better upgrade?

[Punisher911]

Better upgrade? 5Dmkiii or Canon 70-200 f2.8 mkii? My current set up is in my signature..

 

[JacaRanda]

No idea and it may depend on what you shoot most often. Not sure how well your Sigma performs, but you have the range covered already. The jump from 70D to 5Dmkiii is a significant jump imo, so I would go for the 5Dmkiii.

 

[sabbath999]

I would always always ALWAYS choose glass over digital body upgrades until my glass stable was completely where I wanted it to be, assuming the glass upgrade is a SIGNIFICANT one... for example, if it's just upgrading from 70-200 f2.8 mark 1 to mark 2, not so much... but coming from consumer glass to pro L glass, absolutely.

You get hugely more photo-quality impact from glass than a digital body upgrade, and better glass will not only help the camera you own but also the camera you own four bodies from now after 4 more upgrades.

 

[JacaRanda]

Agree generally with sabbath999, but I read so often how much difference FF is from croppy. Hard to not think about the lenses I have and if I was in the same situation.

 

[Punisher911]

Most shooting would be portraits and live bands.

 

[sabbath999]

Agree generally with sabbath999, but I read so often how much difference FF is from croppy. Hard to not think about the lenses I have and if I was in the same situation.

The difference between a 70D and a FF body isn't even on the same planet with the difference between a Sigma 18-250 f/3.5-6.5 and a Canon 70-200 f2.8 mark 2.

Sigma consumer glass vs. one of the best lenses ever made by mankind?

That's not even a close discussion, it's not even in the same ballpark. It's not even on the same planet, or even the same solar system.

Then, you throw in the fact that he can be using that 70-200 20 years from now, about 15 years after that full-frame camera became a paperweight, well... I personally think the choice is a pretty obvious one.

 

[JacaRanda]

Most shooting would be portraits and live bands.

Hmmm. Tough decision. Because of what you shoot, I would still lean towards FF (unless you are concerned about how old the 5d is and how soon a mark iv version will be out). 70-200 mark ii is a great lens that should last nearly forever.

 

[JacaRanda]

Agree generally with sabbath999, but I read so often how much difference FF is from croppy. Hard to not think about the lenses I have and if I was in the same situation.

The difference between a 70D and a FF body isn't even on the same planet with the difference between a Sigma 18-250 f/3.5-6.5 and a Canon 70-200 f2.8 mark 2.

Sigma consumer glass vs. one of the best lenses ever made by mankind?

That's not even a close discussion, it's not even in the same ballpark. It's not even on the same planet, or even the same solar system.

Then, you throw in the fact that he can be using that 70-200 20 years from now, about 15 years after that full-frame camera became a paperweight, well... I personally think the choice is a pretty obvious one.

Haaa, just posted as you posted. I was not only thinking of the Sigma, but the other lenses he has too. I'm not disagreeing with you. Still would be a tough decision for me.

 

[Punisher911]

I was just talking to my boss who has the 70-200mkii and a 6D... We were discussing the lens being a long term investment that will hold well for whatever camera I shoot in the near future... vs the 5Dmkiii is going to be replaced next year..... I guess my newest concern is the crop factor with the 70-200 becoming 105-300 ish.. For outdoor shoots/portraits that's a non issue.... but for indoors..... hmmmm.

 

[sabbath999]

I was just talking to my boss who has the 70-200mkii and a 6D... We were discussing the lens being a long term investment that will hold well for whatever camera I shoot in the near future... vs the 5Dmkiii is going to be replaced next year..... I guess my newest concern is the crop factor with the 70-200 becoming 105-300 ish.. For outdoor shoots/portraits that's a non issue.... but for indoors..... hmmmm.

The 70-200 will make better pictures indoors, outdoors, in space, on the moon, WHEREVER... than a Sigma consumer-grade lens. Portraits with a tack-sharp 70-200 at 2.8 vs portraits with a 6.5 Sigma lens? No comparison, WHATEVER, whether indoors or out. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

I've got nothing against Sigma consumer glass, it's just the difference between those two lenses is like the difference between crossing the ocean in first class on a 787 or crossing it in an open row boat. Both will probably get you there, but one IS better.

 

[JacaRanda]

I was just talking to my boss who has the 70-200mkii and a 6D... We were discussing the lens being a long term investment that will hold well for whatever camera I shoot in the near future... vs the 5Dmkiii is going to be replaced next year..... I guess my newest concern is the crop factor with the 70-200 becoming 105-300 ish.. For outdoor shoots/portraits that's a non issue.... but for indoors..... hmmmm.

The 70-200 will make better pictures indoors, outdoors, in space, on the moon, WHEREVER... than a Sigma consumer-grade lens. Portraits with a tack-sharp 70-200 at 2.8 vs portraits with a 6.5 Sigma lens? No comparison, WHATEVER, whether indoors or out. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

I've got nothing against Sigma consumer glass, it's just the difference between those two lenses is like the difference between crossing the ocean in first class on a 787 or crossing it in an open row boat. Both will probably get you there, but one IS better.

He has other glass. No argument between the Sigma and the Canon.

 

[sabbath999]

He has other glass. No argument between the Sigma and the Canon.

He also has an outstanding digital body already, and is considering purchasing a camera that will not be anywhere near of an upgrade as the lens would be, upgrading to a camera that is about to be replaced in the line by a newer model.

 

[Punisher911]

I didn't mean it an issue of quality of the mkii lens indoors, but more of a distance factor to the subject indoors when adding in the crop factor. The Sigma lens, I actually stopped using once I bought the 24-105 L lens. It really does look like the lens is the way to go here. Specially with the mk4/5dx or whatever it ends up being called comes out next year....

 

[JacaRanda]

I didn't mean it an issue of quality of the mkii lens indoors, but more of a distance factor to the subject indoors when adding in the crop factor. The Sigma lens, I actually stopped using once I bought the 24-105 L lens. It really does look like the lens is the way to go here. Specially with the mk4/5dx or whatever it ends up being called comes out next year....

Yup, chasing camera models could be endless. I hate adding to dilemnas, but have you considered Tamron 70-200 2.8 latest version?

 

[Punisher911]

Not sure I've seen the "newer" Tamron version.. any links?