finally upgrading body and lense: 5D MKIII VS 5DMKII

[Nothnagel]

I'm hoping for some input.

I have been hoping(saving) to take photography more seriously for a long time and
finally I'm taking the step in the right direction. I'm tired of renting.

I love shooting people, especially kids and would love to get more involved in documentary photography and portraiture.
I also like wildlife(but not priority for now).

firstly,
I need to choose between the 5D MK III and II. If i go with the 5d MK II , I can afford more lenses,

Then lenses:
I am debating between only getting prime lenses - 35 f1.4 L and 135 f2 L ?
or 70- 200 2.8 LII and then save up for more prime or the 24-70 LII, if worth the money - but i've heard good things.
or mix it all up.

 

[CanonJim]

To tell you the truth, if I was looking at portraiture, and street/urban photography, I'd probably bypass the 5D and get a 7D instead - save a lot of bucks which can be put to good use on glass. The 5D is the world's best landscape DSLR, but for portraits and the kind of photography you say you concentrate on, it does not really buy you a lot over the 7D, IMO.

 

[TCampbell]

The focusing system is a huge advantage in the 5D III. The 5D II has a focusing system which is more like what you'd find on a Rebel body.

I don't agree that the 5D is a "landscape" DSLR. It's highly used for portraits, weddings, events, where action-shots are not the primary need. The 7D has some advantages for sports and action photography with it's focusing system in continuous shooting speed. The 5D III has an even better focusing system, but speed isn't quite as fast as a 7D in continuous mode (again... it wasn't optimized for sports, but it is actually pretty fast.)

The major difference is that a 7D is a crop-frame camera and the 5D bodies are all full-frame. You'll get wider angles of view on all your lenses when they're attached to full-frame bodies.

The 70-200mm f/2.8L is practically a staple... it's a bread-n-butter lens that a lot of photographers own. I own the original edition, not the Mk II. The 24-70mm f/2.8L II keeps promising to ship... but as far as I know it's still not shipping. The limited reviews all seem very promising.

I do own the 135mm f/2L and that is an amazing lens -- especially if you like bokeh. I do not own the 35mm f/1.4 (or any 35mm prime).

If you were only going to get 1 prime lens, I'd probably get a 50mm because that's a "normal" angle of view on a full-frame body. A 35mm providers close to a normal angle of view on a crop-frame body, but is wide-angle on a full-frame camera.

 

[JohnTrav]

If your budged can afford it I would get the 5DIII.

I have a 7D and it is also a great body. So that can be considered like mentioned before. Eventually I plan to invest in a 5DIII but still going to keep my 7D. IMO no matter what you get you will be happy with. Only thing I can say, and its not from personal use but from reading tons of reviews, is that the auto focusing on the 5DII is not as fast as people would like. The 7D auto focus is plenty fast enough for me.

I also own the 70-200 f/2.8 L and it is sharp. Def a lens worth investing in. the 35mm f/1.4 L is also a really nice lens. Its very sharp. I would also recommend looking into the 50mm f/1.4.

Hope this helps a little bit.

 

[MLeeK]

For portraiture or anything that is not low light/low contrast the focusing system on the 5d2 is fine. However... I absolutely hate it for low light and the camera really can't keep up with any sports I shoot either. I was sorely disappointed in it for anything other than weddings and portraiture. For those things? Gorgeous images.

I do feel that my 7D is a much more versatile camera and use it far more than the 5d2. It has a great focus system and can keep up for sports as well as portraits, weddings and anything else I put it to. There are better cameras for some of the applications I use it for, but I am not dishing out the blunt for the 1DX until I win the lottery.

This is my theory (for what it is worth) When you are purchasing your camera buy the best, most up to date body you can possibly buy at the time. Bodies come and go and are upgraded every two to three years. If you buy the most current now, you won't feel the pinch and need to upgrade it for maybe 3 to 5 years. That gives you time to accumulate good glass which will be with you forever if you care properly for it.

Others are much the opposite of me and say: Just buy a good body that fits your basic needs. Bodies come and go and the images are 100% the result of what you put into them. Totally true. And like I said, glass stays with you forever.

 

[Derrel]

All-primes is limiting. Less versatile than having one or two L-series zooms. I would want the 5D-III much more so than the 5D-II.

 

[Skor35]

From the responses on this page and the reviews I have read on these cameras, If you are starting out and wanting to continue to excel the 7D would be a better option so you can afford some higher quality lenses, those are going to last much longer than the camera body itself. You can always down the road upgrade to the 5d mkIII but is it really worth the almost $2000 difference right now. My opinion would be to use the 7D to really get a grip on your photography skill, with some high quality lenses and then upgrade down the road. After all most of the reviews I read said the 5d mkIII based its AF system off the 7D, but it is upgraded. Good luck with your decision.

 

[Nothnagel]

Thanks for all the advice. It really helps.
I'm definately going full frame -i've had cropped so long.
Another lens question.
canon 70-200 f2.8LII vs sigma 70-200 f2.8.
The price difference is big and if i go for the Sigma I can get another lense.
Is the quality that different?