I am ready for but wedding pictures , grandchildren portraits ect...

gce

I have a T3i that I'm very happy with. I just got my first L lens a 100-400. Works great on my 1.6 crop body. I just couldn't justify twice the price for a full frame body. It just depends on what you want out of your DLSR, I guess. I'm sure you'll love the 5D but I'm sure you'd love a 1.6 body too.

Strong Bad

I'm a Nikon guy, but in general it's better to invest in the best glass you can afford, then get a good body. How about the 7D? I wouldn't be overly concerned with full frame based on what you want to shoot. I shoot alot of college gymnastics and lemme tell ya, you're gonna want that 70-200 2.8 that they have. Nikon has the same general lens as well and you're gonna want this lens with the gymnastics, concerts and dance recitals.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is_ii_usm

Happy shooting!

drselect

[QUOTE=gce;1822461 I just got my first L lens a 100-400. [/QUOTE]
Could you please be more specific as to which one? Also was this a replacement for an existing lens? What other lens are you using?

Thanks for the reply
drselect

gce

I'm pretty much have all the lens I need...I hope. :razz: ( EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM / EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM / EF 100 f2.8 Macro USM / EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM ) The EF-S lens will only go on a crop body. You can also find out alot more info on this site http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

Emlyn

I'm perfectly happy with my 7D as it more than meets my needs. But, with the 5D MK III having come out earlier this year, the 5D MK II is selling for around only $400 more than the 7D. The 5D MK III is selling for double the price of the MK II.

Even if I was starting over, I'd probably stick with the 7D and my usage is similar to the original poster's intended usage. I haven't checked to see if a new version of the 7D is coming out some time soon.

nspindel

I'm thinking of selling my 5d MKII and buying the new 6d.

drselect

Emlyn wrote: »

Even if I was starting over, I'd probably stick with the 7D and my usage is similar to the original poster's intended usage. .

If you don't mind could explain why for you that you stick with the 7D?

Strong Bad wrote: »

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is_ii_usm

Thanks that very good to know. I actually have a possiblilty of getting on of those used but didn't know if I wanted that or the 24-105 f4L

nspindel wrote: »

I'm thinking of selling my 5d MKII and buying the new 6d.

I saw that the 6d was coming out but not sure if I wanted to put that into the mix.

nspindel

You should definitely consider the 6d. Built in geotagging and wifi is huge for an SLR, especially when it's a full frame. And the price seems great.

drselect

[QUOTE=Strong Bad;1822463 I shoot alot of college gymnastics and lemme tell ya, you're gonna want that 70-200 2.8 that they have. [/QUOTE]
Are you mostly shooting from the floor?
This will show how much I still need to learn does that lens help with not being able to use a flash and needing to use fast speed because of the action?

nspindel

Sure does. I used to have the 70-200 f2.8. It's a sick lens. And yes, the 2.8 is a full stop faster than the 70-200 f4, which is what I have now. The difference in low-light is huge.

drselect

nspindel wrote: »

Sure does. I used to have the 70-200 f2.8. It's a sick lens. And yes, the 2.8 is a full stop faster than the 70-200 f4, which is what I have now. The difference in low-light is huge.

Have to ask what made you switch?

nspindel

Swapped the 2.8 with a friend for his f4 plus $700. Used the $700 plus cash from selling my 5d MKI to buy the 5d MKII. I don't do much low light stuff, so I can make due with the f4. I do miss it sometimes though!

mystik610

Generally you want to spend less on the body, and more on the glass. But there are benefits to a full frame camera that are worth the money, IMO....and go beyond what you could obtain through glass alone. (ie, the largest aperture you'll find on a zoom lens is 2.8, and a FF will give allow you to have even better low light performance/depth of field).

The downside to the 5D MKII, is that the auto-focus system is pretty dated and leaves a lot to be desired. Not a huge detriment if you don't shoot a lot of action sports, but I do run into issues using the outher autofocus pointsdarkened areas without the autofocus assist beam on my speed light. Not a deal killer to me, as this is usually in lighting situations that I wouldn't dare shoot with a crop-sensor camera.

drselect

mystik610 wrote: »

The downside to the 5D MKII, is that the auto-focus system is pretty dated and leaves a lot to be desired. Not a huge detriment if you don't shoot a lot of action sports, but I do run into issues using the outher autofocus pointsdarkened areas without the autofocus assist beam on my speed light.

