60D or 7D? Worth the extra $700?

[ljenningsphotog]

I'm torn.... suggestions? Opinions? Thoughts?
Thanks

 

[Mach0]

What do you shoot?

 

[ljenningsphotog]

I have a t1i now. have some (6) really good lenses and am ready to upgrade to a better body. are the differences in fps and auto focus points gonna matter much? Will I notice?
I do mostly children and weddings

 

[Bogs]

i m not on the canon team but imho 60D is a very solid slr and while 7D is a bit better it is still a crop frame too. if i was considering upgrading from 60D, i would get into full frame with 5d markII, they should be going for cheap now because markIII just came out

 

[DiskoJoe]

7d ftw. Dont even think twice. Superior camera. A 5d mark ii is solid as well but you would need full frame lenses where with a 7d all of your lenses that you own would work with it.

 

[o hey tyler]

What lenses do you have? Looking at your website, I can see you have an 18-55mm kit lens, a superzoom 18-250mm, and a 50mm f/1.8 II. I didn't see any other lenses.

Frankly, none of the lenses I saw were fit for commissioned wedding photography. Which is probably why a lot of your indoor shots had motion blur and a lot lacked sharpness.

 

[ljenningsphotog]

What lenses do you have? Looking at your website, I can see you have an 18-55mm kit lens, a superzoom 18-250mm, and a 50mm f/1.8 II. I didn't see any other lenses.

Frankly, none of the lenses I saw were fit for commissioned wedding photography. Which is probably why a lot of your indoor shots had motion blur and a lot lacked sharpness.

Hey there Tyler. Thanks for your $.02, but I didn't ask your opinions on my work or whether you thought my lenses are "worthy".

 

[Overread]

But you're making a financial choice to extend your working equipment - tyler's point is that you're choice is not in line with getting the greatest amount of gain for the investment you're looking to spend.

 

[ljenningsphotog]

I understand, however, he saw shots with 3 of my 6 lenses. There's no reason to be rude and act as though you are "above" everyone else, that's all. I appreciate the feedback, just wasn't looking for critique's of my work (hardly any of which were indoors)

 

[o hey tyler]

Well, you may not realize this, but Glass > Body. It's much more important in wedding photography to have high quality glass with LARGER maximum apertures other than f/3.5 on the wide end, especially if you are going to be charging for the wedding. The only thing you'll reap the benefits of with getting a new body is slightly better ISO performance. That's not going to save your butt when you're shooting in a dark environment with a consumer grade kit lens that comes with your T1i, or an 18-250mm "jack of all trades, master of none" lens.

Clients pay for high quality images that are sharp, have adequate DoF, and lack of motion blur due to a slow shutter speed. What you really should be buying is an 85mm f/1.8, or better yet a 70-200mm f/2.8L.

I'm not trying to act "better than you," I'm telling you from my experience what you need at a minimum to shoot a commissioned wedding, and your lens choices are simply not there. So, I've seen shots from 3 of your 6 lenses. Which other lenses do you have, and why do they not get as much "on camera" time as the three lenses I already listed?

I strongly suggest you watch this video, because it relates somewhat to where you're at. I'm not trying to discourage you from shooting weddings, but it's bad form to charge ~$700 (base price) for wedding photography shot with consumer grade kit lenses. None of the lenses I saw that you use in your EXIF are "really good" It's just reality, sorry if it's harsh.

[video=youtube;RjBSIvg3pjc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjBSIvg3pjc[/url][/video]

 

[Overread]

Aye, but shifting to the higher MP sensors that the 60D and 7D have you've also got to have the right glass, otherwise whilst the body is improving the resulting quality can suffer because the lens hasn't got the ability to resolve on the high and dense sensor (this is partly the reason why you're seeing so many new lenses being made and released).

It's not to say that weaker lenses are incapable of performing well, but that their performance might be hampered and you won't get the full gain possible.

Personally, for the situations you describe, I'd be more inclined to suggest looking toward the 5D range of bodies. Letting you shoot indoor or in any closer environment with a longer focal length lens whilst still getting the wider angle of view you want. This is important because once you go below around 50mm in focal length (say to a 35mm) you start to get perspective distortion. For portraits and such taken close this is bad as it results in nearer parts of the subject being enlarged over further ones (Big noses, hands, arms etc...) wherease because 35mm camera bodies case a wider field of view you can use a longer telephoto lens, still get the wider angle of view, and eliminate the problem of the perspective distortion.

Fullframe bodies also tend to have the edge over crop sensor in terms of high ISO noise control - I'm not sure how big the difference between the 5D and 7D is, but the 5DMII is certainly ahead of the 7D in this department.

 

[ljenningsphotog]

They do get time, but not everything I shoot makes it to my site. I agree you need good glass, but I also dont think good photography is all in the equipment. Some of the best photos I've seen have been taken with iphones and crappy point and shoots. It's all in the creativity of it.

 

[o hey tyler]

So what are your other three lenses?

 

[ljenningsphotog]

100mm Canon 1/2.8
50mm Canon 1/1.8 II
55-250 Canon 1/4-5.6 IS

 

[Overread]

I would honestly consider selling the two long zooms you have an getting a 70-200mm f2.8 instead. Heavier, bigger but with a constant f2.8 aperture which allows you far more working light when needed. There are also primes such as the 85mm and 135mm which would give you even wider apertures to work with.

50mm f1.8 is a good performer optically, but build quality is shoddy and its not the greatest lens - a 50mm f1.4 (sigma) would be an ideal replacement, giving you a better overall working tool (much quieter AF and faster) which is also more durable.

The 24-70mm f2.8 is also a lens I think you would be wise to consider - unless you go down the path of prime lenses (and then you'd ideally want a second body to mount a second prime to for fast changing) - the zoom will cover your most used ranges for many situations and with the support of a flash or two would be more than enough to work indoors and outdoors.

Couple those lenses with a 35mm, fullframe camera body and you'd be well equipped for the subjects and situations you shoot in.


YES art is part of the game, but the working professional also has to deliver a product. Whilst that product is the produce of art its also got to have a certain standard of finish that the client expects. Further art should be for arts sake alone and not the result of direct limitations of equipment/technical understanding on the part of the photographer - when there is affordable equipment which can overcome those limitations.