Not sure if I understand this. I do know that one of the things that PMO with my little digital video camera is when I try to video my kids on a poorly lighted stage during one of there dances. The autofocus goes nuts while I try to zoom in and out of the light or they move in and out of the light and I keep wishing I had a manual focus camera. I was hoping the 5D MKII would help in these conditions both from a picture and video standpoint.

nspindel

mystik610 wrote: »

Generally you want to spend less on the body, and more on the glass. But there are benefits to a full frame camera that are worth the money, IMO....and go beyond what you could obtain through glass alone. (ie, the largest aperture you'll find on a zoom lens is 2.8, and a FF will give allow you to have even better low light performance/depth of field).

The downside to the 5D MKII, is that the auto-focus system is pretty dated and leaves a lot to be desired. Not a huge detriment if you don't shoot a lot of action sports, but I do run into issues using the outher autofocus pointsdarkened areas without the autofocus assist beam on my speed light. Not a deal killer to me, as this is usually in lighting situations that I wouldn't dare shoot with a crop-sensor camera.

Agreed, the autofocus is one of the big advances between the 5D MKII and MKIII. Comes at a steep price, though. The 6D is a bit better autofocus, but not as advanced as the 5D MKIII. But the price difference is huge.

nspindel

The 5d line has always been excellent low-light performers. In it's day, the MKI was great at low light, although technology has advanced considerably since then. The MKII is a great low-light performer, and the MKIII is even better. The 6d looks to be a great low light camera as well. I've never used it for video, I'm only speaking for still shooting.

Emlyn

drselect wrote: »

If you don't mind could explain why for you that you stick with the 7D?

I've been using Canon cameras exclusively for the last 20 years, so don't even consider anything other than Canon. I considered anything at the 5D level and up more of an advanced amateur/semi-pro/hobbyist camera when I made my decision to go with the 7D a couple years ago. Cost was definitely a factor for me, and I'm strictly an amateur interested in recording events easily, but being able to get high quality images through great lens choices. I couldn't justify anything more expensive, and the 7D and associated lenses and other accessories is already quite expensive. It looks like Canon has chosen to split the 7D's target market into two different cameras now with the 6D and 60D, unless there is a direct replacement for the 7D coming out. If I had to go with something new in the next few months now, it would probably be the 60D for the main reason it best fits the level of usage I'd want to get out of it, weighing the total expense also. It also has an articulating screen. If photography was to be more of a hobby for me, I'd go with the 6D.

jbooker82

Emlyn wrote: »

If I had to go with something new in the next few months now, it would probably be the 60D for the main reason it best fits the level of usage I'd want to get out of it, weighing the total expense also. It also has an articulating screen.

That is what I use and like it a lot. I wouldn't really consider photography a hobby. I do like motocross and wanted a camera that was up to taking action shots at speed. My main lens that I use is the 70-300mm non L lens. I would like to get the Sigma 8-16mm wide angle lens though.

Fireman32

I'm a Nikon guy but I was told when I first got into photography and I now tell people to invest in good glass before upgrading to a new body. I still shoot with a DX camera the D200 and why I want a full frame body my next investment will be some good glass. I will start with the 70-200 2.8 and then the 24-70 2.8. If you get a full frame body you will want to make sure that you gave some good glass to work with as well. Also lenses will hold their value if you take good care of them. I have bought all of my lenses used through my local camera shop and saved money from buying new. Thats just my .02 let us know what you decide.

Dave

Strong Bad

drselect wrote: »

Are you mostly shooting from the floor?
This will show how much I still need to learn does that lens help with not being able to use a flash and needing to use fast speed because of the action?

Yes, I work it out with the colleges and get a floor pass. If I can't get a pass to shoot on the floor, I don't go. I won't mess with the stands. I use the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRII mounted on the D700. Remember, no flash photography at all at gymnastics meets. It's all available light.

mystik610

drselect wrote: »

Not sure if I understand this. I do know that one of the things that PMO with my little digital video camera is when I try to video my kids on a poorly lighted stage during one of there dances. The autofocus goes nuts while I try to zoom in and out of the light or they move in and out of the light and I keep wishing I had a manual focus camera. I was hoping the 5D MKII would help in these conditions both from a picture and video standpoint.

The auto-focus on the 5D MKII will still be better than on your point and shoot. Generally, phase detection autofocus (used in SLR's) is faster and more reliable than the contrast detection autofocus systems (used in point and shoots and mirrorless cameras), and generally, even an older DSLR will outperform a point and shoot in terms of autofocusing.

That said, the 5D MKII is a 4 year old camera, and there has been quite a bit of advancement in the autofocus systems used in DSLR's. The 5D MKII has 9 autofocus points, with a single cross-type point in the middle of the frame....which is essentially the same autofocus systems the canon rebels are using. I shoot on a 5d MKII, and that cross-type AF point is much crutch when shooting in low-light without a speedlight.

The 5D MKIII has 61 autofocus points, 41 of these being cross-type points. The 7D has 19 cross-type points, and the 60D has 9 cross-type points. The 7D and 5D MKIII also have a much more sophisticated auto-focus tracking systems as well, making them better choices for action shots.

At the end of the day, its a matter of deciding how much you're willing to spend, and choosing what your priorities are. I have a 5D MKII, and although a nice AF system would be nice, given that I shoot primarily portraits and landscapes, having the benefits of a full frame sensor is a worthwhile compromise for me. I'll probably never go back to a crop-sensor camera, no matter how good the AF system is. The center AF points works well enough for me, and I've set my menus so I can quickly engage the auto-focus assist beam on my speedlight without firing the flash when needed.

If you absolutely need a more sophisticated autofocus system and are within the budget of the 5D MKII, then the 7D might be a better choice. If you have the money and feel you need both a full frame camera AND a sophisticated AF system, then pony up for the 5D MKIII!

edit: one more thing. If you feel that you'll ever go FF even if you don't initially, do yourself a favor and buy only EF mount lenses. I took a pretty big hit unloading a bunch of EF-S lenses when I bought my 5D MKII.

nspindel

The 6d is an 11-point, single cross type autofocus. While everything mystik610 is saying is accurate, I can add that I have used my 5DMKII for action shots at baseball games with very good results. I'm in the camp who have had crop sensors and have gone full-frame, and could never go back. Wholeheartedly agree that you should only buy EF lenses, even if you get a crop body. You don't want to find yourself wanting to upgrade to a full frame and suddenly realizing that all of your glass needs to be replaced.

bikerboy

If image quality is the most important issue, then getting the full frame slr is the best choice. A co-worker has a 5d mk ii and loves it. His pics are very good. If you choose a crop format then all lens will not be optimum for the full frame if you change your mind. Making the right format size and brand choice for the body is the most important starting point because the lens will follow. The new nikon looks promising.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d600/
I use a Sony Nex-7 and love the fact that it has great image quality and weight/size is about half of a though the lens type slr. Good luck.

audiocr381ve

I own the 5D MK3 & 7D.

I say get the 5DM3 with the 24-105 L kit lens and be done with it for a long time. The 24-105 is an excellent lens. You can really push the ISO on the MK3 (the reason I bought it) and get very clean images, so shooting with an F4 lens won't be a big problem. You can always bring along the very cheap 50 1.8 ($100) if you need a few extra stops.

nspindel

Maybe he should get a Ferrari as well, to drive his $4000 camera around in?

nspindel

audiocr381ve wrote: »

I own the 5D MK3 & 7D.

I say get the 5DM3 with the 24-105 L kit lens and be done with it for a long time. The 24-105 is an excellent lens. You can really push the ISO on the MK3 (the reason I bought it) and get very clean images, so shooting with an F4 lens won't be a big problem. You can always bring along the very cheap 50 1.8 ($100) if you need a few extra stops.

Explain to me, please, what a 24-105 or a 50 will do for him when he's trying to do gymnastics shooting?